why Q~Q3 are 28mm, not 35 or 24?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

Leica brought out a compact camera that replaces the common 28-70 zoom with a cropping system Which I find a brilliant idea  

 

 No, their marketing is brilliant: making believe that their digital crop is like a real zoom. Very well done, and reading the reactions here, many swallowed the coolaid.

And don’t get me wrong, I am really happy the Q is a best seller. I would by my third one if they bring out a 40/50 version. Not the 28 must crop version.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

 No, their marketing is brilliant: making believe that their digital crop is like a real zoom. Very well done, and reading the reactions here, many swallowed the coolaid.

And don’t get me wrong, I am really happy the Q is a best seller. I would by my third one if they bring out a 40/50 version. Not the 28 must crop version.

The only things that differ are the pixel count and DOF, which are fairly irrelevant on a travel and casual camera. The images will be identical in aspect, perspective and anything else, especially as other cameras in this category are equipped with relatively slow zoom lenses, which takes care of the DOF argument. A cropped to 70 mm 1.7 28  will have less DOF than a zoomed-out lens @ 70/ 5.6. 
I am not going to post the proof again, I have done so often enough but this is really photography basics 1.1. 
28 must crop is the essential idea behind the camera.  Newer models even have framelines underscoring this idea. 

[Olaf_ZG]

28 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The only things that differ are the pixel count and DOF, which are fairly irrelevant on a travel and casual camera. The images will be identical in aspect, perspective and anything else, especially as other cameras in this category are equipped with relatively slow zoom lenses, which takes care of the DOF argument. A cropped to 70 mm 1.7 28  will have less DOF than a zoomed-out lens @ 70/ 5.6. 
I am not going to post the proof again, I have done so often enough but this is really photography basics 1.1. 
28 must crop is the essential idea behind the camera.  Newer models even have framelines underscoring this idea. 

You think you proofed it, except you didn’t: why do people have a nice set of SL apo’s? Or both a 28mm and 50mm lux? Why do carry a hefty zoom on your SL as you could do it digitally?
 

If it is all the same, Leica’s marketing fooled you again, cause you bought way too much.

A 28/1.7 can’t replace a 50/1.7, many mp can’t replace a good zoom. Unless one doesn’t care about IQ ofcourse. Which could be the case, but you will be offended.

[Le Chef]

24 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

You think you proofed it, except you didn’t: why do people have a nice set of SL apo’s? Or both a 28mm and 50mm lux? Why do carry a hefty zoom on your SL as you could do it digitally?

You keep missing context in this discussion. @jaapv keeps explaining it for you but you have failed to grasp the role of the Q camera and why it has the specification it does. The Q is a point and shoot camera that is designed to reduce the amount of clutter you take with you. It’s a trade-off between convenience vs the highest IQ. If you need higher IQ then buy an SL and whichever lenses you need. No one here is arguing against that.

[ynp]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Except when you run into a situation that needs a wider lens.

I stitch, if possible. 

[Olaf_ZG]

23 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

You keep missing context in this discussion. @jaapv keeps explaining it for you but you have failed to grasp the role of the Q camera and why it has the specification it does. The Q is a point and shoot camera that is designed to reduce the amount of clutter you take with you. It’s a trade-off between convenience vs the highest IQ. If you need higher IQ then buy an SL and whichever lenses you need. No one here is arguing against that.

And you are keep on missing my point: I want such p&s with a 40/50 lens. That’s it. I don’t want them to take the 28mm away, it’s great for many people, but not for me. I would love another f/l.

The whole story about digital crop/ zoom is just utterly marketing bs, which obviously many people swallowed. Worst thing is, one can’t even see the full cropped frame before taking the shot, as Leica want is to see 28mm only. Any other digital p&s performs better here. But then, I don’t want to complain about the negatives, enough going on in this sub forum already.

I just stick to my wishes for an additional Q.

[Einst_Stein]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don’t have Q3 long enough yet, but I checked with friends who have Q2 for fheir cropping/usage “histogram”, they rarely go beyond 50mm. 35mm being the most. 

With Q3, it is possible to move somewhat towards 90mm. 

But compared to my XV at 70mm, Q2 cropped to 70mm is not preferred. It is acceptable compromise at most.To use Q3 mainly in 90mm? A smaller than 1” sensor camera? Good joke!

Edited December 26, 2023 by Einst_Stein

[Knorp]

20 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I just stick to my wishes for an additional Q.

Amen to that !

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!

 

[Einst_Stein]

I would expect another focal length Q, on the longer side. But it is also questionable whether M or L with multiple lenses is a better choice.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And you are keep on missing my point: I want such p&s with a 40/50 lens. That’s it. I don’t want them to take the 28mm away, it’s great for many people, but not for me. I would love another f/l.

The whole story about digital crop/ zoom is just utterly marketing bs, which obviously many people swallowed. Worst thing is, one can’t even see the full cropped frame before taking the shot, as Leica want is to see 28mm only. Any other digital p&s performs better here. But then, I don’t want to complain about the negatives, enough going on in this sub forum already.

I just stick to my wishes for an additional Q.

