Jump to content

Pondering to sell my X100V for a Q/Q2


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys,

I own an X100V + its teleconverter (that I seldom use since I bought the M240 and M246), so, I was thinking to sell it and getting instead a nice lens for my M, or as an alternative a Q/Q2 for "snappy daily photos with one hand" kind of stuff. Given that I don't care about the integrated ND filter of the X100V (since it degrades the quality in ANY light condition) and I can live without the hybrid viewfinder.

I just have some doubts about some things:

- does Leica Q/Q2 show that ugly "bokeh cut" from the leaf shutter at fast shutter speed? My X100V from 1/750 up gives a really ugly bokeh since the leaf shutter isn't "fast enough", I'd be annoyed if the Q cameras show the same issue. I always use electronic shutter with the Fuji since it bothers me a lot, but then I forget to swap back to the mechanical one and I get banding in artificial lighting, so annoying!

- is build quality superior to the fuji also for the first Q (I used briefly the Q2 in a Leica store and its ergonomics and sensation of solidity blew my mind)?

- is the viewfinder of the Q less enjoyable that the one on the Q2? If yes is it a big deal?

- are Q cameras inferior in "interior light children chasing" compared to the X100V? I don't need a fast af (for 90% of my needs my Pana GX1 + the 20mm is already excellent), I'd just wish that the camera doesn't hunt and go crazy in lights like "1/125 - f1.7 - iso 3200 - 3000 Kelvin". I mean I can live with that, since my Fuji is not good at that, I just don't want to "donwgrade" a situation that is already somewhat annoying

- manual focus with Q and Q2 give the same experience or the Q2 made it better?

- dust on the sensor is an issue for the Q or also for the Q2?

- do the Q/Q2 have any IR pollution like M cameras?

And in general, if there are other differences I should know about the Q/Q2. I can't care less about resolution, if the other things are negligible I'd be more than happy with the first iteration.

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both a Q and a Q2.

Build quality is similar, buttons have a better quality feel on the Q2. With that said, the Q feels very nice to use. Manual focus feels exactly the same.

Viewfinder is definetly worse on the Q but it's totally usable. 

Never had any dust on my Q, not sure if it's pure luck or if due to me taping the microphone holes.

Q is excellent indoors, only issue I can report is that the white balance is unrelible indoors.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tomas Eriksson said:

I have both a Q and a Q2.

Build quality is similar, buttons have a better quality feel on the Q2. With that said, the Q feels very nice to use. Manual focus feels exactly the same.

Viewfinder is definetly worse on the Q but it's totally usable. 

Never had any dust on my Q, not sure if it's pure luck or if due to me taping the microphone holes.

Q is excellent indoors, only issue I can report is that the white balance is unrelible indoors.

Thank you.

Does the Q/Q2 has ugly bokeh balls at fast shutter speeds?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Q  1/2500s f/1.7

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

To me, there were two reasons why I preferred the Q2 above the Q:

- weatherproof, as a daily camera, it should be on my shoulder, not in a bag…

- ability to crop as 28mm is too wide for me for daily usage

I totally agree on both counts. Not having enough MP to make it work cropping on the Q led me to selling it. I tried to enjoy the X100v as a replacement, but in my mind it didn't fill the need. Later I bought the Q2 and love it. It being able to act at 28-75mm makes it a useful set up and I'm finding I like 28 more now then before. It's strange knowing I can crop to 50mm is getting to like shooting full 28mm.

I enjoy the UI better on the Q2 then I did on the Q or X100v. It's more like the CL or SL2. Having both the Q2 and x100v caused me to never use the x100v and I recently sold it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Haven’t had a lot of experience with the Q2.   Addressing the dust issues with the Q however…I’ve owned one for four years and have sold seven of them to people I know (our company is a Leica dealer in Canada).  All of these people are users, not collectors.  On my advice they all taped the mic/speaker holes.

Not one of them has had a dust issue.  Of course if you shoot video this isn’t feasible but if you just shoot stills, tape the holes and you’re good.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Besprosvet  I cannot answer all of your questions, but here are a couple of answers based on my experience with my Q2.

Bokeh:  Beautiful bokeh at f/1.7 - no ugly bokeh cut or balls.  See the image in post #4 above, which was made with the Q rather than the Q2.

