p.11 #2 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
This example showcases the versatile usage of the Leica 28/1.7 Lux lens for the Q series, which can effectively function as either a 26mm or a 24mm lens based on specific requirements, despite being officially labeled as a 28mm lens by Leica. By intentionally avoiding the in-camera distortion correction, the resulting image captures a broader field of view, closely resembling a 24mm perspective.
It's worth noting that the standard distortion correction applied by Leica is quite substantial, with a correction value of around +54 in LR barrel correction. This correction narrows the field of view, effectively cropping the original 24mm image to approximately 26mm after the correction process.
JPEG file out of the camera (~26mm)
RAW file with removed distortion correction (~24mm)
p.11 #4 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
This example showcases the versatile usage of the Leica 28/1.7 Lux lens for the Q series, which can effectively function as either a 26mm or a 24mm lens based on specific requirements, despite being officially labeled as a 28mm lens by Leica. By intentionally avoiding the in-camera distortion correction, the resulting image captures a broader field of view, closely resembling a 24mm perspective.
It's worth noting that the standard distortion correction applied by Leica is quite substantial, with a correction value of around +54 in LR barrel correction. This correction narrows the field of view, effectively cropping the original 24mm image to approximately 26mm after the correction process....Show more →
It looks like there is still some distortion present in the manually corrected one. You can see it in the doorway at the very left edge of the image. Unless you have a curved door
p.11 #5 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Well I went to the Australian launch of the Q3. Definitely an stunning camera and a significant upgrade on my Q2. I was even tempted although I know I won’t shoot it. But I have made a huge error in judgement…..
I took K. She’s a full time artist and has a great eye. I got her into m43 because she has had a benign tremor since childhood and IBIS is game changing for that. Last year I upgraded her to an OM-1, which is a sensational camera. Then. two so she’d have a backup. Full set of lenses. I’ve introduced her to the Olympus primes. She really likes primes. Especially between 24 and 50. In 2019 she took a Leica photo trip with me so I thought she’d like to say hi to Nick, our tour leader, who was at the launch. The Steve McCurry exhibition is on in Sydney, so we made a day of it and I took her to exhibition, lunch in the city and the Q3 launch at the Leica Store Sydney.
Well, they say the Q is the gateway drug to Leica. And now I’m down AUD 9K and K gets herself a Q3 when the next batch lands.
So when I said, “definitely, no more fixed 28mm cameras”, it may have been a bit premature. I suppose I’m lucky M’s don’t have IBIS and SL’s are big……
p.11 #6 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
lifeandmylens wrote:
It looks like there is still some distortion present in the manually corrected one. You can see it in the doorway at the very left edge of the image. Unless you have a curved door
Indeed, it appears that my previous explanation may have lacked clarity. The wide image I shared portrays the lens in its uncorrected state, wherein the barrel distortion is quite prominent. Leica rectified the distortion in-camera (as shown on the JPEG sample), but it can be reversed during post-processing. By applying a +54 barrel distortion adjustment in software like Lightroom (LR), the image will resemble the original shot straight out of the camera.
p.11 #7 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
This example showcases the versatile usage of the Leica 28/1.7 Lux lens for the Q series, which can effectively function as either a 26mm or a 24mm lens based on specific requirements, despite being officially labeled as a 28mm lens by Leica. By intentionally avoiding the in-camera distortion correction, the resulting image captures a broader field of view, closely resembling a 24mm perspective.
It's worth noting that the standard distortion correction applied by Leica is quite substantial, with a correction value of around +54 in LR barrel correction. This correction narrows the field of view, effectively cropping the original 24mm image to approximately 26mm after the correction process....Show more →
Fred, can you share the method you used to bypass corrections being applied to the raw and what aperture your sample was taken at?
p.11 #8 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
Indeed, it appears that my previous explanation may have lacked clarity. The wide image I shared portrays the lens in its uncorrected state, wherein the barrel distortion is quite prominent. Leica rectified the distortion in-camera (as shown on the JPEG sample), but it can be reversed during post-processing. By applying a +54 barrel distortion adjustment in software like Lightroom (LR), the image will resemble the original shot straight out of the camera.
