Fuji X100V vs used Leica Q

[Igor Sotelo]

I was thinking about a street-casual type of camera and went today to see a Leica Q. Didn't like the design of the camera, but the ergonomics were good and the design is something that may grow on me over time.

The price of the cameras is $1400 for the Fuji and around maybe $2200 for an used Leica.

The Leica Summilux 28mm 1.7 should be much better than the Fuji 23mm 2.0 even now in it's second iteration.

I saw samples from the Q vs the previous X100F on similar subjects, and the Leica is sincerely on another level, both straight out of the camera.

The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera, while Leica is full frame. I do like the look of the X100 better, but the Leica seems easier to operate manually and neither camera seems to be made as well as my Nikon Df.

Video and tilt screen characteristics are fine but not critical.

Which one would you choose?

Another option is to get the best F or EF prime I can in the 24 to 35mm range. But that's not going as light, the shutter won't be quit and may not give the type of pictures Leica is well known for.

 

[Orangorill]

I would choose the X100V, since the form factor of the Q makes it just as tricky to bring along as a ILC. The body might be compact (certainly for FF), but the lens is not.

I'm actually considering an X 113.

 

[LenRivers]

You can buy a 28 mm and 50 mm conversion lens for the X100V. You have lots of option with Fuji. IF you want to use TTL flash it will be way less expensive with non-Leica flash, SF--40 or 60.

Yes, any full frame camera will just have that extra special look.... I have the Q2 and from 24 mp to 47 mm is breathtaking.

To that end You may want to use your $2000 more effectively and look at an actual system camera from Fuji XT whatever or even See where you might be with a Sony A7 iii, or Nikon Z mirrorless for full frame.

I have shot Fuji X before. XE-1, XT-1, XH-1, XE-3, X100 S and F. I did not like the XE-3 mostly because of the touch screen was not smooth I want the Dpad and controlled stick or at least the Dpad and save the swipe screen for my iPhone

I now shoot Sony A7 iii and sold some lenses and video gear to make the Q2 cost me $1500 new.

I decided not to get the Fuji X100 V even though it has nice feature like the tilt screen but I lived without it. The crop of the Q2 is large enough even at 75 mm you can easily make an 8x10 print.

*****

In the end you have to like your decision and carry the camera and use it. Only you have to like your photography

IF you are not sure what to do most likely it is just GAS and I advise sleeping on it and think about it... Whatever you do if you buy and sell it again you will lose 50% of your money pretty much on the resale so think about the right decision for you and the frequency you will actually use the camera

***

this is the first time I have been able to buy a Leica it was never ever ever on my radar but I made it work. My number one is Auto Focus ability and I wont buy a manual only camera or lens. I cant focus to save my life.

 

[Igor Sotelo]

You can buy a 28 mm and 50 mm conversion lens for the X100V. You have lots of option with Fuji. IF you want to use TTL flash it will be way less expensive with non-Leica flash, SF--40 or 60.

Yes, any full frame camera will just have that extra special look.... I have the Q2 and from 24 mp to 47 mm is breathtaking.

To that end You may want to use your $2000 more effectively and look at an actual system camera from Fuji XT whatever or even See where you might be with a Sony A7 iii, or Nikon Z mirrorless for full frame.

I have shot Fuji X before. XE-1, XT-1, XH-1, XE-3, X100 S and F. I did not like the XE-3 mostly because of the touch screen was not smooth I want the Dpad and controlled stick or at least the Dpad and save the swipe screen for my iPhone

I now shoot Sony A7 iii and sold some lenses and video gear to make the Q2 cost me $1500 new.

I decided not to get the Fuji X100 V even though it has nice feature like the tilt screen but I lived without it. The crop of the Q2 is large enough even at 75 mm you can easily make an 8x10 print.

