Viramati
Lives in
london, United Kingdom
Works as a
photographer retired
Has a website at
http://www.dpsampson.zenfolio.com
Joined on
Feb 21, 2008
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| Al Fateh Grand Mosque by mallen1976 from Your City - B&W Night Picture | Fascia walkie talkie building London by ian herridge from Abstract Architecture | Beakable by Hobbyfotograaf from Breakable | St Paul's - DT NYC by mollymcd from Modern - Old-Fashioned |
Beginner's GuidesGetting Started
In-depth testingLatest Camera Reviews
Beyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videos
real world performanceField Test Videos
see how we seeSample Galleries
In-depth ReviewFujifilm X100F
Show CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017
Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
What's that Noise?Shedding some light on the sources of noise
2464FeatureWhat is equivalence?
If only Sony would learn from fuji. They never will though
Had the C2040Z which was my first digital camera
Kodak Box Brownie
Yet another step backwards for the photographer. First we lost the non reflective screen a few years ago and now SD card reader and USB ports. I recently upgraded my mid 2012 model with an 1Tb SSD drive, 16gb RAM and hopefully it will serve me for years to come.
So sorry to hear this, I first learned Lightroom through one of his video tutorials. RIP
alextardif: Leica Q...sure, expensive jewelry, but one that's easy to justify even for a hobbyist, provided there's access to disposable income. A one-time $4,500 treat, yeah, sure, why not.
SL? Not so much. An exercise in keeping up with technology by Leica. An entirely new system (presumably aimed to be a workhorse for a working pro) that simply can't possibly gain traction like the crazy growth of Sony's FE, simply due to unattainable cost with barely any real ROI. EVF is a thing of beauty, but... not much else.
The Q is far more than a piece of jewellery and possibly the best digital camera I Have ever owned or used
Angrymagpie: I'd go with something like the a7rii 28/2, but the Q is really pretty though...
I have the A7rII and the FE28 and can tell you that the lens on the Q is a load better as is the whole shooting experience
I wonder what firmware they used to test as the banding in the shadow areas which was really bad in the first version has been eliminated in the latest update. Without a doubt the best fixed lens digital camera I have ever owned.
Shame about the banding which seems to be about the same as I get with my Leica Q
Will be sticking with my Leica Q
Now we're talking. Great news
Viramati: The Leica q richly deserves it's winning position
Yes I used to have the leica summicron 28/2 asph a fantastic lens on the M240 (one of the best leica lenses IMO) but unfortunately a disaster on the A7rII with really bad smearing towards the edges. New it costs more than the leica Q and i traded it in when I bought the Q. I also have the FE 28 which I bought before the Q was released and while an excellent lens for it's price it is nowhere near the 28 summilux on the Q. For street and documentary work the Q excels and as good as the A7rII is technically I really prefer the analogue controls on the Q and the fact the the lens has a good DOF scale and focuses beautifully manually
Viramati: The Leica q richly deserves it's winning position
I also have the A7rII and along with the FE55 it complements the Q with it's 28mm very well. Of course the A7rII will be a bigger seller but that doesn't take anything away from the Q's strong points
Viramati: The Leica q richly deserves it's winning position
Well I can tell you that Leica can't keep up with the demand for this camera. You might think it is expensive and it is but it is cheaper than the RX1R and add on viewfinder where when originally released. The IQ from the leica sensor and lens just wow me everytime. One of the best £2900 I have ever spent on a camera
The Leica q richly deserves it's winning position
DStudio: Since some here are raving about the Sony A7R II in comparison, I went back and reviewed the gallery again. I remember I especially liked the photos of the girl looking out the window.
Too bad, they would have been even better with this camera.
The Sony is good, but it's not even in the same class as this camera. Not a single one of those photos compares to the better photos here. These simply have better dimensionality. The photos look and feel more like the actual items, rather than just photos of the objects. These are the nicest quality photos I've seen in a DPR gallery in a while.
There's really no trick to seeing the difference. Just take your analytical, rational glasses off for a moment. Instead observe and feel the photos as you go through them. Don't try *too* hard; just notice that most photos don't have quite the qualities these do. Perhaps some purists will prefer other Leica models, but this Leica glass is still capturing something special that most others miss!
I have both the A7rII and the Q and the files straight out of camera are so much better than the Sony. Yes the Sony files can be worked on but the combination of the Q sensor and the leica lens is sublime.
oris: a lot of stripes in the dark areas.
nice photos/
Ori
the sometime banding in the shadow areas is about the only issue I have with the camera but I find it easily removed in Nik's Dfine2 noise management software. Otherwise probabaly the best camera I have ever owned
Great camera but I will stick with my mkIII
Looks interesting but not for me. Will stick to my Billingham Hadley pro
Come dpreview let's interview people who know what they are saying. In the UK the 28 summilux is £3979 and the Q is £2900 so the lens costs a third more