Leica Q and your thoughts...

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 10, 2017

It has been a long time since I posted in this forum but I come back often to view photos by Choi, Jono and others.

I am considering buying a Leica Q as my walk around and travel camera. I currently use the Fuji X-T1 and X-E2 as well as the Pentax K1. I have no plans for getting rid of those for other reasons... but I am very attracted to the Q.

What I find attractive is the quality of the lens and only carrying extra batteries and memory cards... along with the somewhat diminutive size of the Q.

My question to those who OWN or have OWNED this camera and have experience with it is what have you found to be the downside of owning/using this camera? I understand you are married to a single focal length but are there other issues that come with the Q that are not so obvious. I have read many reviews, most of them with high praise (thanks Jono). Very little negative other than wishing the focal length might be 35mm or even 50mm. For me, 28mm seems comfortable and from what I have read and seen in online postings the lens/sensor mating is quite perfect. I've always felt that Leica glass was the heart of the images Leica produces. So yes, I am intrigued by the Leica Q.

So, the camera has been out for a while, certainly long enough for "issues" to be found, please share your thoughts as I do not spend (note I did not say invest) $4,200 on a whim. And then there is always the thought of the Q2 being a possibility.

The last Leica I owned was the M8 which I sold because it just did not work for me as a main camera but the Q, with AF and Manual option, just might fit my needs as my walk around, carry all the time camera.

Thanks in advance.

Washashore · Jun 10, 2017

Recent Leica Q photos inserted from iPad

Jim,

Please buy the Q, shoot with it post your photos here or on your site and above all create a page at your site about the Q. I hold your phototography work, opinions, comments etc. in high esteem as I am sure most readers of this fourm do.

Now back to the Q.... It has been a very sweet camera for me, I like 28mm and I like a sharp image. I also have a thing for fixed lens cameras with leaf shutters. I often think that the Ricoh GR inspired the designer of the Q but Leica forgot the flash opting for viewfinder instead which is fine with me. Leica also cooked-in the new "Leica Look"!

I have seen artifacts in some Q images such as moire in fabrics but otherwise it is a great way to make pictures and so enjoyable to use. I tend to setup almost all work through the viewfinder and use DNG only files. Look forward to your setting preferences.

It would be great if Q 2 could be a Q X Vario in a walk around, carry all the time camera.

Hope you follow through on the Q... so glad to hear your interested.

W.

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 10, 2017

Washashore said:
Washashore wrote:
Jim,

Washashore said:
Please buy the Q, shoot with it post your photos here or on your site and above all create a page at your site about the Q. I hold your phototography work, opinions, comments etc. in high esteem as I am sure most readers of this fourm do.

Thanks for the kind words. The last several years have found me taking a break from posting on my own website as well as many others. I still read much more than I post. Should I take the plunge and buy the Q I will most certainly create a page for it at Boxed Light.

Washashore said:
Now back to the Q.... It has been a very sweet camera for me, I like 28mm and I like a sharp image. I also have a thing for fixed lens cameras with leaf shutters. I often think that the Ricoh GR inspired the designer of the Q but Leica forgot the flash opting for viewfinder instead which is fine with me. Leica also cooked-in the new "Leica Look"!

I must agree that everything I have seen and read point to the Q being a very good camera although somewhat limited by the fixed lens... but that said, the fixed lens matched to that sensor seems to be ideal. The lens is incredibly sharp from edge to edge and the electronic shutter negates having to use ND filters when shooting wide open under bright lighting conditions.

Washashore said:
I have seen artifacts in some Q images such as moire in fabrics but otherwise it is a great way to make pictures and so enjoyable to use. I tend to setup almost all work through the viewfinder and use DNG only files. Look forward to your setting preferences.

I've not come across any moire laden shots from the Q but I will investigate further on that issue. I was under the impression that the Q was either JPG or JPG + DNG. DNG only would be the way I would prefer to shoot.

