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.

Adam L

Member
I'm torn. My Sony RX1 is getting beat up and I'm considering an upgrade. For those that have used both, is this a material increase in quality (both image and shooting) or minor, or just different? The things that I like most about the Sony is the dynamic range, silent shutter, & low light capabilities. I'm at best an enthusiast but I try hard to pay attention to good technique when time permits. I miss not having an EVF/OVF but that alone is not worth $4K. I've been using a fixed lens for the last 4-5 years and sometimes wish I had more reach. Going full mirrorless to the Sony is a huge investment and one that I must resist.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I decided I really had to go and hold a Leica Q and play with it before joining the long waiting list I have been quoted by several UK suppliers.

I am really glad I did.

I know this will be a dissenting view but I was not impressed. Firstly, the viewfinder may be high resolution but there was something about it which just did not fit right with me. I am a great supporter of EVFs believing that analogue finders are dead. I've used one since I got my GF-1 about 5 years ago, then with a GH-2, RX1 and now A7/S/Rs. Is the actual physical size of the viewfinder itself smaller than, say, a A7 even if it is higher resolution? Something just did not feel right about it to me.

Secondly, I realised that much as I like fixed lens cameras (for example I shoot a lot with my GR, DP2M and DP3M) that the 28mm view was not exactly thrilling - which is odd as I like my GR a lot. Again, this could have been because the viewfinder was, well... a bit dim. I actually got my A7R out as soon as I got home to look through the viewfinder in case I have suffered some kind of overnight revelation that they are no longer any good... and I am pleased to say I still find it the best EVF I have used.

Then there is build quality. It felt cheap. The lens body looks like a Leica lens and responds like a Leica lens but the lens body itself felt a bit plasticky which is weird for something which is metal. I had watched TCS Jordan's just published review and a couple of times he talked about Panasonic's involvement with the Leica Q. I thought he was speculating. I am beginning to think maybe he knows something we don't. It may have coloured my view but I can see what he was getting at. It may be magnesium but it didn't exude the heft and weight of say a M6, M7 or my much loved but now departed M8.

I'm glad I went to see one - indeed it is only sensible if one is contemplating parting with GBP 2900 for one - because the lust I felt is slaked.

In fact, I think the RX1 I owned exuded a more well built and usable feel than the Leica Q. It certainly made we want to leave the store with one when I had the opportunity. I sold it expecting my A7/R/S to be a replacement but I have missed it and I have been contemplating getting a RX1R. I put that on hold when the Leica Q was announced expecting to be dazzled by the product.

Now I think I'll wait and see what the RX1/R replacement is like because I suspect Sony will go for the jugular with a Q-killer that will also be more to my liking.

Apologies if my thoughts offend anyone - I was very enthused by this camera - indeed was willing to plonk my hard earned savings on it and rejoin the Leica camp. It even ticks the box of my liking for fixed lens cameras (which not everyone enjoys). But I'll pass for now.

LouisB
 

D&A

Well-known member
Louis your thoughts are well appreciated. Like ice cream we all have preferences and no one should ever feel bad by atating why they like or don't like ( or favor) a particular camera....even if it goes against the grain. In fact it presents a different point of view which many will appreciate. I'm always surprised when someone posts a slightly disenting opinion and is chastised for it. On the contrary, its refreshing and wish more reviews would prese t a genuine balanced view...not just throw a bone for the sake of throwing one to appear balanced.

*** Addition.... Louis regarding heft and built of the Q....I felt same way about x cameras like x vario. Its supposed to be metal I believe but it feels like plastic. I was surprised by this.

Dave (D&A)
 

D&A

Well-known member
Adam your info regarding Leica's different flashes really hits home. There doesn't appear to be any standardization with regards to TTL and Leica's various flashes and bodies.

The 24D works great in A mode but doesn't bounce. It works fair to poor in TTL mode on a M9 and not all that much better on a M240. The newer sf26 doesn't appear to work at all in TTL on a M9 but well on a M240. Why TTL protocol should be different between a M9 and M240 is strange.

I'm not certain how the SF 26 works on X series of cameras and that is something I'd l98ove to know. The SF 26 also also should have had a A mode in my opinion. The advanatge of the sf 26 over the sf24 was supposed to be its bounce ability even though power output is low.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

peterb

Member
I find the Q utterly intriguing and enchanting. Definitely a nice landscape/travel/walkabout camera.

