The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Leica Q: First impressions.

aDam007

New member
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.

The blackout time is faster then a DSLR can bring up and bring down it's mirror. I would say almost on par with a non-1series Canon. Or on par for all intents and purposes. I actually haven't gone to my studio yet to do a comparison, it could be faster.. It's a non-issue in shooting single frame.
BUT it slows down when shooting continuos frames.. Then it feels more sluggish then the 1Dx/5DIII for sure. Much quicker then the A7II

Oh and focus tracking is good. I was walking backwards, my wife was walking at a decent pace, and all the shots were in focus.. Which I think is harder for a wide angle to be honest, as it has so much contrast packed into such a small space. Her head was like 10% of the frame maybe? This was of course in bright light. I think the 5D3 would have had some missed frames here, just on the erratic way two people were walking against each other.

-------------

I think a interchangeable Q system is what everyone wants. And I'd like to point out that Leica has done pretty well with the Q design. So hopefully an interchangeable Q will be here soon.

A few other annoying points after a few hours of shooting. Battery life no fantastic, but not horrible.

Having the shutter dial control 1 stop adjustments then having the thumb wheel also controlling shutter speeds but in half stops is kinda strange. They should have made the shutter dial half stops. Then used the scroll wheel to scroll through AF types or something useful like maybe exposure compensation.

Also, I don't know if I'm doing this wrong, but I can't find the setting where you have it on WYSIWYG constantly, not just on half pressed shutter. The M240 has both options available to the user.. Maybe I'm just tired today of looking at menus. I'll check again tomorrow.
 

Geoff

Well-known member
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.
 

aDam007

New member
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.

It's definitely a RX1 inspired camera. In that it's FF, with a high quality fixed lens.
I'd say that save for the FL, the Leica has it beat at every corner in real world scenarios. I wish their was a better flash then the SF26, but whatever.

I can't wait to see what Sony has cooked up for the RX2, but it would have to not only be significantly better IQ wise then the Q, but would have to also be ergonomically better then it's predecessor or I wouldn't even consider it.

Sony should use the RX2 as a way to test if it can do minimal well. That or they should toss a medium format sensor into the RX2 to shut everyone up.

Unless you're very smart with your compositions, and in some cases you really can't be. I think the 28mm is a great FL for black and white images. The ability to strip messy colors from a scene, and just focus on the way light and dark plays with the image.. I think that's ideal. Though I don't shoot black and white, like rarely or ever.
 

D&A

Well-known member
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.
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)
 
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?
 

aDam007

New member
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 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.
 

aDam007

New member
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)
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 no bounce... Very Terry Richardson type work.

More good news, I went into my bathroom turned off all the lights, so I was essentially being lit by non directional diffused moon light. Basically I couldn't really see what was what. The camera locked focus on letters on a bottle, and it did it pretty quick. ISO50,000 + 15th of a second + 1.7 so it was DARK. Image looks crappy, but a quick convert to black and white, and a few curves adjustment and it's something you'd think could be shot on film (save for the unfortunate but subtle banding that pops up once in every few 50,000 ISO images).
 
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.
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....
 

Hosermage

Active member
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 :p
 

D&A

Well-known member
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
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)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
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.
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
 

aDam007

New member
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'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.
 

aDam007

New member
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 :p

No, I turn it off straight away. I think it annoys people, and 99% of the time I'm shooting people.

I'm pretty sure the camera just has the best AF in the industry. I really found it hard to believe.. I'll update you guys as I go.
 

aDam007

New member
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

Hmmmm... Interesting. I don't actually think I'd sell off my M gear. I'd likely pair down to my favourites (or work lenses). But I'm in the process of doing that now anyway (to focus on the S-system). Though I do wish there was an interchangeable Q.

But if Leica puts a 75 or 90 fixed lens Q in my hand, I might be able to scrape by at a wedding with just the Qs and a backup M :D
 

aDam007

New member
I had a nice walk around with the Q today.. Very refreshing to use it leisurely. I just can't cope with the 28mm lens. Will post a few SOOC JPG files soon.
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Thanks for keeping this thread alive, aDam....

My thoughts, which were shared recently through an email:

I actually quite like the "crop" feature. It works well in terms of using the Q as a 35 mm cropped sensor if one desires, as the files are still quite large and field of view isn't dramatically changed. 50 doesn't work all that well, due to the smaller sizes and distortions still in play.

The Q vs RX1R is a very interesting comparison. I can say for sure that the Q feels more polished and complete, but it is bulkier (feels about M9 sized, but slightly lighter, less so with the grip attached), and thus slightly less portable. Battery life is much better (600+ shots, vs 300 for the RX1R), and the camera focuses much quicker, something that the early reviews have not emphasized. It's about as good at focusing as nearly any camera I have owned, even in poor light, unless the scene has no contrast, at which point I'd go with manual focus.

Speaking of which, the AF/MF implementation is superior to the RX1R, and it can be used very joyfully as a manual focus camera. The built in EVF is very nice, notably better than the attachable EVF RX1R, which makes sense given the 2 year interval. Image quality, I would say, is comparable. The RX1R still holds up fine here, and honestly, if you preferred the 35 mm field of view over 28, or should cost factor in, or if you were not enjoying an M sized camera, all would push someone towards a used RX1(R) at around $1500 to $2000.

At this time, I would see taking the Q over an M if I wanted to keep it simple on a social outing (28, as you know is perfect for family outings or street work), working a street photography shoot, or using the macro for taking photos particularly of food on an outing (the M does not offer this), or further if ISO performance is valued.

All in all, I think the Q does many, many things right. It's a really refined product from the get go, and Leica clearly had a strong design and implementation team behind this. If it is successful, which I think it will, it'll be a great sign of things to come.
 

aDam007

New member
Hi Ashwin, my pleasure.

It's difficult for me to shoot with a 28mm FL. If the Q has taught me anything about myself, it's that I don't like 28mm. I knew this going in, considering my track record with my M-system.

I'll be putting up a proper review tomorrow night. With pictures.. But for now here are some more images:

These are SOOC JPG files made small in LR. Chalk with my typical resizing problems:
(They're all almost 1 stop to dark, there's a reason for this, I will mention it in my proper review. BTW weather was overcast and crappy. Not a good day for photos.)


f/5.6


f/1.7


f/11


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


f/5.6


I should also add, they were all sharp until I resized them :(
I really need to learn how to get the best out of web jpg files.
 
Top