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

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am puzzled by your comment that 50mm is your preferred focal length, but you find that you have too much background in your shots around the people you are photographing. The 'correct' response to this would be to ditch 50mm and use 75mm (or get closer to your subjects). Do you mean that 50mm is your preferred focal length on a M because it occupies more of the viewfinder? And 75mm puts too much stress on your eyes and their ability to focus? If so then I suspect you won't achieve satisfaction with either your M or a Q2/Q3. I would also suggest looking at a CL with, say, a 60mm TL (90mm equiv) or 35mm TL (50mm equiv). Both are superb lenses and create great images on the 24mp sensor of the CL. 

FWIW I switched from CL to Q2 simply to cut down on the quantity of kit I owned. I still regret the CL (and 35 and 60), and I am 100% certain I do not get better photos of people on the Q2 than I ever did on the CL.

Edited April 11, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[Advertisement]

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

[Miltz]

If you’re Current kit is the the SL-2 with 50mm Apo, going to 28mm is a massive change. No matter what Leica says crop modes on the Q3 suck. Since the camera doesn’t zoom to crop like every other camera that does crop modes it’s nearly impossible to use frame lines for anything past 35mm. Even going from 35mm to 28mm is a big change especially since the 28mm on the Q is really around 27mm even after corrections. I knew all this going into it. I hope Leica offers zoom to crop for the people who want it. 

[Kozonoh]

You should say: nearly impossible for you. For me it’s no problem.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, Kozonoh said:

You should say: nearly impossible for you. For me it’s no problem.

Agreed - it's just not an issue - for me.

Why is anyone using the crops for framing anyway? They help with composition, but since you get the full raw image, you can create the perfect crop afterwards. You can choose any size, shape or position you like within the 28mm frame.

The very useful function of the crop modes, for me, is that they constrain autofocus and exposure metering to the cropped area. They are just metering and focusing tools; calling them framing tools is a misnomer.

Edited April 12, 2024 by LocalHero1953

[dpitt]

On 4/11/2024 at 2:13 PM, mokona said:

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

As suggested, consider a CL or even a TL2 with and EVF.
I can sympathize with older eyes and at least having to use glasses with correct diopter to see the focusing patch clearly. But with these glasses I can not even read the top dial of my M...

I almost never use a 28mm on my FF camera's. I either go for 50 mm or 35 and even like 21 mm better for occasional use. I just like to see and approach the world with 50mm rather than 28mm, and often even crop my shots even further.

Also, I find my SL wonderful, eyes problem solved, but is too big and heavy for traveling. So my Leica TL2 with EVF and a Summicron 35 v3 M lens is a very compact and light solution with excellent results. The CL is maybe even better, there are some pro's and con's but I would recommend that you consider them both. And if you want there are a multitude of L mount options to chose from with AF and even OIS on some. The Lumix 20-60mm S lens will give a very useful 30-90 FL and is relatively small and light. Or you can go for the compact Summicron 23mm TL...

Edited April 13, 2024 by dpitt

[Wellsyboy]

I think with the 28mm FL the essence is to be comfortable getting close........

[Wellsyboy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 4/10/2024 at 1:38 AM, 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.

Tha was a cracking tip about the "shutter pressed" review function - thank you. For anyone else reading this it only works in single shot mode (obviously!) but it is extremely useful. 

[Simone_DF]

On 4/9/2024 at 11:46 PM, lencap said:

 

I think you have a few options here, and you have to pick your poison, as none of them is ideal to your situation, at least at the moment.

1. Wait for a Q with a 50mm (have you sent a request to Leica? If they think enough people will buy it, they'll make it, but they also need to know how many of us are around)

2. Keep your Q3 and crop all the time, which I personally think is dumb, but to each their own. If it works for you, more power to you.

3. You say the SL + 50 APO is too big and heavy, I agree. What about the SL3 + a Sigma prime? The 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 are compact and light, and have a manual aperture ring, which will bring the experience closer to your M.

4. Switch to another brand. The Nikon ZFC has a great implementation for manual lenses and will work well with most of your M lenses too, especially if you don't care about corners. Plenty of options to explore with other brands too.

[Casey Jefferson]

The first thing to take good frames with the Q series is to get low. It's one camera to avoid shooting at eye level unless subject gets very close or you'll end up with neither here nor there kind of shot with lots of perspective weirdness.

The 35mm and longer is more forgiving. But when shooting at tight spaces like crowded location or small venue, as well as family photo, the Q series is hard to beat.

One thing that makes the Q series most enjoyable to shoot is that recompose just works.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

22 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

I think you have a few options here, and you have to pick your poison, as none of them is ideal to your situation, at least at the moment.

1. Wait for a Q with a 50mm (have you sent a request to Leica? If they think enough people will buy it, they'll make it, but they also need to know how many of us are around)

2. Keep your Q3 and crop all the time, which I personally think is dumb, but to each their own. If it works for you, more power to you.

3. You say the SL + 50 APO is too big and heavy, I agree. What about the SL3 + a Sigma prime? The 50mm f2 and 90mm f2.8 are compact and light, and have a manual aperture ring, which will bring the experience closer to your M.

4. Switch to another brand. The Nikon ZFC has a great implementation for manual lenses and will work well with most of your M lenses too, especially if you don't care about corners. Plenty of options to explore with other brands too.

The ZF is also a reasonably big camera. Maybe an A7CR with the Sigma you mention. I will say I'm using the SL3 with the Sigma DGDN 50 f2 and I really like it. I have the APO, non APO and Summilux. They all have their place but the Sigma get the most use.

