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

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Chris W said:

Having had an original Q and now owning an X1D2 I do think there is a comparison to be made.

I absolutely loved my Q, image quality, build quality, colours out of camera. I just didn't;t want to shoot at 28mm (26?) all the time. I know since the Q2/Q3 you can crop in.

Although bigger and heavier, I still feel the X1D2 with the 45p lens is very ergonomic and a comfortable walk around camera. The images are stunning, the colours are gorgeous and need no fixing. The 45p gives me the 35mm equivalent I would have loved in the Q.

Both systems haver great image quality. The Q3 is lighter and I imagine much better with focus than the X series. The X series also offers amazing image quality, but the ability to change lens.

Qx is excellent, and probably the best ever single camera that can cover 50% of usage. But it is not enough. Cropping Q can't replace a true longer lens without cropping. 

So here X2D shows its value. 

But I compared X2D with SLx and Sx. Xs series lenses are generally one or more stop smaller in aperture. Not much, but unfortunatley exactly what Leica's glass significantly shining. Even Contax/Zeiss 645 shows much sweeter IQ. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Chris W]

The only XCD lens that gets you into Q territory is the 45p, maybe one of the new V lenses. Most XCD or Leica SL lenses are big, heavy and not EDC worthy IMO.

Even the affordable 45p delivers superb image quality in my opinion, albeit F4 aperture.

[Einst_Stein]

12 minutes ago, Chris W said:

The only XCD lens that gets you into Q territory is the 45p, maybe one of the new V lenses. Most XCD or Leica SL lenses are big, heavy and not EDC worthy IMO.

Even the affordable 45p delivers superb image quality in my opinion, albeit F4 aperture.

I don;t own X2d, I merely tried it a few miniutes. To me X2D+ 45P is an excellent landscape tool. Portability would not be the goal though. At least I don't care much if eyeing on X2D.

For portability, my favorite set is Leica XV + XU. XV for flexibility, XU for the prime sweetness. Since I just got Q3, XV + Q3 might be the next alternative, still struggling. 

[Photon42]

The X2D with the 38V is similar to a Q regarding the focal length and max aperture.

[adrianh]

I just got my  X2D , opted for the 55V and waiting for the 28P

IMHO it is a good companion for the Q3 but not a really option. It is more then 50% heavier, costs double the price, is much bigger and is way slower.

The X2D  will probably replace my M11, the weight is very similar, the price of the body and the lenses are comparable, it is faster in good light due to AF but AF is really bad in low light, however manual focussing is  nice  with the V-Lenses. Flash is way simpler and much much cheaper due to Nikon TTL implementation.

 

 

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!

Edited January 1, 2024 by adrianh

[student]

2 hours ago, adrianh said:

IMHO it is a good companion for the Q3 but not a really option. It is more then 50% heavier, costs double the price, is much bigger and is way slower.

The X2D  will probably replace my M11, the weight is very similar, the price of the body and the lenses are comparable, it is faster in good light due to AF but AF is really bad in low light, however manual focussing is  nice  with the V-Lenses. Flash is way simpler and much much cheaper due to Nikon TTL implementation.

Fair comparison IMHO

[anonymoose]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm getting awfully close to picking up a used X1D II 50C with a 45mm lens. My Q2 is letting me down in low light and shadow detail when I expose for highlights.

I'll post a comparison here if I decide it's a good idea to spend $6k I didn't intend on spending 🤣

[Photon42]

54 minutes ago, anonymoose said:

I'm getting awfully close to picking up a used X1D II 50C with a 45mm lens. My Q2 is letting me down in low light and shadow detail when I expose for highlights.

I'll post a comparison here if I decide it's a good idea to spend $6k I didn't intend on spending 🤣

With the Hassy and the 45 you lose two stops of light gathering capability from looking at the respective maximum apertures. The sensor of the Hassy thus would need to be three stops better to see a little difference. In addition, the Q2 has image stabilisation, which the X1D2 lacks.

[Einst_Stein]

1 hour ago, anonymoose said:

I'm getting awfully close to picking up a used X1D II 50C with a 45mm lens. My Q2 is letting me down in low light and shadow detail when I expose for highlights.

I'll post a comparison here if I decide it's a good idea to spend $6k I didn't intend on spending 🤣

You might be happier with 38v.

[anonymoose]

I went to test out the X1D II 50C and took some comparison shots on it and my Q2. Playing around with them in Lightroom, even with the slower lens on the X1D, shadow recovery is at least a stop better than my Q2.

That being said, the difference in image quality isn't there and I love using my Q2 enough that the X1D isn't worth it for me. I might rent one in the future when I can take it out to shoot landscapes.

And yes, the autofocus is as bad or worse than they say. Made my Q2 feel like a Sony A1 🤣

Edited January 6, 2024 by anonymoose

[PeterGA]

I've been patiently waiting for a good reason to sell my 50 0.95 Noctilux and the 100 megapixels from Hasselblad was a good reason to do it. As for Q3 I'm happy with the Q2 moncrome. 