An ideal kit for me might be the Q along with a D Lux (I actually prefer it to the Panasonic version due to the hand grip add on which to me looks like it might provide a better balance while holding it) to get those shots I might want to have a little zoom capability with decent IQ (with a dollop of nice bokeh on the side, perhaps?) and a decently fast (and sharp) lens and the same DNA in the AF. Thoughts?
 

algrove

Well-known member
Louis
After reading your post, I grabbed my Q to try and better understand your views.

Strangely, I do not find it "plasticky" as it has just the right amount of weight to me for its size. Regarding the EVF, I agree it is different and the data contained in it is smaller than on my M EVF-2 which is less spectaular, but works fine for me. I am still referencing the manual to see how various features might work for me, but even though I have the RX-1, I find this 28 a good FL for my street/candid work. That said some report that the RX-1 35mm lens is better in the corners than the Q's lens.

I take no offense in your comments and believe we all have the right to express our own views without chastisement.
 

barjohn

New member
Like a whole lot of others I have been waiting for a new digital Leica CL, my all time favorite camera with its 3 lens package was just the right size and weight. The Q comes the closest to a CL so far, though it is a bit larger. The CL was 121mm x 76mm x 32mm and the Q is 130mm x 80mm x 40mm?? (body only). The CL without lens was 365g and the Q is 640g so it is close in many ways though lacking the OVF and interchangeable lenses. The other big plus I see is the fast AF and faster electronics as that has been the failing of the X, XV, and T. In this price range the electronics should be top notch. As to build quality, the XV and T were both fine, to me and the Q appears to be at least as good if not better. It may not match the M in build quality but in this age of digital, there is a rapid point of diminishing returns where it doesn't pay to go too far with a camera in which the electronics are not replaceable and will soon become obsolete from a performance perspective. Sensor technologies are rapidly changing and today's sensors may appear rather pedestrian 4 or 5 years from now much as sensors from 4 or 5 years ago appear today when it comes to resolution and low light sensitivity. Curved sensors and stacked or shifted at extremely high speed sensors will produce better color with less loss of light at the edges and higher dynamic range. Maybe one day, someone will produce a camera body that is the ideal physical size made of titanium with interchangeable electronics so one buys a high quality body and upgrades the electronics as technology advances.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I decided I really had to go and hold a Leica Q and play with it before joining the long waiting list I have been quoted by several UK suppliers.

I am really glad I did.

I know this will be a dissenting view but I was not impressed. Firstly, the viewfinder may be high resolution but there was something about it which just did not fit right with me. I am a great supporter of EVFs believing that analogue finders are dead. I've used one since I got my GF-1 about 5 years ago, then with a GH-2, RX1 and now A7/S/Rs. Is the actual physical size of the viewfinder itself smaller than, say, a A7 even if it is higher resolution? Something just did not feel right about it to me.

Secondly, I realised that much as I like fixed lens cameras (for example I shoot a lot with my GR, DP2M and DP3M) that the 28mm view was not exactly thrilling - which is odd as I like my GR a lot. Again, this could have been because the viewfinder was, well... a bit dim. I actually got my A7R out as soon as I got home to look through the viewfinder in case I have suffered some kind of overnight revelation that they are no longer any good... and I am pleased to say I still find it the best EVF I have used.

Then there is build quality. It felt cheap. The lens body looks like a Leica lens and responds like a Leica lens but the lens body itself felt a bit plasticky which is weird for something which is metal. I had watched TCS Jordan's just published review and a couple of times he talked about Panasonic's involvement with the Leica Q. I thought he was speculating. I am beginning to think maybe he knows something we don't. It may have coloured my view but I can see what he was getting at. It may be magnesium but it didn't exude the heft and weight of say a M6, M7 or my much loved but now departed M8.

I'm glad I went to see one - indeed it is only sensible if one is contemplating parting with GBP 2900 for one - because the lust I felt is slaked.

In fact, I think the RX1 I owned exuded a more well built and usable feel than the Leica Q. It certainly made we want to leave the store with one when I had the opportunity. I sold it expecting my A7/R/S to be a replacement but I have missed it and I have been contemplating getting a RX1R. I put that on hold when the Leica Q was announced expecting to be dazzled by the product.

Now I think I'll wait and see what the RX1/R replacement is like because I suspect Sony will go for the jugular with a Q-killer that will also be more to my liking.

Apologies if my thoughts offend anyone - I was very enthused by this camera - indeed was willing to plonk my hard earned savings on it and rejoin the Leica camp. It even ticks the box of my liking for fixed lens cameras (which not everyone enjoys). But I'll pass for now.

