from Q2 to Q3?

[kengai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the Q2 was considered a great camera until recently.
Now the Q3 is being talked about, the first rumours are being read, and the question of the transition from Q2 to Q3 is being raised: what do you think?
Are there or will there be real improvements to justify the switch?

[Le Chef]

Since we don’t know the full spec, don’t know the price, since no one like Jono has published his experience yet, and since even amongst Q2 owners their usage varies considerably, it’s hard to say yes, upgrade or not. Best solution is to wait. 

[Mikep996]

IMO, the reason I would be interested in a Q3 is in the potential resolution improvement in the ability to crop.  I see no use (to me) in a tilt screen, increased battery life (never had a battery fail to last for a  day of shooting my Q2), etc..   Don't need in-camera storage or in-camera recharging.  I don't disagree with having them but I would never buy a camera just to get that capability.

But since my current enthusiasm for my Q2 is its ability to crop with its fixed lens and not carry my M10R with a couple of lenses, then the more pixels available, the better it can do that.  So I'm enthused about the possible 60MP sensor but totally uninterested in everything else that has been rumored  Further, since I have no use for it, I hope it doesn't have a tilt screen unless they manage to implement it without the hunchback look.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Mikep996

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, kengai said:

the Q2 was considered a great camera until recently.
Now the Q3 is being talked about, the first rumours are being read, and the question of the transition from Q2 to Q3 is being raised: what do you think?
Are there or will there be real improvements to justify the switch?

The Q2 will still be a great camera after the Q3 is released. Whether it is worth it for you to upgrade is a question that only you will be able to answer.

[trickness]

Q3 will have better autofocus and a higher resolution BSI sensor, so probably better dynamic range and (perhaps) less noise at higher ISO. And that clunky tilt screen.

Is this worth $2500 more than a used Q2? If you crop a lot, maybe. If you take photos at weird angles that require a tilt screen, maybe. 

But if the release of the Q3 knocks prices of used Q2's down to $3500 (they're already around $3900)? At that point, really hard to make a case for getting a Q3, unless you just want it. And no matter what we say, we all end up wanting the shiny new thing, don't we? 🤩

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by trickness

[Mikep996]

"And no matter what we say, we all end up wanting the shiny new thing, don't we? 🤩"

Yes, the reality is that's the ONLY reason to buy it.  I have never heard of a "new" camera that was able to make a poor photographer into a good one.  

I have a Bronica SQAi and a Hasselblad 501CM.  My pics are no better with the Hassy than they are with Bronica.  More important, I actually prefer shooting with the Bronica so that's the one I carry to take photographs.  I carry the Hassy when it's important to get the, "WOW, He's using a Hasselblad!" comments.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Mikep996

[bobtodrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 minutes ago, Corius said:

The Q2 will still be a great camera after the Q3 is released. Whether it is worth it for you to upgrade is a question that only you will be able to answer.

I find this laughable…’the Q2 was a great camera until recently’…what did they all develop the plague at the same time 😂

I have images from my first digital camera, a Panasonic L1 (7.5mp) that I sell in 16x20 print size and they look fine.

[dancook]

The Q series camera has always been my favourite, but not without room for improvement.

Things like focusing on the brighter background when you and subject are moving and using wide AF, perhaps phase detection will help this? I'm interested to see what is said about the AF.

Also sometimes when hip shooting I'd sometimes not press the shutter button fully, I'm excited about the screw thread shutter button since adding a soft shutter release button will make it easier to fully press (I'm pressing from half way down the side of my thumb because of how i hold the camera). I've even got one sitting in my drawer from my fling with the M series cameras.

I'm also a fan of the tilt screen and shooting at low angles, so that's a boon for me.

Not bothered about the MP, but I do like to use the crop modes when shooting live music to improve the variety of photos - so I guess that's helpful.

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by dancook

[LocalHero1953]

60mp over 48mp is not going to make much of a difference - 12% increase in linear resolution - 8400x5600 to 9500x6300 😐. It's not a game changer. Q->Q2 was 40% by comparison.

I will wait and see what other changes there are: much better AF with usable face recognition? Better low light noise and colour? Video for more than 30min? That's all much more interesting to me. Tilt screen? Meh.

 

[dancook]

I had a thought too - whilst internal storage isn't much, it's probably a good jpg backup for wedding size

[liggy]

Highly unlikely I’d make the switch even though I’d dearly love usb-c charging and a tilting screen.  The extra mp would be hardly noticeable imo.  

[Farrell Gallery]

So, just because something new is *one day* coming, that renders the predecessor obsolete? 

[M11 for me]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb LocalHero1953:

difference - 12% increase in linear resolution

That means that your photographs will improve by 12%. That is certainly a game changer. And roughly 1 out of 10 will be a keeper whereas before it was none 😇

So great that we can prove everything by means of mathematics.

Edited May 14, 2023 by M11 for me

[beewee]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

60mp over 48mp is not going to make much of a difference - 12% increase in linear resolution - 8400x5600 to 9500x6300 😐. It's not a game changer. Q->Q2 was 40% by comparison.

I will wait and see what other changes there are: much better AF with usable face recognition? Better low light noise and colour? Video for more than 30min? That's all much more interesting to me. Tilt screen? Meh.