*****

In the end you have to like your decision and carry the camera and use it. Only you have to like your photography

IF you are not sure what to do most likely it is just GAS and I advise sleeping on it and think about it... Whatever you do if you buy and sell it again you will lose 50% of your money pretty much on the resale so think about the right decision for you and the frequency you will actually use the camera

***

this is the first time I have been able to buy a Leica it was never ever ever on my radar but I made it work. My number one is Auto Focus ability and I wont buy a manual only camera or lens. I cant focus to save my life.

I think a lot before buying something, typically never sell anything after buying something. I realized it would be good to go with a DSLR's rather than the ILM route because one can get great lenses at reasonable prices, since many people are switching systems.

It seems the Leica Q is a good way of getting an extremely high quality Leica wide angle lens, that also auto focuses, has macro function and as a bonus a full frame Leica digital camera that's very light, well made and has full array of functions. But have the impression someone that used the camera could give me advice if it's a good idea of getting one. I used one just few minutes.

Initially always though about the different iterations of the X100, and now the X100V, but wish it was a full frame camera. Was looking the alternatives, and an used Leica Q isn't that much more expensive. Maybe should also check some of the Sony RX-1, though I would feel more comfortable using something well made from a more traditional brand, even if specifications aren't top notch.

Dreaming isn't bad at all, sooner or later it all gets reality.

 

[Foskito]

”The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera”

No it is not real, is just an illusion, so you Leica Q for $2200.

 

[LenRivers]

There are a lot of video reviews on YouTube for pretty much everything so that is good to watch as well.

So far as what to do like anything if you have a certain need find the tool that can do what you need. Depends how practical you approach the decision. If you are ok with losing money when you resale then again, get what you need today.

Speaking to the X100S and X100F my personal experience with the "S" Auto focus was not good and low light not great. The X100 F better and for sure needed an external flash for indoors and I liked the conversion lenses but it takes time to attach and remove a screw mount lens (very slow process vs anything else)

I use really right stuff grips for both my Fuji and Leica and Sony and Nikon etc. JB camera design is another company.

***

Most importantly can you live with and be happy with a limiting way to see the world. There is no way the leica can be my only camera. I use the Sony 24-105 zoom a lot

I did buy end of last year a Sony RX-100 vii so my thought is if I need small with the leica and longer lens that is what I will do and I have the Sony in a Small Rig cage with grip.

***

I decided while the Fuji X was fine do I want to go for my 3rd X100 if I was not 100% happy with the S and F, and I said no for now.

***

Ultimately you have to figure out who you are and what you want to do. You can usually rent cameras like this for a few days and IMO the X100V is the same camera as the X100F with little upgrades but over all the same thing. If you liked the prior X100's then get the Fuji if not I am not sure what is different My point is photography should stir passion to create not oh I have to replace my toaster or something

 

[athensGA]

I own both a Leica Q and an X100f. I alternate them depending on situation. The Q has slightly better autofocus. The Q edges the F in producing cinematic rendering of up close subjects. The Q is 2 stops better in low light photography. My main photo interest is night street photography and the Q is better for this.

However the Q is front heavy and a bit unwieldy. It is not a camera you would bring to a party or out to dinner or stick in the side pocket of your backpack to take out in the airport. I throw my F in the back seat pocket of my jeep and leave it unlocked. The F is better for rugged hiking. I grab it on the way out the door and stick it in a coat pocket when walking my dog. I take it mountain biking and jogging when i'm visiting cities. You are more likely to get into a concert with the F(v). The built in flash of the F can be very handy.

The Q is like a supermodel. The F is that smart, cute, funny girl (or guy) next door. The Q DOES best the F in ultimate image quality, but if I had to pick just one to own forever it would be the F. You know you should have married that girl (guy) next door instead of that crazy supermodel.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/83702654@N07/

 

[BostonBoy]

I own both a Leica Q and an X100f. I alternate them depending on situation. The Q has slightly better autofocus. The Q edges the F in producing cinematic rendering of up close subjects. The Q is 2 stops better in low light photography. My main photo interest is night street photography and the Q is better for this.