LouisB

Hi Louis,
I agree the Rx1 feels a little more "dense" than the Q, I wouldn't go so far saying the Q feels plastic. For me it feels well made and like a good compromise between weight and build. I do like that it is not as heavy as the Leica M. The viewfinder you can change the brightness as far as I understand. I feel its one of the better EVF, but still far from an optical one for my taste. I like a lot that it is build into the camera. For me the simplicity of the Q user interface is highly appreciated compared to the Sony A7 series. On the other side the A7 is the more flexible camera and if you say you prefer the EVF of the A7 I do not doubt that you do.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I'm torn. My Sony RX1 is getting beat up and I'm considering an upgrade. For those that have used both, is this a material increase in quality (both image and shooting) or minor, or just different? The things that I like most about the Sony is the dynamic range, silent shutter, & low light capabilities. I'm at best an enthusiast but I try hard to pay attention to good technique when time permits. I miss not having an EVF/OVF but that alone is not worth $4K. I've been using a fixed lens for the last 4-5 years and sometimes wish I had more reach. Going full mirrorless to the Sony is a huge investment and one that I must resist.
I have used both cameras only a little bit, but I would see the main differences:
Q: faster AF (depends what you mainly shoot, when having kids like I do fast AF doesn't hurt)
Q: Build in viewfinder
Q: better auto iso implementation and simple user interface
Q-RX1: different color signature (Sony colder, Leica warmer and more saturated - I prefer Leica specially for skin)
Q-Rx1: 28 vs 35mm. I don't know yet what I prefer. I like 35mm more often but sometimes love to be able to use 28mm, so which is better for me???
RX1: A little smaller, if you don't put the EVF on the Camera

PS: If you missed more reach then going from 35 to 28mm does not sound the right direction for me.
 

aDam007

New member
Adam your info regarding Leica's different flashes really hits home. There doesn't appear to be any standardization with regards to TTL and Leica's various flashes and bodies.

The 24D works great in A mode but doesn't bounce. It works fair to poor in TTL mode on a M9 and not all that much better on a M240. The newer sf26 doesn't appear to work at all in TTL on a M9 but well on a M240. Why TTL protocol should be different between a M9 and M240 is strange.

I'm not certain how the SF 26 works on X series of cameras and that is something I'd l98ove to know. The SF 26 also also should have had a A mode in my opinion. The advanatge of the sf 26 over the sf24 was supposed to be its bounce ability even though power output is low.

Dave (D&A)
Hi Dave,

Yeah, it's strange to say the least. Seems like more wrong with it then just difference of the way one camera meters a scene over another.. I don't own X series cameras, so I couldn't tell you about the compatibility.

I grabbed a Nissin i40 for ease of manual flash exposure. It's a good balance on the camera. Quick to adjust exposure on the fly.

Maybe Leica will up their flash game if they bring out a Q interchangeable.
 

barjohn

New member
Anyone tried the Metz Mecablitz 26AF-1? It is supposed tone compatible with Leica and only $129 versus the Leica price for the similar looking SF26.
 

aDam007

New member
Does not work. I tried. Metz and Schmidt told me that they're not going to have a M240/Q compatible one for quite some time (as in, they're going to make it, but I'm sure they have to wait until Leica sells X amount of flash units before they're legally allowed to).
 

Viramati

Member
Some preliminary thoughts after 1 day
Positives
1. AF appears to be very good and accurate
2. the lens is lovely
3. Like the analogue controls
4. files certainly seem to have a 'special' look
5. EVF is clear and smooth

Not so positive
1. Bad banding in shadows even at moderately high iso (I have probably been using the A7s to much!!)
2. Can't move magnified focus point in manual focus.

What I would like to see
1. FN button menu needs to be configurable as it is hard to access certain settings quickly.
2. Easier access to and nameable presets needed
3. DNG only
4. Access to configure auto-iso through the iso button

All in all this will probably be my go-to street/documentary camera as long as the light is not too low and then I will have to go back to the A7s and FE28
 

aDam007

New member
Just got back from a week in HK.. It's why I haven't been active.

I brought the Q, and had the M-P, 21lux, 50lux, 90APO. Found myself using the Q the whole time. Save for a quick walk from the apt. to Starbucks and back where I used the 21lux. Never felt like I needed/missed the tele lenses.

To be honest, I find that the M-P + "insert good M lens here" is still a better IQ package. But it's really hard to fault the Q, as the images are amazing, the camera is small and light, and easy to use. AF is fantastic, and if you're lazy the OOC JPG files are better then what you'd get from the M240 (and I like the M240 OOC JPG files a lot).


All in all, the Q is a great densely populated city camera. Pictures in a while, I'm really busy this weekend and next week.
 
Top