 

 

 

[Photon42]

Just note the X1D's sensor was first marketed around 2014 in the CFV 50 (first gen). Of course the sensor isn't everything, but it is also not nothing ....

[Einst_Stein]

12 hours ago, PeterGA said:

I've been patiently waiting for a good reason to sell my 50 0.95 Noctilux and the 100 megapixels from Hasselblad was a good reason to do it. As for Q3 I'm happy with the Q2 moncrome. 

 

 

 

I don’t understand the logic to replace the 50mm/f0.95 with 100mP sensor. 
Did you get the f0.95 because you thought that would give you higher resolution? and then found it is not?

[Al Brown]

Always forever and ever I take the X2D over any Q. Not even a 0.00001s of thinking.
I would take a Q3 over X1D though without any second thoughts.

[S Maclean]

I'm late here, but I'm able to give an informed opinion since I have a lot of the gear in question.

First, X2D can not be compared to the Q cameras.  They are not on the same plane in any aspect.  One is a fantastic system for portability, fast use, ease of use, etc. It has a single lens, form factor, and technology that can be used by anyone, from iPhone users to professionals. The other is a medium format 100 mp first-in-class photographers tool that, although good on automatic mode, is meant to be a tool for though out, paced photography.  We bought the Q for my wife, a fantastic photographer who hates technical tinkering. I use it sparingly and love it, but I would instead use the M11 when in need, Which, on a 28 mm lens range, is very easy to use fast in hyper-focus and gives me far better choice of other, more attractive prime focal lenghs.

The Hasselblad images are addictive. I have the x2d and the 907x, and I cannot get enough of it. So are the M11 (and the Q, I guess), but pound for pound for cityscapes, landscapes, etc, Hasselblad wins. For portrait it depends on the style.  For studio, X2D.

I have no experience with the S3, which I suppose would be a better comparison to the X2D or with the SL2 if we forgo medium format and mp count.

And i know that MP count is not critical beyond 40 or so.  But there is no arguing that the 100mp paired with a medium format sensor make a difference.

The dynamic range, color rendering, IBIS (can take a perfect pic handhled at 1 sec with some care) on the Hassy is just not matched, definitely not by the Q

I've tested the Hasselblad for street photography (even the 907X), and it can be done, but it is heavier, slower, slow focus, and I end up getting a hit ratio of about 60% or less if I am really on the move.

With the Q, under the same circumstances, I get about 90% hit ratio, with the M11 about 80/85%.  This is taking pics on the move, fast focusing or hyperfocusing, shooting from the hip, etc. In other words, real use.  X system is challenged but not fully defeated under that scenario.

But, give me time to compose, and the X is a beast.

So...Q or X2D:  X2D ($ aside).

M system vrs X2D or 907X: Very close, just depends on form factor preference and intended use and end-user experience. Both systems will be a joy to use and give you outstanding results, with small compromises or hoops to jump over in each case.

X2D versus S3 (or Fuji) I suspect here it also depends on the end user but the IQ will be similar.  FUJI is going to beat everything if you are a fast-trigger shooter, S3 in the middle and Hassy perhaps slightly more limited on field use.

907x : a joy to use if the process is as important as the image itself.

In my expereince the joy of using the M systems manually, as well as the 907X, produces amazing results on my images....because I am just, truly, invested on each image.  X2D used manually would fall right behind those 2, but under some conditions,  the IBIS, MP count, IQ and color quality and ease of use really give an advantage.

 

But no, the Q is not part of that conversation at all.

 

 

[bags27]

4 hours ago, S Maclean said:

I'm late here, but I'm able to give an informed opinion since I have a lot of the gear in question.

First, X2D can not be compared to the Q cameras.  They are not on the same plane in any aspect.  One is a fantastic system for portability, fast use, ease of use, etc. It has a single lens, form factor, and technology that can be used by anyone, from iPhone users to professionals. The other is a medium format 100 mp first-in-class photographers tool that, although good on automatic mode, is meant to be a tool for though out, paced photography.  We bought the Q for my wife, a fantastic photographer who hates technical tinkering. I use it sparingly and love it, but I would instead use the M11 when in need, Which, on a 28 mm lens range, is very easy to use fast in hyper-focus and gives me far better choice of other, more attractive prime focal lenghs.

The Hasselblad images are addictive. I have the x2d and the 907x, and I cannot get enough of it. So are the M11 (and the Q, I guess), but pound for pound for cityscapes, landscapes, etc, Hasselblad wins. For portrait it depends on the style.  For studio, X2D.

I have no experience with the S3, which I suppose would be a better comparison to the X2D or with the SL2 if we forgo medium format and mp count.

