jgwong
Member
Craig Mod, one of my favourite writers, recently wrote an extensive six-month field test of the Leica Q:
Over these last six months, the Q joined me while on assignment in South Korea, trekking across Myanmar, hiking the mountains of Shikoku, and spending a few freezing nights on Mt. Kōya. It was used in searing heat, 100% humidity, covered in sweat amid rice fields beneath a relentless sun. And in subzero temples, as candlelit Shinto and Buddhist fire ceremonies ushered in a new year.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Very good review, except obsession with iPhone.
Pictures are great as well.
Pictures are great as well.
squirrel$$$bandit
Mentor
Really excellent review, and well written, too. Makes me want one, of course. Thanks!
raid
Dad Photographer
I want a Q! I need to create a kickstarter!
dwojr
Well-known
I do too! That was a great review!
Out to Lunch
Menteur
The author does not bother to compare the Leica Q with any other similar camera...except for his beloved iPhone. Within a year or two this US$ 4,250 camera with it's fixed lens will have lost 50% of it's value? I'd rather invest in M mount lenses that hold their value better, Leica or otherwise.
pechelman
resu deretsiger
His "new found love" or whatever he called it about cropping strikes me as a bit amateurish. By all means, crop when you need to, but to get all excited about cropping?
Either way, a somewhat OK overview of using this camera.
Either way, a somewhat OK overview of using this camera.
It's your cash, but it's not like for the $4250 (or half at $2125) it's not like you won't be using the thing and having fun with it... and you don't have to feed it film. If you're worried about things keeping value, photography equipment is not the right place to put your cash generally speaking. Depreciation vs. having fun using the camera? Not a bad price to pay.
13Promet
Well-known
jgwong
Member
The author's fondness of the iPhone is explained in this article he wrote for The New Yorker.
And, yes, he's aware he's contradicting himself as stated in the original article:
And, yes, he's aware he's contradicting himself as stated in the original article:
This camera lit me on fire. All the more potent taking into consideration my disavowment (in The New Yorker, no less) of cameras just a scant two years back. Two years ago the landscape felt dismal and the iPhone increasingly — and excitingly — formidable.
I'm kind of sick of hearing about how the iPhone (yes, even the latest one) is comparable to m43, apsc, and FF. It's ridiculous. Is it ok quality? Yes... but lets be honest, people like the iPhone because of convenience and it being "good enough." I'm not a tech / specs geek, but anyone who uses all of these cameras clearly can see a difference. That said, the iPhone... as is any camera... is capable of allowing for great photos. Let's not even get into haptic and ergonomics.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I want it in the banner of this forum!
icebear
Mentor
Thanks for sharing interesting read. He is definitely enthusiastic about the Q.
I also like it very much and I am somehow mad that currently I don't get out and use mine more. I guess I might sell my M9 (new sensor) and just keep the Q for color and the MM.
I traded 3 film M's and some cash for the Q. I would have been hesitant to fork out that much when owning already 2 digital M's but having used the Q and seeing the quality of the files and the functionality, yes indeed, it's a great camera.
kkdanamatt
Well-known
From an investment point of view, you are 100% correct.
However, purchasing a camera or a lens involves much more than simply a monetary return on your investment. If you are seeking to maximize your ROI, then you should never buy cameras, cars, audio equipment, computer gear, fine watches, etc. They will all depreciate in value, some more than others.
I just "downgraded" from a used Leica M9 to a used Leica Q and couldn't be happier with my decision. This "downgrade" cost me about $700, which is mere pocket change because I used the M9 for two years and I plan to use the Q for at least that long or even longer.
The Leica Q is perfect for my needs: high quality optics, full frame sensor, complete automatic or manual controls, and enough pixels to crop to my heart's content. The Q has revitalized my photographic juices.
I still have all my M lenses from 18mm through 90mm, which I use on a Fuji X-E1 body, but now, I always grab the Q first.
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
MCTuomey
Mentor
fine to dislike the Q for a number of reason: fixed 28mm, EVF only, and so on. it's not for everyone, sure.
me, i likey. nails focus up (real) close wide open far far faster & more reliably than i can with a manual M. single point, multi-point, face detect - any way i want. like a GR except with a $4k lens. it's smile every time you pick it up, like craig mod says, that kind of shooting. not investment grade, crazoo fun grade. no confusion here.
me, i likey. nails focus up (real) close wide open far far faster & more reliably than i can with a manual M. single point, multi-point, face detect - any way i want. like a GR except with a $4k lens. it's smile every time you pick it up, like craig mod says, that kind of shooting. not investment grade, crazoo fun grade. no confusion here.
BlackXList
Well-known
Just a question that jumps out to me whilst reading the review:
Can the touch screen be turned off?
I have cameras with touch screens and I always turn it off, don't need it don't want it.
If I can't turn it off, that's a complete dealbreaker for me.
Can the touch screen be turned off?
I have cameras with touch screens and I always turn it off, don't need it don't want it.
If I can't turn it off, that's a complete dealbreaker for me.
MCTuomey
Mentor
rear screen can be turned off, yes.
kkdanamatt
Well-known
Yes
The LCD can be turned off.
Also, if it is turned on, the touch screen can be disabled.
Thanks for clarifying that issue, I was wondering...