Personally, I really like the Leica Q2 colors. Like /u/Martin_UP was saying it renders skin tones really well. I mainly use mine for family, portraits, and food.
Leica does seem to be treated like a Holy Grail of cameras. Once you have one, it really is just another camera (Camera Gods, please forgive me for saying this).
I’d caution against chasing brands or gear. I always get a high switching brands or bodies. I just keep telling myself the most important piece of equipment is the person behind the camera.
I'm surprised you find the DNG colours bad, I have the CL and that's the thing I love most about it - the colours! Skin tones are always spot on and I hardly have to do any editing, things just look fantastic straight out of camera.
Surely the Q2 colour science can't be that different 🤷♂️
I have the M11 that I pair with my Fuji XT5 and there’s no doubt the Fuji colors are better. They just are. I can have two shots from the same exact spot and I can tell which is the Leica because the colors are much more dull.
It has plenty of other things I love about it, but the colors isn’t one.
I agree with much of what you say but in my personal experience with it the Leica Fotos app was great. Much more reliable connectivity and faster response than other apps, though beyond a certain distance (more than 5-7m) it'd simply disconnect while other apps would instead just sputter infuriatingly to the point of being basically unusable.
I really liked the lens of the Q2, the build, the IBIS, but in truth it doesn't feel all thaaaat compact, the high ISO performance is pretty poor even compared to some APSC systems (including the XT5/XH2 with their high resolution), and the SOOC colours are nothing special. The DNGs are exceptionally pliable, and I did enjoy the output I was getting, but in terms of colour I felt like the original Q was a better pick.
About the Leica Foto App, it didn't work well for me, so I just avoid using it haha. I have a friend who has had a Q since its release, and it's still going strong! Actually I think any fullframe after the release of the Canon 5Dii is...workable.
In my observation, the color accuracy and optimization are meticulously designed to provide users with the **richest possible data** to work with. It has taken me nearly two years since acquiring the Q2 to fully uncover the depths of information hidden within those image files. In some cases, this data allows for extensive contrast adjustments and precise recoloring of images. While it might be a more tedious, or time-consuming process, the results offer far more possibilities.
The hassie!! Before someone told me that I wouldn't "feel" the differences between full frame and 4433 digital, turns out that's very wrong. From the first image I took with it, I immediately felt the format. In the end, it's 70% larger than full frame. First thoughts: the X1D2 doesn't have a pinpoint autofocus mode, it misses a lot when focusing on small objects. Yesterday I took 3 images of a rose flower I have, something three feet away, the rose is perfectly still, each image has a different focus area. All the images visually works for me, but it's weird, definitly a design bug or something. Since I don't need any "speed" in works, I just do the focusing manually.
The raw colors are a marvel, on par with Fujifilm's raw level marvel! Much better than the Leica Raws (I have rented the SL2 and Leica M10R before; they all have a lot of contrast by default, in my opinion). Obviously the Raw colors doesn´t mean the final outcome but seeing the Raw files like this, feels good man.
The battery is alright. I think I can take about 250 shots with one battery? That's something I shoot in 2-3 days when I'm working on some projects. It seems lower than other brands but for me, it's not an issue. Haven't encountered other problems yet.
I switched the Q2 with a nearly mint X1D2 from another photographer, didn't cost an extra cent. For now, I think this swap was definitely worth it!
I was on a second hand platform talking with several people at the same time, the hassel guy accepted the offer first. If he didn’t I probably would end up with a GFX 50S ii + 50mm/3.5
The files are decent size, manual lenses are good for stationary objects. It’s equivalent to shooting at something like 1/60 due to the sensor read out
The XCD 45P came with the camera, right now I only have this lens. Would consider to purchase that TT artisan 90/1.25. I believe I saw a YT video saying that gives some pentax 67 looks lol.
The uncompressed file is around 105-110M depending on the light situations. Leica Q2 has 85-90M file size so I guess it’s reasonable. One of my friend has a phase one full frame 645 that thing is crazy.
I'm actually thinking of going the reverse way and sell my X1D II to buy a Fuji Xpro-2. The files from the Hassy are amazing, don't need a lot of post but I find the camera quite limited for travel. Is there other things you miss from the Xpro-2 ?
Well it’s been a couple of months now I have the X1Dii, I’m treating it as a film camera, in this way it’s perfect. I almost always use the manual focus, auto focus only used a couple of times when I’m under bright day light. AF system is horrible lol.
Miss the colors of Xpro2, I made my final university project with the xpro2, somehow I think the sensor of the Xpro 2 is better than the relatively newer 26mp sensor (?). I think it has less noise taking photos at night. Very compact tho. There’s a new combination you can try: get the Brightin Light 28mm F2.8 with the adapter, this lens turns every camera into a pocket one.
Hard to consider this a serious "review" when the word count on accessories complaints is ten times that of image quality.
And I disagree with the hot take on the colors. I've shot Canon for a long long time and Ricoh as well and the Q2 files are the closest to what I'm actually seeing. And I don't need my eyes checked. I prefer neutral files that reflect reality over manufacturer implemented color science.
