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

How could any camera geek resist Leica Q?
Old 06-20-2015   #1
Hsg
who dares wins
 
Hsg is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 641
How could any camera geek resist Leica Q?

I assume that resisting Leica Q is going to be the most difficult task facing Leica and camera geeks in general who have enough cash or credit to buy one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #2
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 62
Posts: 19,391
Yes it is. A manly man wouldn't buy one. It's like the new vw beetle.

(sarcastic post responding to the original post which has now been edited.)
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #3
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,510
Agreed. Manly men would only shoot plate film cameras. Or at the bare minimum a Fuji GW690.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #4
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
 
Colin Corneau is offline
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Winnipeg MB Canada
Posts: 964
I've seen some weird posts, made by people who really need to go outside, before but this one really takes the cake.
__________________
www.reservedatalltimes.com

"Viva Film Renaissance"
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #5
Hsg
who dares wins
 
Hsg is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 641
I removed the comment about its potential target market.



Anyway, so what are your reasons for not buying a Leica Q when its available?

In my case its lack of funds.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #6
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hsg View Post
Anyway, so what are your reasons for not buying a Leica Q when its available?
Sensor seems dramatically sub-par if you look at testing done by dpreview.

Price.

28mm lens.

a 35 or 40mm lens would have been more tempting.

So, in the end, not tempted at all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #7
Brian Atherton
Registered User
 
Brian Atherton's Avatar
 
Brian Atherton is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Based in Blighty
Posts: 527
I have the funds. I looked... and never gave it a second thought. I have no need of a digital with a fixed 28mm lens. Leica or otherwise.
__________________
Brian

"Maintenant, mon ami !"
http://www.asingulareye.wordpress.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #8
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 979
It'a a girly cam...hahaha!
If it were a manly cam...it would have been .95...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #9
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,510
I think it's a cool camera and would like to check it out. But then again, I think pretty much any camera is cool.
I don't think I'd get one though because I already have an M240 with a 28mm lens, as well as other lenses for it so that bit is covered. But more because with all that, I still shoot more film than digital.
$4500 is too much for what would be something I would rarely use.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #10
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,497
Geeks who do not want to spend thousands of Dollars on a fixed lens camera.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

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

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

Old 06-20-2015   #11
Pablito
coco frío
 
Pablito's Avatar
 
Pablito is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Salsipuedes
Posts: 3,481
Sigh.... just goes to show that any thread can turn sexist...
  Reply With Quote

Sexy Sexist Q Quip
Old 06-20-2015   #12
Dektol Dan
Registered User
 
Dektol Dan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 922
Sexy Sexist Q Quip

I love the Q, but it's only about the lens.

I've never been moved by the 240 sensor, it seems like it has flatness to it. On this blog there are already M9 and 240 color comparisons. The 240 looks more lifeless. The 240 makes Japanese style black and white.

Sure the sensor doesn't have the rust issue, but that doesn't mean I have to marry a girl who only gives missionary style love for safety's sake.

Give me some adventure Ms. Leica!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #13
MiniMoke
Registered User
 
MiniMoke is offline
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Luxembourg
Age: 56
Posts: 455
A reason to resist the Q? PRICE!

Unfortunately.... cause this could be just right for me
__________________
Meet me at www.whyfilmcameras.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #14
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 34
Posts: 1,067
have no interest on the Q at all, mainly because it's 28mm.
if this was 35 croppable to 50 i would be
__________________
earldieta.com - flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #15
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
I Love 28 and could use a smaller camera for backcountry. But Q AF and heavy corrections rule this machine out for me. I prefer 28cron/M9 for now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #16
Emile de Leon
Registered User
 
Emile de Leon is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 979
Actually..I really like some of the pics I've seen with this cam...
I must be a girly mon'..ya mon'
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #17
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hsg View Post
I assume that resisting Leica Q is going to be the most difficult task facing Leica and camera geeks in general who have enough cash or credit to buy one.
You're not making a good assumption. I don't need to resist buying a new camera because I'm satisfied with the cameras I already have. I'm intrigued with the Q because it has some of Leica's latest technology and is an interesting design, but I feel no urge to buy one.

The most difficult task with regard to the Q is ignoring all the incredibly dumb things that are being bandied about as fact about it. In that effort I will persevere.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #18
Addy101
Registered User
 
Addy101 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 1,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablito View Post
Sensor seems dramatically sub-par if you look at testing done by dpreview.
No, it isn't. I guess you refer to this page of their hands-on review where they compare it to the sensor inside the Nikon D750 - the D750 clearly is better. However, if you change the comparison to the Canon 5Ds or 6D, the Leica looks better. In the end, the sensor falls in between the class leading Sony sensor and the Canon sensor.

