Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.1446 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
toshiro wrote:
Leica M2 / CV 50 / Tmax 400
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34296079955_c5da794004_z.jpg
S by L, no Flickr
---------------------------------------------
Very nice!
AbramG wrote:
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
I agree, that is what I do with RX1 and M during travel. I usually put 50mm or 21mm on M. but somehow, I almost never take RX1 out if I am not travelling, I much prefer just take the M if I have to take one. Hence, I haven't upgrade my RX1 or getting into Q yet.
Leica M2 / CV 50 / Tmax 400
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4168/34296079955_c5da794004_z.jpg
S by L, no Flickr
---------------------------------------------
Very nice!
AbramG wrote:
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
I agree, that is what I do with RX1 and M during travel. I usually put 50mm or 21mm on M. but somehow, I almost never take RX1 out if I am not travelling, I much prefer just take the M if I have to take one. Hence, I haven't upgrade my RX1 or getting into Q yet.
Apr 27, 2017 at 01:12 PM
p.1446 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
OleAndre wrote:
Hope none of you mind me posting more from Lofoten
As usual, with the combo M246 and Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4.
https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2886/34155147851_c7f51b4851_b.jpg
Zeiss Distagon 35 ZM - Lofoten Hustinden
All the best,
Ole
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonder
50mm Summilux with M240
Hope none of you mind me posting more from Lofoten
As usual, with the combo M246 and Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4.
All the best,
Ole
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonder
50mm Summilux with M240
Apr 27, 2017 at 09:11 PM
p.1446 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
AbramG wrote:
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
Dialog for the sake of dialog since I've been lurking but I haven't taken many personal photos at all lately and really haven't had much at all to show/post in the last few months..
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of the size? I ask because I'd like to hear what you think. Since I feel it would be VERY difficult for me to use a GR after using a Q. I'm also trying to convince my friend not to buy a GR since he's been on about getting one for months.. I keep telling him to just stick with his A7 and maybe add the cheap 28/2 from Sony, but his argument is always that it's the best IQ for size that he's seen. And a few other random functions he thinks he'll use
The primary reason I don't like it, and am trying to talk him out of it is that the GR feels like very old tech from a usage standpoint. Whereas the Q is really top notch and doesn't get in my way... And I don't say this lightly as I've bought and sold the Q 3 times already (mainly due to the wide FL). This is my 4th Q body and I have very little complaints with the camera in actual usage (a few: lack of manual mode in video, and the half stops/full stops nonsense I mentioned in my review ages ago still bothers me). In fact in actual usage (other than buffer issues sometimes when doing fashion type outfit of the day photos where I shoot a few frames a second to get movement) I think that the Q is better than any other AF camera I've used save for the pro series bodies from Canikon. And it's laughably small compared to the 1Dx and D5 which have both had more annoyances with full body AF shooting into the sun than the Q has.
(Weirdly enough I also have the GH5 and it's AF in video drifts similarly to the Q, but actually is worse than the Q. Though not nearly as bad as youtube makes it out to be.)
And yes again, I get that it's mega convenient because of the size to IQ ratio.
As a side note, although I'm not 100% smitten with the sensor in the Q, I think it's pretty good for the way I use it as a travel/everyday cam. And I find it better than the SL sensor, even though some have suspected it's the same sensor just that the SL is a tweaked version of... I don't find this to be true, but what do I know maybe it's all in the lenses.
Also I'm still not buying an M10, quite happy with my M-D (even though I have it up for sale along with the SL kit on getdpi [probably also should list it on FM]). BUT I will say that from the limited time I played with the M10, I'm quite impressed with the sensor.. Why that sensor couldn't have gone into the SL is beyond me... I'm angry to the point where I'm selling off all my Leica gear (save for the Q). Seriously if the M10 sensor was in the Q and SL, I would be happy right now. That and I wish they had a Q50mm I'd buy and own both and probably would even consider using them for work and just having something random for times when I need 85-135 range.
OK OK... Here are a few personal photos shot with the SL + 50SL (Mostly shot wide open and edited by Emily herself since I've barely had the time to do anything personally) since I've not posted anything on the image forum in a while:
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
Dialog for the sake of dialog since I've been lurking but I haven't taken many personal photos at all lately and really haven't had much at all to show/post in the last few months..
