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!

The Leica Q2

retow

Member
YEEEEESSSSS PlEEEEEEEEAAAAAASE!!! I'm still shocked Leica or a third party hasn't done this yet!!! I'd actually prefer a 2x, but would take either. Even if it was expensive, I'd buy one in a second.
Alternatively they could bring a Q2 sibling with a 40 f2 (or 35) and a wide angle converter.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Converter lenses for the Q2 would be great, similar to what Fuji has done very successfully with their X100 series.

Always great for a small and effective and still high quality setup. Although the prize for a Leica certified converter lens would be huge :cool:
 

Paratom

Well-known member
YEEEEESSSSS PlEEEEEEEEAAAAAASE!!! I'm still shocked Leica or a third party hasn't done this yet!!! I'd actually prefer a 2x, but would take either. Even if it was expensive, I'd buy one in a second.
That is exactly what I also thought.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I've adapted front element converters to other cameras/lenses in the past with good results. It's a lot easier to make decent quality with a tele converter than a wide converter of this type.. :)

Here's a page with a few of them... I've owned and used most of these (not the Nikon) at one time or another:
http://pages.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/FZ-10/Converters/Lenses/Telephoto.html

The Olympus converters are, in general and from my experience, the best. If Leica would deign to design their own specifically for the Q/Q2, I'm sure it would be even better...

G
 

Chris C

Member
Alternatively they could bring a Q2 sibling with a 40 f2 (or 35) and a wide angle converter.
Or even better [for me] a 28mm to 40mm impeccable zoom of whatever maximum f stop the lens design lands at to utilise the whole sensor at both ends of the range. That would be all my working range in one camera. However, and like even the sprighliest member here; I don't have enough years left to wait for it's introduction.

It was just a dream some of us had ................ Chris
 

Geoff

Active member
Stopped by local camera dealer yesterday who had a Q2 demo to handle. Played with it a few minutes and offer the following:

  • Its neat. Has lots of appeal. Works well, fast, silently.
  • Its not that small... kind of like a M with a Summilux on it. It won't go in a pocket, and its got some heft.
  • Frame lines are nice enough - rather liked the operation with the 35mm best. AF was fast, accurate. Shutter very quiet. All good.
  • Easy to use, but a lot of complexity built in under the hood. Some things are very straightforward, others need some time and use.
  • Most importantly, the viewfinder is a delight. Did a side by side with a G9, and while the G9 is nice enough, the Q2 finder is pleasant on the eyes. Easy to use and somehow just nicer to look through. One of the first EVF that one would enjoy using.

Its appealing enough. Not sure its worth giving up an M for, but could be good "one lens" travel camera. Definitely fun.

PS - one other note - does anyone else notice that the colors from the Q just seem more delicate? Even on the screen... softer and much less grating on the eye. Its even this way in EVF.
 
Last edited:

Godfrey

Well-known member
Or even better [for me] a 28mm to 40mm impeccable zoom of whatever maximum f stop the lens design lands at to utilise the whole sensor at both ends of the range. That would be all my working range in one camera. However, and like even the sprighliest member here; I don't have enough years left to wait for it's introduction.

It was just a dream some of us had ................ Chris
I understand the sentiment, but it's never worked for me. I'll take a fast 28 f/1.8 with a 50 Mpixel sensor backing it up over any short zoom that's slower. I just can't get into shooting methodologies with zoom lenses except as used as a practical compromise at the focal length extremes ... my typical shooting is between 24 and 90 mm FoV equivalents, an ultra wide zoom (16 to 35) and a long zoom (90-300) make sense for when I might occasionally want wider and longer.

The Q2 remains interesting to me. A Hasselblad X1D with the 21mm lens is also interesting to me. The versatility of having a good lens with enough pixels to back it up for cropping and such in rendering is proving appealing, as I'm also discovering with the Light L16. The L16 is more compact than either, but compared to either it lacks responsiveness and the image processing workflow is somewhat tedious and time consuming. Pluses and minuses... as always.

The biggest obstacle to placing an order immediately for any new camera is that I have plenty of cameras already that I really like. It's hard for me to justify the expense to myself... :D

G
 
I've adapted front element converters to other cameras/lenses in the past with good results. It's a lot easier to make decent quality with a tele converter than a wide converter of this type.. :)

Here's a page with a few of them... I've owned and used most of these (not the Nikon) at one time or another:
http://pages.mtu.edu/~shene/DigiCam/User-Guide/FZ-10/Converters/Lenses/Telephoto.html

The Olympus converters are, in general and from my experience, the best. If Leica would deign to design their own specifically for the Q/Q2, I'm sure it would be even better...

G
Thanks. I have tried a few and ran into issues with a lot of vignetting.. I think the way the lens is made to be wide, affects this a lot. has anyone used on of these inntthr link with the Q?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Thanks. I have tried a few and ran into issues with a lot of vignetting.. I think the way the lens is made to be wide, affects this a lot. has anyone used on of these inntthr link with the Q?
I would expect the tele converters to work well on the wide Q lens presuming you used at least the 50mm cropping lines as a baseline. Any wider than that and I am pretty sure there would be vignetting. The point, for me, would be to get an effective 75 to 90 mm eqFoV with a bit more pixel resolution than 6.6 MPixels.

Not much more, for sure. It's been my theory/idea for some time that you need more resolution for wide lens photographs than long lens photographs, due to the detailing required to make a wide lens photo sing.

G
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
"Diluting the mark" is an absurd comment. Pointless implied bashing...

A lens is a Summilux, always has been a Summilux, when Leica decides it's their best offering for the most light at the focal length. Period. The lens names are not inviolably tied to a specific maximum lens opening, and never have been. Certain conventions were followed for while, but there were always exceptions. Like Summarons that were f/3.5 to f/5.6, Elmars from f/2.8 to f/4.5, Hektors from f/4 to f/6.3, etc.

G
 
A lens is a Summilux, always has been a Summilux, when Leica decides it's their best offering for the most light at the focal length. Period. The lens names are not inviolably tied to a specific maximum lens opening, and never have been.
So the 28mm f1.7 Summilux is the best 28mm lens Leica offers for the most light at the focal length. Is it better than the 28mm f1.4 Summilux for the most light at the focal length? Can you name another Summilux that isn't f1.4 other than the upcoming 90mm f1.5 Summilux?
 

MGrayson

Subscriber and Workshop Member
How many other Summiluxes have a macro mode? It's an amazing lens, whatever it's called.
 

JohnBrew

Member
Thank you for the review, Jono. It's a tempting camera, possibly the best value Leica. If they made a 50mm version I would be very tempted.
Agreed, Jorgen. Maybe a Q2S with native 50mm lens and crop factor for 75 & 90. That's where my shooting is now. M8.2 w/50 & M9-P w/90.
I think Leica did an excellent work with this camera. And an M with 47mp would probably clear out the moths from the bank account.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
And an M with 47mp would probably clear out the moths from the bank account.
Well, I cannot help myself but manually focusing any M with 47MP via even the best RF system seems to be a nightmare. But maybe Leica has up some more (optical) tricks up their sleeves :cool:
 

JeRuFo

Active member
Leica couldn't win in naming the lens of the q. If it didn't have a name it would be strange and people would ask if it was an adapted existing lens. If they made up a new name for an adapted existing design they would have been blamed for taking credit for a simple rebrand and in doing it this way it is apparently not fitting in the summilux line (of 6 lenses, if I'm not mistaken).
Most likely they wanted to give the Q a summilux lens all along, but they found a 1.4 version too big for the design and they decided to give the lenses a slightly smaller diameter.
 
Top