fredmiranda.com

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3 … 7

9 … 21 22 end

Archive 2015 · Leica Q: First impressions.

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #1 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Spyro P. wrote:
That's good, I wouldn't understand the technology anyway, so I'm more interested in real life experiences

There are two basic shortfalls of EVFs today: first one is that they dont have enough resolution to focus manually without this disgusting and distracting focus peaking. How does the Q do in that regard? Does it even offer the option to focus manually without peaking or magnification?

And the second one is situations with massive DR (think the typical situation with the bright window in a dark room), where the EVF can only expose for the window or the room, and all the...Show more →

Here is the explanation by DPR in their Q preview:

The electronic viewfinder on the Leica Q is a Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS) display and has an effective resolution of 3.68 million pixels. LCoS technology, which is a field sequential system, only shows you 1.04M dots at any given time, as it cycles between red, green, and blue. While the image on the screen looks great, some may find 'color tearing' to be an issue when blinking or panning the camera.

I think in the past there has been some unhappiness with field sequential systems due to the tendency to see ghosting/tearing when panning the camera through a scene quickly, likely due to EVF refresh rate. So far no one seems to have brought this up as being a problem with the Q in use. Probably because its refresh rate is quite high.

Jun 14, 2015 at 09:24 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #2 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Spyro P. wrote:
That's good, I wouldn't understand the technology anyway, so I'm more interested in real life experiences

There are two basic shortfalls of EVFs today: first one is that they dont have enough resolution to focus manually without this disgusting and distracting focus peaking. How does the Q do in that regard? Does it even offer the option to focus manually without peaking or magnification?

And the second one is situations with massive DR (think the typical situation with the bright window in a dark room), where the EVF can only expose for the window or the room, and all the...Show more →

Yes to the first question. I can turn off magnification and focus peaking and there is enough resolution for me to nail focus accurately EVERY time. Almost like using a precision screen on a Canon camera (but better). The only catch is, it's a 28mm lens, so you're talking close up subjects.. Further away and the person or object is to small, but that's also going to be a problem with Canon wides and manual focus.
Also to add, you can have it peak and zoom, or just peak or just zoom. Or do nothing. But AF is so good you wouldn't want to MF.

Also want to add I feel the AF patch is a tiny bit to big for a 28mm lens. But it works

To your second point. No, the EVF isn't going to see the DR range of a human eye/brain combo. It will still be wonky, but it thus far hasn't been a large annoyance, as I keep my camera on spot metering.

Wonder if Profoto will come out with a series of removes for TTL and the Leica M/S/Q system BIG SMILE

Jun 14, 2015 at 09:33 AM

Ray S.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #3 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Thanks folks - that's really helpful information. There are times I like to switch to fully manual shooting and I appreciate how easy it is to do on the Q (and the DF and the Coolpix A), but I more often prefer using Aperture priority mode with a great auto-ISO setup including minimum shutter speeds (the total lack of which is the biggest downside of the RX1 IMHO). Shutter speeds change a lot in good light as you move in and out of shadows and I like a minimum where the camera can take it higher when needed - no downside for me and it can react to changing light a lot faster than I can, so I can put all of my energy into nailing the moment.

I really can't afford this camera and have no business even thinking about it, but I always wanted the RX1 to be more like this one, with 28mm, shutter speed control in auto-ISO, good zone focus tools (the Sony was workable, but not nearly as elegant as the Q), etc. And I have a Coolpix A, which I love and which does all of the same things but only about 85-90% as well, and a DF, which I love and does all of the same things at least as well, but at a size and weight penalty. So it was inevitable that I was gonna check this one out pretty closely.

The lack of this particular feature wouldn't be a deal breaker unless I'm looking for a deal breaker, which I am! Because the price is already the real deal breaker, but it's nice to give it some help...

-Ray

Edited on Jun 14, 2015 at 09:44 AM · View previous versions

Jun 14, 2015 at 09:33 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #4 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Jun 14, 2015 at 09:35 AM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #5 · Leica Q: First impressions.

What replaces SET on the Q to confirm a menu selection, etc.? Is it the center button of the multi-way controller/D-pad (whatever it's called)?