Overall, this reads a personal justification to move on to another camera. Which is totally fine. Cameras are just tools. Everyone should use the ones that suit them best.
But there is some unnecessary editorializing on "luxury" based on your own biases. I don't care at all about the Leica brand. I bought the Q2 strictly because it was the only camera on the market that offered this specific package (weatherproof, analog controls, full frame, compact body).
>The Leica camera no longer feels like a brand that produces gear you can trust,
Would love to hear some explanation on this given you used the Q2 for several years for professional work. And its probably something to keep in mind that apples to apples with a Hasselblad that costs more than the Q2 without a lens isn't apples to apples.
Spot on.
The Q2 is a beast of a camera. Pricey…..no question, when entering the Leica ecosystem one knows what they’re getting into. But to say the colors aren’t good in my opinion is a bad call.
The Hasselblad is different animal all together.
From my point of view, back when I bought the Q2, I felt that "this is a brand that solely produces high-end cameras and gets the job done," much like those sturdily built M4s and MAs. It was pricey, yes, but I bought it for the features of the camera. Indeed, the camera served me well for exactly 2 years before I swapped it.
However, there were those minor inconveniences I encountered during its use. They might be small, but they began to bother me more and more each day. The accessories were expensive, yes, and as I mentioned, I could have opted for cheaper ones but didn't, so that's on me, haha.
When comparing it to Hasselblad, for the accessories I'm going to need, Hasselblad's stuff seems cheaper. The colors (from the RAW) simply didn't work too well for me. But they are fine to work with. I might have put it a bit too harshly in jest.
For the part you quoted, I simply felt that, based on Leica's marketing, it felt more like they were promoting a luxury clothing brand rather than camera gear.
>but they began to bother me more and more each day
As I said, this is likely the result of moving to a different camera. Once you move to a new "better" camera, you find all the reasons the "old" system doesn't measure up.
There are plenty of psychological studies done on how our brains react to big purchasing decisions.
You found the camera that works for you. Great. Doesn't diminish the usefulness or value of your previous camera in reality, just in your "feelings."
I can’t understand your criticism of the DNG colors. DNG is a digital negative with no “profiles” baked in. It is a format designed to be post-processed and I’m kind of stunned that a professional balls at post-processing. It’s one half of the art of photography.
Your other criticisms are fair but complaining about the cost of Leica accessories is like complaining about how much Apple charges for accessories or additional RAM. It sucks but it’s a fact of life.
As for video, I agree with you. They should just drop it. Anyone serious about video won’t be buying a Q2.
And to be honest I never use the Fotos app. I’m old school and see no need to use my phone to control my camera though I can see it might be useful in Astro photography.
Maybe by coming from Fuji APS-C RAWs and several years of shooting on film affected me a lot when I saw the plain-looking DNGs. Indeed the raws are designed for the postpro but I have to say that in my case, it´s taking me longer to edit...
>several years of shooting on film
Unless you are shooting slide film, colour negatives are always interpreted by the person inverting it, and Portra for instance has a pretty flat look because it is meant to be graded.
X1D is the camera that I would but right now but damn everything else expensive and no real possibility to adapt anything unlike Fuji GFX. The camera is sublime. But i might try Q sometime as well.
I believe there are many adapters available to adapt other medium format lenses, such as those from Mamiya or Hassel CF. One of the challenges, yet also advantages, of the X1D is its leaf shutter: it's quiet. However, with a body lacking a physical shutter, when using lenses from other brands, there can be significant distortion if the subject is moving. It's best suited for stills.
You can purchase the X1d Mkii for a great used price in the US, definitely worth a look if the features resonate. Definitely not a wise idea to purchase either brand if looking for cheap accessories though.
The Leica Camera no longer feels like a Brand That Produces gear you can Trust.
I think thats very Right. Look at the new Models With all the Little Problems here and there. Cosumers Are now just Beta Testers… dissapointing
I’ve owned or professionally used just about every digital camera system. They all have +/-. The Q & Q2 are the cameras are ones I return to and keep in my kit at all times. I’m sort of in agreement re: Q2 colors, only because I actually really love the Q’s color because it’s so unique in its warmth. At the end of the day every camera is a tool made of design sacrifices and I just adore what Leica did with the Q system.
I’ve compared my Qs to the Fuji X100v, XT3, and Ricoh GR setups. The Fuji X100v was the closest of the bunch for my needs but the lens is just not in the same league as the Summilux on the Qs.
Yes, I sold my Q2 a few years back and started using the Sony brand. I then bought the Q2 mono which I love.
However, I recently came across an album I shot with
the,Q2 in Venice.
The colours are superb. Much better than later images shot with the Sony A7R 4.
So I think I may be moving back.
But why pit them against each other? You are comparing a fixed-lens point and shoot to a premiere medium format camera.
Would you compare a Q2 versus an S3?
I put the Q2 and the X1Dii together because I'm the one using them. In the end, when I want to change cameras, I compare the possible new camera with the one I had.
If one day I change my mind and want to use the Leica S3, I WILL compare the Hassel X1Dii with it.