Washashore said:
It would be great if Q 2 could be a Q X Vario in a walk around, carry all the time camera.

Well, that is my only fear.... buying now only to discover the Q2 is six months away. That kind of thing has happened to me before... leaves a bitter taste in the buyer's mouth.

Washashore said:
Hope you follow through on the Q... so glad to hear your interested.

We shall see. It is a substantial price to pay and now that I am a certified, card carrying senior citizen, retiree.. I must watch my ever shrinking disposable income. But the old saying rings true... You only go around once in life.

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my question. I hope that other owners/users will pitch in with their own observations on the Q.

Highland grey beard · Jun 10, 2017

Just to pick up on two points. Since firmware v2 you can shoot in DNG only. The lens sensor combination is good enough to stand heavy crops and still print to A4 and even bigger with a little upscaling.

The macro function is a very useful addition for a walk around camera but of course 28mm lens is not an ideal macro focal length and can give a distorted effect.

I moved from an XPro2 and a range of primes and do not regret it in terms of convenience and IQ. A 1.7 lens at 28mm is great to use wide open. I also like the uncomplicated menu and general feel of the camera. I like a wrist strap and Thumbs Up for ease of carrying.

Just a few thoughts.

Dr. Ulrich Rohde · Jun 10, 2017

Nice to "see" you again. I do have the Q and find 28 mostly too extrem so I oscillate between the Q and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II Digital Camera.

Actually more towards the Sony. Less distortion and the 42 MP allows for plenty zooming ......

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 10, 2017

Highland grey beard said:
Just to pick up on two points. Since firmware v2 you can shoot in DNG only. The lens sensor combination is good enough to stand heavy crops and still print to A4 and even bigger with a little upscaling.

Good to know. I prefer to shoot DNG when possible.

Highland grey beard said:
The macro function is a very useful addition for a walk around camera but of course 28mm lens is not an ideal macro focal length and can give a distorted effect.

I assume that distortion can be corrected within LightRoom and or Photoshop.

Highland grey beard said:
I moved from an XPro2 and a range of primes and do not regret it in terms of convenience and IQ. A 1.7 lens at 28mm is great to use wide open. I also like the uncomplicated menu and general feel of the camera. I like a wrist strap and Thumbs Up for ease of carrying.

I have the 18mm, 23mm, 18-55m, 16-50mm and 56mm. I began with the X-E2 then X-Pro 1 and then the X-T1. All good cameras but I prefer the form factor of the X-E2 but it is a bit small and the balance is not good with some of the above lenses. I never care to take all of the lenses when out shooting... of course the Leica Q would force me back into the mode I used with my first rangefinder, the Argus C3. Zoom with your feet.

Highland grey beard said:
Just a few thoughts.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 10, 2017

Dr. Ulrich Rohde said:
Nice to "see" you again. I do have the Q and find 28 mostly too extrem so I oscillate between the Q and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II Digital Camera.

Actually more towards the Sony. Less distortion and the 42 MP allows for plenty zooming ......

Yes, it has been a while. I've noted that most of the old crew are still here, a few have wandered off, like myself.

Funny thing is that I keep the 18mm f/2.0 on my X-E2 most of the time and that translates to 27mm on the crop sensor. I've grown quite comfortable with it. Very few of the Fuji lenses approach the IQ of the Leica counterparts. The Q interests me mainly due to the camera size, IQ, simplicity and of course the larger sensor.

No decision made yet. If it were a bit less costly I might not have to think about it but as always you must pay Leica the required pound of flesh to enjoy their products.

All the best, sir. Thanks for your input.

athensGA · Jun 10, 2017

I owned a Q for one year. I am an enthusiastic amateur who mainly does street/travel photography. I've also owned/used fuji and M43 gear and shoot a little film too.

The thing was an absolute jewel to handle, fondle, admire, shoot. Absolutely unmatched by anything i've ever used/handled before.