One question. Why?
This has been a thing for ages with the Q, for some. But I don’t get why. The digital corrections are part of the lens design. they’re supposed to be there. So that’s how *I* would judge the lens.
Is there some advantage to removing the corrections I’m missing? I certainly don’t like the look of any of the uncorrected images I’ve seen.
p.11 #10 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
flash wrote:
One question. Why?
This has been a thing for ages with the Q, for some. But I don’t get why. The digital corrections are part of the lens design. they’re supposed to be there. So that’s how *I* would judge the lens.
Is there some advantage to removing the corrections I’m missing? I certainly don’t like the look of any of the uncorrected images I’ve seen.
Gordon
Hi Gordon,
In my opinion, the practical utility of this feature is limited. However, if an image lacks straight lines and one desires a slightly wider perspective, this option can be useful. Instead of applying the full "+54" distortion correction, using a smaller value like "+20" can result in a wider image with significantly reduced barrel distortion compared to leaving it uncorrected.
In photos where in-camera distortion correction is used, subjects near the edges of the frame might look stretched due to the wide-angle lens distortion. This can be unattractive, especially when taking pictures of people. However, you can fix this by adding barrel distortion. When you remove the in-camera correction, you introduce a noticeable amount of barrel distortion to the image, which helps solve the problem.
To demonstrate this, I have included an example image sourced from dpreview. The initial image is the Q2 DNG file as captured by the camera, while the second image has had the distortion correction removed. Pay attention to the seated girl's appearance, which appears elongated in the properly corrected image. In the end, it boils down to a compromise between barrel distortion and wide-angle distortion.
DNG straight of the camera (with Leica corrections)
LEICA Q228.0 mm f/1.7 lens28mmf/1.71/50s2500 ISO0.0 EV
DNG with Leica corrections removed
LEICA Q228.0 mm f/1.7 lens28mmf/1.71/50s2500 ISO0.0 EV
After running this, the image will show up uncorrected.
Thanks Fred. I use exiftool myself. I asked because I noticed there was no noticeable vignetting on your uncorrected image, even know the lens heavily vignettes wide open. What aperture did you shoot at?
One thing I like about the Nikon Z bodies is if you disable distortion correction in the camera then it shows you the uncorrected view in LV, which makes critical framing easier for those who plan to bypass the corrections. LR still forced you to use the corrections even when disabled in camera, which I get around by converting to DNG and stripping off the opcodes.
p.11 #12 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
snapsy wrote:
Thanks Fred. I use exiftool myself. I asked because I noticed there was no noticeable vignetting on your uncorrected image, even know the lens heavily vignettes wide open. What aperture did you shoot at?
One thing I like about the Nikon Z bodies is if you disable distortion correction in the camera then it shows you the uncorrected view in LV, which makes critical framing easier for those who plan to bypass the corrections. LR still forced you to use the corrections even when disabled in camera, which I get around by converting to DNG and stripping off the opcodes.
There is intense vignetting. I just added a preset that takes care of it.
p.11 #13 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
Hi Gordon,
In my opinion, the practical utility of this feature is limited. However, if an image lacks straight lines and one desires a slightly wider perspective, this option can be useful. Instead of applying the full "+54" distortion correction, using a smaller value like "+20" can result in a wider image with significantly reduced barrel distortion compared to leaving it uncorrected.
In photos where in-camera distortion correction is used, subjects near the edges of the frame might look stretched due to the wide-angle lens distortion. This can be unattractive, especially when taking pictures of people. However, you can fix this by adding barrel distortion. When you remove the in-camera correction, you introduce a noticeable amount of barrel distortion to the image, which helps solve the problem.
To demonstrate this, I have included an example image sourced from dpreview. The initial image is the Q2 DNG file as captured by the camera, while the second image has had the distortion correction removed. Pay attention to the seated girl's appearance, which appears elongated in the properly corrected image. In the end, it boils down to a compromise between barrel distortion and wide-angle distortion....Show more →
Left side jar, too.
