Leica Q

Solarflare · Jun 10, 2015

Premiere and review The 2015 Leica Q Typ 116 Ming Thein Photographer

Hmmm.

I'll have to sleep over it - but this sounds a lot like my new compact.

Solarflare · Jun 11, 2015

24 megapixel Full-frame CMOS sensor

14-bit, New 3:2 aspect ratio (36x24mm) sensor with No optical low-pass filter

Leica 28mm, f/1.7, Summilux ASPH.

11 lenses in 9 groups, 3 aspheric, aperture 1.7 to 16 in 1/3ev stops

Infinite to 30cm or 17cm focus in macro mode with depth of field scale

Optical image stabiliser (3 stops), 49mm thread

1/2000s mechanical shutter, 1/16000s electronic shutter

3inch 1040K pixels, touch-screen, 3:2 aspect

EVF with LCOS display 3,686,000 pixels plus +3/- dioptre correction, 4:3 aspect

Digital zoom option: 35mm (15mp), 50mm (8mp) using thumb button (keeps original DNG file)

10fps in DNG/JPEG (at same time) 40+ continuous images

49 point Autofocus, AFs/AFc, with Touch AF and Face detection options

P/A/S/M/FN button or menu for scene modes

ISO100 to ISO50,000

Maestro processor (from Leica S series)

Wi-Fi / NFC - app available for remote control and transfer

1080HD Video, 60/30fps, stereo sound, 720 available, dedicated movie button

Customisable Fn (function) button - simply press and hold to customise

Leica Q compact full frame camera announced Leica News Rumors
The Leica Q Typ 116 Review The Future of German Camera Engineering Leica News Rumors
Review Leica Q
Code Name Hemingway - the Leica Q reviewed by Jono Slack
Hands-on with the Leica Q Type 116 La Vida Leica
Leica Q Hands-On Review Sample Photos
Leica Q First Impressions Review Digital Photography Review
Das ist Gut Hands-on with the Leica Q Digital Photography Review
Alex Habermehl Copenhagen with the Leica Q The Leica Camera
Accessories Leica Q Photography - Leica Camera AG
Technical Equipment Leica Q Photography - Leica Camera AG
Leica Q Hands-On and Video Interview - Luminous Landscape

So after a good nights sleep I really miss:

- Tilting screen for shooting from the hip - Now thats the biggest bummer.
- Weathersealing - Drat. I guess I will have to be a lot more careful with this one than with my D600 then.

Also:

- The general "Apple" approach to user configurability. Meaning important options are missing.
- Assertion that wide open at close focus is supported (unlike the X Typ 113, which closes down to f/2.8 at minimum distance)
- Annoyance of the presence of a macro mode. So why exactly would I need a macro mode on a 28mm focal length ? I really, really dont. Much rather give me more optical performance instead, please.
- Lug and video button placement
- Zebras disabling during exposure compensation changes
- No compression for raw file (... seriously ?!? Thats kinda stupid)
- Probably STILL cant reprogram this stupid video button (which would be awesome because lets face it, video is better but not even remotely actually good just yet); I much rather would activate ISO selection instead with this button.
- Shutter speed and ISO only in 1 stop incremenets, while Aperture and Exposure comp are in 1/3 stops

I get plenty in other respects, though. Great image quality, as expected. Really fast AF. Really good build. Fast operation. Touchscreen.

Oh, and theres of course the price. But if I use this camera for the next 10 years (which is a realistic number), I just spend 400€ per year for it. And its kind of doubtful that there will be huge advancements in the future compared to this package.

So yeah, right now I'm still positive I want this thing.

beagle100 · Jun 11, 2015

Solarflare said:
Premiere and review The 2015 Leica Q Typ 116 Ming Thein Photographer

Hmmm.