And i know that MP count is not critical beyond 40 or so.  But there is no arguing that the 100mp paired with a medium format sensor make a difference.

The dynamic range, color rendering, IBIS (can take a perfect pic handhled at 1 sec with some care) on the Hassy is just not matched, definitely not by the Q

I've tested the Hasselblad for street photography (even the 907X), and it can be done, but it is heavier, slower, slow focus, and I end up getting a hit ratio of about 60% or less if I am really on the move.

With the Q, under the same circumstances, I get about 90% hit ratio, with the M11 about 80/85%.  This is taking pics on the move, fast focusing or hyperfocusing, shooting from the hip, etc. In other words, real use.  X system is challenged but not fully defeated under that scenario.

But, give me time to compose, and the X is a beast.

So...Q or X2D:  X2D ($ aside).

M system vrs X2D or 907X: Very close, just depends on form factor preference and intended use and end-user experience. Both systems will be a joy to use and give you outstanding results, with small compromises or hoops to jump over in each case.

X2D versus S3 (or Fuji) I suspect here it also depends on the end user but the IQ will be similar.  FUJI is going to beat everything if you are a fast-trigger shooter, S3 in the middle and Hassy perhaps slightly more limited on field use.

907x : a joy to use if the process is as important as the image itself.

In my expereince the joy of using the M systems manually, as well as the 907X, produces amazing results on my images....because I am just, truly, invested on each image.  X2D used manually would fall right behind those 2, but under some conditions,  the IBIS, MP count, IQ and color quality and ease of use really give an advantage.

 

But no, the Q is not part of that conversation at all.

 

 

I find it amazing (in no way implying incredulity or dispute) that you could rank the 907x system that highly, given that it lacks IBIS. I say that as someone who owns it (with the 50c): the only digital camera I use--for international travel, as I otherwise shoot only film. I agree that the 907x offers a wonderful shooting experience (I otherwise mainly use a film Blad, and when focusing  always move the 907x in the wrong direction, so reminiscent it is of the film version). So, absolutely, agree: a joy to use. My shooting buddy has the X2D (I convinced him to buy it) and I've used it. Very nice, but not the 907x. My Q went a long time ago; no regrets. I almost bought a M11P instead of the 907x and glad I didn't, though all respect to its images. 

 

[S Maclean]

7 hours ago, bags27 said:

I find it amazing (in no way implying incredulity or dispute) that you could rank the 907x system that highly, given that it lacks IBIS. I say that as someone who owns it (with the 50c): the only digital camera I use--for international travel, as I otherwise shoot only film. I agree that the 907x offers a wonderful shooting experience (I otherwise mainly use a film Blad, and when focusing  always move the 907x in the wrong direction, so reminiscent it is of the film version). So, absolutely, agree: a joy to use. My shooting buddy has the X2D (I convinced him to buy it) and I've used it. Very nice, but not the 907x. My Q went a long time ago; no regrets. I almost bought a M11P instead of the 907x and glad I didn't, though all respect to its images. 

 

For me it's about its intended use.  Don't get me wrong, I would not complain and would love for it to have the Same ibis as the x2d, which is incredible, but once you get used to it you just have to do work around it. As you would on a film camera.

I have the x2d so I take that when I know I don't want to deal with the lack of Ibis or viewfinder. But I have been very pleasantly surprised the couple of times I've taken the 907x for a walk through a city. It yields well, specially on wider lenses; 38, 28 and sometimes 55. And specially on shots where DOF is not critical amd can be stopped down a bit.

To have both, plus the m11, is an incredibly unnecessary luxury that I have chosen to take, and I don't regret it.  I am not a dentist, but that doesn't mean I can't live like one.

[Viv]

I am still getting used to my newly-acquired X2D, but I am very impressed by the images, which usually need little or no post-processing. The tactile experience is also most pleasing.

However, I will keep my Q2, which is a great travel camera and my CL for snapshot shooting. I am undecided whether or not to keep the M11. I don't use it a lot.

Incidentally, I sold a Fuji system to finance the X2D.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Smogg]

19 minutes ago, Viv said:

I am still getting used to my newly-acquired X2D, but I am very impressed by the images, which usually need little or no post-processing. The tactile experience is also most pleasing.

However, I will keep my Q2, which is a great travel camera and my CL for snapshot shooting. I am undecided whether or not to keep the M11. I don't use it a lot.

Incidentally, I sold a Fuji system to finance the X2D.

Usually people who sell Leica M later regret it. The experience of shooting with a Leica M is incomparable. Don't rush to sell this camera, let it sit on the shelf for a while and it will find its way to your heart again, I'm sure

[Viv]

7 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Usually people who sell Leica M later regret it. The experience of shooting with a Leica M is incomparable. Don't rush to sell this camera, let it sit on the shelf for a while and it will find its way to your heart again, I'm sure

I agree with you. I am not in any rush.