You may wish it, but I can just imagine the scene in the camera shop:  “I’d like to donate 6000$ to Leica for a variable crop camera” “ Certainly Sir Here we have the Q short 28-70 mm and here the Q long for 50-150.”  Ah, I see. Well the 28- 70 has a Summicron 50 equivalent at Summilux speed and the 50-150 a Summilux 50 and a host of focal lengths I never use. I like 35, 50 and occasionally 28. Do you ever sell any of those 50-150ies?”  “ Sure, I sold one to some Scandinavian. Sorry it is so dusty, Sir. “. 

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And you are keep on missing my point: I want such p&s with a 40/50 lens. That’s it. I don’t want them to take the 28mm away, it’s great for many people, but not for me. I would love another f/l.

The whole story about digital crop/ zoom is just utterly marketing bs, which obviously many people swallowed. Worst thing is, one can’t even see the full cropped frame before taking the shot, as Leica want is to see 28mm only. Any other digital p&s performs better here. But then, I don’t want to complain about the negatives, enough going on in this sub forum already.

I just stick to my wishes for an additional Q.

Additional? I already see no use for one, let alone a 12000 Euro wish for two. 😅

[M11 for me]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Olaf_ZG:

You think you proofed it, except you didn’t: why do people have a nice set of SL apo’s? Or both a 28mm and 50mm lux? Why do carry a hefty zoom on your SL as you could do it digitally?

In that instance we would need a Q21 and a Q28 and a Q35 and a Q50 and a Q75 and a Q90 and a Q135. Plus a big bag to carry them all. And something just comes into my mind: Lets opt for a Qzoom 21 - 135mm f/1.2. 

Maybe we are happy with the 28mm f/1.7.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

You think you proofed it, except you didn’t: why do people have a nice set of SL apo’s? Or both a 28mm and 50mm lux? Why do carry a hefty zoom on your SL as you could do it digitally?
 

If it is all the same, Leica’s marketing fooled you again, cause you bought way too much.

A 28/1.7 can’t replace a 50/1.7, many mp can’t replace a good zoom. Unless one doesn’t care about IQ ofcourse. Which could be the case, but you will be offended.

Oh no, I am not offended at all, but I fail to see any advantage in these extremely high pixel counts for 95% of photographs. A60 MP Summilux 28 can easily replace a 50 mm Summicron with the added advantage of being a stop faster to reduce ISO. You have failed to explain why it “could not replace” In my view it is the Princess on the Pea Syndrome. No offense meant, it is a close relative to GAS which we all suffer of. 

[Olaf_ZG]

2 minutes ago, jaapv said:

You have failed to explain why it “could not replace” other than in a placebo way. 

For portraits I don’t like 28mm, I prefer at least 45mm, say with f2. The new Q, with a flipscreen, will give me a samewise feeling as I had with a 500cm plus 80mm. Never used a 50mm on it.

Being close with a 40/50 is so much different then being close with a 28mm. I am sorry you can’t see this.

[Olaf_ZG]

32 minutes ago, jaapv said:

You may wish it, but I can just imagine the scene in the camera shop:  “I’d like to donate 6000$ to Leica for a variable crop camera” “ Certainly Sir Here we have the Q short 28-70 mm and here the Q long for 50-150.”  Ah, I see. Well the 28- 70 has a Summicron 50 equivalent at Summilux speed and the 50-150 a Summilux 50 and a host of focal lengths I never use. I like 35, 50 and occasionally 28. Do you ever sell any of those 50-150ies?”  “ Sure, I sold one to some Scandinavian. Sorry it is so dusty, Sir. “. 

I guess you are right, Leica convinced people so much that the Q has a variable crop (and that they are unique with it) that any new tighter version will leave many Q’ers with a bad taste in the mouth. Better than a 28mm cropped it can’t be. Leica’s marketing killed its own expansion.

 

[Olaf_ZG]

25 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

In that instance we would need a Q21 and a Q28 and a Q35 and a Q50 and a Q75 and a Q90 and a Q135. Plus a big bag to carry them all. And something just comes into my mind: Lets opt for a Qzoom 21 - 135mm f/1.2. 

Maybe we are happy with the 28mm f/1.7.

According your name, I guess you have a M. I also guess you have more lenses? Why? 

[jaapv]

13 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

For portraits I don’t like 28mm, I prefer at least 45mm, say with f2. The new Q, with a flipscreen, will give me a samewise feeling as I had with a 500cm plus 80mm. Never used a 50mm on it.

Being close with a 40/50 is so much different then being close with a 28mm. I am sorry you can’t see this.

Then what exactly is the difference in your perception if your subject stays at the same distance?  Perspective the same, I assume you stop down a bit to avoid a fuzzy nose  and you are still at 30 MP.

[jaapv]

11 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

According your name, I guess you have a M. I also guess you have more lenses? Why? 

Because an M is a totally different camera concept…

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Olaf_ZG]

6 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Then what exactly is the difference in your perception if your subject stays at the same distance?  Perspective the same, I assume you stop down a bit to avoid a fuzzy nose  and you are still at 30 MP.

I need to turn this question around: why did you bought 10k worth of zooms, if a digital crop could be sufficient? 

[Olaf_ZG]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

Because an M is a totally different camera concept…

It is not about the concept, it proofs there is a need for different f/l’s.

I guess you were the one who bought a black Ford as well, as that was the only choice.