I'll have to sleep over it - but this sounds a lot like my new compact.

it's only $5,000
Maybe I'll pick up a couple on the way home

sashbar · Jun 11, 2015

Leica's price is ridiculous in our age of rapid digital camera evolution/deprecation. In the film era it was different, now in 10 or even 8 years it will be an obsolete piece of digital junk, compared to modern cameras of the future with their hugely superior high ISO and AF performance, predictive engines, organic sensors and God knows what other wonders under the hood. And you will still keep paying €400 a year for it at the time when a €400 camera will be most probably better. We need to realise that camera bodies is a fluid thing these days. Great today, mediocre tomorrow. High price digital bodies like Leica are made exclusively for high heeled blokes who never count money. I am not moved at all and even given a chance I would not swap my XT1 for this Q Leica. Costly cameras are sooo XX century.

Gary A. · Jun 11, 2015

Fuji X cameras, fixed lens and ILC's, all have a macro setting ... it doesn't alter the actual focus, but when activated, sorta limits/alerts the lens to focus close-up first. I suspect it may be the same sort of idea.

Gary A. · Jun 11, 2015

I find the Q quite fascinating. If it was more affordably priced I'd be very tempted to take a crack at it.

Derrel · Jun 12, 2015

sashbar said:
Leica's price is ridiculous in our age of rapid digital camera evolution/deprecation. In the film era it was different, now in 10 or even 8 years it will be an obsolete piece of digital junk, compared to modern cameras of the future with their hugely superior high ISO and AF performance, predictive engines, organic sensors and God knows what other wonders under the hood. And you will still keep paying €400 a year for it at the time when a €400 camera will be most probably better. We need to realise that camera bodies is a fluid thing these days. Great today, mediocre tomorrow. High price digital bodies like Leica are made exclusively for high heeled blokes who never count money. I am not moved at all and even given a chance I would not swap my XT1 for this Q Leica. Costly cameras are sooo XX century.

Did you not see Ming Thein's little blurb? This is not an expensive camera--it's a cheap Leica. ;-)

Solarflare · Jun 12, 2015

First of all, 10 years is the upper limit of useablity for a digital camera anyway. Thus, if I get the Q, I really dont expect to get more than 10 years out of it. Because unlike film cameras, digital cameras simply dont last. In 10 years, the electronics will have been worn down and might stop function any time, the memory cards for the camera wont be available anymore, neither will be new chargers or batteries. Thats just how digital cameras are. No matter if they are from Leica or somebody else. There is no way around this - this is the consequence of having electronics - electronics simply age.

Second, well, predictions are hard, especially about the future. However, if we look at the current development - the advancements in respect to IQ are getting smaller and smaller. The Sony A7s was kind of a game changer recently with extreme High ISO performance (useable high ISO up to about 50k to 100k), as was the Nikon D810 with native ISO 64, but overall the last really noticeable jump in plain technology was between Nikon D90 and D7000, because of the improved dynamic range. Ever since we're mostly getting really only small increments, and fine tuning. Which is what both A7s and D810 are, and probably the new Sony A7rII with a backlit sensor as well. I also dont expect that much from organic sensors, anyway - Fuji keeps delaying this introduction again and again, so maybe we're in for a disappointment in that area, in respect to what additional performance we will actually get from it. What I really hope for, though, is that somebody starts using dichrotic mirrors on the sensor itself, on every pixel, at some point in the future - that would then give us least twice the sensitivity than before, the effective sensor size would EXPLODE (since thanks to mirrors the photo diodes can now grow in the 3rd dimension) though I'm not sure if my thinking there is correct (I suspect this allows to make sensors with really low ISOs, thus allowing to collect a lot of light and get even better signal to noise ratios), and we'll get the resolution of Foveon X3 sensors (full 3 color channels in every pixel) without the disadvantages (bad high ISO performance due to tons of color noise). Thats about the last really substantial jump in sensor technology, though, because otherwise we're only limited to how efficient our sensors are (and how large we can make them, and how low ISOs we can support, in order to get better signal to noise).