Jun 14, 2015 at 09:58 AM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #6 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Ray S. wrote:
Thanks folks - that's really helpful information. There are times I like to switch to fully manual shooting and I appreciate how easy it is to do on the Q (and the DF and the Coolpix A), but I more often prefer using Aperture priority mode with a great auto-ISO setup including minimum shutter speeds (the total lack of which is the biggest downside of the RX1 IMHO). Shutter speeds change a lot in good light as you move in and out of shadows and I like a minimum where the camera can take it higher when needed -...Show more →

Is it that much different than say leaving the camera manually on f/8 and 1/500 with auto ISO? With that combo, you'll never blow a sunlit scene because it was too hot for the lowest possible ISO, while auto ISO 3200+ should be adequate for any deep shadow areas during the day.

I've been slow to adopt auto ISO, but have started using it more recently at times, such as the situations you described in urban settings going through constantly changing areas of direct sunlight and deep shadows. With the M240 I could combine it with aperture priority, but still don't trust this so much. I guess because I have auto ISO set to a slowest speed of 2x focal length. Maybe I need to use 4x focal length. It's possible to set the slowest speed to 1/500 at the highest end, but at least for me, I feel this could run into serious problems if I'm not paying attention. The other problem, for me, with the M240, that I guess isn't a problem with the Q, is that once ISO is over 1000, the frame rate drops from 3fps to 1, which is another variable I try to avoid as much as possible. For some reason I never gelled with the concept of setting various user profiles for different applications. Maybe because I'd end up creating a number of them, then due to infrequent use would forget what they did and therefore would just ignore them and end up thinking, what's the point?

Jun 14, 2015 at 10:26 AM

Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #7 · Leica Q: First impressions.

rscheffler wrote:
Here is the explanation by DPR in their Q preview:

The electronic viewfinder on the Leica Q is a Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS) display and has an effective resolution of 3.68 million pixels. LCoS technology, which is a field sequential system, only shows you 1.04M dots at any given time, as it cycles between red, green, and blue. While the image on the screen looks great, some may find 'color tearing' to be an issue when blinking or panning the camera.

I think in the past there has been some unhappiness with field sequential systems due to the tendency to see...Show more →

I'm fairly certain that in the past and even currently, Panasonic is the manufacturer that has used this technology the most. It's used in the LX100 (with disappointing results) and was used in the G3.(but not the G4 which uses OLED). This must be the next generation in the Q.

Here is a great explanation and diagram of the LCOS tech from Imaging-Resource (in their review of the Panasonic G3):

"The keys to the Panasonic G3's EVF performance lie in two technologies. First, the active element of the display is an LCOS (liquid crystal on silicon) chip. This technology actually controls the state of the liquid crystals with electric fields projected through the silicon. This means that all the active circuitry can be on the back side of the chip, so the entire display surface is active: With no dead areas between pixels, light is reflected from the entire surface, so there are no distracting black areas surrounding each pixel."

"Because the LCOS chip is reflective, you generate an image by bouncing light off its surface, rather than by passing light through it as in a conventional transmissive LCD. LCOS chips can also change states very rapidly; fast enough that you can display the red, green, and blue color channels in very quick succession with no blurring or crosstalk between the color channels. Human persistence of vision blends these together into a single pixel displaying a full range of color. Looking into the Panasonic G3's EVF, you don't see individual red, green, and blue stripes or dots -- there is no grid -- you just see a surface of continuous color, which looks more like an optical viewfinder. To be fair, this isn't a new innovation with Panasonic: the original Minolta A1 digicam used similar technology, but its EVF had much lower resolution, and considerably lower image quality overall. The concept has certainly been seen before, but the Panasonic G series' EVF is on another level from earlier designs." The Minolta connection is very interesting given Sony's ownership now.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG1/zbeamsplitter-lg.jpg

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCG3/DMCG3VIEWFINDER.HTM

Jun 14, 2015 at 10:57 AM

uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #8 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Tariq Gibran wrote:
It's really an impressive feat that Leica has trumped every other camera manufacturer - including Sony with their unreleased A7rII - with this higher resolution EVF. I'm very curious to see where this EVF shows up next (Panasonic, Olympus or...). I do think the use of this EVF is strong evidence that Leica plan to use it in an ILC version.