Build quality:  In a word, solid.  My Q2 is as well built and as solid as my M10 Monochrom.  The Q2 is not a second tier "discount" Leica.  Far from it.

Dust on the sensor:  I have had my Q2 since Nov. 13, 2019 and I have no dust on my sensor.  I use my Q2 exclusively for still photography and have covered the microphone and speaker openings with black gaffer tape to safeguard against dust entering these openings.  This may have helped in terms of keeping my sensor dust free.

Before I got my Q2, I owned a Fuji X100F which served as my back-up camera for my M-P 240.  The thing that really started to grate on me as time with the x100F went by was the over complex nature of the camera's controls and menu system.  The deal-breaker came when I was shooting an event using the X100F outdoors during a rain storm.  Somewhere about halfway through the shoot, I apparently touched the camera the wrong way and it switched to shooting in JPEG rather than RAW.  I always shoot in RAW, as I have more options/control in post processing.  That was the end of my dalliance with the X100F.

I have found that the Q2 camera controls are clean, straightforward and simple to use compared to the X100F.  The menu system of the Q2 is a joy to use compared to the X100F.  Those two points are not trivial considerations IMHO.

The X100F was a decent camera and is a good choice for many uses; it just was not a good fit for me.  As for the Q2, it is light years better than the X100F in terms of streamlined usability and functionality.  And then there's the matter of Q2's the full frame 47.3 mp sensor, the 28mm Summilux ASPH lens, macro capability, IP52-certified weather sealing and optical image stabilization (OIS).  The Q2 has a compelling list of features and capabilities, the lens and the sensor being chief among them.

As for comparing the original Q to the Q2, Leica Store Miami has a good web page that details how the two stack up against each other:  https://leicastoremiami.com/collections/q-system-camera/products/leica-q2-black-anodized?variant=14069364457516

Hope this helps...

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot with both cameras... For Grab it and Growl, I'll take the 100V any old day.  It's smaller... (can hardly be seen in my hand) and seems to focus faster.  Very light, and for those of you who enjoy the way a camera looks; this V is even better looking than a M series.  I won't go into the nifty way of adjusting it's color rendering.

Now, the Q is solid, simple and the ones I've owned are very reliable.

Bottom line:  D'ffrn't strokes...

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you use X100V as EVF or OVF?

I went to the store and checked X100V and Q. Fuji - no problem, except all is too tiny for adult like me :) 

After staring into Q EVF, my eye kind of hurt for long time. I never had this problem before, even with Fuji EVF cameras from earlier 2Ks.

If you are more into OVF with X100V, digital M might be your thing, not Q.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

One other major difference I found coming from X100F and X100V to a Q2 (my first Leica) was the few JPEG adjustments available on the Q2.   Where Fuji provides for a lot JPEG customization and film simulations, the Q2 and likely all Leica digital cameras seem intended primarily for raw shooting followed by post-processing.  The Q2 can produce decent JPEGs, but the power is in raw post-processing.  You may also need to upgrade your computer and storage.     

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Trankster said:

One other major difference I found coming from X100F and X100V to a Q2 (my first Leica) was the few JPEG adjustments available on the Q2.   Where Fuji provides for a lot JPEG customization and film simulations, the Q2 and likely all Leica digital cameras seem intended primarily for raw shooting followed by post-processing.  The Q2 can produce decent JPEGs, but the power is in raw post-processing.  You may also need to upgrade your computer and storage.     

Good point.  I use my Fuji jpegs most of the time.  I pretty much only use the Q2 RAW images unless they are quickies for social media.

Different animals for sure even though they are fixed lens relatively large sensor compacts.  Never really experienced whatever "cut bokeh" might be with my X100S.  Maybe it's a thing with the V.  Lucky for the OP that the V models are selling used at over MSRP right now.

The Fuji is very compact and I like that.  I'd prefer an EVF only model Fuji as I never really use the OVF and the EVF leaves something to be desired vs. the best in class EVFs these days.   I have been going through a bunch of my old images lately looking for candidates for the Topaz Photo AI treatment as that program is fun to play with.  I still like the look from even the old 16mp X-Trans jpegs.  

