Q2/Q3 or Hasselblad X2D? Which do you choose?

[PeterGA]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I reach for the X2D with a 30 on it most of the time these days - I just like the ergonomics of the blad I found the Q difficult to hold and shoot in comparison to the X2D which is just about perfect for me.

[40mm f/2]

I am still wondering if I should get the Q3-43. I had the original Q and I liked it a lot but I was not so convinced about its edge performance. For years I had 2 cameras in my bag: the Q and a Sigma Merrill DP3 (75mm equivalent). The DP3 went to 0.33X better than any Q in macro mode at 0.25X  but it was only good to ISO200. I replaced the Q with a Hasselblad 907X50C and I liked using it a lot but it is limited mainly by lacking IBIS. This year I got a X2D and its performance is amazing especially its IBIS (and the just released MkII is even better but for me  the camera I have is good enough) and colors and DR are so much better on both Hasselblad cameras than the images I took with my Q. 

I am still liking the idea of 2 cameras instead of changing lenses so sometimes I run around with the 907X with the 45P and X2D with the 28P (in cities for architectural) or otherwise the 90V but that is quite heavy. So I am contemplating getting the Q3-43 and using one of my Hasselblad cameras with one lens. One hesitation for me is how far off is the Leica to the Hasselblad in terms of color and dynamic range (around 1 stop less according to https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm). I would appreciate comments  from owners of both camera systems

Edited August 29 by 40mm f/2

[adrianh]

I have posted previously pictures in this thread, so you can see the differences. I would also see it rather an alternative to the SL3. I think that the X2D2 is now superior in the most categories to the SL3. And in the same ball park price wise. 

[adrianh]

1 hour ago, 40mm f/2 said:

I am still liking the idea of 2 cameras instead of changing lenses so sometimes I run around with the 907X with the 45P and X2D with the 28P (in cities for architectural) or otherwise the 90V but that is quite heavy. So I am contemplating getting the Q3-43 and using one of my Hasselblad cameras with one lens. One hesitation for me is how far off is the Leica to the Hasselblad in terms of color and dynamic range (around 1 stop less according to https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm). I would appreciate comments  from owners of both camera systems

That does not make much sense to me, sorry. If you have dynamic situations like weddings, I get the point that you want to work with 2 bodies. But you are doing cities. They don't run around. They don't change poses. So you can take your time, I would rather invest in good lenses. 

Now to your question: yes the Q3 has a somewhat lower dynamic range. Is it a show stopper? I personally don't think so, but only you can decide. The X2D2 has a new mode called HDR, I am still playing with it but I can already say that this seems to be a pretty big improvement in the right situtions (which I am currently experiencing in Dubrovnik). 

[DenverSteve]

On 6/7/2023 at 9:31 PM, ropo54 said:

So, which way would you go? Q2/Q3 or Hasselblad X2D?

The Q shoots faster, but the X2D is greatly improved;

The Q is a fixed lens, while the X2D affords may options?

X2D is 100mpx medium format image.  Better dynamic range brings larger files.  

Both have image stabilization.

The X2D is slightly more expensive, particularly when factoring in several lenses

Landscape shooting?  Street shooting?  Portrait shooting?  Moving objects vs states objects?

If you could have one or the other, which would you choose? Pick your winner.

 

Your own post shows that they are totally apples to oranges.  No comparison between the two cameras.  While neither is "compact" the Hassy is way larger & twice as heavy. Add to that one is fixed prime lens and the other is ILC, completely different formats and, again, apples to oranges.  No comparison.  Even if the IQ and functionality were identical, no comparison. 

Edited August 29 by DenverSteve

[RQ44]

X2D for work and Leica for play.

[anonymoose]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not sure where else to put it, so I'll put it here. Did a comparison of my Q2 vs. X1D II + XCD 38mm f2.5. Most shots were at 1/250 (lack of IBIS on X1D hurts) and 800-1600 ISO wide open. It's shocking how well the Q2 performs against the X1D.

• Detail occasionally had a slight nod to the X1D, but they were mostly tied.
• X1D had slightly nicer colors in some of the shots, but in others reds were coming out pinkish. X1D was consistently a little too yellow. Q2 tends to be a little too blue.
• Bokeh/rendering went to the Q2 most of the time.
• X1D had better dynamic range and highlight/shadow recovery.
• X1D has better ergonomics, but I preferred the Q2 overall (though I'm biased since I own it)
• Q2 having a directional pad is preferred for me. Not a huge fan of touchscreen only operation.
• X1D's rear display is fantastic.

Edited yesterday at 01:08 AM by anonymoose

[frame-it]

1 hour ago, anonymoose said:

Did a comparison of my Q2 vs. X1D II + XCD 38mm f2.5. Most shots were at 1/250 (lack of IBIS on X1D hurts) and 800-1600 ISO wide open. It's shocking how well the Q2 performs against the X1D.

• Detail occasionally had a slight nod to the X1D, but they were mostly tied.
• X1D had slightly nicer colors in some of the shots, but in others reds were coming out pinkish. X1D was consistently a little too yellow. Q2 tends to be a little too blue.
• Bokeh/rendering went to the Q2 most of the time.
• X1D had better dynamic range and highlight/shadow recovery.

why don't u post the unprocessed shots here for comparison, with screenshots of your LR or C1 processing page

 

[anonymoose]

8 minutes ago, frame-it said:

why don't u post the unprocessed shots here for comparison, with screenshots of your LR or C1 processing page

 

My wife/daughter are in all of them, so can't post them unfortunately.