I agree. It's getting pretty clear now that this is not an AF 28 cron in a light body, but overall the finish is well done and images very nice. But what's becoming more and more clear is that the Q is made from the Panasonic menu, with Leica ordering and organizing the fare. Fair enough.

@Derek TY for chiming in about the build of the RX1, good to know

nicoimages wrote:
I think that the issue of software distortion correction degrading resolution is real but grossly exaggerated. It is disappointing that Leica did not manage to design a lens that does not need such drastic correction but let's keep things in perspective - corner sharpness is still impressive at f5.6 when I looked at Reid's test images and who would shoot a landscape wide open?

For example, although not strictly speaking a "corner" shot one can hardly claim that the lens is not sharp at infinity - https://www.flickr.com/photos/gizmodo/18486290560/in/album-72157653933909649/

I am looking forward to receiving my pre-ordered Leica Q from Red Dot Cameras (3rd...Show more →

Edges are not off the chart in that sample, though most of the frame is pretty sharp. Again as somebody once said: I knew the 28 cron. The 28 Cron has been a friend of mine. You sir, Mr Q, are no 28 cron

Let alone a 28 Lux, which might finally satisfy Ron at that FL on the 240

(The M9's kinder rendering with the Cron, for me, deflates M240 GAS)

In fact, their use of the term "summilux" for a F/1.7 was my first clue there is some panasonic in there somewhere. More than just "some", it turns out.

Edited on Jun 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM · View previous versions

Jun 14, 2015 at 10:57 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #9 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:10 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #10 · Leica Q: First impressions.

rscheffler wrote:
What replaces SET on the Q to confirm a menu selection, etc.? Is it the center button of the multi-way controller/D-pad (whatever it's called)?

Yeah, there is.. It's just slightly different button position from the added FN button.

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:11 AM

Ray S.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #11 · Leica Q: First impressions.

rscheffler wrote:
Is it that much different than say leaving the camera manually on f/8 and 1/500 with auto ISO? With that combo, you'll never blow a sunlit scene because it was too hot for the lowest possible ISO, while auto ISO 3200+ should be adequate for any deep shadow areas during the day.

I've been slow to adopt auto ISO, but have started using it more recently at times, such as the situations you described in urban settings going through constantly changing areas of direct sunlight and deep shadows. With the M240 I could combine it with aperture priority, but still don't trust this so much. I guess because I have auto ISO set to a slowest speed of 2x focal length. Maybe I need to use 4x focal length. It's possible to set the slowest speed to 1/500 at the highest end, but at least for me, I feel this could run into serious problems if I'm not paying attention. The other problem, for me, with the M240, that I guess isn't a problem with the Q, is that once ISO is over 1000, the frame rate drops from 3fps to 1, which is another variable I try to avoid as much as possible. For some reason I never gelled with the concept of setting various user profiles for different applications. Maybe because I'd end up creating a number of them, then due to infrequent use would forget what they did and therefore would just ignore them and end up thinking, what's the point?

Maybe something to revisit.

OT to this, but lately have remapped the control dials of my Canons for sports events so that one adjusts ISO rather than aperture, since for me, in those situations, 99.999% of images are shot wide open and I care more about manually controlling the ISO to match a desired shutter speed. The one downside, IMO, of dedicated aperture and shutter speed rings/dials is that they can't be repurposed like this. With the Q it theoretically could be possible for the thumb dial to be given the option for direct ISO adjustment via firmware update, but wonder if Leica would ever see the logic in doing so. It would give fingertip control for all three exposure variables. Maybe their thinking about ISO is similar to mine until recently, that it's something you set infrequently. For me it's probably a long ingrained habit from shooting film (which I haven't for over a decade), where of course you couldn't change ISO on the fly... and with earlier digital systems where you wanted to be cautious about moving into higher ISO ranges due to quality concerns...