The 28mm focal length was useful and versatile. But man when 28mm ain't right, it just REALLY ain't right.

The lens was as sharp as advertised. But I'm still a little perplexed that Leica was forced to use digital correction for a 'lux branded lens. I would have thought the optics alone would have been distortion free. That aspect troubled me, although I'm not sure why as it was nothing that affected the ultimate imaging.

The autofocus was on par with my M43 gear which really leaves nothing to be desired. Switching to manual focus - either standard or macro was an absolutely dreamy experience. Also the OIS was very useful and effective.

The sensor was very good but not great. High iso and DR were a smidgen better than the fuji x-trans 2 I'm used to, and I understand the x-trans 3 has made the gap negligible.

The camera was a little bulky, especially with the leica leather case and lens hood in place, both of which i felt were necessary to protect such a costly item. It was not nearly the afterthought throw-in-a-bag, throw-in-a-jacket-pocket camera that the x100 is.

The camera was a psychological albatross for me. I was VERY self-conscious about it and would cringe whenever people would recognize it and ask me about it. I always felt I had to worry about it, secure it etc. This and it's size made me hesitate to take it to casual social events, to dinner, to a wedding, through the airport etc. It was just too big and noticeable. I have none of these qualms with my x100t.

I'm including some of my favorite images from my time with the Q, but ultimately for me the x100t has ALMOST the imaging prowess, a good bit of the handling pleasure, a fraction of the cost and NONE of the ownership self-consciousness that the Q gave me.

local sunflower farm

at the farmer's market

Abandoned auto plant Detroit

Street shooting in NYC

Jk1002 · Jun 10, 2017

I have the Q, I don't have really any major quibbles with it except that I use the 50mm digital crop more often than I would like and find it hard nailing shots as they just show a frame in the EVF without zooming into the image - it can be too small.

some people complain about video button, didn't have that issue. I do find the diopter moves to easily, that I read a few times from other people so,I am not the only one.

I am self conscious about it as well, I taped over the Leica Red point and now after few month I do not worry about it anymore.

I looked at Fuji as well, coming from an X10 but felt I would gte lost in the amount of options.

I do take pictures in low light a lot when I travel and the Q made a huge difference.

In regards to a new Leica, I would not expect that to happen in month but probably in a year the risk is there.

Question is if that will be a quantum leap or just a small improvement. Also, it will probably hard to get just like the M10 these days.

I am hoping they do lense adapters next like Fuji has for the X100

O would recommend to look at the M240 with the promo or maybe you can find a used M262. That is to some point a very different picture taking experience but you have flexibility with the lenses and there are some awesome deals available

bosjohn21 · Jun 10, 2017

Hi Jim long time no see I hope your still shooting your great images.

While I do not own a Q I have mounted a twenty eight on my M to see what it would be like working with the full frame 24 mg sensor as I am trying myself to figure out if I want one. I can tell you that it has been a bit liberating really. I find I really am not missing much the other lenses I have out side of needed speed. So really want a q but first a ten sigh but the 28 is a very useable focal length and cropping is not a major issue to fifty mm

progo · Jun 11, 2017

Q is only 2 years old at this point, I think Q² is 2-3 years in the future.

I'm having some GAS over Q as well. I come from the Fuji X100 series. It's very difficult this time because Q is not a slam-n-shut winner compared to the X100T, but it left a unforgettable impression when I tested it out in a store.

Dr. Ulrich Rohde · Jun 11, 2017

There are very good and nice pictures, but they were processed. The Q has a fixed lens and the system is /was optimized for fixed 28 mm. The sensor is the same as in the SL .

If you look at the raw data, you can see the huge in camera processing to generate the JPGs.

I just find the "hit rate" of the Sony better, more pictures come out good, but there os a lot of question of taste.