However the Q is front heavy and a bit unwieldy. It is not a camera you would bring to a party or out to dinner or stick in the side pocket of your backpack to take out in the airport. I throw my F in the back seat pocket of my jeep and leave it unlocked. The F is better for rugged hiking. I grab it on the way out the door and stick it in a coat pocket when walking my dog. I take it mountain biking and jogging when i'm visiting cities. You are more likely to get into a concert with the F(v). The built in flash of the F can be very handy.

The Q is like a supermodel. The F is that smart, cute, funny girl (or guy) next door. The Q DOES best the F in ultimate image quality, but if I had to pick just one to own forever it would be the F. You know you should have married that girl (guy) next door instead of that crazy supermodel.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/83702654@N07/

I think that sums it up nicely.

Best part for me is they both fit equally (quick swap) in the Leica Q Holster bag, and both have their own use cases.

 

[bonesetter]

You have to really like 35mm FL to bond with the Fuji, and since owning (both) I have gravitated to 28mm. 35 being just 'not quite wide enough, and then not quite long enough'

Close quarter markets, groups, busy streets etc the Q's 28 is great, and if needed you can always crop a little in post

In that regard I went for the Ricoh GR as a smaller pocket cam (28mm)

Sorry to throw in another, but thought I would mention it as you are talking about two different FL's

 

[Igor Sotelo]

I own both a Leica Q and an X100f. I alternate them depending on situation. The Q has slightly better autofocus. The Q edges the F in producing cinematic rendering of up close subjects. The Q is 2 stops better in low light photography. My main photo interest is night street photography and the Q is better for this.

However the Q is front heavy and a bit unwieldy. It is not a camera you would bring to a party or out to dinner or stick in the side pocket of your backpack to take out in the airport. I throw my F in the back seat pocket of my jeep and leave it unlocked. The F is better for rugged hiking. I grab it on the way out the door and stick it in a coat pocket when walking my dog. I take it mountain biking and jogging when i'm visiting cities. You are more likely to get into a concert with the F(v). The built in flash of the F can be very handy.

The Q is like a supermodel. The F is that smart, cute, funny girl (or guy) next door. The Q DOES best the F in ultimate image quality, but if I had to pick just one to own forever it would be the F. You know you should have married that girl (guy) next door instead of that crazy supermodel.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/83702654@N07/

Being ASP-C, do you find limitations on the X100 performance, like in low light ie. Apparently deep of field is really like of a 35mm 3.0 lens, wide open, compared to a 28mm 1.7. Would you miss the Q image quality if only had the X100.

The Q is still a small camera ie, probably around half the weight compared to an ILC with something like a 28mm 1.8 lens. The Q I saw in a local Leica store was well used and terribly ugly, btw. Will pass on it, unless they accept a crazy cheap offer and flexible payments.

 

[Igor Sotelo]

”The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera”

No it is not real, is just an illusion, so you Leica Q for $2200.

I had an APS-C DSLR, never liked that one. As much as I appreciate X100 ergonomics, looks and high quality photos that probably takes, something is telling me to better go full frame.

On eBay some Q's are around $2500, free shipping and make offer option. Locally on kijiji or in store is around the same. That's what is worth now.

 

[LeonD]

I own both a Leica Q and an X100f. .....I alternate them depending on situation. The Q has slightly better autofocus. The Q edges the F in producing cinematic rendering of up close subjects. The Q is 2 stops better in low light photography. My main photo interest is night street photography and the Q is better for this.

However the Q is front heavy and a bit unwieldy. It is not a camera you would bring to a party or out to dinner or stick in the side pocket of your backpack to take out in the airport. I throw my F in the back seat pocket of my jeep and leave it unlocked. The F is better for rugged hiking. I grab it on the way out the door and stick it in a coat pocket when walking my dog. I take it mountain biking and jogging when i'm visiting cities. You are more likely to get into a concert with the F(v). The built in flash of the F can be very handy.