Sorry, rambling... It would seem for the Q to best suit your preferences, Leica would need to add user profile selection to the Fn button. Seems like an 'easy' firmware fix. Would be great to see Leica significantly widen the options available for Fn button assignment....Show more →

You'd be amazed. Your suggestion (manual mode with auto ISO) has been my work-around on cameras that don't have adequate shutter speed control in auto ISO in aperture priority mode. And I always have to monitor the ISO and frequently have to run the shutter speed up in good light and down in low light. Looking at the exif from a bunch of Coolpix A shots, which IS programmable this way, walking around at f7.1 with a max ISO of 6400 and minimum shutter speed of 1/500, I have brightly sunlit shots where the camera is down at base ISO and the shutter speed ends up at 1/800 or 1/1000, and other shots in deeply shaded areas where the ISO will go up to 5000 in order to maintain 1/500.

With this setup, the camera is following the exact logic in balancing ISO and shutter speed I'd use if setting it manually, but it does it faster than I'd ever be able to and it saves me from having to think about it on a shot by shot basis. On the Coolpix A, I have two custom settings on the mode dial - one for street, one for nearly everything else, and then I've got the PASM modes to flip into for something I want to set differently at a given moment. On the DF, where I occasionally shoot with zooms also and some lenses with VR and some without, I have four different custom settings in Nikons shooting "banks" - fortunately it lets me name them so I don't have to remember which is which. One is for street with a wide prime, very much like the settings I described above but with a max ISO of 12,800 because the high ISO is sooooo good with that sensor. The other three all use Nikon's "auto" shutter speed setting and float with the focal length and work with either primes or zooms. One is at the conventional 1/focal length for shooting primes and zooms in typical situations, one is biased two stops faster for shooting action. And one is biased two stops slower for shooting static subjects in low light with VR lenses. I occasionally leave these modes, but it's rare - there's not much they don't work brilliantly for. So I spend my time making sure my aperture is set right for the visual effect I want in a shot and I work the exposure comp dial based on the light, but the camera does the rest and it doesn't miss...

I don't have a problem with automated settings as long as I can control the parameters of when the camera does what. With this setup it keeps the ISO as low as possible while still meeting my minimum shutter speed (as I would), raises the shutter speed as needed in bright light (as I would), raises the ISO as the light decreases (as I would), and then in extremis, when there's too little light to meet my minimum shutter speed with the camera pegged at my highest permitted ISO, then it'll start dropping the shutter speed, but only as much as absolutely needed for a proper exposure. In all cases, it's balancing these parameters exactly how I would and I've come to trust it totally. I obviously leave these modes on the rare occasion I'm doing a time exposure or just going for motion blur or something. But 98-99% of the time, I'm in these modes...

-Ray

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:12 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #12 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:14 AM

Ray S.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #13 · Leica Q: First impressions.

adamdewilde wrote:
You can set the min shutter speed and max ISO.
Works quite well.

Yeah, that I was already aware of. But to fully take advantage of that functionality, I need to be able to have at least a couple different groups of settings that I can move between quickly and easily.

Thanks,

-Ray

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:14 AM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #14 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Ok, so two more wall shots, this time just SOOC JPG files:
(I don't know if these help anyone.)

The first one HERE is F/11 and it's pretty close up. Within 2 meters.
The second one HERE is F/5.6 and it's around 3-4 meters.

And here are some 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.)

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ1.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ2.jpg
f/1.7

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ3.jpg
f/11

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ4.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ5.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ6.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ7.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ8.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ9.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ10.jpg
f/5.6

http://www.jupitersnake.com/FM/SOOCQ/SOOCQ11.jpg
f/5.6

I should also add, they were all sharp until I resized them

Jun 14, 2015 at 11:46 AM

serhan_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #15 · Leica Q: First impressions.

uhoh7 wrote:
I agree. It's getting pretty clear now that this is not an AF 28 cron in a light body, but overall the finish is well done and images very nice. But what's becoming more and more clear is that the Q is made from the Panasonic menu, with Leica ordering and organizing the fare. Fair enough.

