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

[prk60091]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

You can find many reviews (dating back to 2015) like this speculating that Leica went with the 28mm "with the iphone it is the most used focal length in the world" https://kristiandowling.com/blog/2015/6/10/leica-q-typ-116-camera-review

This was verified by our Leica rep at the time.

It may not have ever been stated by Leica in their literature...but it definitely influenced their thinking.

I, and many people I know had an iphone in 2015.

 

You can find many reviews (dating back to 2015) like this speculating that Leica went with the 28mm "with the iphone it is the most used focal length in the world" https://kristiandowling.com/blog/2015/6/10/leica-q-typ-116-camera-review

 

just because someone speculates something does not equate to a fact

[jaapv]

15 hours ago, adan said:

1) Remember that the Q was originally an in-house research project to examine digitally correcting lens output, distortion in particular. The Q "28mm" lens is intentionally designed to natively produce a lot of fisheye distortion (thus keeping it smaller than expected), which the camera firmware straightens out.

This was to test the concept, for use in the SL lenses if/where needed (and save size and the amount of optical correction needed in those**). But once the Q got rave reviews from beta testers, it was put into production as its own product line.

2) Most (not all, but most) compact "kit zooms" start at "28mm" - 35mm is passé, and 24 is rare. And that is the ultimate target market for the Q - a high-end FF fixed-lens "camera bag in one camera." As the Q has acquired higher-resolution sensors, a cropping function is available to provide reasonably decent resolution when cropped to 35, 50 and now 75mm framing (similar tech is now available in the M11 60Mp camera). The 2004 Digilux 2 also sported "28-90" framing, and the Q is in some degree the updated Digilux 2 (outstanding f/2-ish fixed lens, EVF in the "M-like" corner location, manual shutter/aperture/focus controls).

Compare:

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!

 

3) 28 is popular with many "street shooters," for the added DoF and other reasons (Garry Winogrand used 28 a lot). Leica did "abuse" the 0.72 M viewfinder - going all the way back to the M4-P - by squeezing in 28mm framelines. And even briefly produced an optional "wide M" 0.58X viewfinder, to make the 28 lines even more visible.

_________________

** This is rumored to be the reason Erwin Puts, an expert on Leica's optical correction genius over the decades, walked away from Leica in his last years. He was disgusted that Leica would stoop to digitally-correcting its top-end lenses.

https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2019/10/erwin-puts-says-farewell-to-leica.html#:~:text=Erwin Puts%2C who for several,no longer willing to follow.

Not quite. He told me that he was unhappy about the intrusion of Panasonic electronic thinking in all Leicas and the Q specifically. And he did not like the direction the top management was taking the company. 

[Advertisement]

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

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, prk60091 said:

You can find many reviews (dating back to 2015) like this speculating that Leica went with the 28mm "with the iphone it is the most used focal length in the world" https://kristiandowling.com/blog/2015/6/10/leica-q-typ-116-camera-review

 

just because someone speculates something does not equate to a fact

Assuming you missed the point about the rep confirming it.

[prk60091]

4 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

Assuming you missed the point about the rep confirming it.

No I did not-- Unless it was someone from Leica Wetzler- saying it came from a 'rep'  is meaningless.  "Rep's" make stuff up all the time.

 

 

[bobtodrick]

41 minutes ago, prk60091 said:

No I did not-- Unless it was someone from Leica Wetzler- saying it came from a 'rep'  is meaningless.  "Rep's" make stuff up all the time.

 

 

Okay…so what, other than your ‘speculation’ do you have that proves otherwise?

[Miltz]

Well 24mm is very close to 26mm which is what the field of view of the Q really is. Would I want a 35mm Q? Maybe. 26mm is close enough to 35mm to be able to crop even in the original Q. Would I trade size and weight for 35mm? No. I suspect size and weight played a role in the design decision.

[prk60091]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

Okay…so what, other than your ‘speculation’ do you have that proves otherwise?

I have nothing to prove.  I am not the person making the assertion.

[bobtodrick]

2 minutes ago, prk60091 said:

I have nothing to prove.  I am not the person making the assertion.

Ahhh...so just your speculation....'nough said.

[thegobi]

Maybe they were just trying to compete with the Ricoh GR - the greatest street photography camera ever made!  😜

[Olaf_ZG]

7 hours ago, gigithephotographer said:

There has been evidence. How reliable it is, is up to you to judge. 

Somehow, there is a hardcore of Q users fearing a 45mm version. They think it is not needed, for them, so no one needs it. Somehow, those hardcore users can’t even imagine someone else being happy with a 40/50 version. So sad.

Their argument is, they can crop. They believe it’s the same. Even more sad.

[Al Brown]

On 12/21/2023 at 2:17 AM, gigithephotographer said:

It’s a 28mm lens because of the iPhone. 

iPhone's default focal lenght of the #15 iteration is is 24mm. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with leica Q and vice versa, even though on previous iphones there was 26mm as default.

[Le Chef]

On 12/21/2023 at 1:48 PM, bobtodrick said:

Ahhh...so just your speculation....'nough said.

Actually he never made the assertion. This is a roll up from another poster.
 

I think most of us would not believe reps, the aunt of the guy I met who worked at Wetzlar, or the cat the puts the cameras in to boxes. I’m sure when Leica believes there’s a market for a longer lens Q they will let us know. In the meantime we can continue to enjoy whatever Q we own.