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of the size? I ask because I'd like to hear what you think. Since I feel it would be VERY difficult for me to use a GR after using a Q. I'm also trying to convince my friend not to buy a GR since he's been on about getting one for months.. I keep telling him to just stick with his A7 and maybe add the cheap 28/2 from Sony, but his argument is always that it's the best IQ for size that he's seen. And a few other random functions he thinks he'll use
The primary reason I don't like it, and am trying to talk him out of it is that the GR feels like very old tech from a usage standpoint. Whereas the Q is really top notch and doesn't get in my way... And I don't say this lightly as I've bought and sold the Q 3 times already (mainly due to the wide FL). This is my 4th Q body and I have very little complaints with the camera in actual usage (a few: lack of manual mode in video, and the half stops/full stops nonsense I mentioned in my review ages ago still bothers me). In fact in actual usage (other than buffer issues sometimes when doing fashion type outfit of the day photos where I shoot a few frames a second to get movement) I think that the Q is better than any other AF camera I've used save for the pro series bodies from Canikon. And it's laughably small compared to the 1Dx and D5 which have both had more annoyances with full body AF shooting into the sun than the Q has.
(Weirdly enough I also have the GH5 and it's AF in video drifts similarly to the Q, but actually is worse than the Q. Though not nearly as bad as youtube makes it out to be.)
And yes again, I get that it's mega convenient because of the size to IQ ratio.
As a side note, although I'm not 100% smitten with the sensor in the Q, I think it's pretty good for the way I use it as a travel/everyday cam. And I find it better than the SL sensor, even though some have suspected it's the same sensor just that the SL is a tweaked version of... I don't find this to be true, but what do I know maybe it's all in the lenses.
Also I'm still not buying an M10, quite happy with my M-D (even though I have it up for sale along with the SL kit on getdpi [probably also should list it on FM]). BUT I will say that from the limited time I played with the M10, I'm quite impressed with the sensor.. Why that sensor couldn't have gone into the SL is beyond me... I'm angry to the point where I'm selling off all my Leica gear (save for the Q). Seriously if the M10 sensor was in the Q and SL, I would be happy right now. That and I wish they had a Q50mm I'd buy and own both and probably would even consider using them for work and just having something random for times when I need 85-135 range.
OK OK... Here are a few personal photos shot with the SL + 50SL (Mostly shot wide open and edited by Emily herself since I've barely had the time to do anything personally) since I've not posted anything on the image forum in a while:
Apr 28, 2017 at 04:16 AM
p.1446 #5Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Hey Adam! Long time no see! I have to say that I really like your wife's editing. Obviously she worked to get a certain look while we photographers are more limited by technical details like preserving highlights or achieving a neutral white balance. You should let her edit your shots more often
Apr 28, 2017 at 05:41 AM
p.1446 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
adamdewilde wrote:
...Also I'm still not buying an M10, quite happy with my M-D...BUT I will say that from the limited time I played with the M10, I'm quite impressed with the sensor.. Why that sensor couldn't have gone into the SL is beyond me... I'm angry to the point where I'm selling off all my Leica gear (save for the Q). Seriously if the M10 sensor was in the Q and SL, I would be happy right now
Adam - You're right about the M10, but why don't you want to get it? Don't you still have some M-lenses?
I'm very happy with my M10, but the trouble is that I've been so busy that I have shot no more than some 100 frames with it. Basically, with it's "infinite" shadow recovery, I'm trying to see how well it can do with the highlights. In particular, I'm trying to figure if, in very bright light, it can have a graceful transition from the lightest tones to blown-out tone, when that is unavoidable, which is one of the hallmarks of, say, Portra 400 and Tri-X. Actually, the M9 handled that reasonably well, but far from film.
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
...Also I'm still not buying an M10, quite happy with my M-D...BUT I will say that from the limited time I played with the M10, I'm quite impressed with the sensor.. Why that sensor couldn't have gone into the SL is beyond me... I'm angry to the point where I'm selling off all my Leica gear (save for the Q). Seriously if the M10 sensor was in the Q and SL, I would be happy right now
Adam - You're right about the M10, but why don't you want to get it? Don't you still have some M-lenses?
