Leica Q or Q2 best value

[DaveB-Austin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’m looking to get into the Q as an EDC - have a Fuji x100vi now but want to try the Q series.  Is it a better value to get a used Q (116) for $2,200 or a Q2 for $3,200?  Assuming I’m buying from a reputable person / dealer of course… would love any perspectives on this.  

[Advertisement]

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

[parigby]

The Q2 is a distinct step up from the Type 116, and has the advantage ( so l believe ) of being weather sealed, whereas the Type 116 isn’t. 

[Dazzajl]

Unless you prefer the look from the original Q, as I do, you're definitely getting a better specced, more advanced and weather sealed camera if you go for the 2. And the prices do seem quite close these days. 

The model specific image sharing threads on the forum here are probably the best resource on the net for comparing image style and quality of different cameras. 

[Chris W]

Yes, I think the Q2 is probably the sweet spot. I had an original Q and loved it, but the extra megapixels make the Q2 a more versatile camera.

I would rather have a Q than an X100VI, but if I had the budget I'd rather have a Q2 than a Q.

[Olaf_ZG]

Weatherproofing is an advantage to me, so the Q2 for that reason. That said, the Q is the only camera which doesn’t have its bag. 

[Chris Nebard]

Definitely the original Q typ 116 for me. The lens is something special and is the same across Q, Q2, Q3(28mm) range anyway - but, the sensor and processor were designed in tandem with it, specifically for the Q. I have no idea if that philosophy carried through into the Q2. Nevertheless, the additional megapixels of the Q2 are meaningless - for me - and although weather sealing would be nice, I wouldn’t trade that for the reportedly better high iso and low light performance of the Q.

I’ve used mine since 2017 as my everyday camera, for travel, and for weddings as a second camera. I probably would upgrade to a Q3(28) but only because of the flip-screen, the ability to compress the files, better battery life, improved EVF, and because the low light performance is said to be as good (or better?) than the original.

That last point would be the clincher for me, and is one good reason why I wouldn’t swap my Q for a Q2 (great camera though it undoubtedly is). Everyone is different, and what’s best for me will not be the same for them. 

Go with the functionality you need and what you’ll be happy with. If that is a higher spec, newer camera, the Q2 may be it. If you’re happy with no weather sealing, (still) good low light performance, beautiful files and output, the Q typ 116 might be enough. Either way, you can’t really go wrong with a Q. Enjoy whatever you choose! 👍👍

[NigelG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I went with a second hand Q116 as a second (or maybe 5th 🙄) camera to complement my Ms as the price difference to the Q2 in the uk at least was quite substantial. 
It also helped that I only own silver (or s/steel) Leicas…that option (or matt black) was dropped after the original version.

[bobtodrick]

I’ve the original Q and see no reason to upgrade.  Many consider 24mp to be the sweet spot for full frame sensors (16mp for cropped sensors).  More megapixels gets you more resolution, great if you make very large prints or do a lot of cropping…but at the expense of lo-light performance.  As I do a lot of available light indoors shooting and print no larger than 16x20” (which is well within the capabilities of a 24mp sensor I see no need to upgrade.

There is the issue of weather proofing, but I have been out many times in a light drizzle with no issues.  In heavier rain I keep my camera under my jacket til I need to shoot…again in 6 years never a problem.

Bare in mind I’ve never been one to upgrade unless there is a real reason…my daily driver is a 13 year old Acura that runs great…and I don’t have a monthly payment 😂

[Driften]

Do you crop in from the x100VI much now? How much do you like 28mm? If you like shooting more 35mm/50mm and just having the option of 28mm then get the Q2. I like the colors better on the original Q better than when I had the Q2, but with good Lightroom presets they can be the same. The Q2 has the newer menus and button layout that makes things easier to use, but even the Q is easier to use then the X100VI. Also some people have had dust issues with the Q, and the weather sealing on the Q2 takes care of that. I've owned X100f, X100V, and x100vi. I loved the Q and Q2 better than any of those, but the x100vi came closest. I think if I could do it all over it would be the Q3 43  

[Aram Langhans]

I will reiterate Driften in a way.  I tested the original Q and fell in love with the images.  Way better than anything I had used at that time.  (Nikon, Sony).  I did not buy it because I am not strictly a 28mm kind of shooter.  I like more versatility and to go longer would mean losing a fair amount of quality.  Don't get me wrong.  The images are amazing.  So, I waited and when the Q2 came out, I jumped.  Had to wait a bit to get it with the backlog, but was happy I did.  When it went to 48MP it opened up more possibilities for cropping w/o losing too much quality.  Major crops still yielded sharp large prints.  Weather sealing was a plus.

I cannot speak to the low light capabilities of each as I did not get to test the original Q under low light.  I do know that I shoot a lot of low light/night stuff and the Q2 did show a weakness compared to my Nikon D750 that I had at the same time.  So, when the Q3 came out with a supposed Sony sensor, I jumped on that and have been happy.  60MP was not really a factor for me nor the tilt screen, but I have since decided they both are a better for me, so that was an added bonus. 

But your choice would seem to hinge on how much you rely on 28mm or do you want longer.  So, if you are a 28mm lover, go for the original and you will be very happy.  If you dabble with longer lenses a bit, go for the Q2 and you will be very happy. 

[Chris W]

Agree with the above. I wasn't a lover of 28mm so reluctantly sold my original Q. Fabulous camera though and fabulous images out of it.

[PhotoCruiser]

I bought a Q back in spring of 2019 for a 6 months road trip with my RV trailer around souther Europe as i needed the camera and the Q2 was still not available.
While i took many great photos till August when i found a new Q2 and got a reasonable deal for selling the Q but i disliked the EVF and that she is not waterproofed.
I think that the Q2 is for me the better camera than the Q but the Q3 will not have so much benefits for me to fork out another substantial sum after i bought a perfectly new but at half price SL2 and then added 3 Sigma lenses.

I would not suggest the Q as 2200 is a too steep price for such a old camera with some flaws, 1K more and you get a Q2 what is the better and newer camera.

Chris