My little Q2 vs M10 test

[TheLaird]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I did my little test of my Q2 versus the borrowed M10 today.

DNG with no conversions. Q2 image is on the left. Yes some differences in focus as the M10 is new to me and also Q2 at 1.7 and M10 at 1.4. I also tried to arrange them in PS to have the same items in the frame.

Now the exposures were as near as I could get but perhaps not 100% the same. I feel the M10 has whiter whites but not really much difference in the blacks. Is this the exposure?

I am trying to not automatically jump to the conclusion that the M10 with 50mm Summilux lens is better. My wife felt the Q2 had more 3D type look to it. More detail perhaps. She might be right.

Anything others can say (apart from redo the test with a test card and tripod)?

 

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!

 

[Advertisement]

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

[GFW2-SCUSA]

An interesting test as I was just last night looking at some amazingly beautiful pictures taken with an Q3 and thinking I might want one. First and foremost Of course your wife is correct. Now that is established, I see the M10 (which I use) pictures to be a tad sharper and the whites whiter. This little test did not convince me that I need a Q.  However I am not one to get that deep into the technical side of my phictures. Razor sharpness isn't a requirement nor crystal clear colors. I'm more concerned that I get the image I want and that it is clear and in focus and convey's what I saw/felt at the moment. 

 

[brickftl]

a better test would be the original Q against the M10 since they share the same 24 mp sensor. 

I had the original Q, then Q2, then Q3. IMO, the best images were from the original Q, hence one of the reasons that when I was ready to jump to rangefinder I went with the M10 despite all the raves about M10R's higher mp count. So glad I did.

[jdlaing]

4 hours ago, brickftl said:

a better test would be the original Q against the M10 since they share the same 24 mp sensor. 

I had the original Q, then Q2, then Q3. IMO, the best images were from the original Q, hence one of the reasons that when I was ready to jump to rangefinder I went with the M10 despite all the raves about M10R's higher mp count. So glad I did.

Same megapixel but definitely a different sensor.

[brickftl]

3 hours ago, jdlaing said:

Same megapixel but definitely a different sensor.

are you sure? I read that both cameras have 50,000 max ISO number and the same image processor called Maestro 2 which is reportedly made by Fujitsu.

[dugby]

The Maestro Milbeaut SOC chip is developed by SOCIONEXT, a separate company created by a partnership of Fujitsu and Panasonic.

https://www.socionext.com/en/pr/sn_pr20180928_01e.pdf

 

Edited March 30, 2024 by dugby

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, TheLaird said:

Anything others can say (apart from redo the test with a test card and tripod)?

Re-do the test with equivalent lenses.

Sorry, but I am completely unimpressed comparing a 28mm from one system (whether cropped or uncropped) to a 50mm from another system.

Photographic imaging and optical design simply don't work that way.

[otto.f]

14 hours ago, TheLaird said:

Q2 had more 3D type look to it. More detail perhaps.

I see exactly the opposite, not only in this test but also in general. When I see the Q2 and M10 image threads there is this systematic difference in sharpness and depth in favor of the M. What you see in the test as ‘depth’ is just a little longer exposure and/or softer contrast of the lens. 

[Eoin]

What’s the whole point of your test?.

Assuming you’re thinking of moving to a M10, I’ll make the following observations.
1, Are you a screen viewer or print hanger?, there is a world of difference looking at the minutia on screen, but print them out and hang them, look at them at normal distances or even up close, much of the nuances are not apparent.

2, You’ve made no adjustments, the difference in whites and colours could be as simple as white balance differences between the cameras.

3, I own both M & Q cameras, I prefer the M for my photography hobby needs and the Q for situations where I just want a “do it all with no fuss” camera.
Both are equally capable within the limits of available light and my photography skills.  

4, I can clearly see the differences a M body or M lens can make to an image, but truth be told, those differences are lost on most viewers of the image, they are always more interested in the subject or context the image was taken in, not the colours, sharpness or background blur.

