There is an interchangeable lens version with AF: it's called the SL2.

Yes it's larger and the lenses are larger, but that's what you get when you want a Leica MILC with AF. There are rumors about a mini SL2 floating around but even that would not be the size of the Q2 and the lenses would still be the same SL lenses.

Thoughts R Us:

"but that's what you get when you want a Leica MILC with AF." If you want a Leica full framed MILC. If an APSC sensor suits you, there's the CL and TL2 bodies, which have the same lens mount as the SL2.

Thoughts that just won't do, its a m replacement we need. If you look at the q2 they've managed to make an af 28mm that small. It surely can't be a huge leap to detach it and make the body a bit larger for IS. Its got to be the future for them ive had several M cameras but even I've had enough, if you dont innovate and progress you die, Morgan Car company being an exception but even they are having to develop new platforms and ev technologies

One can buy an optional EVF to attach to a Leica M; it works quite well. So if you want an M with EVF, you can indeed have that.

Most of what people are complaining about in this thread is available from Leica today. Want a mirrorless FF Leica ILC: you have the SL2 and SL2s. Want a smaller Leica ILC: you have the CL series with APS-C sensor. Want an M with EVF: you have the M with the Visoflex EVF attachment. And if you want an even larger EVF to use with M lenses, you have the SL2 and SL2s with the M adapter.

Of course if you want smaller Leica FF and don't mind a fixed lens body, you have the marvelous Q series.

Really, there are no shortage of choices for those who want to go Leica.

Bigsensorisbest:

Where are you getting the idea that the Leica CL has been discontinued? It hasn't been.

There was an APSC fixed lens Leica with a zoom, don't remember how wide it was, called the X-Vario. It has been discontinued; that was years ago.

The CL is still listed on the Leica Camera website; I don't think it is discontinued.

Hunter_C:

Not only is the Q2 Monochrome an AF camera, it uses the same lens as the regular Q2 and the first Q.

I fail to understand why a manual focus lens with no zoom (a prime lens) is such a surprise. But this one has AF.

Really, you should download some of the RAWs. The cat photo is a revelation that is hardly apparent from what is displayed here.

Pomo. They’ve actually released a three filter screw on kit for this camera so that’s all sorted then.

You don't know what you don't know. 😆

Same can be said for comparing d850 shots to d750 or canon 5div or insert whatever camera here. 99% of people would fail a blind identify which pic came from which camera test.

What’s the point? Use the camera that makes you want to take pictures whether a Leica or a camera phone.

The point is that people like to brag about the superior output of a Leica, but they would likely fail a comparison test.

@hioe04 nails it. Let's face it; you can take basically the same images with any camera system these days. That means that the differentiator for most should be the camera system they enjoy using the most because that will motive them to use the camera more and improve their skills more.

The old paradigm of judging camera equipment on performance is dead; technology has advanced to that point where all are more than sufficient.

Reviewers should review more on the experience of using a camera. Yes that's subjective but so are reviews for movies, music, etc. It would be more useful to more people and make reviews more relevant.

Use what you enjoy. Otherwise what's the point, unless you're a working pro?

Thoughts - Totally agree - there is very little to choose between the image quaity of modern cameras. The questions to ask are:

Are all the lenses you need available in the system?
Does it provide all the specs and features you need?
Do you enjoy the feel, operation and styling of the camera?
Can you afford it?

Also very relevant is whether it will be your *only* camera (in which case versatility is important), or whether it will be supplemental (e.g. a DSLR or MILC user might see benefit in adding a compact fixed lens camera, or a video-centric camera).

Personally I shoot on DSLRs currently, and I could *afford* the Q2 Monochrom, and I'd love to have it, but I can't justify the cost in terms of the amount of use it would get.

Most of the "anti" brigaade here are either plain ignorant or plain jealous, IMO.

well if you would push the iso beyond like 6400ish , everybody would see the difference ... in favor of the monochrome sensor...why so much hate for the leica..just dont buy it..and get over it

Ming Thein tested the original 18MP Leica Monochrom against the D810 (36MP) and found the Leica to have more resolved resolution. You want to think that a 45MP D850 is going to be exactly the same as a 47MP Mono? Yeah, nah.