I'm very happy with my M10, but the trouble is that I've been so busy that I have shot no more than some 100 frames with it. Basically, with it's "infinite" shadow recovery, I'm trying to see how well it can do with the highlights. In particular, I'm trying to figure if, in very bright light, it can have a graceful transition from the lightest tones to blown-out tone, when that is unavoidable, which is one of the hallmarks of, say, Portra 400 and Tri-X. Actually, the M9 handled that reasonably well, but far from film.
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
Apr 28, 2017 at 08:44 AM
p.1446 #7Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Leica M10, DR Summicron-50 , ISO 100. Again, I'm posting both a color and B&W version, as many people want to see the MA10 B&W conversions as well.
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
Apr 28, 2017 at 11:32 AM
p.1446 #8Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
zhangyue wrote:
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonder
Thank you very much for your kind words zhangyue (or do you prefer Michael?)
I have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure correct, I first add a mild tweak to the tone curve (I have a preset for different tone curves to make it faster). Then I adjust the black and white levels, before usually lowering the highlights and setting the shadows to my liking (either up or down). In the end I adjust clarity (between +10 and +20 for landscapes), and add sharpening (A=40, R=0.7, D= 40, M=25). I have never felt the need to add noise reduction.
How much time does it take? Well, the tweaking back and forth is fairly simple, but I tend to spend a lot of time looking at my photos after I have tweaked. But then I mostly look at the format and if the crop is right, etc.
Here is my last photo shown unedited and edited. Note that I have kept the crops in order to clear out some other rocks that I regard as noise and negative to the overall balance in the image. For this image i managed to overexpose more than I prefer, but luckily I was still able to save most of the highlights. Bare in mind that when I took this photo the weather was harsh. It was a storm coming from the north, with wind up to 30 meters per second, and lots of hail and snow in the air. When I edited this shot, I wanted recreate some of that.
Overall, I am very impressed with the M246 files. The amount of detail is impressive, and the files have a lot of potential. However, there is one drawback. Highlights easily gets burned out, and I find it best to avoid exposing towards the highlights. The positive is that the shadows are so rich, and can be lifted substantially without loosing contrast or details.
If you want I can post more before and after shots so that you can evaluate whether this is a camera for you.
All the best,
Ole
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonder
Thank you very much for your kind words zhangyue (or do you prefer Michael?)
I have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure correct, I first add a mild tweak to the tone curve (I have a preset for different tone curves to make it faster). Then I adjust the black and white levels, before usually lowering the highlights and setting the shadows to my liking (either up or down). In the end I adjust clarity (between +10 and +20 for landscapes), and add sharpening (A=40, R=0.7, D= 40, M=25). I have never felt the need to add noise reduction.
How much time does it take? Well, the tweaking back and forth is fairly simple, but I tend to spend a lot of time looking at my photos after I have tweaked. But then I mostly look at the format and if the crop is right, etc.
Here is my last photo shown unedited and edited. Note that I have kept the crops in order to clear out some other rocks that I regard as noise and negative to the overall balance in the image. For this image i managed to overexpose more than I prefer, but luckily I was still able to save most of the highlights. Bare in mind that when I took this photo the weather was harsh. It was a storm coming from the north, with wind up to 30 meters per second, and lots of hail and snow in the air. When I edited this shot, I wanted recreate some of that.
Overall, I am very impressed with the M246 files. The amount of detail is impressive, and the files have a lot of potential. However, there is one drawback. Highlights easily gets burned out, and I find it best to avoid exposing towards the highlights. The positive is that the shadows are so rich, and can be lifted substantially without loosing contrast or details.
If you want I can post more before and after shots so that you can evaluate whether this is a camera for you.
All the best,
Ole
Apr 28, 2017 at 11:52 AM
p.1446 #9Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
adamdewilde wrote:
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.Dialog for the sake of dialog since I've been lurking but I haven't taken many personal photos at all lately and really haven't had much at all to show/post in the last few months..
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of...Show more →
Adam,
I don't disagree with you at all, I think the Q is a marvelous bit of tech and sure I would love to have one as I really do love the 28mm focal length, but for me it really boils down to the cost for a fixed lens camera. I totally appreciate what the Q is and what it's capable of, but considering it would cost me more to buy one than a used M240 I just have a hard time stomaching that for the time being.
