Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica Q / T / X Series

Leica Q / T / X Series For the Leica Q, T, X series digital cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-08-2019   #41
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 6,086
Yeah, well even at that price I still won't be joining the crowd. I hit my enthusiasm peak yesterday, now the truck is having another fit, so I'll be putting camera funds into getting it fixed. But one can dream...or hit the Lottery.


PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #42
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
 
Ken Ford's Avatar
 
Ken Ford is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago, IL USA
Age: 56
Posts: 3,030
After sleeping on this, I’m going to pass on a Q2 for now and probably in total. I really would prefer an ILC version with an EVF. It may never happen...

For me right now, a Nikon Z is shaping up to be a better choice for a digital platform to use my M lenses.
__________________
"If you can control yourself and just loathe us quietly from a distance then by all means stay." - Joe

Leica: M-P Typ 240 - M6 - Leicavit M - RapidWinder - Motor M - 21 Super-Elmar - 28 Ultron - 35 Summicron ASPH - 40 Summicron - 75 APO-Summicron ASPH - 75 Summarit-M - 75 Color-Heliar - 90 Elmar-C
Nikon RF: S2 - S3 2000 - 35/2.5 - 50/2 - 50/1.4 Millennium - 105/2.5 - 135/3.4
X-Pro2, X-M1, X100s, NEX-7, dp0 Quattro, N1V1, N1V2, oodles of other stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #43
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ford View Post
For me right now, a Nikon Z is shaping up to be a better choice for a digital platform to use my M lenses.
If you can wait a couple of months, the rumor is the SL2 will be announced in June. M lenses are likely to perform better on it than the Z if the lore is correct.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #44
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,223
I favor using 50mm and 35mm lenses in most of my photography, and I don't think that I will even think about getting a Q or Q2. Fixed lens cameras make more sense to me when they are small and light and used when sharp snapshots are needed at times when and where a full size camera may be less suitable. I am still with the old M8 and M9 cameras, while I stay interested in getting additional lenses, because they are fun to try out and explore.
Still, if you want to downsize to one Leica camera with one lens and at a cost that is lower than getting an M10 with a Summicron or Summilux and if a 28mm view is OK for you, then the Q2 could be a suitable choice. When needed, you could crop.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #45
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ford View Post
After sleeping on this, Iím going to pass on a Q2 for now and probably in total. I really would prefer an ILC version with an EVF. It may never happen...

For me right now, a Nikon Z is shaping up to be a better choice for a digital platform to use my M lenses.
I have the Z7, and my M lenses work far better on my M240.
I wish that wasn't so, which pretty much was the reason I bought the Z7.
I now kinda wish I kept my D850.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #46
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 3,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Still, if you want to downsize to one Leica camera with one lens and at a cost that is lower than getting an M10 with a Summicron or Summilux and if a 28mm view is OK for you, then the Q2 could be a suitable choice. When needed, you could crop.
That sums it up precisely for me plus the option of AF.
I use a Richo GR and have a 28 Summicron ASPH so 28 is fine as a F/L.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #47
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
On a side note, the SL2 is now rumored for June.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #48
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
On a side note, the SL2 is now rumored for June.
John,

Brutal.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #49
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 61
Posts: 9,619
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Thank you Cal! You are my ONLY HOPE left! Mr. Leica does not seem to be interested in giving me a loaner Q2 to try out.
Raid,

Tonight's New York Lotto: 05,11,14,42,52 58 and 25,34,41,43,44,48.

Wish us luck.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #50
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,223
Thank you
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #51
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,106
That Q2 sure looks and sounds lovely. I look forward to seeing all the images that you guys and gals will be posting here.

Unfortunately I am a very slow learner.

I am still trying to get the most out of my M-A, Lux 50 and HP5+.

Judging by my most recent prints it will be awhile before I will be buying anything digital.

Beside, I just blew my stash on more 11x14 paper.
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #52
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,235
My GR3 will ship next week so...won't be long to hold for the GAS to wear off!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #53
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,843
I'm so p'd off at Leica now. I'm trying NOT to want a Q2 in the worst way. [email protected] them!