In fact, their use of the term "summilux" for a F/1.7 was my first clue there is some panasonic in there somewhere. More than just "some", it turns out.

It looks to be the first child of the panasonic-leica marriage on the Leica side eg here is gm-5 summilux 15mm 1.7 (30mm equiv):


	http://www.jessops.com/ce-images/PRODUCT/PRODUCT_ENLARGED/APANACM175274496.jpg

vs Q


	http://www.ephotozine.com/articles/fixed-lens-full-frame-leica-q-announced--27645/images/1000-Leica-Q-2_1433938960.jpg

I love the af responsiveness on Pana cameras eg perfect for street/kids shooting and I can have small 3 primes with gm5 (rx100 iii sized). But any lens below 50mm (25mm in m43) has that auto distortion correction. That is the reason I started to use raw therapee, since adobe doesn't have that unreverse option. For me it is more problem with the people shots where people are on the corners then the landscape/bldg shots which might need distortion correction.

Jun 14, 2015 at 12:12 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #16 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Ray, that's very interesting and thanks for taking the time to explain your requirements. My takeaway is you're much more organized at recognizing the various use parameters you have and setting up your gear accordingly, than I ever would be.

Jun 14, 2015 at 12:29 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #17 · Leica Q: First impressions.

nicoimages wrote:
For example, although not strictly speaking a "corner" shot one can hardly claim that the lens is not sharp at infinity - https://www.flickr.com/photos/gizmodo/18486290560/in/album-72157653933909649/

uhoh7 wrote:
I agree. It's getting pretty clear now that this is not an AF 28 cron in a light body, but overall the finish is well done and images very nice. But what's becoming more and more clear is that the Q is made from the Panasonic menu, with Leica ordering and organizing the fare. Fair enough.

Edges are not off the chart in that sample, though most of the frame is pretty sharp. Again as somebody once said: I knew the 28 cron. The 28 Cron has been a friend of mine. You sir, Mr Q, are no 28 cron

Let...Show more →

Funny you should mention the 28 Lux-M... I shot a wedding yesterday where two of the inside venues were human equivalent black holes.

ISO 3200 1/30 f/1.4. When someone dimmed the lights during the reception I even considered ISO 6400 for the first time ever with the M240 (due to the tendency for banding), though I think someone else turned up the lights again a few minutes later.

(maybe the videographers who were suffering a lot, too). I couldn't even use bounce flash because the ceiling was painted red. Needless to say, 1/30 shutter speed is extremely marginal for reliable results and I never used the 28 Cron because it was too slow. I could have used a 28 Lux, I guess. But I'm still on the fence. I like the size of the 28 Cron, its sharpness and predictable field curvature characteristics (which I can compensate for on the fly). I still like its rendering on the M240 too, though something was definitely changed in the burned-into-the-file profile corrections between the M9 and M240. And there's the probability that the next M model will be 1-2 stops better in handling high ISO (though really wish they can eliminate banding that is also evident in the Q). I have to admit, the thought of the Q was on my mind at times yesterday... Unfortunately I have no connections with Leica for demos, but would love to try a Q for a couple weddings to see how it works.

Regarding the Gizmodo samples on Flickr: While the edge performance does drop somewhat, I'm seeing variation in how undesirable it looks, to my eyes. At least a middle apertures, it doesn't look like edge smearing like putting a 28 Cron on an unmodded Sony. Rather, it looks like loss of fine detail due to interpolation. High ISO grain structure does look like its stretched slightly in the very corners. Lower frequency structure remains intact, which gives a good sense of image content when not viewed too closely. In some scenes I wonder if there could be a bit of field curvature, bending focus towards the camera at the edges? Distant central content was sharp but not similarly so at the edges, yet nearer content seemed better. Maybe it's just a matter of small fine detail at distances not surviving the software corrections as well as somewhat coarser details of nearer objects. Overall, I'm not really turned off by what I see and would like to see how much of a difference there is between SOOC and converted RAWs in respect to fine detail retention.