For what it is, to me the GR represents an incredible value. Sure it's not as good as the Q but it's also like 1/10th of the price. Interestingly, your comment about how the Q just gets out of your way is the opposite of my experience, in my (admittedly brief) hands on time with one I was put off by all the menus and buttons I had to press just to use it. For whatever reason I couldn't just pick it up and shoot. I'm totally willing to spend more time with one if given the chance though. For me the GR is invisible, I thought its control layout was excellent and very customizable (in a logical sense) and yes I love the very compact size of it. I love the non-descript nature of the camera and how it just disappears in your hands. I love the image quality and what the lens / sensor combo can produce. Is it perfect? No, of course not, but for me it is a wonderful tool that I enjoy using along-side my M240 or film M bodies.
Additionally, for my personal tastes, I'm trying to get away from having too much tech / features in my cameras, I know that's less convenient but I like it that way.
I would still gladly try a Q, and when they get down to the $2k or less price-point maybe I'll give one a shot.
AbramG wrote
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of...Show more →
Adam,
I don't disagree with you at all, I think the Q is a marvelous bit of tech and sure I would love to have one as I really do love the 28mm focal length, but for me it really boils down to the cost for a fixed lens camera. I totally appreciate what the Q is and what it's capable of, but considering it would cost me more to buy one than a used M240 I just have a hard time stomaching that for the time being.
For what it is, to me the GR represents an incredible value. Sure it's not as good as the Q but it's also like 1/10th of the price. Interestingly, your comment about how the Q just gets out of your way is the opposite of my experience, in my (admittedly brief) hands on time with one I was put off by all the menus and buttons I had to press just to use it. For whatever reason I couldn't just pick it up and shoot. I'm totally willing to spend more time with one if given the chance though. For me the GR is invisible, I thought its control layout was excellent and very customizable (in a logical sense) and yes I love the very compact size of it. I love the non-descript nature of the camera and how it just disappears in your hands. I love the image quality and what the lens / sensor combo can produce. Is it perfect? No, of course not, but for me it is a wonderful tool that I enjoy using along-side my M240 or film M bodies.
Additionally, for my personal tastes, I'm trying to get away from having too much tech / features in my cameras, I know that's less convenient but I like it that way.
I would still gladly try a Q, and when they get down to the $2k or less price-point maybe I'll give one a shot.
Apr 28, 2017 at 12:59 PM
p.1446 #10Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
edwardkaraa wrote:
Hey Adam! Long time no see! I have to say that I really like your wife's editing. Obviously she worked to get a certain look while we photographers are more limited by technical details like preserving highlights or achieving a neutral white balance. You should let her edit your shots more often
, I should give you her email so you can try and convince her to help me
Hey Adam! Long time no see! I have to say that I really like your wife's editing. Obviously she worked to get a certain look while we photographers are more limited by technical details like preserving highlights or achieving a neutral white balance. You should let her edit your shots more often
, I should give you her email so you can try and convince her to help me Apr 28, 2017 at 01:32 PM
|
p.1446 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Mitch Alland wrote:
Adam - You're right about the M10, but why don't you want to get it? Don't you still have some M-lenses?
I'm very happy with my M10, but the trouble is that I've been so busy that I have shot no more than some 100 frames with it. Basically, with it's "infinite" shadow recovery, I'm trying to see how well it can do with the highlights. In particular, I'm trying to figure if, in very bright light, it can have a graceful transition from the lightest tones to blown-out tone, when that is unavoidable, which is one of the...Show more →
Mitch, I'd like to see what your findings are, and would love to read your thoughts on the limitations of the sensor once you've tested it in all conditions.
I thought of getting an M10, but thus far I BARELY use my M-D and I actually have a lot of fun with the M-D when I use it.. So having an M10, it just might go unused at this point in my life. Basically I'm not selling my remaining M lens (50APO), and I'm just going to wait till the price of the M10 comes down, and my free time goes up!!
adamdewilde wrote
...Also I'm still not buying an M10, quite happy with my M-D...BUT I will say that from the limited time I played with the M10, I'm quite impressed with the sensor.. Why that sensor couldn't have gone into the SL is beyond me... I'm angry to the point where I'm selling off all my Leica gear (save for the Q). Seriously if the M10 sensor was in the Q and SL, I would be happy right nowI'm very happy with my M10, but the trouble is that I've been so busy that I have shot no more than some 100 frames with it. Basically, with it's "infinite" shadow recovery, I'm trying to see how well it can do with the highlights. In particular, I'm trying to figure if, in very bright light, it can have a graceful transition from the lightest tones to blown-out tone, when that is unavoidable, which is one of the...Show more →
Mitch, I'd like to see what your findings are, and would love to read your thoughts on the limitations of the sensor once you've tested it in all conditions.