G
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #54
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 6,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
That Q2 sure looks and sounds lovely. I look forward to seeing all the images that you guys and gals will be posting here.

Unfortunately I am a very slow learner.

I am still trying to get the most out of my M-A, Lux 50 and HP5+.

Judging by my most recent prints it will be awhile before I will be buying anything digital.

Beside, I just blew my stash on more 11x14 paper.
A kindred spirit!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #55
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,268
I recently spoke of my desire, in a post on a thread hat RFF, to upgrade my Leica M8 by buying an M240 due to its advantages in sensor technology and all this confers, plus its live view ability etc.

But something happened on the way to the camera store. Or at the camera store more precisely. I had the chance to handle a pristine Leica Q. Long story short, I am now he proud owner of a new Leica Q. What I think really did it for me was auto focus (super quick and accurate) and my realization that while I enjoy MF using a rangefinder in principle (ahh they sure don't make nostalgia like they used to) my eyes are unlikely to get any better and in fact are likely to go the other way as is my ability to hand hold and extract usable images from a non image stabilized body. (I think I feel a little about rangefinders cameras the same way I feel about my sex life as I get older - memories, memories.)

While I had some trepidation about a 28mm fixed lens camera given my predilection for longer lenses I have found it actually works well. And oh, my God that 28mm f1.7 lens !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! For me it renders not perhaps like any Leica glass I have ever used and is more reminiscent of the Zeiss glass that was to be found on my old Contax T2 which was super - contrasty and oh so sharp. This Leica lens has those advantages plus that of having of surprisingly good bokeh - given it is a 28mm lens.

Match the above to a beautiful and traditional looking body, a superbly competent and quick AF system and a fairly simple yet functional menu system (thank you Leica - having used the monstrosities prevalent in other systems, thank you, thank you, thank you) and you have the makings of a superb camera.

The only thing I could think of to make it better would be to have Leica double the pixel count on the sensor. Oh, wait a minute, they have and they have called it a Leica Q 2. While I am not a pixel glutton, for me the real benefit of the huge sensor is the ability to crop images (in camera if you wish) to say, a 75mm equivalent field of view while retaining a workable pixel count in the final image. Then I could say for sure - Tele lens? I don't need no stinkin' tele lens!

As for now - I am happy with the Q. In fact ecstatic. But one day....one day, a Q2 might just be on the cards in a few years when the price drops enough. Seriously if the Q2 is as good as the first model (and I have no reason to think it will not be) then the owners of this camera will be very happy chappies and ladies. When I was considering if to actually lay down that much money I did read every review I could lay my hands on and I struggled to find any negative comments or even reservations. I believe that will carry over into the new camera as well.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #56
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,223
Show us soon some results from your Q, Peter.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-09-2019   #57
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Show us soon some results from your Q, Peter.
I will do Raid. Just as soon as I have a chance to make a few at least semi serious shots.

I am particularly interested to see how it performs in the high ISO and Dynamic Range departments. So far I have not had any chance to assess these but the color rendering, sharpness and contrast all look excellent on the rear LCD.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #58
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
 
Ken Ford's Avatar
 
Ken Ford is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Suburban Chicago, IL USA
Age: 56
Posts: 3,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
If you can wait a couple of months, the rumor is the SL2 will be announced in June. M lenses are likely to perform better on it than the Z if the lore is correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
I have the Z7, and my M lenses work far better on my M240.
I wish that wasn't so, which pretty much was the reason I bought the Z7.
I now kinda wish I kept my D850.
Iím definitely not a candidate for a SL2 - Iím primarily a Nikon shooter, so the Z makes sense for me.