 

Assuming the Q2 does use a similar variant of the M11 sensor, dynamic range and high ISO performance would be the most noticeable improvement on the sensor side. About 1-1.5 stop improvement in noise/dynamic range to ISO 1600 compared to Q2 and then very noticeable improvement in high ISO performance from ISO 3200-25000 compared to the Q2 sensor. I expect there will be some color improvements as well on the red channel that was added to the S3, SL2-S, and M11.

Generally speaking, better dynamic range and lower noise usually translate to better subject detection. Higher megapixel count will help with eye-tracking at farther subject distances but 48->60 MP is really a small change so it’ll have minimal impact. PDAF is nice but I’m not sure how much benefit we’ll see for a 28mm lens but I’d love to be proven wrong on this. Maybe at f/1.7-f/2.0?

[goodbokeh]

4 hours ago, beewee said:

Assuming the Q2 does use a similar variant of the M11 sensor, dynamic range and high ISO performance would be the most noticeable improvement on the sensor side. About 1-1.5 stop improvement in noise/dynamic range to ISO 1600 compared to Q2 and then very noticeable improvement in high ISO performance from ISO 3200-25000 compared to the Q2 sensor. I expect there will be some color improvements as well on the red channel that was added to the S3, SL2-S, and M11.

Generally speaking, better dynamic range and lower noise usually translate to better subject detection. Higher megapixel count will help with eye-tracking at farther subject distances but 48->60 MP is really a small change so it’ll have minimal impact. PDAF is nice but I’m not sure how much benefit we’ll see for a 28mm lens but I’d love to be proven wrong on this. Maybe at f/1.7-f/2.0?

I use the Q2 side by side with the A1 and A7R5. In most situations I limit my ISOs in all 3 cameras to 1600. My experience is the Sony sensors have about 50% of the 1-1.5 stop advantage in noise/dynamic range you mention. The Q2 deficit is easily managed for me with the EV dial and Topaz (if needed).

[Genoweffa]

12 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

I find this laughable…’the Q2 was a great camera until recently’…what did they all develop the plague at the same time 😂

I have images from my first digital camera, a Panasonic L1 (7.5mp) that I sell in 16x20 print size and they look fine.

I still have canon 5d...I put zeiss 135 on it...kaboom!

[Kristofferpaulsen]

i honestly dont really think we need much more resolution. Sure, I'd take it, but 50mp is really a sweet spot in my opinion. I also shoot with a 100mp phase one, and once you're into frequency sep etc, those files get pretty monstrous.

 

I'd be more interested in better low light performance and better autofocus, I'm sure I'm not alone. My run and gun rig is an SL2 with a 50mm and a Q2, and I always notice how much richer the SL2 files are.. so I'd love to see some of that in the Q2. Having saying that, it's an incredible camera the way it is, and I really don't need it to be any better.

 

I'd also take more frame rate  options in video. I doubt we'll see a swivel screen, this would be pretty un-Leica, and IMO out of character for the model. These things are designed to be small tanks that can take a beating, and swivel screens aren't going to be conducive to that. 

[Mikep996]

"Sure, I'd take it, but 50mp is really a sweet spot in my opinion. "

I agree with the idea - but I thought 24 was the sweet spot!  It's funny, just about every increase in MP was declared to be the "sweet spot" when the NEXT increase was announced.  IOW, if you had a 12MP camera, that was the "sweet spot" when 16-20 came out."  60 will be the "sweet spot" when 75 (or whatever) becomes common.

I thought my 6MP Nikon DSLR was plenty when it came out!  Heck, I've got an uncropped 16x20 print from it on the wall and a 16x20 print from my M10R or Q2 doesn't look any "sharper" unless you pull out a magnifying glass to look at prints on the wall.   Of course, nowadays, it seems that is the only way many people, especially internet "influencers," look at images - at 400% on a computer screen!  🙄

Did (does) anybody look at a corner of Ansel Adams prints at 400% and express concern about the lack of detail?   Well, yeah...probably some influencers do. 😏   All the old lawyer jokes can be appropriately shifted over...😵‍💫

Edited May 15, 2023 by Mikep996

[beewee]

I imagine when people talk about ‘sweet spot’ for sensor resolution, it’s based less on image quality and more on workflow requirements including processing power of your computer, speed and capacity of your storage, and transfer speed of files between camera/memory card to computer, external storage, and eventually to some form of output media.

Sweet spots evolve as computing power and storage costs/capacity/speed changes but it boils down to what a user friendly workflow can support without jumping through hoops for more resolution. I recently dug up a 500GB Lacie external drive from 2008 and decided to back it up before discarding it. It took over 5hrs to grab about 450GB of data off of it. The drive weighs about 4kg and was a giant brick. Today, that same amount of storage can fit on a microSD card and it would have taken about 30 minute to to offload 450GB from a fast microSD card. I think if I was stuck with 2008 storage technology, even if I had 50 MP sensors, I wouldn’t want anything more than 12 MP. But guess what, the M1 Max MacBook Pro can transfer data at well over 1000GB/s and crank through 60 MP images without even spinning up the fan, so 60 MP seems like a nice sweet spot if I don’t have to wait for anything to process or transfer.

Edited May 15, 2023 by beewee

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[LocalHero1953]

I still think that no image needs more than 24mp, and certainly no interchangeable lens camera or one with a zoom lens needs more. The Q series is unusual in that it is designed with a single prime so that it can be cropped. So I'm happy to accept a Q2 with 47mp or a bit more. In a body that gives you the FL shooting envelope of a traditional M, it makes a lot of sense.