Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I was looking at users pictures from Q on Flickr. BW.
Checked a7 and M-E from other users. Just to compare.
BW from Q is pleasing. Even at 1:1 size.
Color is nice as well. Very good sensor.
Checked a7 and M-E from other users. Just to compare.
BW from Q is pleasing. Even at 1:1 size.
Color is nice as well. Very good sensor.
Why is it just a vacation camera?
raid
Dad Photographer
It may be well suited for travel, having one lens.
GaryLH
Mentor
I am not sure I understand as well..
There are plenty of fixed lens cameras that have not been automatically termed vacation cameras, though they can fit that bill.
- the whole Sigma DP line
- Sony Coolpix A
- Ricoh GR
- Fuji X100 family
Are some example I can think of..not saying that the Q wouldn't also work well as a vacation camera.. But the aforementioned cameras work well in all sort of situations except the DP family (high ISO limited and af speed slow).
I can also c where people would say of any of these that I mentioned can be "my perfect vacation camera". Doesn't mean they are to be always used that way..as was implied by the comment of expensive vacation camera.
Btw still not interested in the current Q. However, if Leica ever did a Q w/ 40f2 (digital CL), if I got the funds, I might reconsider my stance.
Gary
There are plenty of fixed lens cameras that have not been automatically termed vacation cameras, though they can fit that bill.
- the whole Sigma DP line
- Sony Coolpix A
- Ricoh GR
- Fuji X100 family
Are some example I can think of..not saying that the Q wouldn't also work well as a vacation camera.. But the aforementioned cameras work well in all sort of situations except the DP family (high ISO limited and af speed slow).
I can also c where people would say of any of these that I mentioned can be "my perfect vacation camera". Doesn't mean they are to be always used that way..as was implied by the comment of expensive vacation camera.
Btw still not interested in the current Q. However, if Leica ever did a Q w/ 40f2 (digital CL), if I got the funds, I might reconsider my stance.
Gary
taemo
eat sleep shoot
I had the GR as only digital camera while in NYC couple of weeks ago and last weekend while in Waterton NP I had the X100 w/ GW3 and Tele-converter lens with me, they are great little cameras but here's why I think they are not the perfect vacation camera compared to the Q.
the GR is very small and discrete, perfect for street photography in NYC and I always had it set to 35mm crop, however to me it's not fun to shoot with outside of street photography
the X100 family is great, fun to shoot with its rangefinder like body, has a wide and tele converter lens but they are not exactly small, fast and easy to mount on the camera.
if you have a UV filter on the 35mm lens, you have to unscrew the adapter, screw the converter lens and finally turn the conversion settings on the menu, now if you have to continuously change between focal lengths, this can get ugly really quickly.
also the X100 lens and the WCL-X100 takes 49mm filter while the TCL-X100 takes 67mm
the Q on the other hand feels like a RF camera which means fun to shoot with for me and can crop to 35mm(16MP?) or 50mm(8MP?) with a push of a button without having to fool around with converter lens.
sure the lens might be a little too big but I will be most likely walking with the camera on a strap.
these are just my observations based from my experience with the GR and X100 and what I've seen from the Q reviews, so who knows, I might change my mind once I hold a Q in my hands. my backup plan is to get a X100T instead (GR for 21mm, 28mm and 35mm and X100T for 50mm)
the GR is very small and discrete, perfect for street photography in NYC and I always had it set to 35mm crop, however to me it's not fun to shoot with outside of street photography
the X100 family is great, fun to shoot with its rangefinder like body, has a wide and tele converter lens but they are not exactly small, fast and easy to mount on the camera.
if you have a UV filter on the 35mm lens, you have to unscrew the adapter, screw the converter lens and finally turn the conversion settings on the menu, now if you have to continuously change between focal lengths, this can get ugly really quickly.
also the X100 lens and the WCL-X100 takes 49mm filter while the TCL-X100 takes 67mm
the Q on the other hand feels like a RF camera which means fun to shoot with for me and can crop to 35mm(16MP?) or 50mm(8MP?) with a push of a button without having to fool around with converter lens.
sure the lens might be a little too big but I will be most likely walking with the camera on a strap.
these are just my observations based from my experience with the GR and X100 and what I've seen from the Q reviews, so who knows, I might change my mind once I hold a Q in my hands. my backup plan is to get a X100T instead (GR for 21mm, 28mm and 35mm and X100T for 50mm)
Jack Sparrow
Well-known
Hahaha! Looks like somebody is determined to find out who made yqu?