I thought of getting an M10, but thus far I BARELY use my M-D and I actually have a lot of fun with the M-D when I use it.. So having an M10, it just might go unused at this point in my life. Basically I'm not selling my remaining M lens (50APO), and I'm just going to wait till the price of the M10 comes down, and my free time goes up!!
Apr 28, 2017 at 01:34 PM
p.1446 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
OleAndre wrote:
Thank you very much for your kind words zhangyue (or do you prefer Michael?)
I have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure...Show more →
What you said almost exactly reflects my findings with the M246. I kind of miss the simplicity of not having to deal with colour while getting to appreciate the mailability of the file even though it's a pure black and white image.
zhangyue wrote
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonderI have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure...Show more →
What you said almost exactly reflects my findings with the M246. I kind of miss the simplicity of not having to deal with colour while getting to appreciate the mailability of the file even though it's a pure black and white image.
Apr 28, 2017 at 01:37 PM
p.1446 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
AbramG wrote:
I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.Dialog for the sake of dialog since I've been lurking but I haven't taken many personal photos at all lately and really haven't had much at all to show/post in the last few months..
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of the size? I ask because I'd like to hear what you think. Since I feel it would be VERY difficult for me to use a GR after using a Q. I'm also trying to convince my friend not to buy a GR since he's been on about getting one for months.. I keep telling him to just stick with his A7 and maybe add the cheap 28/2 from Sony, but his argument is always that it's the best IQ for size that he's seen. And a few other random functions he thinks he'll use
The primary reason I don't like it, and am trying to talk him out of it is that the GR feels like very old tech from a usage standpoint. Whereas the Q is really top notch and doesn't get in my way... And I don't say this lightly as I've bought and sold the Q 3 times already (mainly due to the wide FL). This is my 4th Q body and I have very little complaints with the camera in actual usage (a few: lack of manual mode in video, and the half stops/full stops nonsense I mentioned in my review ages ago still bothers me). In fact in actual usage (other than buffer issues sometimes when doing fashion type outfit of the day photos where I shoot a few frames a second to get movement) I think that the Q is better than any other AF camera I've used save for the pro series bodies from Canikon. And it's laughably small compared to the 1Dx and D5 which have both had more annoyances with full body AF shooting into the sun than the Q has.
(Weirdly enough I also have the GH5 and it's AF in video drifts similarly to the Q, but actually is worse than the Q. Though not nearly as bad as youtube makes it out to be.)
And yes again, I get that it's mega convenient because of the size to IQ ratio.Adam,
I don't disagree with you at all, I think the Q is a marvelous bit of tech and sure I would love to have one as I really do love the 28mm focal length, but for me it really boils down to the cost for a fixed lens camera. I totally appreciate what the Q is and what it's capable of, but considering it would cost me more to buy one than a used M240 I just have a hard time stomaching that for the time being.
For what it is, to me the GR represents an incredible value....Show more →
Good to hear.. I hope it didn't sound like I was attacking your opinion or anything. I was really just curious what the draw was since A LOT of people rave about the GR. I will pass the info along to my friend, though I don't think he needs convincing since he's pretty set on one.
I hear you about tech in your gear. I do love the simplicity of the M-D. But I think after using the Q for so long (so many times) it's really just second nature to me more so now than any other camera. But I go through phases to be honest.
Anyway I'm in LA now, and should have a bit more time for personal photos. So who knows what I'll use. And since I have my SL gear listed, whatever goes goes.. Whatever doesn't sell, I'll keep and use for those fun days out.
adamdewilde wrote
AbramG wrote
I did really like the Q when I tried a friend's out recently, but at the same time it made me appreciate my Ricoh GR even more than I already do.I love putting a 50mm on my M and carrying the GR in my pocket for when I need 28mm, it's my ideal travel setup.