I do not hate Leica, just dislike the ignorance about the huge disadvantage a monochromatic sensor has what comes to grayscale post processing possibilities.

"Thoughts R Us" said in the Q2 Monochrome review forum that maybe Leica planned a smaller SL2, perfect for all kind of lenses and a 47mpx FF sensor... that would be really interesting for me...

There's a rumor about a smaller SL2 from Leica Rumors:

https://leicarumors.com/2020/11/03/the-rumored-leica-sl2-s-camera-could-be-a-small-version-of-the-sl2.aspx/

Leica Rumors is a credible site and usually gets it right...but of course the usual caveats apply.

The rumor does state the smaller SL2 would most likely have a 24 MP sensor, not the 47.

Architectural photography in its element with black and white. Try clouds for contrast. As for cast of worst actors in any Hollywood blockbuster the movie Titanic with Leonardo di Caprio finding true love in temperatures below freezing. That 1500 people drowned never got mentioned as if that was not so important. Stanley Kurbrick was a genius. So was Peter Sellars as DrStrangelove.

Who would you suggest in Barry Lyndon rather than Ryan O Neal?

basleigh:

"Higher than expected sales may prove everyone wrong on this gamble."

Leica has been selling M Monochrome bodies for years. It's a safe bet that the Q2 will sell well for Leica.

The last 45 minutes of Titanic was full of people falling to their deaths as the ship sank, of people scrambling to lifeboats, they actually included how the gates to steerage were locked so the richies could get to the lifeboats first, and not even fill them to capacity.

Flashlights were an historical inaccuracy but James Cameron commented that they were included because he had to light the scene somehow! And that scene was all the dead bodies bobbing around in the water.

I feel like the human tragedy was quite well mentioned in the movie Titanic.

@basleigh, exactly the same number of shades of grey are possible with a monochrome sensor and a Bayer sensor.

The folks that make Red cameras for video published a nice, plain-language explanation of the difference between monochrome and Bayer sensors: https://www.red.com/red-101/color-monochrome-camera-sensors

Being English any storytelling about Titanic catastrophe needs to be addressed with sensitivity and respect because it was an indictment of Britain and British overconfidence advertising the unsinkable ocean liner. Like Bismark launched with great fanfare the applause was short lived. HMS Hood paid a heavy price with few survivors. Over 5000 sailors went down in that battle of the high seas 1941. Titanic going down was better portrayed in British version A night to remember with Kenneth Moore as First Officer in black and white like documentary. Hollywood sells soap.

Yes, that's true too. At the time however, the Hollywood version of Titanic was one of the most expensive movies ever shot-Cameron actually built a full size model of the top of the Titanic. That movie really brought Titanic era British hubris to light.

Correction; Kenneth More. British 1950's matinee idol when there was a British film industry; many great actors like Rex Harrison Michael Rennie John Mills and Jack Hawkins.

In last scene of Night to Remember Kenneth More cited British overconfidence and false claims by the owners of Titanic being invincible. Hence not enough lifeboats. As humans we suffer from such illusions of grandeur like winning wars bringing on revenge eventually.

On the other hand Barry Lyndon contains some of the most gorgeous colour photography I have ever enjoyed in a movie.

Disagree....DrStrangelove and Bedford Incident shot in B&W accentuates the drama like news report as more realistic like with shower curtain railings coming off in Psycho. Hotel owner Norman Bates so much colder in metallic grey. Colour becomes a distraction.

@SDKat I must disagree with you. 2001: A Space Odyssey is great in large part due to the cinematography. When the chimps are smashing the bones in the beginning and the one flies up in the air in slo-mo.. or during the space walk when all you hear is the astronaut's breathing, let's not forget the pshychedelic dimensional jump sequence that still looks good today.

Also Close Encounters of the Third Kind-not a wasted frame in there.

Speaking of Psycho.. that shower scene had 73 (or was it 74) distinct shots cut together to make the scene.