Even the SL2 with the Sigma might suit.

Gordon

[Luke_Miller]

22 hours ago, Casey Jefferson said:

The first thing to take good frames with the Q series is to get low. It's one camera to avoid shooting at eye level unless subject gets very close or you'll end up with neither here nor there kind of shot with lots of perspective weirdness.

Just recently picked of a used Q2.  Love the camera and lens.  I agree with Casey that for a lot of shots getting lower helps reduce the 28mm exaggerated perspective in tight situations.  Going forward I expect I will replace it with a used Q3 when they become available.  Its tilting LCD will allow waist level shooting and the Perspective Control feature will act as a visual cue to the amount of exaggerated perspective in the image as I compose the shot. 

[ianforber]

On 4/16/2024 at 2:32 PM, Luke_Miller said:

Just recently picked of a used Q2.  Love the camera and lens.  I agree with Casey that for a lot of shots getting lower helps reduce the 28mm exaggerated perspective in tight situations.  Going forward I expect I will replace it with a used Q3 when they become available.  Its tilting LCD will allow waist level shooting and the Perspective Control feature will act as a visual cue to the amount of exaggerated perspective in the image as I compose the shot. 

Never thought of or noticed any benefits of getting low. I’ll give it a try on my Q2. How low is low? I’m 6’ if that makes a difference. 

[Luke_Miller]

1 hour ago, ianforber said:

Never thought of or noticed any benefits of getting low. I’ll give it a try on my Q2. How low is low? I’m 6’ if that makes a difference. 

Getting low allows one to compose the shot without having to tilt the camera down.  If I were doing a shot of folks seated at a table, I could either compose the shot while standing or after taking a seat at the next table.  In the first case I would have exaggerated perspective (tilting verticals), but little to none in the second.  The idea is to try to get to the same level as the subject.

[David Wien]

1 hour ago, Luke_Miller said:

Getting low allows one to compose the shot without having to tilt the camera down.  If I were doing a shot of folks seated at a table, I could either compose the shot while standing or after taking a seat at the next table.  In the first case I would have exaggerated perspective (tilting verticals), but little to none in the second.  The idea is to try to get to the same level as the subject.

I think this might possibly have been the thinking behind the titling screen of the Q3. Just thought!

David

[40mm f/2]

I had the original Q and the 28mm focal length which is in reality a 26mm lens is the main reason I gave it up. 26mm is close to the standard angle of view to phone cameras. For some that may be great as it is what they are used to but a single focal length camera is for me to take more selective pictures than a phone. Optical the Q-lens is a great performer in the center but not so much in the corner and using a longer focal length  could allow to design a smaller, lighter lens with better edge performance.

A Leica Q with 40mm (+/-5mm) would be for me a definite buy. I find a tilting screen extremely useful for both shots low to the ground but also when using a tripod (Less hunching and also a little bit smaller tripod).

Edited April 20, 2024 by 40mm f/2

[Le Chef]

3 hours ago, 40mm f/2 said:

Optical the Q-lens is a great performer in the center but not so much in the corner

Are you saying that once you’ve put an image through Lightroom or other post software and used the optical corrections you still get subpar performance from the lens?

Edited April 20, 2024 by Le Chef

[40mm f/2]

Yes, also visible in prints.Actually completely uncorrected this lens is even wider with more distortion and vignetting and corner softness but that not obvious as the lens correction is already happening in the camera. In general it is true to some extend to all wide angle lenses much less now than decades ago. The only way to have edge performance identical to center performance are spherical sensors with lenses specifically designed for that sphere. (Sony developed something like that and maybe release it???). As the lens and sensor curvature are designed together it is not something easy to use in a camera with exchangeable lenses but it would be perfect for fixed lens cameras like the Q

[GinaJ]

I traded in my m9 for a Q2 and had a similar experience.  It is a fun camera to shoot and very responsive and quiet, but for whatever reason I was never as happy with the images I made with the Q2 compared to the M.  A few years later I ended up going back to the M and added the 1.4x magnifier from Light Lens Lab for my 50mm lenses.  I agree with other forum members who recommended the CL, I bought a used one on a whim and absolutely love it.  It makes zero sense since on paper in every way the Q2 has better specs but I find the CL to be more enjoyable to use, and I am happier with the images I make with it.  It's an added bonus that you can use M lenses on it with an adapter.  Perhaps try renting one first to see if you like it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Pindy]

One thing the Q lens makes clear is that, especially in cloudy weather, even in what should be strong side light, the wrong metering can be tough because you get a lot of sky which darkens faces in either evaluative or highlight-weighted metering. Either you're riding the exp comp, or you set it to center weighted or spot. Mercifully, these cameras also have a lot to work with in the shadow slider.

But It's a great challenge to compose differently, more interestingly.

[Kiwimac]

I had the first Q. Never got on with the 28 frame really. It was neither wide enough nor narrow enough to hold my interest. 
 

Back when I shot for money I had a pair of Nikon D3s bodies, one with a 17-35 and one with 70-200. 
 

Guess what? Lightroom tells me that I shot the majority of my work at 17, 35, 70 and 200!! I rarely used the focal lengths in between. 
 

Thus 28 never quite worked for me and the Q found a new home. 
 

I borrowed the Sony version of the Q concept with a 35mm and that was a much nicer camera for me and it’s a shame they killed it.