I get that the GR fits in the pocket.. And the IQ seems to be good from the images I've seen on the net. BUT I played with a GR a bit while in Japan on two occasions, and I have to say that I wouldn't compare a Q to it in any way. And I'm curious that you "appreciate the GR more, is that because of the size? I ask because I'd like to hear what you think. Since I feel it would be VERY difficult for me to use a GR after using a Q. I'm also trying to convince my friend not to buy a GR since he's been on about getting one for months.. I keep telling him to just stick with his A7 and maybe add the cheap 28/2 from Sony, but his argument is always that it's the best IQ for size that he's seen. And a few other random functions he thinks he'll use
The primary reason I don't like it, and am trying to talk him out of it is that the GR feels like very old tech from a usage standpoint. Whereas the Q is really top notch and doesn't get in my way... And I don't say this lightly as I've bought and sold the Q 3 times already (mainly due to the wide FL). This is my 4th Q body and I have very little complaints with the camera in actual usage (a few: lack of manual mode in video, and the half stops/full stops nonsense I mentioned in my review ages ago still bothers me). In fact in actual usage (other than buffer issues sometimes when doing fashion type outfit of the day photos where I shoot a few frames a second to get movement) I think that the Q is better than any other AF camera I've used save for the pro series bodies from Canikon. And it's laughably small compared to the 1Dx and D5 which have both had more annoyances with full body AF shooting into the sun than the Q has.
(Weirdly enough I also have the GH5 and it's AF in video drifts similarly to the Q, but actually is worse than the Q. Though not nearly as bad as youtube makes it out to be.)
And yes again, I get that it's mega convenient because of the size to IQ ratio.
I don't disagree with you at all, I think the Q is a marvelous bit of tech and sure I would love to have one as I really do love the 28mm focal length, but for me it really boils down to the cost for a fixed lens camera. I totally appreciate what the Q is and what it's capable of, but considering it would cost me more to buy one than a used M240 I just have a hard time stomaching that for the time being.
For what it is, to me the GR represents an incredible value....Show more →
Good to hear.. I hope it didn't sound like I was attacking your opinion or anything. I was really just curious what the draw was since A LOT of people rave about the GR. I will pass the info along to my friend, though I don't think he needs convincing since he's pretty set on one.
I hear you about tech in your gear. I do love the simplicity of the M-D. But I think after using the Q for so long (so many times) it's really just second nature to me more so now than any other camera. But I go through phases to be honest.
Anyway I'm in LA now, and should have a bit more time for personal photos. So who knows what I'll use. And since I have my SL gear listed, whatever goes goes.. Whatever doesn't sell, I'll keep and use for those fun days out.
Apr 28, 2017 at 01:49 PM
p.1446 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
OleAndre wrote:
Thank you very much for your kind words zhangyue (or do you prefer Michael?)
I have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure...Show more →
Thank you very much about your reply. We should never forget it is not the camera made the image. Even my gear head potion in my brain always think otherwise.
Those images stand out because your composition, scenery, the weather condition, mood and your fine taste of process. of course camera didn't let you down I'd say.
Before and after is always helpful for any people, I'd love to see more personally but don't feel the pressure that you have to post It took more time to posting and explaining. I appreciate your detail reply very much already.
Good work everyone.
Adam, welcome back, enjoy what your thinking as always. Nice images and editing
zhangyue wrote
Really really enjoy your M246 images, You make me want that camera. How you process your images? (Just briefly is OK) I am very curious. Is it the camera or your process works wonderI have a fairly simple editing process with the M246 files. To be clear, they need to be edited, SOOC they are rather boring and my experience with both landscapes, cityscapes and portraits is that they will look pale, dull and with little contrast. But the information is there, and there is so much room for editing so that in the end they have given me a result that is in line with what I visualised when I pressed the shutter.
Provided that I have the exposure...Show more →
Thank you very much about your reply. We should never forget it is not the camera made the image. Even my gear head potion in my brain always think otherwise.
Those images stand out because your composition, scenery, the weather condition, mood and your fine taste of process. of course camera didn't let you down I'd say.