Whatever you don't like 'bout the Leica Q, the sensor shouldn't be a reason to shun it.
__________________
Das Bild ist ein Modell der Wirklichkeit - Wittgenstein
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #19
Vobluda
Registered User
 
Vobluda is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Age: 44
Posts: 830
Quite easily as it has 28mm lens.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hsg View Post
I assume that resisting Leica Q is going to be the most difficult task facing Leica and camera geeks in general who have enough cash or credit to buy one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #20
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,298
The high ISO banding artifacts have attenuated my initial excitement. This is one reason why low-light photographers might not be as excited as others.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #21
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,109
I already have the Sigma DP2M! Why would I need a second fixed lens digital camera?
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

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

Old 06-20-2015   #22
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
I already have the Sigma DP2M! Why would I need a second fixed lens digital camera?
A dp1m, dp3m, dp0q, dp1q, dp2q, and dp3q...mix and match so your dp2m won't be lonely?

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #23
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
 
Phil_F_NM's Avatar
 
Phil_F_NM is offline
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Age: 42
Posts: 3,933
If I had the money for a Leica Q, I'd buy a truck, pay off some debt and save some towards my hopeful future mortgage.

Phil Forrest
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #24
CK Dexter Haven
Registered User
 
CK Dexter Haven is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hsg View Post
Anyway, so what are your reasons for not buying a Leica Q when its available?
.
1 / Wouldn't buy a 28mm-only camera.
2 / The bokeh is not so good.
3 / Costs too much for what it does.
4 / The size doesn't really make sense for me. Not small enough to be a 'real compact,' and not large enough to be comfortable. Too large to not have interchangeable lenses - at that price.
5 / Leica is very likely to abandon or not repair it within a few years.
6 / Other cameras are better and/or more versatile.
7 / At 28mm, just about everything is going to be in focus, and any camera can do that. Pictures will not look much different from cell phone snaps. If I pay this much for a camera, it's got to be able to differentiate itself. A 'sharp' lens with a not-so-high res sensor doesn't impress me. Why not just get a Sony with a Zeiss?
8 / Next year, Leica will improve this camera by adding some small feature they could have implemented already, and those with the old one will feel cheated.


How many people would have been interested in a Leica CL with a fixed 28? If there was a Hexar RF just a touch wider, also available? Why?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #25
lukitas
second hand noob
 
lukitas's Avatar
 
lukitas is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Brussels, belgium
Posts: 759
I like 28.
__________________
lukitas

Gallery

photos by lukitas
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #26
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,669
Last weekend I tried both the Q and the 240, shot photos on my own card with them. I liked the feel and other things about the Q but it was the 240 that really did it for me, I thought the files were just beautiful.

I bought a 240 from the classifieds a few days ago.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dektol Dan View Post
I love the Q, but it's only about the lens.

I've never been moved by the 240 sensor, it seems like it has flatness to it. On this blog there are already M9 and 240 color comparisons. The 240 looks more lifeless. The 240 makes Japanese style black and white.

Sure the sensor doesn't have the rust issue, but that doesn't mean I have to marry a girl who only gives missionary style love for safety's sake.

Give me some adventure Ms. Leica!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #27
richard_l
Registered User
 
richard_l's Avatar
 
richard_l is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 1,518
I don't recall ever having used my 28mm Ultron. Anyhow, for full frame I'm satisfied with film. A 50mm in the X series might be handy.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #28
fireblade
Vincenzo.
 
fireblade's Avatar
 
fireblade is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
Agreed. Manly men would only shoot plate film cameras. Or at the bare minimum a Fuji GW690.
Just a test, i went and picked up one of my Nikon DSLR's, looked down my pants, Yeah!!...I'm still a man

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
I already have the Sigma DP2M! Why would I need a second fixed lens digital camera?
Excellent camera, and the rest of the series 1 and 3......all for $550 each.
__________________
Vincenzo

"No place is boring, if you've had a good night's sleep and have a pocket full of unexposed film."
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #29
ktmrider
Registered User
 
ktmrider is online now
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: el paso, texas
Age: 66
Posts: 1,153
I am thinking the Sony with the Zeiss 35 for a bit more then half the price. However, I am content with the M9 and a slew of M mount lenses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #30
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emile de Leon View Post
Actually..I really like some of the pics I've seen with this cam...
I must be a girly mon'..ya mon'
There are some very good shooters already at work with the Q, and I agree, many shots look very nice, like they have the processor in "M9 emulation"mode with better DR, very good color, and of course less noise at high ISO.