5, The M system is a different way of seeing and shooting, the cost of admission with a few lenses can be eye-watering when compared to other equally capable systems.
Choose a system that best suits your photographic eye and personal needs … 

 

[TheLaird]

Many thanks to all for your thoughts. In trying to answer your valid and informed replies, just some more input from me.

Yes it would have been good, and also more apt, to test more like-for-like cameras but I have a Q2 and my mate has M10 with the 50mm lens. Upgrading for a test is not really on, so trying the best with what I have available.

I do a lot more printing now and also a lot more mono. However since I also do colour, I cannot just get a mono Leica but fully appreciate that the monos it would give would be far better. If the lotto numbers come in, who knows.

I sold my Fuji GFX kit to get the Q2 as it was too heavy, bulky and awkward to carry about. It did give truly fantastic IQ but I was not using it. And with the best camera being the one in your hand, I certainly use the Q2 much more than I ever did the GFX. Yes I miss the longer reach and that is one reason for looking at the M10 as I can get a 75mm lens. I have tabled with the Digital zooms on the Q2 to see what that can give me. And is it acceptable?

I did say at the top that I was trying to not automatically say the M10 was better, but it is of course in terms of IQ. I am not a retro film type image looking guy as I have a couple of film cameras for that., so am not really looking at using vintage type lenses on M10 to give that older type look. I do like the way that tones, especially in monos, drift into one another. I can also see that the F1.4 even compared to the F1.7 does have superb fall off in focus and a couple of snaps I took off my wife, really show that up well.

However Eoin (whose name I share but in the Welsh format) hits the nail on the head. Choose a system that best suits your needs and taste. I have a couple of days with my mate's camera so will try some more.

On a technical note. I think the focus bit is OK but what I really miss is the details in the viewfinder. I like to have the camera at my eye and change aperture and sometimes shutter speed to get the better exposure. I am not sure the M10 gives that and the little red triangle thing just confuses the hell out of me. So I needed to take the camera away from eye, look at the back of it and alter it there to get the wanted exposure. Is this just a learning curve (and I appreciate it might very well be) or have I set it up wrongly? (My mate is away for the weekend and I do not want to contact him really)

 

 

[brickftl]

3 hours ago, otto.f said:

I see exactly the opposite, not only in this test but also in general. When I see the Q2 and M10 image threads there is this systematic difference in sharpness and depth in favor of the M. What you see in the test as ‘depth’ is just a little longer exposure and/or softer contrast of the lens. 

I agree with offo.f 100%

[brickftl]

1 hour ago, Eoin said:

What’s the whole point of your test?.

Assuming you’re thinking of moving to a M10, I’ll make the following observations.
1, Are you a screen viewer or print hanger?, there is a world of difference looking at the minutia on screen, but print them out and hang them, look at them at normal distances or even up close, much of the nuances are not apparent.

2, You’ve made no adjustments, the difference in whites and colours could be as simple as white balance differences between the cameras.

3, I own both M & Q cameras, I prefer the M for my photography hobby needs and the Q for situations where I just want a “do it all with no fuss” camera.
Both are equally capable within the limits of available light and my photography skills.  

4, I can clearly see the differences a M body or M lens can make to an image, but truth be told, those differences are lost on most viewers of the image, they are always more interested in the subject or context the image was taken in, not the colours, sharpness or background blur.

5, The M system is a different way of seeing and shooting, the cost of admission with a few lenses can be eye-watering when compared to other equally capable systems.
Choose a system that best suits your photographic eye and personal needs … 

 

agree 100%

Edited March 30, 2024 by brickftl

[otto.f]

2 hours ago, Eoin said:

I can clearly see the differences a M body or M lens can make to an image, but truth be told, those differences are lost on most viewers of the image, they are always more interested in the subject or context the image was taken in, not the colours, sharpness or background blur.

👌🏼

[jdlaing]

10 hours ago, brickftl said:

 

are you sure? I read that both cameras have 50,000 max ISO number and the same image processor called Maestro 2 which is reportedly made by Fujitsu.

The same image engine yes.

[brickftl]

On 3/30/2024 at 9:59 AM, jdlaing said:

The same image engine yes.

oh ok got it