[Le Chef]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Somehow, there is a hardcore of Q users fearing a 45mm version.

No one is fearing anything - that’s your deflection; because there’s only a Nothing Burger to discuss that’s sadly simply filled with laughably vacuous speculation.

Edited December 23, 2023 by Le Chef

[earleygallery]

On 12/21/2023 at 4:47 AM, Einst_Stein said:

If you compare Leica M summicron or SL summicron, 28mm is not the smallest, nor the cheapest. 
it is 35mm or 50mm.
Size is definitely not the reason of 28mm. 

You can't really compare the Q lens to an M lens, it's designed as a unit together with the sensor and relies on digital correction as the lens is otherwise terribly distorted like a semi fish eye lens. I'm certain there was an interview with the designer after the original Q came out and they said size was a factor in choosing a 28mm lens (as well as the idea that one would be able to crop the image to acheive a longer focal length).

[reynoldsyoung]

You guys are so absolute with your assertions.  Everybody should take a deep breath and enjoy the discussion...with the view that everyone, to some degree, is contributing to it.  This is such a great place to learn!

[thegobi]

5 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Somehow, there is a hardcore of Q users fearing a 45mm version. They think it is not needed, for them, so no one needs it. Somehow, those hardcore users can’t even imagine someone else being happy with a 40/50 version. So sad.

Their argument is, they can crop. They believe it’s the same. Even more sad.

Somehow there is a hardcore of 45mm users fearing a 28mm version. They think it is not needed, for them, so no one needs it. Somehow, those hardcore users can’t even imagine someone else being happy with a 28 version. So sad.

Their argument is they can’t crop. They believe it’s not the same. Even more sad.

🤣

It took 20 years for Ricoh to run out of ideas and improvements to the GR and make a 40mm version—a 28mm ‘only’ camera…

Leica listens to its customers—complain to them, and if there are enough of you to make it viable, maybe you might get one…

Until then, maybe we can respect the people that think what makes a Q a Q is the 28mm lens…. 😜

[Simone_DF]

2 hours ago, thegobi said:

Somehow there is a hardcore of 45mm users fearing a 28mm version. They think it is not needed, for them, so no one needs it. Somehow, those hardcore users can’t even imagine someone else being happy with a 28 version. So sad.

😜

That’s where you are so terribly wrong.

NO ONE has even remotely considered taking the 28mm away. Me, like most, want a 50mm Q as a second camera to the 28mm Q or alongside another camera. 
Is it really that hard to understand?

[thegobi]

3 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

That’s where you are so terribly wrong.

NO ONE has even remotely considered taking the 28mm away. Me, like most, want a 50mm Q as a second camera to the 28mm Q or alongside another camera. 
Is it really that hard to understand?

You did notice it was a parody of the attitude of another comment…no?  
Is it really that hard to understand? 🤣

In this universe, right now, the Q is a 28mm fixed prime, mirrorless camera.

Does this mean there should also be a 35, a 40, and a 50 now? I am losing track of all the demands in this thread… 😆

…no! Wait! Make it a zoom lens! Yeah! 

You can make your demands to Leica instead— maybe they will listen!

In the meantime I am going to go out and take some photos with my non-imaginary Q2M (that I kinda knew was a 28mm before I bought it and still thought ‘that’s the camera for me!’)—and I may even crop the images 😱

So much angst over gear… 🙂

[LocalHero1953]

What a bizarre thread! I had to re-read it, but I see no one has posted saying there must be a Q45 and the Q28 must be stopped. I see no one posting that a Q45 should not be made because it is a threat to the Q28. I see no one posting that there would be no demand for a Q45. (I do see the traditional monthly spat about the focal length of the lens.)

All I see is several posts upping the toxic ante as if those arguments had just been made.

Peace and goodwill everyone.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[thegobi]

It is a very bizarre thread and I am guilty of stirring the pot a bit - only because it is bizarre to have arguments over personal lens preferences and cameras that don’t exist! 

Let’s get this back on track then! 🙂

I was one of those that bought a Ricoh GR 40mm - why? Because after many many years of  28mm versions I wanted to try something new—but not really because 40 was my favourite lens.

I think Ricoh honed what a GR was to the point that the only thing left to change was a different lens. To do that with a Q sounds like a big deal considering how integrated the lens, body and software are. It will come down to how many people wanting something other than 28mm to make that investment. I am not sure Leica is close to that yet as the Q3 seems to be selling well.

It is possibly even more unlikely now as Leica seems to be pushing—very hard—the ability to ‘zoom’ ( *cough* crop 😜) to get other focal lengths with a 60 megapixel sensor. (and yes I understand that it is not the same thing, but how much of the Q customer base really cares?)

As to why 28 in the first place? There are all the interesting technical arguments, but maybe part of it was simply just 28 and 35 are the most traditionally popular street photography lenses? If it came down to a coin toss, you can crop a 28 to kinda get a 35 but not the other way…

For now though, maybe everyone should chill out and enjoy what they can do with 28mm and if they don’t like ‘zooming’ (*cough* cropping), petition Leica for something different—it worked with Ricoh! 🙂

Oh, and for those that celebrate this time of year I hope you have a wonderful festive season. 🙂