f16sunshine
Moderator
Personally I like a fixed lens camera. I will take a leaf shutter and sealed system any day over an ILC.
I rarely change lenses in the field (like never).
If budget was no issue, and, Leica (or fuji for that matter) offered multiple focal lengths in fixed lens models I would purchase in that mode rather than buying ILC system cameras and lenses..... no looking back!
Carrying a Leica Q-28 and Leica Q-50mm in the same bag for events would be great! As would a Q-35mm and Q-90mm.
Again, I don't change lenses in the field. Why have an ability you don't use?
There are other technical and performance advantages to matching a lens and sensor as well. They are advantages that ILC systems rarely can match.
Michael Markey
Mentor
For sort of photography that we see on this forum (ie not sports) I find that the 28fl is the most useful plus the camera gives you the option of a 35 crop.
I wouldn`t really need anything else.
The fact that it has af is for me an additional attraction.
+ what Andy says ...I usually carry two Merrills 45/75 and a GRv28.
No messing about changing lenses.
Drago
Established
I don't get it either, but we live in a free world. I don't get the point of a M-A too, for the price of body alone you can build a whole system, but hence somewhere, someone is buying them 
Ranchu
-
I won't be buying this camera, but I do think your point isn't all that large. You can only put one lens on at a time, and if you only use a 35mm fov, there's no need to be able to put on a 50mm you'll never own. I think the design is a fair one. Having a camera that costs twice as much with the lens because I can put lenses I'll never use on it doesn't make much sense to me. I think Leica should have done this a long time ago, but it should have an optical finder.
mlu19
Established
Sony Rx1 was retailed for close to $3k when it first came out. Leica can easily charge that much more just because.
f16sunshine
Moderator
I agree on the optical finder.
If Leica was to build a range of fixed lens RF cameras it could be all the rage!.
Imagine a fixed lens f1.4 40mm or f2 50mm with a leaf shutter and RF focus in front of a 24mp ff sensor...mmmm Delicious!
I would sell all my little arty film cameras and buy this Fixed lens gem.
Keep only the Fuji GF670 for Film B+W. All else in Digital with the new camera or 5D for wide and long lens work (work ..work)
I ordered one... while rangefinder focusing is my favorite MF method, I prefer AF to MF. However, the main reason for me is ergonomics. I prefer the M type shaped body to anything with a grip. Additionally, I tend to only use one/two lenses per body anyway. The Q came at the right time for me. I wanted a Leica, I wanted FF, I like 28mm, and I want AF with MF as a secondary option.
What's funny for me is that many assume that if they don't like 28mm, nobody else does.
What's funny for me is that many assume that if they don't like 28mm, nobody else does.
daveleo
what?
My 2 favorite cameras of all time had (have?) fixed prime lenses.
I still own and love both of them (one film, one digital).
I have no problems with the design concept.
But I imagine the Q sitting on a table and $4000 in cash sitting next to it and someone says "Pick one of these and take it home". On the train ride home, I'd envy the guys who took the Q.
I still own and love both of them (one film, one digital).
I have no problems with the design concept.
But I imagine the Q sitting on a table and $4000 in cash sitting next to it and someone says "Pick one of these and take it home". On the train ride home, I'd envy the guys who took the Q.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Well Dave you pretty much just said it. I would envy guys also. Until two years later when I bought their cameras for $1500 (fingers crossed).
So what it comes down to again, as with any Leica, is that the main gripe is the price tag?
daveleo
what?
John, speaking for me only, and being picky about words, I'm not "griping" about Leica gear or their pricing. I am just explaining why I'd leave the Q on the table and take the $4000 cash.
However .... if that were only, say $1500 cash, I'd probably grab the camera and run.
It does really, as you say, come down again to the price tag and what the cash is worth to you versus what the camera is worth to you.
I understand Dave. I get it... believe me, I keep wondering if I'm being foolish spending the cash, but oh well... I like it enough to do it and it'll be useful to me.
willie_901
Mentor
Well the Q has an anti-aliasing filter.
Quite some time ago the lack of an AA was considered a fundamental advantage by M8 owners. And back then sensor assemblies without AA filters were (almost) unprecedented.
What has changed? How come the Q's AA filter is just fine now? Was omitting the AA filter ever an advantage?.
To be complete, the higher pixel density and reduced pixel pitch common in newer sensor beds increase the effective sampling frequency which decreases aliasing artifacts. Still, the M240 has no AA filter and the same pixel density as the Q. I have no idea how the pixel pitch compares.
Quite some time ago the lack of an AA was considered a fundamental advantage by M8 owners. And back then sensor assemblies without AA filters were (almost) unprecedented.
What has changed? How come the Q's AA filter is just fine now? Was omitting the AA filter ever an advantage?.
To be complete, the higher pixel density and reduced pixel pitch common in newer sensor beds increase the effective sampling frequency which decreases aliasing artifacts. Still, the M240 has no AA filter and the same pixel density as the Q. I have no idea how the pixel pitch compares.
Lss
Well-known
This is not what all the reviews suggest. It is anyway weak enough to induce moire.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
Your above situation was the same for me when I purchased my Monochrom: a contriversal camera that some people on this forum called "stupid;" it was priced at $8K and was considered expensive; many argued that a M9 was more practical; there was a long wait (5 months in my case, but that was o.k. because I didn't have the cash); there were many who could not understand why the Monochrom was a great camera for some; the Monochrom was not a camera for the masses; there was a lot of bashing/hating...
In the end the purchase of my Monochrom ended up being some of the best money I ever spent, the camera made me very happy and still does. For me it was and is my dream camera, warts and all.
Cal
I get that Cal and Helen... I do think it is a lot for what it is, but then again, there's no such thing as a cheap Leica digital. I guess it appeals to me in an emotional sense as well... which is what ultimately needs to end up happening when you buy Leica stuff. I'm going to go back to the Leica Store on W Broadway and check it out again to make sure.
Ariefb
Established
I don't see fixed lens as a disadvantage. Pricing-wise, 4k for a 28mm 1.7, FF sensor, and well-designed body, that's a steal.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
John,
It is a lot of money, but in many ways the Monochrom was and is a dream camera that almost seems like Leica made especially for me. Here we are 2 1/2 years later and now there is a M-246 to replace my Monochrom, but I'm still happy with my camera.
While I find it very interesting the level of passion displayed by others, either for or against, this polarizing of opposing sides has happened before. The parallels and controversey are rather profound.
Anyways my spin is one way to make art is to do exactly the opposite of what everyone else is doing. The "Q" kinda presents a lot of style and definitely is not for everyone, and for me this is what makes it an interesting camera for me. You know how I love the 28mm FOV.
Cal
Brooklynguy
Established
One could also say that for $3,800 (price of a 28 Summicron), you similarly "are stuck" with only one focal length (no zoom, no variety, no nuthin'!), and no camera to boot! Or for $7,000, you only get that boring 50mm FOV and only f/2--ugh! who wants that tripe when CaNikon's Nifty 50 is $100! In fact, this could be argued for ANY lens and any price, since cheap point and shoot cameras can be had for almost nothing, relatively speaking.
Timmyjoe
Mentor
The $3800 28 Summicron can be part of a very versatile package. A system that you can build on.
The $4250 Q is stuck with one focal length, nowhere to go to expand the possibilities of its supposedly brilliant sensor.
That 28 Summicron will make beautiful images on a Leica M, Monochrom, M9, M8, Mp, MA, M7, M6TTL, M6, M5, M4, M3, M2, and many other cameras. It is an investment in a system that you can build on.
Best,
-Tim