Huss, what issues are you having with M lenses? Iím looking at a Z6 if it matters.
__________________
"If you can control yourself and just loathe us quietly from a distance then by all means stay." - Joe

Leica: M-P Typ 240 - M6 - Leicavit M - RapidWinder - Motor M - 21 Super-Elmar - 28 Ultron - 35 Summicron ASPH - 40 Summicron - 75 APO-Summicron ASPH - 75 Summarit-M - 75 Color-Heliar - 90 Elmar-C
Nikon RF: S2 - S3 2000 - 35/2.5 - 50/2 - 50/1.4 Millennium - 105/2.5 - 135/3.4
X-Pro2, X-M1, X100s, NEX-7, dp0 Quattro, N1V1, N1V2, oodles of other stuff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #59
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 12,853
Peter congrats on the "new" Leica Q, hope you'll continue to like it. I've had my Q for less than a year now and it has found considerable favor. (see my RFF Gallery if you wish, back a few months). And the Q2 looks really excellent...

As you say, there comes a time when autofocus and image stabilization become more attractive features! The one annoyance I've faced is the video button getting accidentally activated... I went almost two days shooting on vacation before I realized I was taking short videos every time I pressed the shutter release.
__________________
Dougís Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #60
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
Peter congrats on the "new" Leica Q, hope you'll continue to like it. I've had my Q for less than a year now and it has found considerable favor. (see my RFF Gallery if you wish, back a few months). And the Q2 looks really excellent...

As you say, there comes a time when autofocus and image stabilization become more attractive features! The one annoyance I've faced is the video button getting accidentally activated... I went almost two days shooting on vacation before I realized I was taking short videos every time I pressed the shutter release.
Thanks Doug. I will post a few early test shots from my Q here shortly. Ouch to your experience with video shooting. I have once or twice done something the same with video buttons though not on this new camera (yet) and I have had the comparatively good fortune of realizing it quickly enough to undo the damage. However I must here fess up that the worst experience I ever had was with a Nikonos 5, which I bought immediately before a diving / sailing holiday around Melanesia back in the late 1980s. Every roll was improperly loaded by me resulting in 20 rolls of nothing for that trip. At least I can write that off to me being a complete newbie and looking on the bright side, my processing costs were zero. Though it did cost me the price of a repeat holiday to the same location the next year (which however, I did not mind one bit).
  Reply With Quote

Some early Leica Q shots
Old 03-10-2019   #61
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,268
Some early Leica Q shots

I indicated below that I would post some shots from my new Leica Q (the original one) for those interested to see how that generation of Q performs. I have not had time yet to use the camera seriously but have taken a few shots while out at dinner in a restaurant and at home in my lounge room. In each case the images have been shot with available light in what was, again in each case, pretty "ordinary" light at best.

The one deficit that is potentially (I will know more as I gain experience) a little disappointing is what seems to be a relative lack of "overhead" to pull back blown highlights even though all my shots are DNG. Not sure what is going on here other than admittedly particularly difficult and contrary lighting in a couple of the images. The RAW files produced by the Q are pretty large and hence not compressed so I should have expected there to be lots of data still there to be revealed. It may be that I shot without any compensation dialed in whereas usually I like to shoot at least half stop under to reduce / avoid blown highlights and to provide more scope to correct blown highlights. It's just that the blown highlights here were more blown than I expected. Never the less other aspects of the image are very good and much as I hoped and expected. (And maybe there is better software than Lightroom for processing DNG files though in general I have found Lightroom to be excellent for pulling data out of blown highlights and too dark shadows).

The processing of these images is minimal incidentally, - a little tonal adjustment and a very minor touch of sharpening - Q files seem not to need much in any event and that is a Godsent as I usually have to work more extensively on images from other cameras to get a final image I am happy to run with. )

A shot at dinner (difficult lighting admittedly) which shows the above and the sharpness and clarity of the lens which offsets that issue by other virtues. If anything the lens is almost too sharp for flattering portraits as skin pores and every skin defect show up clearly when viewed at full resolution. Still I won't complain. It is nice to have a lens which is almost unfailingly this sharp. (Not sure why wifey is beginning to poke her tongue out. I suspect she is talking. What, her talk? That's unusual -hahahahahahaha)



Another shot in the dark confines of the tapas bar. The ambient lighting was considerably darker than shown here - the out of the camera shot required some brightening to display well here. The camera locked onto the background (my bad - not the camera's fault and notwithstanding the dark conditions, AF lock was near instantaneous). But the effectiveness of the image stabilization is made perfectly apparent by the blur of the moving subject against the very sharp image of the writing on the rear wall.