The Q is like a supermodel. The F is that smart, cute, funny girl (or guy) next door. The Q DOES best the F in ultimate image quality, but if I had to pick just one to own forever it would be the F. You know you should have married that girl (guy) next door instead of that crazy supermodel.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/83702654@N07/

I have both the Q and X100F and agree with the above.

For me, the decision which to take usually has to do with if I want the camera around my neck or in my pocket.

 

[Le Chef]

I guess if you see a camera as apiece of personal jewelry then the Fuji is the right call.

If you prefer to just shoot jpeg then pick the Fuji. If you want to get the highest quality images you can, and are prepared to do some work in post to RAW images then the Q/Q2 will win hands down.

If you want to concentrate on capturing images rather than fiddling with buttons and settings then the Q/Q2 is the best choice.

it really depends whether you want to take photographs or wear a camera.

 

[Foskito]

”The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera”

No it is not real, is just an illusion, so you Leica Q for $2200.

I had an APS-C DSLR, never liked that one. As much as I appreciate X100 ergonomics, looks and high quality photos that probably takes, something is telling me to better go full frame.

On eBay some Q's are around $2500, free shipping and make offer option. Locally on kijiji or in store is around the same. That's what is worth now.

The point is saying “wondering if the Fuji is a real camera” is a classic troll comment. I have 2 Leica M bodies, a Sony A7Rii and a Fuji XT3. The X lenses are up to any task. I bet more than enough for whatever photographic need you might have.

 

[Bejersey]

Talking about Fuji...many of the 4 camera TV shows are using
See fujinon 25‑300 lenses

. Not saying they are the same...but close cousins at least.

”The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera”

No it is not real, is just an illusion, so you Leica Q for $2200.

I had an APS-C DSLR, never liked that one. As much as I appreciate X100 ergonomics, looks and high quality photos that probably takes, something is telling me to better go full frame.

On eBay some Q's are around $2500, free shipping and make offer option. Locally on kijiji or in store is around the same. That's what is worth now.

The point is saying “wondering if the Fuji is a real camera” is a classic troll comment. I have 2 Leica M bodies, a Sony A7Rii and a Fuji XT3. The X lenses are up to any task. I bet more than enough for whatever photographic need you might have.

--
http://www.photographybyrichardmsmith.com/

 

[bonesetter]

I guess if you see a camera as apiece of personal jewelry then the Fuji is the right call.

If you prefer to just shoot jpeg then pick the Fuji. If you want to get the highest quality images you can, and are prepared to do some work in post to RAW images then the Q/Q2 will win hands down.

If you want to concentrate on capturing images rather than fiddling with buttons and settings then the Q/Q2 is the best choice.

it really depends whether you want to take photographs or wear a camera.

One point of contention to yours is Leica's DNG output needs absolute minimal pp'ing, ie you don't have to put work into them

 

[David V]

I was thinking about a street-casual type of camera and went today to see a Leica Q. Didn't like the design of the camera, but the ergonomics were good and the design is something that may grow on me over time.

The price of the cameras is $1400 for the Fuji and around maybe $2200 for an used Leica.

The Leica Summilux 28mm 1.7 should be much better than the Fuji 23mm 2.0 even now in it's second iteration.

I saw samples from the Q vs the previous X100F on similar subjects, and the Leica is sincerely on another level, both straight out of the camera.

The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera, while Leica is full frame. I do like the look of the X100 better, but the Leica seems easier to operate manually and neither camera seems to be made as well as my Nikon Df.

Video and tilt screen characteristics are fine but not critical.

Which one would you choose?

Another option is to get the best F or EF prime I can in the 24 to 35mm range. But that's not going as light, the shutter won't be quit and may not give the type of pictures Leica is well known for.