Third, yes the technology of the Q sensor isnt top notch. Neither are Canons, and people still make good pictures with that one. Nobody can compete with Sony sensors. They have all the great technology and have it patented. The sensor of the Q, though, is still "good enough" (as are Canons) for stunning results. Plus the sensor of course has ONE advantage - it allows to construct a 28mm lens without making it a retrofocus (Zeiss calls those "Distragon") design, thus the lens can be small (and of higher quality, thanks to the decreased needed complexity).

Otherwise the Q seems to have no important weakness, for example the lens is great for the purpose I want the Q (social photography, for which I for example dont need that urgently any border sharpness, but f1.7 is great to have), and the autofocus, ergonomics and apparently also haptics all seem to be great, too.

sashbar said:
Leica's price is ridiculous in our age of rapid digital camera evolution/deprecation.

How so ? The Sony RX1 costs about (?) 3k (3.5k at release, anyway), and the quite inferior (compared to the Q) EVF is quite expensive, too. And the RX1 camera is butt ugly, while the Q is quite beautiful. And the RX1 offers slightly less maximum aperture, "only" f2 instead of f1.7. And its slower, operationwise. Also the ergonomics of the Q seem to be superior, though I dont like the "Apple" approach (aka important fine tuning options are missing).

I repeat: Leica can compete with a huge mass producer like Sony ! Yes, you get a bit more expensive, but you get enough extra that it can compensate for that. Thats very impressive.

So why complain NOW ? The Q is simply unbelievably cheap for what it does and considering its coming from a relatively small company.

Derrel said:
Did you not see Ming Thein's little blurb? This is not an expensive camera--it's a cheap Leica. ;-)

I would have guessed a higher price, too. Considering a new M costs what ? 7k ?

Fred Berg · Jun 12, 2015

Solarflare said:
First of all, 10 years is the upper limit of useablity for a digital camera anyway.

My Leica Digilux 1 is 13 years old. I bought it when it was already 10 years old and considered pretty much obsolete by most people, but it's still going strong and I find the image quality is more than adequate for my needs.

Solarflare · Jun 12, 2015

I didnt said they will explode after exactly 10 years. I just said its a reasonable assumption it will last 10 years. After that, it might break down any day without any warning. Plus the aforementioned compability issues - if the battery breaks down, you probably dont get a new one, if the memory card breaks down, you probably cant get a new one either, and then theres the issue about actually reading whatever memory is present.

Of course you can have luck and it lasts 100 years. Especially if its a Leica, build like a "tank", and happends to not have the errors some Leicas are known for, such as "sensor rust" in the Leica M9, Leica M-E Typ 220, and Leica M Monochrom Typ 230 (*).

But assuming you use it a lot, sooner or later its guaranteed to break down.

Cameras in space, for example, might already break down after a half year ... because of the intense radiation. Its just a consequence of things being that small and that tightly packed.

Fred Berg · Jun 12, 2015

Yes, of course, but my point really is that with Leica it will almost certainly still be working well in 10 years (batteries are still readily available for my fossil as are the memory cards it can handle) and someone will be willing to give you reasonable money for it second hand.

beagle100 · Jun 13, 2015

sashbar said:
Leica's price is ridiculous in our age of rapid digital camera evolution/deprecation. High price digital bodies like Leica are made exclusively for high heeled blokes who never count money. I am not moved at all and even given a chance I would not swap my XT1 for this Q Leica. Costly cameras are sooo XX century.

Hollywood celebrities like leica
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/20/fashion/leica-cameras-favored-by-celebrities.html?_r=0

Solarflare · Jun 13, 2015

Many Leica cameras indeed give the impression of a "camera for the rich".

Namely the Leica X Vario and the Leica T.

The Leica Q though is more a camera for photographers, I think. It has everything a photographer could ask for to make good photographs. None of the slowness of the T or the lack of aperture on the X Vario.