I understand... I use the GR as well. It is the reason why the Q appeals to me. With the GR, I have learned to love the 28mm focal length. The Q should be a step up and should be closer to my FF cameras I'm used to these days. Plus, I was disappointed with the updated GR. That said, the GR will remain my jacket pocket camera.
f16sunshine
Moderator
The GR has definitely changes how I use a wide angle and that 28mm pov in particular.
I never thought composing in an lcd would be so useful.
I think it's the size too .... So compact and lightweight.
Balancing and steadying the camera away from ones eye is easy and comfortable.
Trying to use a fuji x camera with an 18mm and lcd is not the same.
Since you've used the GR, I'm curious to read your thoughts on comparing it to the Q when you get it.
I feel I only like composing with an LCD with lenses that are 28mm and wider... and I think the one handed operation of the GR helps you feel comfortable with it away from your eye.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
This makes sense to me. At 28mm FOV you start to get that all at once view.
Cal
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I rather do not understand why Leica products seem to attract this kind of comment so often. It is a professional camera with quite unique characteristics and high but not impossible price, if someone can make money with it, likes it, feels inspired by it or is a dentist then why not buy (joking, the people who are both dentist AND great photorapher need not feel offended)? To me there are so many other products which makes little or no sense but don't get much comments for not being Leica. For instance, is it really worth spending almost 6,000 US$ to get a Nikon D4s and have few MPX more and one frame/sec more than a D3? Still, the product is there, used by many. The more is produces the more choice we have.
GLF
GLF
willie_901
Mentor
If you are a professional, or even an enthusiastic amateur, sport photographer it does. The D4s has approximately a one-stop signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range advantage over the D3. This alone makes life easier and in the right hands produces superior images.
Disclaimer: I don't do sports/action photography and sold all my Nikon DSLR equipment in 2014.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Well, ok, I cannot be sure as I just tried the camera once at a shop and probably most of the people using the camera did not buy the camera themselves anyway but I know people who spent their own money for it without particular reasons I can see (not claiming they don't exist) and this was actually my point: there is always someone who appreciate things we don't so there is little to "get" about the Q (I am answering the original question not your message), if someone likes and can afford it then there no reason not to buy it.
GLF
willie_901
Mentor
I agree in full.
I guess I don't associate the "get" with appreciation. I decided the Q is redundant for my needs. At the same time I have used fixed-lens cameras and my daily carry (which happens to have a non-RF optical finder) will have the same lens attached to it for months. I appreciate the Q, but I don't "get' the cost:benefit value.
Mcary
Well-known
I get and can appreciate it, but its just not for me.
Michael Markey
Mentor
One sold on the used market in the UK for approx $3813.
Great price for a hot camera... I can't seem to find any for a normal price ($4250).
Michael Markey
Mentor
Yep. It doesn't seem to have hung around. Sold quickly.
richard_l
Well-known
People talk a lot about the 35mm mode of the Q, which is perfectly feasible, but how many actually use it? The large majority of online photos I've seen really look as if they are 28mm. There's nothing wrong with that, and it can be spectacular, but it isn't me. I think there may be a psychological barrier to using only a portion of the full sensor on such an expensive camera, and if I owned a Q, I too might be tempted to succumb to the lure of using the full sensor, in spite of my aesthetic aversion to being stuck at that focal length.
KismetSky
Established
I've used the 35mm "crop" mode on the Q plenty and it serves as a great guide. The best part is the raw file retains the full 28mm frame so you can recrop to your liking after the fact. Lightroom imports it as shot and hitting the crop button reveals the rest of the DNG. The EVF superimposes the framelines over the whole view so it very much mimics a rangefinder's framelines. I've shot with the 50mm framelines and recropped to an approximate 40mm with great success.