Jun 14, 2015 at 12:54 PM

Ray S.
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #18 · Leica Q: First impressions.

rscheffler wrote:
Ray, that's very interesting and thanks for taking the time to explain your requirements. My takeaway is you're much more organized at recognizing the various use parameters you have and setting up your gear accordingly, than I ever would be.

I think I'm also much less trusting of auto exposure modes. The more advanced they become, the more difficult it is to counter-guess their 'fuzzy-logic' for applying exposure compensation on the fly, at least with the cameras I've used. With cameras like the M9 and M240, if used in 'classic' metering (on the M240), it tends to behave fairly predictably,...Show more →
The only thing I'd say is that this isn't an automatic shooting mode with anybody's logic but mine. It's a user controlled mode where I get to tell it how to behave, not some engineer on the design team. Every camera that has a minimum shutter speed control in auto ISO that I've ever used has worked the same predictable way. Some cameras don't have it at all, and some that do don't allow a high enough minimum shutter speed to be useful IMHO, but all of the models that offer this basic function, uses the same very predictable and useful logic.

In anything but the lowest light, it will always use the lowest ISO it can and when there's too much light for base ISO and the minimum shutter speed, it'll raise the shutter speed. This works from relatively low light to the brightest of bright light. And then in very very low light, it will raise the ISO to the maximum I've told it to and, if there still isn't enough light, then it will violate the minimum shutter speed exactly as much as needed. This mode works well for me for lots of shooting, but where it makes the most difference for me is street shooting using zone focus, where I want as much depth of field as I can get. When I got into a really low light setting, I'm generally opening my aperture from whatever really deep DOF aperture I'm using in good light to something wider and I just adjust my expectation of how large my "zone" of what's in focus will be. And I still sometimes see the ISO pegged and the shutter speed come down, but rarely by much...

I can see from your description of what you do that shooting in manual might be a better idea so you can decide to essentially lock out the meter once you've made your basic metering decisions for the situation you're dealing with. I pretty much never shoot in anything nearly that controlled, so I'm always metering - I sometimes switch between matrix (rarely), focus point weighted (often), and spot (often enough) - that's a shot by shot decision on my more static shots. In street shooting, I'm usually moving and shooting quickly enough that I tend to just leave it in center weighted and let 'er rip, although I'm frequently enough changing the exposure comp as I move from sun to shadows, looking into it vs away from it, etc. Just based on instinct which is usually right but occasionally very very wrong!

I never use auto modes - I never even use "program" mode because they take the decision making out of my hands. But I shooting this programmable aperture priority with auto ISO (and shutter speed control) mode on any camera that offers it. And, in fact, these days I won't even seriously consider a camera that doesn't have it because I find it so indispensable. BUT, just about equally important is the ability to switch between different saved settings quickly and easily. The Q is the first camera I've run into in a while that doesn't have easily access to the saved configurations. Olympus is notoriously bad at this and some Fuji cameras are (but some aren't, oddly enough), but most make it pretty easy... And it sounds like other Leicas make it pretty easy, so maybe the Q is just a firmware update away from it...

-Ray

Jun 14, 2015 at 01:12 PM

uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #19 · Leica Q: First impressions.

Speaking of "Unmmodded" Sonys etc, here is the 28 cron on the A7.mod (kolari) at F/8 with focus at infinity:

a7m_28cron_f8 by unoh7, on Flickr

Not good for corner evaluation, because they are too close. But I will do some shooting with it again. My gut says the A7.mod will outperform the Q with the 28 cron, just in terms of image quality. The Q wins in handling, for sure.

Jun 14, 2015 at 01:18 PM

adamdewilde
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.8 #20 · Leica Q: First impressions.

uhoh7 - I'll play around with the Q a bit more before I decide if I like it better then the M+28cron combo. All in all, I think that the 28cron paired better with the M9 (especially SOOCJPG files). So who knows what I'll prefer in the end. Though it's subjective really.

BTW Part 2 of my wife's Q review... I guess: http://www.emilyloke.com/life/photography-life/my-brutally-honest-review-of-the-leica-q/

(Her images in the review, not mine..)

Jun 16, 2015 at 10:03 AM

1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 21 22 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 7 8 9 … 21 22 end