I guess in the end, it really doesn't matter who made what. The camera seems to deliver the goods. Though I'm a little worried now about the issues cropping up. Personally, I think the X100 is still the best option, considering the price and the more useful (to me at least) "35mm" lens.
I guess in the end, it really doesn't matter who made what. The camera seems to deliver the goods. Though I'm a little worried now about the issues cropping up. Personally, I think the X100 is still the best option, considering the price and the more useful (to me at least) "35mm" lens.
Lss
Well-known
What issues?
Jack Sparrow
Well-known
Lss
Well-known
Ah, right, I did see the shattered LCD thing earlier.
Range-rover
Mentor
Leica and Panasonic have been working together so I would guess it's
a Panasonic Sensor if we're still talking about it.
Range
a Panasonic Sensor if we're still talking about it.
Range
GaryLH
Mentor
So correct me if I am wrong...but I am not aware of Panasonic
- selling sensors bigger than m43
- or that they have a ff camera
Given the above and the yield rate of ff sensor, economically it does not make sense for it to be a Panasonic sensor..unless Panasonic is just the fab house. Leica providing the money for the design and fab work.
It is not to say Panasonic does not have the capability of making sensors bigger than m43. In fact, there is a joint venture between Panasonic and Fuji on an organic sensor. Fuji would be using apsc size and Panasonic the m43. Both have plans for smaller p&s size sensors as well... Nobody knows when the organic sensor will come to market. The last rumor had it for 2016 until someone mentioned a heat issue was discovered.
Gary
- selling sensors bigger than m43
- or that they have a ff camera
Given the above and the yield rate of ff sensor, economically it does not make sense for it to be a Panasonic sensor..unless Panasonic is just the fab house. Leica providing the money for the design and fab work.
It is not to say Panasonic does not have the capability of making sensors bigger than m43. In fact, there is a joint venture between Panasonic and Fuji on an organic sensor. Fuji would be using apsc size and Panasonic the m43. Both have plans for smaller p&s size sensors as well... Nobody knows when the organic sensor will come to market. The last rumor had it for 2016 until someone mentioned a heat issue was discovered.
Gary
How was it shattered... user error?
silverbullet
Well-known
there is a rumour going round that the shareholder Blackstone wants to sell it's part of appr. 4x% of shares to someone. For me it makes sense that Panasonic might buy into Leica. Many years of collaborations, an easy access to optical patents etc. etc.
The advantage of this deal would be that a strict separation between m4/3 business and FF line up branded as Leica avoids too much trouble and protects the trust into the m4/3 system.
When we see the trouble with the digital M lineup from the very beginning it's clear for me that an electronic giant plays his game in the background with the Q.
So my guess: sensor and electronics from Panasonic, lens from Panasonic, shipping and item carton from Leica plus price tag…… ;-)
The advantage of this deal would be that a strict separation between m4/3 business and FF line up branded as Leica avoids too much trouble and protects the trust into the m4/3 system.
When we see the trouble with the digital M lineup from the very beginning it's clear for me that an electronic giant plays his game in the background with the Q.
So my guess: sensor and electronics from Panasonic, lens from Panasonic, shipping and item carton from Leica plus price tag…… ;-)
Michael Markey
Mentor
Kate-the-Great
Well-known
Comparisons of Q / M240 / A7(II) of the same scene, same light, base ISO underexposed ~4stops and same aperture/shutter speed would prove illuminating (no pun intended 
) to decipher this mystery.
Different A/D converters & processing will affect SNR & color but the character of deep shadow noise is somewhat distinctive between sensors.
) to decipher this mystery. Different A/D converters & processing will affect SNR & color but the character of deep shadow noise is somewhat distinctive between sensors.