Before and after is always helpful for any people, I'd love to see more personally but don't feel the pressure that you have to post
It took more time to posting and explaining. I appreciate your detail reply very much already. Good work everyone.
Adam, welcome back, enjoy what your thinking as always. Nice images and editing
Apr 28, 2017 at 01:54 PM
p.1446 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Mitch Alland wrote:
Leica M10, DR Summicron-50 , ISO 100. Again, I'm posting both a color and B&W version, as many people want to see the MA10 B&W conversions as well.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2017/post-41618-0-15940700-1493400070.jpg
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2017/post-41618-0-04578800-1493400182.jpg
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
Mitch, somehow, based on all M10 images so far, I don't echo its color is close to M9. If I have to pick, I feel it is a lot closer to M240 than to M9. Maybe just an informal impression.
If I am in the market, the high ISO and maybe close to 1 stop DR improvement and smaller size are the reason for it but not color, IMHO.
Leica M10, DR Summicron-50 , ISO 100. Again, I'm posting both a color and B&W version, as many people want to see the MA10 B&W conversions as well.
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2017/post-41618-0-15940700-1493400070.jpg
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/uploads/monthly_04_2017/post-41618-0-04578800-1493400182.jpg
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
Mitch, somehow, based on all M10 images so far, I don't echo its color is close to M9. If I have to pick, I feel it is a lot closer to M240 than to M9. Maybe just an informal impression.
If I am in the market, the high ISO and maybe close to 1 stop DR improvement and smaller size are the reason for it but not color, IMHO.
Apr 28, 2017 at 01:57 PM
p.1446 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
adamdewilde wrote:
Good to hear.. I hope it didn't sound like I was attacking your opinion or anything. I was really just curious what the draw was since A LOT of people rave about the GR. I will pass the info along to my friend, though I don't think he needs convincing since he's pretty set on one.
I hear you about tech in your gear. I do love the simplicity of the M-D. But I think after using the Q for so long (so many times) it's really just second nature to me more so now than any other camera. But I...Show more →
Adam,
No worries sir! I didn't take it as an attack in any way, it was a genuine question and one I was happy to answer.
Good to hear.. I hope it didn't sound like I was attacking your opinion or anything. I was really just curious what the draw was since A LOT of people rave about the GR. I will pass the info along to my friend, though I don't think he needs convincing since he's pretty set on one.
I hear you about tech in your gear. I do love the simplicity of the M-D. But I think after using the Q for so long (so many times) it's really just second nature to me more so now than any other camera. But I...Show more →
Adam,
No worries sir! I didn't take it as an attack in any way, it was a genuine question and one I was happy to answer
.Apr 28, 2017 at 05:29 PM
p.1446 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
zhangyue wrote:
...Mitch, somehow, based on all M10 images so far, I don't echo its color is close to M9. If I have to pick, I feel it is a lot closer to M240 than to M9. Maybe just an informal impression.
If I am in the market, the high ISO and maybe close to 1 stop DR improvement and smaller size are the reason for it but not color, IMHO.
zhangyue - My impression is that the M10 is a lot closer in color to the M9 than to the M10, at least that's what people who had the M240 and got an M10 tell me. Basically, to emulate the M9 with the M10 you have to increase contrast and apply a cooler WB.
M10 | Summaron f/5.6 28mm | ISO 1600
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
...Mitch, somehow, based on all M10 images so far, I don't echo its color is close to M9. If I have to pick, I feel it is a lot closer to M240 than to M9. Maybe just an informal impression.
If I am in the market, the high ISO and maybe close to 1 stop DR improvement and smaller size are the reason for it but not color, IMHO.
zhangyue - My impression is that the M10 is a lot closer in color to the M9 than to the M10, at least that's what people who had the M240 and got an M10 tell me. Basically, to emulate the M9 with the M10 you have to increase contrast and apply a cooler WB.
M10 | Summaron f/5.6 28mm | ISO 1600
_______________
http://www.burnmagazine.org/essays/2016/05/mitch-alland-alone-in-bangkok/%22]Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine[/URL]
Apr 28, 2017 at 07:59 PM
p.1446 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
The Stately King
M246 + 24/3.8
M246 + 24/3.8
 |
||
 |
||
|
Apr 29, 2017 at 12:13 PM