But please, Leica, just give us the body with an M bayonet, and credit the cost of the lens.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-20-2015   #31
Kate-the-Great
Registered User
 
Kate-the-Great's Avatar
 
Kate-the-Great is offline
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Denver
Posts: 224
Money aside, the Q is easy for me to resist as I much prefer the 35 & 40mm focal lengths to 28 on 135. If I liked 28 I'd be all over it though!
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #32
:: Mark
Registered User
 
:: Mark is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 205
Well, one reason is that I already have a Ricoh GR - possibly my favourite camera ever.

The Q is too large for a one-trick fixed lens camera. If I am going to use a camera that big, I really want changeable lenses.

If I am shooting wide-angle street photography, I really do not want to use something as large and obviously pretentious as the Q. And the small increase in image quality is not going to suddenly make my street photographs suck less...
__________________
Mark
PhotoBlog
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #33
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
I would rather wait for a GR mk3 w/ a 24mp sensor..if by then it has a evf then that would be a plus. 24mp would allow a more usable crop 47. Currently I only use crop 35. I already have the GR and I don't feel the urge at all for the Q.

The other reason is digital rot vs my personal max budget for digital cameras (<2k), puts this camera on the pass list, which basically means all Leica drf's and non-Panasonic Leica clones are on this list for me. But that is just me. I do appreciate the simplicity of the leica design points in their drf's as well as what I have seen in the X and Q series. While the m8 or older m9 are coming into my budget constraint, parts availability becomes an issue for these cameras.

Given my budget constraints, I will admire from afar.

I applaud Leica for the Q and I hope they sell a lot of them. I am w/ others though that thought they should have done a 35 or 40 mm version.

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #34
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
... The other reason is digital rot vs ...
"digital rot" ? What do you mean?

I haven't seen any degradation in performance yet with my Olympus E-1, and it's coming up on 12 years old. That was a $2200 body in 2003... It's actually gotten better with time because current raw converters allow me to shoot at ISO 3200 with very satisfactory results now; the original Olympus raw converter kinda limited it to ISO 400-800. :-)

A Q with a 50 to 75mm lens would be dangerous territory for me ... I'd almost have to have one. With a 28mm on the Q, I can save my pennies for the MM246 body and a Summarit-M 75mm lens.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #35
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
For me there are several factors that are involved in digital rot, for others maybe not
- do I still like the technology of the older product vs what is available currently
- EOL (end of life), is the components on the camera EOL, then so long as my luck holds out, that camera is still good to go, I am ok
- is there a fw bug on that product that could be fixed, but the manufacturer has decided not to fix in favor of just releasing the next gen product
-- in the past, I felt Sony did a lot of this, but looking at their a7 fw updates, they seemed to have learned
- is the batteries still available, so long as your batteries are good, no problem, but once they are dead, your only choice maybe third party vendors or nothing at all. For example, Apple MacBook pro's that used the removable batteries are getting harder to find these days

The oldest digital camera I still use often is my Olympus IR converted epl1. The oldest digital I occasional use is the Sony r1. I am starting to c battery degradation in terms of recharge life cycle, but have not gotten around to looking for replacement batteries yet. Now that u asked about digital rot..thanks for indirect reminder

I have never gone back to re-evaluate high ISO performance of my older cameras in light of better raw converters. Are u seeing a stop better?

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #36
Austerby
Registered User
 
Austerby's Avatar
 
Austerby is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Fircombe
Posts: 1,066
It feels like buyers remorse is setting in quite quickly with the Q - the first reaction was very positive but now I'm reading more considered opinions, which is right and proper when you consider the actual cost.

Personally, I have an X100s and an M8 and am still trying to decide whether I need an upgrade on either of these. I'm edging towards the A7ii but the Q for me isn't the one that I want, though I look forward to seeing what people do with it.
__________________
Austerby
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #37
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,284
Well luckily I am a photographer and not a camera geek.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #38
Hsg
who dares wins
 
Hsg is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 641
What I find interesting about Q is why would Leica copy a name by Ricoh-Pentax, secondly the break with tradition of going with a fixed 28mm instead of 35mm and the groove for thumb grip, which is a breakthrough in ergonomics for cameras.

