Why Do I Have Such Difficulty with the 28mm FL?

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings!

I've posted often about my continued journey among Leica cameras.  I've owned various M, Q and SL bodies, and often shift from platform to platform trying to find "the one".

I'm approaching that point again, and to avoid further damage to my bank account I would appreciate your help.  Currently the SL2-S 50mm SL-Summicron f/2.0 ASPH is my current kit.  I bought it because as a senior citizen my eyesight isn't what it once was, and getting critical focus on a M body camera has been challenging.   Still, the feeling I get when using the M is special and I miss it.

To try to keep the feel of the M shooting experience I shifted to the original Q, giving me a lens with actual markings, and the ability to shoot manually or with autofocus.  The haptics were great, the macro-lens feature a wonderful bonus, and the overall size was perfect.  The issue was, and remains, the 28mm FL.  I just can't seem to master it.  The majority of my photos are people shots, especially candid people.  Needless to say a 28mm FL isn't what portrait shooters pick up for capturing the perfect shot.  I also don't like cropping everything, and with the wide angle lens I rarely was able to avoid it.

So, I'm reconsidering adding/exchanging my SL setup for an M body.  The problem with that strategy will likely be the same problem I had the last time I used the M bodies - at any distance beyond a few yards the 50mm lens (my preferred focal length) often mimics the image size on the Q, lots of background, little primary subject.  The Q made that issue even worse.

The SL has it's place, and renders very nicely, but it's large and doesn't have that "under the radar" feel that the Q/M provide.  

Have you found a way to get the Q's FL to work for you?  My portraits often provide too many body distortions to make me happy, and getting right into someone's face doesn't make for a very effective candid image.  If the Q had a 50mm FL I'd be fine, but it doesn't.  I want to stay in the Leica family, but making another large investment, and then getting frustrated and unable to capture the image I create in my mind is very frustrating.

Your thoughts/suggestions/comments are welcome and invited.  I realize the Q3 with the larger megapixel sensor seems like an obvious answer, along with cropping, but the 28mm FL is the same lens on all the Qs to date, and that's the bigger issue.

Thanks in advance for the help.

[prk60091]

You are not alone having the issue with the Q-116. I have fallen in and out with it and cleaned it up to sell more than once (and then I say- let me give it one more chance)

What I have been doing is to a/shoot in raw (I assume you do as well based on your gear) b/ set the crop to 35mm (or in your case 50mm)-- the crop will only show in the viewfinder- the actual image will be in 28mm.

As I understand it- that may not be true with Q2/Q3 using LR.

This has been working for me.

 

YMMV

[Le Chef]

I think before you abandon the Q, you might want to try a few things.

Take a look at LFI and the Q section to see how others have handled “street” and portrait shots. What can you learn from them?

With a 28 you need to get closer to the subjects, so you could practice that with family and friends until you’re comfortable with it.

Crop! It’s easy to do and any image quality you may have lost can be recovered in denoise programs.

Lastly I don’t see an issue with the lens being the same as the original Q. I don’t see the Sean Reads of this world complaining about the lens.

Edited April 9, 2024 by Le Chef

[GFW2-SCUSA]

Let's exchange the Lenscap for a Thinking Cap.  You like the feel of the M best of all - very understandable, me too. You find the SL2 clunky (my word) but like the viewfinder/autofocus. You don't like the 28mm lens, but like everything else about the Q. You find focusing the M difficult with your older eyes. 

First, you don't say how long you use a camera before switching to another. Could that be the problem? You don't stick with it long enough to master it? The M takes a while to master, but at 78 I find it easier than my SL2. The rangefinder snaps in and it doesn't matter where the subject is. But I have been using Leica since mid 1060s. You like portraits and the 28 is not the right lens, I agree. Let's toss the 28s. That brings us back to the body. You like the M - so that's the one for you. BUT you say something I don't understand - beyond a few yards the 50mm mimics the 28.  No, the 50 is always a 50. What you are seeing is more subject matter in the frame.  The dilemma seems you want close pictures but don't want to get close to the subject. If that's the case, try a 75mm or 90mm. But I don't think that is what you want. 