A general scene setting shot of my lounge room. Sharp uniformly with pleasant yet neutral rendering.



This shot gives an idea of how the bokeh looks. Not bad for a 28mm lens though if this were a fast 50mm I would regard the bokeh as only average at best. However, nothing to complain about and lots to be happy with.



And another shot...........Here I think the bokeh to be smoother, with less of the "busy" character evident in the previous shot.



and yet another..........



Here I missed focus ever so slightly somehow, but I kind of like it as it gives another perspective on how this lens renders.

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #62
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 931
Shots look real good!
I'm sure macro is good too on the Q..
If I only liked the 28 more..
Maybe..
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #63
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 12,853
Looking good, Peter... The IS is clearly effective with the moving-subject shot. And the lens sharpness enhances the 3-D effect I think. Difficult lighting -- I admit to some burning/dodging in LR.

Here’s a short ‘n’ sweet Q2 review by beta-tester Jono Slack:
https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic..._medium=E-Mail

And Sean Reid has put up the first of three parts of his extensive Q2 review on his pay site:
https://www.reidreviews.com/
__________________
Dougís Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #64
karateisland
Registered User
 
karateisland's Avatar
 
karateisland is offline
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Portland, Maine
Posts: 169
This camera is so intriguing, and feels like it's almost the camera of the future, a small fixed-prime device with the MP and stabilization to make it possible for a good crop-to-zoom workflow.

That idea of simulating longer lenses with in-camera cropping is very, very enticing, but for someone like me, who shoots mostly 50 with a 35 as a wide option, the loss in MP at 50 still feels too big. And that's not even considering the loss of the subject separation you get by cropping a 28mm prime instead of using a 50.

As an aside, can anyone speak to how the 35/50/75 frameline functionality works on a Q? I've been using the digital teleconverter on my X100F to great effect, but my major pet peeve is that it defaults to a 35mm frame every time I turn the camera off or it goes to sleep. Does the Leica default back to 28mm in the same way? Or will it hold the last frameline you selected?

As everyone else says, though, I still want it. It's so close to being the Leica I've been dreaming of.

PS--Here's a pretty interesting article from Macfilos digging into the real implications of the crop-to-zoom workflow I discussed above.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #65
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,604
You can crop to zoom on any camera. It is usually just referred to as cropping. Much ado about nothing.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #66
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
You can crop to zoom on any camera. Much ado about nothing.
Agreed... not to mention itís a sloppy way to photograph in most cases.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #67
karateisland
Registered User
 
karateisland's Avatar
 
karateisland is offline
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Portland, Maine
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Agreed... not to mention it’s a sloppy way to photograph in most cases.
Yes, you can crop to zoom with any camera, but some are better suited for it, and the Q2 seems designed (at least in part) to enable this workflow. A direct quote from the article I linked, for those who don't want to read it:

"Leica’s chief lens designer, Peter Karbe, believes that with today’s high-performance lenses and superior sensors, crop to zoom is definitely a viable proposition. He made the point forcefully during his presentation to the LHSA 50th anniversary meeting in Wetzlar last October."

Furthermore, we're not talking about cropping after the fact, we're talking about a camera that either presents a live view of the cropped size, or framelines at the cropped size. That's not possible with "any camera," and even if it were, it would be much less pragmatic with a camera that had a lower-MP sensor and no stabilization. And since the framelines are there, it's really not a particularly sloppy way to photograph.