Not sure if that is over-corrected or some keystoning mixed in with the correction, but look at the menu (top left) and picture frame (top right).
p.11 #14 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Q3
9520 x 6336
Q2
8368 x 5584
Appx. +13.5% (linear PPI)
Not a compelling resolution difference, coming from a Q2. Imo, the features (i.e. tilt screen, USB charging, data x-fer rates) are a greater differentiator than resolution will be of an impact to IQ.
p.11 #15 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
RustyBug wrote:
Q3
9520 x 6336
Q2
8368 x 5584
Appx. +13.5% (linear PPI)
Not a compelling resolution difference, coming from a Q2. Imo, the features (i.e. tilt screen, USB charging, data x-fer rates) are a greater differentiator than resolution will be of an impact to IQ.
I'll hang on to my Q2 for a while, yet.
Don't underestimate the impact of the triple resolution sensor the the higher resolution enables The increase in Dynamic Range and noise handling is noticable. Check out mathphotographer's latest tests results on YouTube. The Leica Store Los Angeles was doing some amazing prints from Q3 images shot at unbelievable high ISO values when I was there last week. I wouldn't have beleived it if I didn't see it with my own eyes.
Then as you say, add the new menu, additional button. the tilt screen, and other improvements. In sum it is a significant upgrade.
p.11 #16 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
RustyBug wrote:
Q3
9520 x 6336
Q2
8368 x 5584
Appx. +13.5% (linear PPI)
Not a compelling resolution difference, coming from a Q2. Imo, the features (i.e. tilt screen, USB charging, data x-fer rates) are a greater differentiator than resolution will be of an impact to IQ.
I'll hang on to my Q2 for a while, yet.
My thoughts as well. The sensor is certainly better. Noticeably. But with AI noise reduction I don’t see it as the big upgrade. I can do silly things with the Q2 in DXO.
The other stuff however, is REALLY nice. Better EVF, focusing, charging, battery life, I/O, etc make for a really really compelling camera. If only it were a 50….
I feel the same way about the X1DII to X2D upgrade. The file quality is actually the least important upgrade. It’s the rest, combined.
p.11 #17 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
There is intense vignetting. I just added a preset that takes care of it.
I checked a few Q2 DNGs and what's interesting is there is no vignetting correction profile - the distortion correction profile is sufficient to remove the portion of the frame with the hard vignette. Here's a f/1.7 example:
Here's the correction profile in the DNG for the above photo:
p.11 #18 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
RustyBug wrote:
Q3
9520 x 6336
Q2
8368 x 5584
Appx. +13.5% (linear PPI)
Not a compelling resolution difference, coming from a Q2. Imo, the features (i.e. tilt screen, USB charging, data x-fer rates) are a greater differentiator than resolution will be of an impact to IQ.
I'll hang on to my Q2 for a while, yet.
Agreed that the resolution is not the most compelling upgrade feature for Q2 to Q3. But having used the Q2 and then the M11, the color and high ISO noise character of the Leica 60mp sensor is (IMO) an even bigger reason to upgrade than the other reasons you mentioned.
p.11 #19 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
snapsy wrote:
I checked a few Q2 DNGs and what's interesting is there is no vignetting correction profile - the distortion correction profile is sufficient to remove the portion of the frame with the hard vignette. Here's a f/1.7 example:
Yes, this is something I've brought up before regarding vignetting. Even without the distortion correction applied, there is very little vignetting on the Q lens except for right at the edge, which is cropped out in the final image and not something most users ever see. Compare that to the 28 Lux-M, which has a very heavy vignette wide open when used on a non-BSI sensor M cameras like the M10M. The 28 Lux-M vignette is artistically useful, though. The character of vignetting added in post never quite looks as good, and it can often ruin the smooth gradients of a blue sky in the outer portions of the frame, especially on images that have been heavily edited already.
p.11 #20 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
There is intense vignetting. I just added a preset that takes care of it.
Strange, perhaps this varies by distance and aperture. I very often had no objectionable vignette when I removed the distortion correction provided I cropped out the hard corners (without the hood attached obviously). What I'm wondering: perhaps removing corrections via an optcode/EXIF tool is removing more corrections than what is done in Capture One by turning off the manufacturer profile.