An M with a 35 or 50mm lens is, in my opinion an unbeatable combination. Look at Peter Turnely's webpage - he shoots everything with an M 10 (just  bought an M11 P a few days ago)  and 35 Lux. If you want closer, then move closer (as he told me once). Is it possible you are wanting your camera to do more than can be expected? 

Anyway, this is just an old man's thought. Worth what you paid for it. I hope you find the combination that allows you the joy of making the pictures you are seeking. 

[JoshuaR]

I sympathize—it took me a long time to come to terms with 28mm, but it's now my most-used focal, albeit on an M. (I've spent a lot of time with the Q cameras, too.) A few thoughts:

* I struggled a great deal with the Q2's crop modes—and what made them finally click for me was setting the image review to "shutter pressed." This makes it so that the zoomed-in view appears automatically in the EVF when you hold down the shutter after you take the shot. This made it dramatically easier for me to visualize the 50mm crop; suddenly I found myself using the Q2 in 50mm mode all the time. You might give that a try.

* I found that I had to re-educate myself about 28mm and what it offers to a photographer. The most useful resource for me in this regard was a lecture by Sam Abell, available on YouTube here. He talks a lot about working in layers, composing from back to front, and balancing many competing elements. 

* As far as the M cameras go—have you tried a magnifier in the viewfinder eyecup? That would provide you with more of a zoomed-in view on the 50mm frame lines.

[lencap]

Many thanks for the comments - all are helpful.  The issue with cropping the 28mm Q is that the body distortions created when taking the original image remain when cropped.  I’ve realized that trying to master that FL isn’t working for me, and I prefer a better solution.  

I also realize that I tend to get frustrated with the learning curve of new gear, and the SL platform has been challenging to master.  That may indeed be part of the “this isn’t quite what I expected” feeling when I can’t compose and create an image as I visioned it.  It certainly seems reasonable to put more energy into mastering the camera before making any further changes.

My comment about the 50 mimicking the 28 wasn’t expressed well.  At distance my subject occupies a small portion of the frame requiring cropping and reducing pixel density.  I prefer a frame more fully filled with my subject.  Adding a 75/90 FL lens on the M body was part of my “problem” since the focusing areas was small and hard to see clearly.  The hit rate on sharp photos wasn’t great, and setting hypercritical focus before shooting didn’t provide a shallow depth of field when I wanted it.  Perhaps getting comfortable being closer to the subject, even if there is less of a candid feel to the shot is part of the answer.  I’ll research Peter’s work - thanks for the suggestion.  I also realize that neither the SL or M platforms is the problem - it’s my lack of understanding how to best use each platform’s strengths.   More training and practice seem like good starting points.

One final comment.  I was recently at an event in an auditorium setting, several rows back from the stage.  The speakers were well lit, but my view was restricted.  I didn’t bring my Leica, and relied on my iPhone 14 Pro.  I zoomed and changed FL often.  The images were pretty decent, easy to take, and share.  But there wasn’t a lot of joy using the iPhone - it was a tool.  That’s the feeling I’m trying to eliminate.  I mention that since I had owned the 24-90 Zoom, but sold it because of the size and weight.  The images were fine, aided by IBIS and the equivalent of 6 prime lenses in one body.  I could easily compose without lens changes.  
 

Perhaps the solution is keeping the SL kit, rebuying the 24-90 for the flexibility and image quality in one lens.  Combined with the 50mm prime I have that may be a one platform solution.  Adding a M body with a Summicron 50 may be the other tool to give me the lightweight smaller footprint/weight option for more intimate use.  Not sure that’s the answer, but you helped me rethink what I need for my toolbox - both gear and skillsets.

Thanks again.
 

 

Edited April 10, 2024 by lencap

[David Wien]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you are happy with a 90mm lens for your portraits, you can achieve that with the Q3 and have raw file of ~18MB. To achieve this, just move back from the subject as far as you would with a 90mm lens -- use digital zoom (p.125 in the manual) -- then crop the resulting photo. Since you are using the centre of the lens, there will be none of the perspective distortions that you get with a 28mm close up. The difference is that the background will not be as out of focus as with the 90mm lens; but you can use f/1.7 to optimise this.

Try it!