Not to say it's the only way to work, but I think it's myopic to dismiss crop-to-zoom as a real possibility in 2019.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #68
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by karateisland View Post
Yes, you can crop to zoom with any camera, but some are better suited for it, and the Q2 seems designed (at least in part) to enable this workflow. A direct quote from the article I linked, for those who don't want to read it:

"Leicaís chief lens designer, Peter Karbe, believes that with todayís high-performance lenses and superior sensors, crop to zoom is definitely a viable proposition. He made the point forcefully during his presentation to the LHSA 50th anniversary meeting in Wetzlar last October."

Furthermore, we're not talking about cropping after the fact, we're talking about a camera that either presents a live view of the cropped size, or framelines at the cropped size. That's not possible with "any camera," and even if it were, it would be much less pragmatic with a camera that had a lower-MP sensor and no stabilization. And since the framelines are there, it's really not a particularly sloppy way to photograph.

Not to say it's the only way to work, but I think it's myopic to dismiss crop-to-zoom as a real possibility in 2019.
I understand completely and youíre right that it isnít as sloppy as after the fact. I concede. However, cropping a $5000 Leica FF down to APSC and M43 respectively seems like a worse choice than just buying a cheaper body and 3 good primes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #69
karateisland
Registered User
 
karateisland's Avatar
 
karateisland is offline
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Portland, Maine
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
However, cropping a $5000 Leica FF down to APSC and M43 respectively seems like a worse choice than just buying a cheaper body and 3 good primes.
Also agreed! I think it's an idea that's at least a few years out from being truly workable (for me).
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #70
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 3,966
Agreed , I don`t think it`s sloppy to crop at all.
Just another way of achieving the shot you want.
After all frame lines are far from precise so you start of with a sloppy composition.
Cropping just tightens it up surely.

This new Q looks to be the perfect general /travel camera
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #71
JMQ
Registered User
 
JMQ is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern New Jersey
Posts: 822
The perfect travel camera? my iPhone. Stop cringing John!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #72
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Markey View Post
Agreed , I don`t think it`s sloppy to crop at all.
Just another way of achieving the shot you want.
After all frame lines are far from precise so you start of with a sloppy composition.
Cropping just tightens it up surely.

This new Q looks to be the perfect general /travel camera
Why would the Qís framelines not be precise?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #73
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMQ View Post
The perfect travel camera? my iPhone. Stop cringing John!
Iím not... I feel the same sometimes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #74
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,881
The Ricoh GR has the option of live view 28/35/47 cropping and you can program a button dedicated to it. It's very convenient.

It's APS-C, but it does exist. Good in a pinch but I wouldn't buy any camera, particlarly one as pricey as the Q if I intended to use it in crop mode most of the time.

You are far better off with an M and the lens you want.

It does look like a nice package if you want 28mm and autofocus.

Quote:
Originally Posted by karateisland View Post
Furthermore, we're not talking about cropping after the fact, we're talking about a camera that either presents a live view of the cropped size, or framelines at the cropped size. That's not possible with "any camera,"
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #75
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Agreed... not to mention itís a sloppy way to photograph in most cases.
I disagree that it's sloppy ... Not every situation can be captured full frame unless you have a bearer with a dozen lenses following you around at all times. The "always shoot full frame" meme is fun as an exercise now and then, can be a signature mark of your photography, but says nothing about being sloppy or careless.

The point of it with the Q/Q2 is that you can set the viewfinder to allow you to frame, create jpegs with that framing, and the DNGs will be auto-cropped to those dimensions but adjustable in image processing when you're rendering the photograph.

A Q2 with an accessory 1.5x front element teleconverter could be a lovely "one camera, one lens" for a lot of my photography. It's got enough pixels to make FoV adjustment by cropping easily doable, is a nice size, and the addition of just a little more reach would fulfill what I do 95% of the time when shooting.