I wouldn't use either the Q2 or the Fuji for chasing kids around.  The A1 doesn't miss.  :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Herr Barnack's comments in post #8 could easily have been written by me. Totally agree with all of them; having also had the X100F and now Q2. I would only add that from an emotional point of view, the Q2 is, to me, a much more inviting camera than the Fuji, and that was not bad.

Edited by Marc B-C
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the X100v for a while and used it mostly with the wide angle adapter (28mm) and it is a great little camera and is both cheaper and smaller. In the end I sold it for a Q2 (I'd had the original Q before) as I missed the FF frame sensor and the f1.7 maximum aperture. The Q2 just has superb IQ and lovely bokeh wide open. What I miss about the fuji is a tilting screen and that is about it. The Q2 is no action camera as it only has contrast detect AF and though fairly fast and accurate it's lock on AF suffers from having this compared to PDAF on the fuji., Dust on the sensor should not be an issue on the Q2. EVF is certainly better and nicer to use than on the fuji . manual focus on the Q and Q2 are essentially the same though unfortunately the distance scale on the lens is not accurate for zone focussing. On the whole the Q2 is a joy to use and is both simpler and easier. If you shoot jpeg (or edit in camera) then the fuji maybe a better choice (but a bit overwhelming in the amount of settings and choices) but if you only shoot RAW the Q is better.

 

Edited by viramati
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had my Q for over 5 years, take it everywhere with me, on my shoulder or in my hand with the strap wrapped.  I've never taped the mic holes, and I've never had dust on the sensor, nor problems with moisture.  It has been in all kinds of environments in over a dozen countries.  I suspect the Q2 is even better, but I've never tried one, do not wish to spend the money, and would need new batteries that don't match the other camera I carry for travel and nature photos.  This is important to me since we do carry-on only luggage for several weeks at a tome, and space and weight are a concern.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2023 at 6:50 AM, stuny said:

I've had my Q for over 5 years, take it everywhere with me, on my shoulder or in my hand with the strap wrapped.  I've never taped the mic holes, and I've never had dust on the sensor, nor problems with moisture.  It has been in all kinds of environments in over a dozen countries.  I suspect the Q2 is even better, but I've never tried one, do not wish to spend the money, and would need new batteries that don't match the other camera I carry for travel and nature photos.  This is important to me since we do carry-on only luggage for several weeks at a tome, and space and weight are a concern.

I have nothing to add here, but wanted to say I checked out your website and you have traveled to some incredible places and taken amazing photographs with your Q.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FrozenInTime said:

Tilt screen and back button single AF made me pick the X100V over a Q2. Hated the X100F D-pad constantly changing settings, so bought a CL first, but then the V fixed that.

If the X100VI does not get IBIS and the Q3 gains a tilt screen, I will go for one, as their sizes are roughly equal with the WCL attached. 

On the X100T, where the D-pad has a triple (!) role as menu selector, AF area selector and set of function buttons, one of the first things I did in the menu was disable the pad buttons as function buttons. I suspect I'd do the same thing on the F, even though it has a separate AF selector, and just use the pad as a menu selector (except for the button at the top, which doubles as the DRIVE selector and I think can't be reassigned - what were they thinking?). Function buttons that are too easy to press accidentally, especially when they have other roles, are just more trouble than they are worth.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Anbaric said:

On the X100T, where the D-pad has a triple (!) role as menu selector, AF area selector and set of function buttons, one of the first things I did in the menu was disable the pad buttons as function buttons. I suspect I'd do the same thing on the F, even though it has a separate AF selector, and just use the pad as a menu selector (except for the button at the top, which doubles as the DRIVE selector and I think can't be reassigned - what were they thinking?). Function buttons that are too easy to press accidentally, especially when they have other roles, are just more trouble than they are worth.

Focus point wander seems to be an unfixed nuisance on Leica as well. The CL was bad, but I like the TL2, where it does not have a direct mapping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had one of the first x100’s and later on the newer versions. I even shot a whole wedding on the first edition.

Biggest issue though was that, as I love to hold a camera with two hands, the fuji was just a bit too small.

Too me, the Q is perfect in size. But then, to me, 28mm is just not it. For that reason I sold the Q, and I am thinking of selling the Q2 as well.

It looks like, that to me, the M is a rather perfect camera for daily usage…

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...