David

Edited April 10, 2024 by David Wien

[Stuart Richardson]

At least to my mind, you are struggling with it because it is overly wide for your vision. 28mm is not a natural feeling angle of view compared to how people see in a single glance. If we scan our eyes around, then yes, we see a wider field. But at any given moment we have our attention at a 40-50mm or so section of what we are looking at, with perhaps 21mm-35mm of peripheral vision. I think the reason they chose 28mm is so that they did not have to make a decision on a single more ideal focal length. 28mm is too wide for many people, but their argument is that you can crop. It also works well for new users and amateurs, as most smartphone cameras are 28mm and a lot of new photographers tend to use very wide angles because the initial impulse is to include everything in the frame...that was also the consideration of a lot of street photographers and journalists. It was not that it is usually an ideal focal length, it was that it was harder to mess up. Over time an aesthetic built up around it. My intention here is not to troll people who like 28mm. If you do, more power to you, I just think that it is better to have the camera conform to your vision than have your vision conform to the camera. I honestly think the Q would have been better as a zoom, rather than a 28mm camera they want you to crop. My ideal would have been around 40mm, but a second Q has been discussed ad nauseum and it is a controversial topic. I did my best to enjoy the Q2 and had the exact same experience as you. Cropping is not satisfying if you are doing it for every single photo. I sold it and found better luck in a used M10M and 50mm and a Ricoh GRIIIx for truly pocket work. The lens is fantastic and quality is quite close to the Q2 and cropping, though obviously a totally different form factor. I use the SL2 for my work and for more serious situations, but it is a large and heavy by comparison. Still, paired with one of the lighter lenses like the Panasonic or Leica ASPH lenses, you may find it works for you. I would encourage you to try it in a store. L mount lenses tend to be as good or better than the Q lens, regardless of who made them. I found my 24mm 3.5 Sigma is of comparable sharpness and quality to the lens on the Q and it was a mere 550 dollars by comparison.

[Luke_Miller]

15 hours ago, lencap said:

Have you found a way to get the Q's FL to work for you?  My portraits often provide too many body distortions to make me happy, and getting right into someone's face doesn't make for a very effective candid image.  

Just recently added a Q2 to the stable for travel and informal events.  My challenge with the 28mm lens is minimizing/avoiding the exaggerated perspective when the lens is not level.  To help do that I have the 35mm frame lines active so as to have a vertical reference as well as the horizon line.  Since I am primarily an event shooter using the tools to straighten verticals during post processing does unflattering thing to my subjects.  The Q3, I believe, has Leica's Perspective Control available which displays lines in the EVF/LCD that show the effects of the exaggerated perspective and have Lightroom automatically correct it.  The movable LCD of the Q3 also allows for waist-level shooting which, in my use, would solve most of the issue.

I think the Q2 would work for candid portraiture if the camera is kept level.  For formal portraiture I prefer 75mm and longer.

But all in all I am happy with my Q2 and will just be careful to manage the perspective challenge.  Generally, I like 35mm with my M bodies and setting the Q2 to 35mm allows Lightroom to apply it to the DNGs on import.  Interestingly Capture One ignores this setting and displays the full image, including (if desired), the nearly 24mm image the lens is capable of.  A lot of lens distortion in the extra coverage, but occasionally useful.

Edited April 10, 2024 by Luke_Miller
Additional thought

[Casey Jefferson]

It took me a year to feel comfortable shooting with Q(2), it's especially difficult to get used to as it's wider than 28mm which I had no problem when shooting it on M (except the frameline, but that's another topic).

It's a great camera! Keep shooting!

[SLamb]

6 hours ago, David Wien said:

If you are happy with a 90mm lens for your portraits, you can achieve that with the Q3 and have raw file of ~18MB. To achieve this, just move back from the subject as far as you would with a 90mm lens -- use digital zoom (p.125 in the manual) -- then crop the resulting photo. Since you are using the centre of the lens, there will be none of the perspective distortions that you get with a 28mm close up. The difference is that the background will not be as out of focus as with the 90mm lens; but you can use f/1.7 to optimise this.

Try it!

