Leica - Is it really a 24mm lens ! And that look !

[LMacky]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/11/2022 at 9:07 AM, Stuart Richardson said:

These are boring photos, but one is the Q2 with the 28mm Summilux and the other is the 24mm Sigma on the SL2. I felt that they were very close. So I guess it depends on who you believe...Leica that it is a 28mm, or Sigma that it is a 24mm. The Sigma is wider, but not by much. My feeling is that the Q2 28mm is indeed closer to a 25-26mm, even after correction. It seems wider than my 28mm M lenses did, but I have not done side to sides with those, so it is harder for me to say. Leica on top, Sigma on the bottom. The Sigma is a hair wider (look at the railing and the tree at the right).

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

That is very helpful.

[Chris W]

On 12/11/2022 at 11:15 AM, jaapv said:

Don't forget that the M framelines are more narrow than the field of view at infinity. - plus an internal focus lens  will show less focal length extension close up than a lens that focuses by shifting the optical cell. 

Well I compared shots inCapture One from my Q with shots from an M240 with a Leica 28mm f2.8 lens and the Q shots were wider, in post processing.

I also guessed it was around 26mm.

Original question:

No, I don't think the Q series offers images like no other. They are extremely nice images and it's a great camera, but I wasn't happy to shoot 28mm (or 26mm) all the time.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Chris W said:

Well I compared shots inCapture One from my Q with shots from an M240 with a Leica 28mm f2.8 lens and the Q shots were wider, in post processing.

I also guessed it was around 26mm.

Original question:

No, I don't think the Q series offers images like no other. They are extremely nice images and it's a great camera, but I wasn't happy to shoot 28mm (or 26mm) all the time.

 Now try it with both lenses at 1 m. 

[Chris W]

31 minutes ago, jaapv said:

 Now try it with both lenses at 1 m. 

Well first, the key here is how does the image look in a photo editor in normal use, eg: at a variety of distances from the subject.

The Q looks wider than 28mm when compared to another Leica with a 28mm lens attached.

Second, I probably did compare the images at a close distance. I set uo a tripod in a local cemetery and shot my Q and M240 at various subjects. The Q was consistently wider.

Edited January 2 by Chris W

[jaapv]

The M lens will be 28 mm AOV at infinity, but wider, something like 25 mm,  at one meter. To reach that angle close up the Q cannot be but 25 mm at infinity as it has internal focusing thus no fokusschwund. 
Leica is perfectly correct to call it a 28 otherwise people would complain that it is too narrow close up. 

[Chris W]

In normal use - which is how people use their cameras - the Q system delivers a wider shot than an M Leica body with M28mm lens.

Not sure what is arguable about that. 

(I wasn't a fan of 28 mm anyway, and struggled to fill my shots with meaningful detail at the wider view).

 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You are observing that normal 28 mm lenses have an effective field of view of approx 25-28 mm through the focusing range due to image field loss. (the extension of the lens as you focus - that is why M framelines are accurate at 1 meter only when they are extended maximally). The AOV of the Q lens remains the same throughout the focusing range due to its construction. To compensate for this effect and to have the correct field of view at all focal distances the Q lens must necessarily have a 25 mm angle of view - otherwise Leica would receive complaints about the lens being "too narrow" .

You are comparing two basically different systems - thus not comparable.

[adrianh]

Guys, I have compared the Q lenses with a LOT of different brands and zooms. It always comes up about 26mm. Why someone would keep telling the people IT IS 28mm is beyond my understading. Why Leica does is very simple: MARKETING. They call it a Summilux 28mm and everyone can compare it to the M-Summilux 28mm 1.4 and say: WAW what a bargain. 

That does not change the fact that IT IS around 26mm wide. Take 20 zooms, go to 26mm and they will be around the same field of view as the Q lens.  We are talking here corrected images. 

[Le Chef]

I would try and understand @jaapv’s explanation. In usage, does it really matter if it’s 25mm or 29mm? No, you use what’s in front of you.

[Olaf_ZG]

And if not, you crop. Another marketing trick of Leica…. Must admit, that department is very good, which, according to stories here can’t be said from both the customer service and QC.

But then, it’s a New Year, no need to repeat the same discussions again. Some people live by Leica’s marketing.

[Ad Dieleman]

I was in doubt if I should get the Q3, a.o. because the lens was supposed to be significantly wider than 28mm and I don't like that. Now that I have it, I did a test to find out the actual focal length.

I photographed a ruler, positioned horizontally at 5.865 m from the front of the body in the center of the image. This is not exactly the front nodal point of the lens, but it can be only a few centimeters off, giving an error of less than 1 %.

I imported the photo into Lightroom, automatically applying the lens correction profile. I measured the width of the ruler of 50cm in pixels in Photoshop: 616 pixels. The width of the sensor is 36mm, according to all data I could find; it might well be 0.1 or 0.2mm smaller, because it putatively is a Sony sensor and these are mostly stated to be 35.8mm or 35.9mm. But let's assume it's really 36mm.

With these data we can calculate the focal length of my Q3 to be 27.4mm. A similar measurement at 3.211m led to a focal length of 27.3mm.

The lens uses internal focusing (the front element doesn't move), so the apparent focal length may well be lower at closer focus distances.

Case closed for me, it's a 28mm for all my intents and purposes.

[Le Chef]

On 1/2/2024 at 3:22 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

And if not, you crop. Another marketing trick of Leica

It’s amazing how you believe Leica has an exclusive on cropping. They must have really impressed you! Many of us have been cropping since the days of film, so this new version must really be something to have convinced you.

[bobtodrick]

On 1/2/2024 at 2:22 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

And if not, you crop. Another marketing trick of Leica…. Must admit, that department is very good, which, according to stories here can’t be said from both the customer service and QC.

But then, it’s a New Year, no need to repeat the same discussions again. Some people live by Leica’s marketing.

Wow...all those images I cropped int he darkroom for 35 years...I had no idea was just falling for Leica's digital marketing!!

 

[Simone_DF]

The difference is that in the past you cropped out of NECESSITY. 
Now you crop because Leica’s marketing told you that it’s not a necessity, but a perk. 

Next step: buy a M11 and a Laowa 9mm f/5.6, and that will be the definitive lens for everything. As a bonus, everything will be in focus. Just point and shot. 

[thegobi]

Feels like shooting with a 28 and it says so right there on the barrel, so that’s good enough for me!

…but maybe I am just another pawn in Leica’s insidious marketing.

Web of lies!

😆

[Le Chef]

2 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

As a bonus, everything will be in focus. Just point and shot. 

And you can still use Leica’s exclusive marketing driven cropping. Now you can be one of a kind!

[Simone_DF]

Yeah, cropping is clearly the new Das Wesentliche

[Chris W]

I've always tried to crop with my feet. Not being superior about it, it's just what I prefer to do. Which is why I haven't been enthralled with the shoot 28mm but crop for 35 or 50mm concept.

[David Wien]

22 minutes ago, Chris W said:

I've always tried to crop with my feet. Not being superior about it, it's just what I prefer to do. Which is why I haven't been enthralled with the shoot 28mm but crop for 35 or 50mm concept.

Yes, I loke to do that also; but there are times when you cant get close enough.

David

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[bobtodrick]

3 hours ago, David Wien said:

Yes, I loke to do that also; but there are times when you cant get close enough.

David

Yeah…a couple months ago I was at a local zoo and was photographing a polar bear…I defy one to crop with their feet.