I own both the Q2 and the X100F (X100V on pre-order) and here are my thoughts:

They really are two very different cameras, cost aside. The build and image quality from the Q/Q2 is noticeably better in every way. It should be for the price difference.

That said, they are both equally pleasing to shoot and the Fuji produces great results. I also think Fuji does a great job on JPEGS, film sims and in-camera editing. With the redesigned body, lens (which is noticeably sharper) and weather sealing, it would appear that Fuji is closing the gap, at a pretty incredible value for the price. Can wait to shoot the 100V myself.

Due to the size and cost, the Fuji is a camera I can take everywhere and anywhere. The Leica is a "day trip" camera or when I want that something extra special from the output, but don't want to load up my system camera and lenses (Nikon Z).

 

[Leica28]

I just don’t see how you can compare a crop sensor to a full frame one.

 

[timwit]

I was thinking about a street-casual type of camera and went today to see a Leica Q. Didn't like the design of the camera, but the ergonomics were good and the design is something that may grow on me over time.

The price of the cameras is $1400 for the Fuji and around maybe $2200 for an used Leica.

The Leica Summilux 28mm 1.7 should be much better than the Fuji 23mm 2.0 even now in it's second iteration.

I saw samples from the Q vs the previous X100F on similar subjects, and the Leica is sincerely on another level, both straight out of the camera.

The Fuji is ASP-C which has me wondering if it's a real camera, while Leica is full frame. I do like the look of the X100 better, but the Leica seems easier to operate manually and neither camera seems to be made as well as my Nikon Df.

Video and tilt screen characteristics are fine but not critical.

Which one would you choose?

Another option is to get the best F or EF prime I can in the 24 to 35mm range. But that's not going as light, the shutter won't be quit and may not give the type of pictures Leica is well known for.

I chose the Leica Q. It may be bigger and bit more bulky with the 28mm Summiliux lens but it inspires me to shoot. I've owned every X100 up until version F.

That said, you need to shoot both cameras to get a feel for each. I didn't realize how much I enjoyed the Leica Q until I took it overseas with me for an unofficial documentary assignment.

Don't be fooled by the aesthetics. The chosen camera should be the right functional fit for you.

Tim C.

 

[athensGA]

I own both a Leica Q and an X100f. I alternate them depending on situation. The Q has slightly better autofocus. The Q edges the F in producing cinematic rendering of up close subjects. The Q is 2 stops better in low light photography. My main photo interest is night street photography and the Q is better for this.

However the Q is front heavy and a bit unwieldy. It is not a camera you would bring to a party or out to dinner or stick in the side pocket of your backpack to take out in the airport. I throw my F in the back seat pocket of my jeep and leave it unlocked. The F is better for rugged hiking. I grab it on the way out the door and stick it in a coat pocket when walking my dog. I take it mountain biking and jogging when i'm visiting cities. You are more likely to get into a concert with the F(v). The built in flash of the F can be very handy.

The Q is like a supermodel. The F is that smart, cute, funny girl (or guy) next door. The Q DOES best the F in ultimate image quality, but if I had to pick just one to own forever it would be the F. You know you should have married that girl (guy) next door instead of that crazy supermodel.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/83702654@N07/

Being ASP-C, do you find limitations on the X100 performance, like in low light ie. Apparently deep of field is really like of a 35mm 3.0 lens, wide open, compared to a 28mm 1.7. Would you miss the Q image quality if only had the X100.

The Q is still a small camera ie, probably around half the weight compared to an ILC with something like a 28mm 1.8 lens. The Q I saw in a local Leica store was well used and terribly ugly, btw. Will pass on it, unless they accept a crazy cheap offer and flexible payments.

Honestly I think the lens/sensor combo on the Q can really make magic. Totally subjective I realize. Yes if I sold the Q I would miss what it can render. I’ll probably keep it forever. It’s depreciated so much in value it’s not worth selling anyway.