David

As I understood it, if you have selected Large DNG you will still have a maximum 60MP RAW file as the DNG is saved at full size in line with your setting.  I also understood that the only thing that affects the DNG size is whether Large, Medium or Small has been selected, and you would get an 18MP raw file size if the DNG size is set to Small.

The JPG is saved at the crop size, so a 90mm crop will give you either a 6MP JPG at the Large DNG size (or Large JPG size if not shooting RAW)  reducing to 2MP at the Small DNG/JPG size.

Happy to be corrected if my understanding is wrong.

[SLamb]

On the subject of the 28mm focal length.  There are hundreds of millions of smartphone users around the world whose introduction to photography has been using 23-28mm lenses in their phones.  Of course some phones have zoom capabilities, but that is normally achieved by cropping into the full size image, as happens on the Q3.  I think that any of those millions of smartphone users would immediately feel at home with the Q3 and its focal length, and maybe Leica is onto something by keeping the 28mm lens rather than going to 50mm or 35mm.  Who know how many of today's smartphone photographers will opt in future for a Q camera with the focal length that they know how to use effectively.

[Anakronox]

Hey, not everyone gels with 28mm.  28mm is almost a Goldilocks focal length for me and how I shoot but I’d be lying if I said it took a while for me to get my head wrapped around leaning into its steprengths and avoiding weaknesses.  For the OP, perhaps another system has what they want.  For example, I’ve been shooting a Zf lately with the 28mm and 40mm primes and combined it makes a fairly inconspicuous setup.  You’ll get the benefits of changing lenses and the autofocus is really solid.  It’s a little fiddly to get setup the first time but once I set it up I haven’t had to go menu diving since.  

[Luke_Miller]

I have well over 6K shots in my Lightroom catalog taken at, or near, 28mm.  From 2002 up until around 2020 I ignored any exaggerated perspective in those images. Slanted verticals did not bother me.  Then Lightroom and Capture One added automatic perspective correction tools and I began using them.  Now in 2024 I have come to the conclusion that blanket application of those tools can do more harm than good.  I still use them but very selectively.  For architecture, cityscapes, and landscapes they can improve the image.  For people shots they can do grievous injury.  Just did a family event in a small room with folks both standing and sitting.  I was walking around with my Q2 capturing the event.  Most shots had lots of exaggerated perspective, but the subjects looked best with no, or minor, perspective correction.  

Edited April 10, 2024 by Luke_Miller

[Qwertynm]

I‘d hold onto your SL-2 and look for a used Sigma 45 2.8 L mount lens. If 28(26) or 35 is not your FL the Q3 is certainly not the camera for you. Yes you can crop to 50mm but then it looks equivalent to a 50 f/3.2 and the FL is actually 46, so that’s why I‘d try the Sigma 45 2.8 on your SL first. I too hope Leica fixes the idiotic rangefinder lines on the Q3 in the crop modes. A workaround would be to shoot 1:1 aspect ratio so it kinda looks like a square 40mm. Or get a Sony A7CR with a 50 2.5G. It’s not a Leica but your best alternative. 

[ianforber]

19 hours ago, lencap said:

Many thanks for the comments - all are helpful.  The issue with cropping the 28mm Q is that the body distortions created when taking the original image remain when cropped.  I’ve realized that trying to master that FL isn’t working for me, and I prefer a better solution.  

I also realize that I tend to get frustrated with the learning curve of new gear, and the SL platform has been challenging to master.  That may indeed be part of the “this isn’t quite what I expected” feeling when I can’t compose and create an image as I visioned it.  It certainly seems reasonable to put more energy into mastering the camera before making any further changes.

My comment about the 50 mimicking the 28 wasn’t expressed well.  At distance my subject occupies a small portion of the frame requiring cropping and reducing pixel density.  I prefer a frame more fully filled with my subject.  Adding a 75/90 FL lens on the M body was part of my “problem” since the focusing areas was small and hard to see clearly.  The hit rate on sharp photos wasn’t great, and setting hypercritical focus before shooting didn’t provide a shallow depth of field when I wanted it.  Perhaps getting comfortable being closer to the subject, even if there is less of a candid feel to the shot is part of the answer.  I’ll research Peter’s work - thanks for the suggestion.  I also realize that neither the SL or M platforms is the problem - it’s my lack of understanding how to best use each platform’s strengths.   More training and practice seem like good starting points.

