erick.boileau
Member
Same here
I want that camera but without lenses + a new line of dedicated AF lenses
Then I shall sell my M
I want that camera but without lenses + a new line of dedicated AF lenses
Then I shall sell my M
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
unravel wrote:
Thank you for the review, just curious, how is the blackout on the EVF? Especially since you shot Sony series, if you could use that as a comparison. This is the only thing that i dont like about mirrorless systems tbh.
On the 28 - years ago, loved the 35mm on an M2, never liked the 28mm (back then). Now have used a 28 on an MM and warmed up to that lens, with a margin for cropping. I never liked the 28 before but liking it now.
On the fixed lens - One advantage is lack of dust on the sensor. Not a minor issue over time.
The Q is a direct challenge to the RX1, both are compact AF high quality cameras, great to travel with. Tough choice, but glad to see Leica in the mix.
Yes, rattling noise like I first heard in Pentax IS bodies scared me too.Hi Dave,
I think I answered your question on the other forum. But I did test the SF26 w/my M240 and I couldn't get the right exposures in TTL. Perhaps I was doing something wrong. I'd be the first to admit that, as generally I'm a manual flash kinda guy.
And I think you're right about the stabiliser, which I think is built into the lens with this camera. So yes while off you would hear rattling noises, but still scares me a little.
I couldn't say. I looked at 100% crops from all my various Sony sensors I've had over the years, various Canon sensors, and various Nikon sensors and 100% crops from the M9 and M240. I came to the conclusion that I think the sensor seems very similar to old tech Canon sensors, but sharper with more resolution (obviously). Similar to the M9, but not exactly the same as under the black dot layer there is a weird texture not present in the M9. None of this is bad, it sounds bad, but it's good.. I'm pretty ok with the sensor. Now I just need LR to work properly with the Q, and some sunny days to test the thing.I really want this camera and I personally LOVE fixed lens cameras. My Rolleiflex taught me the value of simplicity.
The thing that worries me is that Leica might one day soon release a 35/2 version, which would be really better suited to my work. Plus I feel like cropping it to 35 makes it effectively APS-C.
Seriously though, who did this for Leica? Every camera they've made like this has had some fatal flaw that was aside from preference. Now suddenly they have world class AF, latitude, and ISO performance? Maybe this is the effect of the expansion?
I'll have to test the SF-26 w/the M240. Last time I did, TTL didn't seem to work, or at least wasn't working accurately.Yes, rattling noise like I first heard in Pentax IS bodies scared me too.
As for the SF-26, I assumed the TTL protocol was the same for cameras like the M9, M-E, original monochrom as well as the M240. Apparently its not. When I used the SF 26 briefly on all the cameras mentioned, it appeared to be quite accurate (forward firing as well as bounce) with the M240 but not with any of the others. With the M-E, M9 etc, TTL was non functional. Unfortunately Leica is mum regarding use of this new flash with the M9 era of cameras.
Dave (D&A)
Oh ok! I just read that they got Panasonic to do the AF. What a DUH move, seriously. Companies but out better products when they work together IMO. Just like the iPhone and Google maps. Now to discover who made the sensor...there aren't THAT many manufacturers out there....I couldn't say. I looked at 100% crops from all my various Sony sensors I've had over the years, various Canon sensors, and various Nikon sensors and 100% crops from the M9 and M240. I came to the conclusion that I think the sensor seems very similar to old tech Canon sensors, but sharper with more resolution (obviously). Similar to the M9, but not exactly the same as under the black dot layer there is a weird texture not present in the M9. None of this is bad, it sounds bad, but it's good.. I'm pretty ok with the sensor. Now I just need LR to work properly with the Q, and some sunny days to test the thing.
Apparently Leica built this in house with parts sourced from various places. Which is fine by me, as long as it works.
It would be lovely to get a 75 or 90 version of this camera. Nothing will replace my 50APO, so I'm hoping the next Q comes in a tele, as that hasn't been done before, and I hope it comes soon.
Unless it was a fluke, the SF 26 seemed to work guite accurately om the M240 in TTL mode.I'll be interested to hear of your observations with that combination.I'll have to test the SF-26 w/the M240. Last time I did, TTL didn't seem to work, or at least wasn't working accurately.
Good news is, if you use the SF24D on A mode w/the Q116 set the proper way. It's almost more reliable then TTL is. Been walking around the house getting great results. Well as good as I can for on camera flash in a dark room with
Leica indeed deserves a big KUDOS for the Q. Albeit it is not for me because I never ever would spend as much money on a fixed lens camera - simply no way.Leica deserves praise for coming of age.
Based on what Jono and other reviewers', whose views I read with interest, this
Cam is going to rock for many...and rightly so.
But it is not for me. I hate the 28mm fl. I grudgingly use the 35mm..and really
poorly.
Give me a 50mm and a 90mm and I have my cc ready. Or give me an interchangeable Q with its own 50+90 and I shall jump over it.
I want the Q2 to be able to use M mount or its native lenses, if possible. But I would prefer native Q af lenses. And I am done with gear.
I do not want to put cameras in or under my pants...I have other things..important things there..
I wish Leica all success with this offering. And share in the enthusiasm of those that have or shall acquire this Q.
Kudos to Leica.
I'll spend more time trying to figure all of this out before my wedding on the 4th of July. I'll bring the Q with me, but can't promise I'll have time to use it between all the M shots I'll need to take. I have some other jobs before the 4th, but nothing that'll require flash the Q or the M.Unless it was a fluke, the SF 26 seemed to work guite accurately om the M240 in TTL mode.I'll be interested to hear of your observations with that combination.
As for the SF 24, I always found it to work well in A mode but surprisingly fair to poor in TTL. Problem is the Sf24 doesn't so on camera bounce. Asditionally why the SF 24 works woth TTL on both the M9 as well as the M240 in TTL (although only fair in terms of exposure accuracy), the Sf26 only works on the.M240.. Strange indeed.
Dave (D&A)
I like her perspective and writing style
About the bathroom test, it did have the AF-assist light, didn't it? It can't be as magical as Sony A7s, I would think
Leica indeed deserves a big KUDOS for the Q. Albeit it is not for me because I never ever would spend as much money on a fixed lens camera - simply no way.
I would spend my money on a new line of Q-moumt cameras and AF lenses. Based on what we see from the current Q. If there would be a modern Q2 with interchangeable lenses including a 21, 35, 50 and 75 I would jump on it immediately. And maybe even start selling my big M lens collection.
Just my 5c
I think he means the Q....One word: want.