I have a shot for years with a 28mm equivalent, its not easy, so that means this camera is not for everybody. So, who's the target market for Leica Q?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #39
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,035
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
For me there are several factors that are involved in digital rot, for others maybe not
- do I still like the technology of the older product vs what is available currently
Ah, so that has nothing to do with the camera you are evaluating, it has to do with your expectations. ;-)

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
- EOL (end of life), is the components on the camera EOL, then so long as my luck holds out, that camera is still good to go, I am ok
- is there a fw bug on that product that could be fixed, but the manufacturer has decided not to fix in favor of just releasing the next gen product
Hmm. So you're considering end of life to be a conflation of "are components available for a repair" with "does the manufacturer care enough to update the camera any more".

I'm not sure how much that has to do with the camera vs how much it has to do with your expectations, again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
- is the batteries still available, so long as your batteries are good, no problem, but once they are dead, your only choice maybe third party vendors or nothing at all. For example, Apple MacBook pro's that used the removable batteries are getting harder to find these days
I bought batteries for my friend's 2005 PowerBook just the other day. ;-) But, honestly, I wouldn't mix up the computer battery market with the camera battery market. The computer market cycles through things far faster than the camera market.

This could be an issue, except that most of the better cameras from the past 15 years use batteries that are all still available, either originals or third party. I mean, heck, half my film cameras use batteries that haven't been available for 20 years, but I can still get batteries for them via adapters or alternatives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
The oldest digital camera I still use often is my Olympus IR converted epl1. The oldest digital I occasional use is the Sony r1. I am starting to c battery degradation in terms of recharge life cycle, but have not gotten around to looking for replacement batteries yet. Now that u asked about digital rot..thanks for indirect reminder
http://www.bestbatt.com/SearchResult...=Olympus+E-PL1
http://www.bestbatt.com/SearchResult...ch=Sony+DSC-R1
$13 apiece..

With the E-1, an excellent upgrade is to use the BLM-5 (and its charger) from the Olympus E-5 rather than the original BLM-1. More capacity, same voltage, same form factor. It nets about a 50% improvement in exposures per charge over the new performance of the BLM-1. :-) The BLM-5 is available new from Olympus, and there are aftermarket replacements available too, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
I have never gone back to re-evaluate high ISO performance of my older cameras in light of better raw converters. Are u seeing a stop better?
With my E-1 on its default settings producing JPEG+raw files, without optional noise filtering turned on, a sequence of exposures from ISO 100-3200 demonstrate that the in-camera JPEG engine (indicative of the raw processors of its time) produces the same level of noise as LR6.1 produces with ISO 3200 on the raw file. With a bit of Luminance noise filtering in LR6.1, that same ISO 3200 image looks like the ISO 400 JPEG. So two stops solid improvement in noise control, three if you do some tuning. That's huge.

The dynamic range is better too, but that's harder to evaluate since I don't have a 2003-2005 era raw converter available to compare against (it's always going to be best if you're working with the raw files).

By your standards, the E-1 is probably "digitally rotted" since (I believe, not sure) Olympus turned off their standard flat-rate service for it a couple of years ago and many parts are becoming scarce. But it's still a camera that produces beautiful results, it's a bit slow to write files but is responsive as anything modern when it comes to shot to shot performance, and in the hand it still wins my award for "best designed DSLR body ever made."

Nothing to debate here, I was just wondering what you meant by "digital rot." I understand now it has mostly to do with your expectations and desires rather than mechanical or electronic degradation of the camera over time. Nothing wrong with that ... :-)

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-21-2015   #40
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
I guess a better way to put it if u sum it all up..my idea of digital rot..is...though I may hang onto a specific digital camera for as long as I can, eventually it cannot be repaired for one reason or another.

On the other hand, I have some film cameras that date back to the early 1930s that I can still find people that know how to repair them (if u are willing to pay). I have other film cameras that are part of the electronic era, where the components are EOL and right now if I need a repair, it can only happen if the repair person can canibilize from another camera. That is an example of not really digital rot but electronic rot as it relates to anolog film cameras such as a Minolta cle.

Once cameras needed a battery for more than just a meter, the complexities of electronics age EOL issues crept it's ugly head into the picture. Prior to that, if internal meter died, just keep on shooting using external meter and good guesstimate..

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  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 19:55.


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.