Here are some garden examples , close and distant :

The only change made to the pictures are that some are zoomed in so the possibility of the dynamic range can be judged. The LEICA Q has a bit more saturated colors but that can be adjusted here too

Paul JN · Jun 11, 2017

I've now sold mine as it wasn't getting used. During the honeymoon period I thought it was the best camera I'd ever bought and really enjoyed the challenge of moving from 35mm to 28mm. Now I have a Ricoh GRii and it's abilities and charm have taken me by surprise. It's only 2.8 but I didn't need the wider aperture anyway. I used them side by side for a while and decided I liked the jpegs from the GRii. Also the Q was often clipping highlights. No regrets.

Jono Slack · Jun 11, 2017

Hi There Jim

Lovely to hear from you, and thank you to Ulrich for pointing me to this message.

I had a Q for nearly a year during the testing period and whilst I was writing the article afterwards. I thought it was nearly perfect, the combination of image quality and the ergonomics and flexibility was balanced just right.

I didn't buy one, because I've learned from experience that any kind of fixed lens camera just gets left at home (I ALWAYS have a bag with me which is big enough to fit an M camera and a couple of lenses . . . ).

I can see Ulrich's argument for the Sony, and from a technical point of view he may be right, but like you Jim I find 28mm very seductive and I really don't think there are any downsides to the Q, Sony's ergonomics and menus are liked by some, but still seem too much like a computer than a camera to me.

I miss the Q, and have often considered buying one, it's a lovely camera with lots of virtues and no vices (beyond the lens being fixed).

I hope this helps

All the very best to you Jim

Dr. Ulrich Rohde · Jun 11, 2017

Yes, fixed lens may be an issue but if you look in this forum, a large majority of pictures are taken with 35mm , others argue the 50mm point. So, yes, more universal is a camera with a zoom and maybe 2 prime lenses. You guys know this much better then I do.

Have fun ..

fcracer · Jun 11, 2017

Hi Jim,

When I got my Q Titanium, a few members here told me that the biggest downside to the Q is that you'll end up yearning for an M. I thought that was absurd because who in their right mind would spend USD6895 on a camera body and then more for lenses...

Fast forward six months and I'm now dealing with the challenge and satisfaction of learning manual focus, carrying around a block of magnesium and brass and getting used to the unique charm of the M10.

Thankfully, the camera shop I bought the Q from was right. They hold their value well and I only lost a few hundred dollars for the six months of use.

The only downsides for me with the Q are the focal length and the size (it's a little too big to bring everywhere).

There were however many positives including that incredible lens and sensor combination, the build quality, and the super fast and accurate single mode auto focus (continuous is garbage).

Washashore · Jun 11, 2017

Jim,

FYI

I mentioned I have seen artifacts in some Q images such as moire in fabrics.

Here are samples... First is from Q with green stuff on it (moire?). Second is from M240 and is pretty clean.

Hope it shows up going through DPR.

W.

Washashore · Jun 11, 2017

Jim,

THIS IS THE Q IMAGE

Artifacts in some Q images such as moire in fabrics.

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 11, 2017

Washashore said:
Jim,

THIS IS THE Q IMAGE

Artifacts in some Q images such as moire in fabrics.

Not enough to be a deal breaker for me. I've seen worse from my old Canon 5D.

--
Jim Radcliffe

http://www.boxedlight.com

The ability to 'see' the shot is more important than the gear used to capture it.

Jim Radcliffe · Jun 11, 2017

bosjohn21 said:
Hi Jim long time no see I hope your still shooting your great images.

While I do not own a Q I have mounted a twenty eight on my M to see what it would be like working with the full frame 24 mg sensor as I am trying myself to figure out if I want one. I can tell you that it has been a bit liberating really. I find I really am not missing much the other lenses I have out side of needed speed. So really want a q but first a ten sigh but the 28 is a very useable focal length and cropping is not a major issue to fifty mm

Leica Q and your thoughts...

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Forum Enthusiast

Attachments

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Well-known member

Senior Member

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Leading Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Jim Radcliffe

Guest

Keyboard shortcuts