What is even stranger than the price is the fact that (some) people are willing to pay 2-5 times more a camera which does not allow them to adjust the grayscale mapping in post.

As someone who shoots 99.5% for black and white, using a colour sensor, and who shot, processed and printed black and white film in formats from 35mm to 4x5 for many years, I have a different view.

A monochrome display is not required. Almost without exception, all the great black and white photographs from the film era were made by people who looked through optical viewfinders or ground glass that showed the world in colour.

Colour converts to grey tones just fine. The bump in image quality that people claim makes monochrome sensors outperform Bayer or X-Trans is not photographically significant if you're only posting JPEGs on the web. Even if you're printing large, a boat load of other considerations matter more in most cases.

You also give up a lot by using monochrome, primarily the ability to decide how colours map to grey tones in post.

I'm glad monochrome sensors exist. The more tools the better. But please lets not appeal to magical thinking and wish fulfillment.

Do you really think though that someone “only posting JPEGs on the web” is looking at this camera? I do not believe that is the market at all. There are plenty of Canons and Nikons for that (or cell phones for that matter). A GFX 100 is also not worth the price to “only post JPEGs on the web” but that misses the point.

If you are spending $6000 on a camera, you have other ambitions, and for those people a 2 stop improvement in low light performance and the improved resolution may be just what they are looking for.

Yes, yes I do think that people who are "only posting JPEGs on the web" will buy this camera. Most people don't print. Where do you think their pictures end up?

As for the market for this camera, it's people who have $6,000 to spend on a fixed lens monochrome camera. I'm sure that some of them will have the ambition to make and print high quality black and white photographs, and perhaps show and sell them. Others just want a nice camera.

But none of that has anything to do with the point I was making, which is that you don't need a monochrome sensor to make exceptional black and white photographs.

I agree with you on that last point, but better tools certainly help.

As for the first point, I think it is easy to get caught in a social media bubble and think that everyone else exists in the same sphere. We don’t.

Surely this is one of the most beautiful cameras on the market! I think it looks even better than the standard Q2 because it's even more understated in its appearance without the red dot and with the lettering/numbering only in white and grey.

look in your stocking hung by the chimney...with care...

@Jon555: for those considering this camera, that is the question that one must answer. The color Q2 gives you more options, one of which being is to have the image in color. But the Q2M gives you better high ISO performance and DR. So it depends on what one wants.

Also as others have pointed out, some like the idea of shooting with a monochromatic camera for the romance of doing so...and nothing wrong with that either.

Just change the back of a phase one. Not sure id take that kind of money into the wilderness though

28 and 40 are so much more interesting than 24, 35 and 50 though, IMHO...

Hence "IMHO"... :-)

I'm not sure but I thought you couldn't see throught the viewfinder in the dark?
Bescause it isn't bright enough?

Surely the opposite?

I'd have thought skulking around with a menacingly huge DSLR would make you look more tourist like and hence unobtrusive.

As a youngster I shot very little color due to cost and the fact I liked making prints. I guess I had a feel for how things looked in b/w or maybe I only printed the ones that happened to work.

Once working there was about a 15 year period where nearly all of my jobs were shot on color and b/w film.

Then a point came where only color was shot and they converted to b/w for newspapers and other occasional b/w.

So I had little reason to think in b/w but had no problem when I wanted to work that way.

For at least the last 20 years I haven't seen a single image used by a client in b/w.

I shot these in color then decided it would be nice to transition to b/w. Glad to have the color versions though.

https://youtu.be/C4adGwnht7w

I would love to have a Fujifilm X100Vm. I bet that they could make a premium version and sell it for $2K USD.

But with camera sales tanking I bet that we will never see one.

Stranger still that "selling like hot-cakes" remains a durable expression. I mean, when's the last time IHOP ran out of hot-cakes?

Got me!
😋
I'm a non native Englidh speaker
and can't visit iHOP for hotcakes!

@epambos WHY the heck NOT?? it IS, after all, the INTERNATIONAL House of Pancakes!!