One final comment.  I was recently at an event in an auditorium setting, several rows back from the stage.  The speakers were well lit, but my view was restricted.  I didn’t bring my Leica, and relied on my iPhone 14 Pro.  I zoomed and changed FL often.  The images were pretty decent, easy to take, and share.  But there wasn’t a lot of joy using the iPhone - it was a tool.  That’s the feeling I’m trying to eliminate.  I mention that since I had owned the 24-90 Zoom, but sold it because of the size and weight.  The images were fine, aided by IBIS and the equivalent of 6 prime lenses in one body.  I could easily compose without lens changes.  
 

Perhaps the solution is keeping the SL kit, rebuying the 24-90 for the flexibility and image quality in one lens.  Combined with the 50mm prime I have that may be a one platform solution.  Adding a M body with a Summicron 50 may be the other tool to give me the lightweight smaller footprint/weight option for more intimate use.  Not sure that’s the answer, but you helped me rethink what I need for my toolbox - both gear and skillsets.

Thanks again.
 

 

If you don’t like 28mm I suspect there’s no point persevering with the Q2. Personally I crop almost every shot regardless of whether I take it on the Q2 or on 35mm or 50mm on my M11 and I can’t often see a difference between portraits taken near the subject regardless of the focal length. That’s just me though.

I too often fail to master new tech, let alone develop my skills to the level to make the best of existing kit. Good luck in finding what you are looking for. Would a used CL be worth investigating?
 

 

[Olaf_ZG]

I tried the Q and Q2, but the f/l didn’t work for me, so off they went. Will resist in buying a Q3 unless they bring out a 40/50mm version.

The sl24-90 is the most versatile yet most heavy option. In your case I would try the sl with a 65mm sigma… light, tighter than 50mm and as you have already the SL, not a too expensive experiment…

[Pindy]

22 hours ago, JoshuaRothman said:

I sympathize—it took me a long time to come to terms with 28mm, but it's now my most-used focal, albeit on an M. (I've spent a lot of time with the Q cameras, too.) A few thoughts:

* I struggled a great deal with the Q2's crop modes—and what made them finally click for me was setting the image review to "shutter pressed." This makes it so that the zoomed-in view appears automatically in the EVF when you hold down the shutter after you take the shot. This made it dramatically easier for me to visualize the 50mm crop; suddenly I found myself using the Q2 in 50mm mode all the time. You might give that a try.

* I found that I had to re-educate myself about 28mm and what it offers to a photographer. The most useful resource for me in this regard was a lecture by Sam Abell, available on YouTube here. He talks a lot about working in layers, composing from back to front, and balancing many competing elements. 

* As far as the M cameras go—have you tried a magnifier in the viewfinder eyecup? That would provide you with more of a zoomed-in view on the 50mm frame lines.

I watched the Sam Abell talk, just great. Learned so much. 

[JNK100]

Over the years I have used all sorts of cameras and lenses.

I started with an slr with a 50mm lens in the 1980's and then to my current Q3. For the longest time, I used an DSLR with 16-35 and 70-210 f2.8 lenses until the weight and size became an issue. I then bought an M9 with a 50mm 'Lux which I loved . Feeling the 'need' for AF, I moved eventually to Fuji with a 50mm equivalent lens. I then bought 3 zooms.to go with it but the experience was not as I expected for some reason.

I liked the Q3 so set my Fuji at 28mm equivalent for a while and doing it liberating with more time.looling for and taking shots than deciding which FL to my use.

Cropping on the Q3 is very useable up to 50mm and gives me the same resolution as my M9 did. 

However, I have rarely used the crop and am now used to the native 28mm FL.

This works for me and is very satisfying.

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[mokona]

15 hours ago, ianforber said:

I too often fail to master new tech, let alone develop my skills to the level to make the best of existing kit. Good luck in finding what you are looking for. Would a used CL be worth investigating?
 

 

yeah, a CL with le Leica 35mm Summilux TL, sigma 56mm f1.4 and sigma 90mm f2.8: a very nice and light combo.