I just have so many cameras and options already I find it a little hard to justify spending money for one.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #76
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 68
Posts: 3,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Why would the Qís framelines not be precise?
Sorry John ,I wasn`t being clear.
I was thinking of frame lines as a framing device in general terms in relation to the more accurate framing provided by an SLR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #77
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,223
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
I indicated below that I would post some shots from my new Leica Q (the original one) for those interested to see how that generation of Q performs. I have not had time yet to use the camera seriously but have taken a few shots while out at dinner in a restaurant and at home in my lounge room. In each case the images have been shot with available light in what was, again in each case, pretty "ordinary" light at best.

The one deficit that is potentially (I will know more as I gain experience) a little disappointing is what seems to be a relative lack of "overhead" to pull back blown highlights even though all my shots are DNG. Not sure what is going on here other than admittedly particularly difficult and contrary lighting in a couple of the images. The RAW files produced by the Q are pretty large and hence not compressed so I should have expected there to be lots of data still there to be revealed. It may be that I shot without any compensation dialed in whereas usually I like to shoot at least half stop under to reduce / avoid blown highlights and to provide more scope to correct blown highlights. It's just that the blown highlights here were more blown than I expected. Never the less other aspects of the image are very good and much as I hoped and expected. (And maybe there is better software than Lightroom for processing DNG files though in general I have found Lightroom to be excellent for pulling data out of blown highlights and too dark shadows).

The processing of these images is minimal incidentally, - a little tonal adjustment and a very minor touch of sharpening - Q files seem not to need much in any event and that is a Godsent as I usually have to work more extensively on images from other cameras to get a final image I am happy to run with. )

A shot at dinner (difficult lighting admittedly) which shows the above and the sharpness and clarity of the lens which offsets that issue by other virtues. If anything the lens is almost too sharp for flattering portraits as skin pores and every skin defect show up clearly when viewed at full resolution. Still I won't complain. It is nice to have a lens which is almost unfailingly this sharp. (Not sure why wifey is beginning to poke her tongue out. I suspect she is talking. What, her talk? That's unusual -hahahahahahaha)



Another shot in the dark confines of the tapas bar. The ambient lighting was considerably darker than shown here - the out of the camera shot required some brightening to display well here. The camera locked onto the background (my bad - not the camera's fault and notwithstanding the dark conditions, AF lock was near instantaneous). But the effectiveness of the image stabilization is made perfectly apparent by the blur of the moving subject against the very sharp image of the writing on the rear wall.





Hi Peter,

Your images came out very nice. I know what you meant by not getting 100% what you expected from a new camera to you. I would also take photos in less challenging lights to see how the Q does there, and then I would move to the more difficult scenes to better understand the Q and figure out how to optimize settings so that you get what you have been used to get, or maybe get something new.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #78
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Why would the Qís framelines not be precise?
It doesn't really matter if they are precise are not since you end up with the full 28mm image and can crop anyway you want.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #79
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
I disagree that it's sloppy ... Not every situation can be captured full frame unless you have a bearer with a dozen lenses following you around at all times. The "always shoot full frame" meme is fun as an exercise now and then, can be a signature mark of your photography, but says nothing about being sloppy or careless.

The point of it with the Q/Q2 is that you can set the viewfinder to allow you to frame, create jpegs with that framing, and the DNGs will be auto-cropped to those dimensions but adjustable in image processing when you're rendering the photograph.

A Q2 with an accessory 1.5x front element teleconverter could be a lovely "one camera, one lens" for a lot of my photography. It's got enough pixels to make FoV adjustment by cropping easily doable, is a nice size, and the addition of just a little more reach would fulfill what I do 95% of the time when shooting.

I just have so many cameras and options already I find it a little hard to justify spending money for one.

G
Let me clarify... sloppy when people tend to crop to save bad composition, not when photographing with the crop in mind.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #80
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,659
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
It doesn't really matter if they are precise are not since you end up with the full 28mm image and can crop anyway you want.
Ok two things... framelines on a mirrorless should be as accurate as a SLR since you are viewing through the lens with the added benefit of seeing your exposure as well. Secondly, the Q shows you the accurate framelines for 35, 50, etc and gives you the resulting crop.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:53.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.