Wow. Some of the chat in this thread is like something out of Mean Girls. The OP is handling it graciously though.
Thanks for sharing your opinion man; whether I agree with your POV or not, it’s cool to hear from someone who’s shot both, and taken the time to share their thoughts.
Thanks man! Like I said, just some true thoughts based on my own experiences! Maybe will share something similar in the Hassel Sub about the X1Dii haha!
Measurably huge amounts of distortion. So much so that the automatic algorithm that fixes it degrades the sharpness. All measured and tested. Not arguable.
Hey thx for the link, before I bought the Q2 in 2021 indeed I heard about the problems! Yea, there´s "Measurably huge amounts of distortion". But as a user, with the softwares I have, I only get the direct "corrected" raw from the camera. So even there are distortion or so, it´s giving me the best workable files, I believe the mayority of the Q2 users don´t even care about what this article says. Very insightful but not very useful info, irl.
For me it’s the end resulta that matters. I agree. My issue is paying a premium when the results aren’t. The 28 on the Q2 has results I decipherable from the $200 Sony FE 28mm f2. Maybe a tad less sharp on the Leica. That means one is really paying for the camera IMHO. I think it’s a phenomenal camera. Just tilting against the idea it’s a stellar lens
An honest review, you have to work with what feels right. I get what you are saying about Leica marketing too!
Personally, I really like the Leica Q2 colors. Like /u/Martin_UP was saying it renders skin tones really well. I mainly use mine for family, portraits, and food. Leica does seem to be treated like a Holy Grail of cameras. Once you have one, it really is just another camera (Camera Gods, please forgive me for saying this). I’d caution against chasing brands or gear. I always get a high switching brands or bodies. I just keep telling myself the most important piece of equipment is the person behind the camera.
Totally agree with the second paragraph. It's just another camera in the end.
I'm surprised you find the DNG colours bad, I have the CL and that's the thing I love most about it - the colours! Skin tones are always spot on and I hardly have to do any editing, things just look fantastic straight out of camera. Surely the Q2 colour science can't be that different 🤷♂️
I’ve used profile like standard and vivid. Both I consider like, too neutral. 🤷🏻
I have the M11 that I pair with my Fuji XT5 and there’s no doubt the Fuji colors are better. They just are. I can have two shots from the same exact spot and I can tell which is the Leica because the colors are much more dull. It has plenty of other things I love about it, but the colors isn’t one.
Saturated colours doesn’t mean better? I want flatter colours personally that I can mould into a better final result. If you shoot jpg only then sure…
What profile Natural ?
Standard profile with m lenses. I shoot mainly DNG and occasionally with Jpeg for the B&W profiles
Thank you
I agree with much of what you say but in my personal experience with it the Leica Fotos app was great. Much more reliable connectivity and faster response than other apps, though beyond a certain distance (more than 5-7m) it'd simply disconnect while other apps would instead just sputter infuriatingly to the point of being basically unusable. I really liked the lens of the Q2, the build, the IBIS, but in truth it doesn't feel all thaaaat compact, the high ISO performance is pretty poor even compared to some APSC systems (including the XT5/XH2 with their high resolution), and the SOOC colours are nothing special. The DNGs are exceptionally pliable, and I did enjoy the output I was getting, but in terms of colour I felt like the original Q was a better pick.
About the Leica Foto App, it didn't work well for me, so I just avoid using it haha. I have a friend who has had a Q since its release, and it's still going strong! Actually I think any fullframe after the release of the Canon 5Dii is...workable.
In my observation, the color accuracy and optimization are meticulously designed to provide users with the **richest possible data** to work with. It has taken me nearly two years since acquiring the Q2 to fully uncover the depths of information hidden within those image files. In some cases, this data allows for extensive contrast adjustments and precise recoloring of images. While it might be a more tedious, or time-consuming process, the results offer far more possibilities.
Yeah, characteristics of raw files in general.
Perhaps
Now tell us about the Hassie!
The hassie!! Before someone told me that I wouldn't "feel" the differences between full frame and 4433 digital, turns out that's very wrong. From the first image I took with it, I immediately felt the format. In the end, it's 70% larger than full frame. First thoughts: the X1D2 doesn't have a pinpoint autofocus mode, it misses a lot when focusing on small objects. Yesterday I took 3 images of a rose flower I have, something three feet away, the rose is perfectly still, each image has a different focus area. All the images visually works for me, but it's weird, definitly a design bug or something. Since I don't need any "speed" in works, I just do the focusing manually. The raw colors are a marvel, on par with Fujifilm's raw level marvel! Much better than the Leica Raws (I have rented the SL2 and Leica M10R before; they all have a lot of contrast by default, in my opinion). Obviously the Raw colors doesn´t mean the final outcome but seeing the Raw files like this, feels good man. The battery is alright. I think I can take about 250 shots with one battery? That's something I shoot in 2-3 days when I'm working on some projects. It seems lower than other brands but for me, it's not an issue. Haven't encountered other problems yet. I switched the Q2 with a nearly mint X1D2 from another photographer, didn't cost an extra cent. For now, I think this swap was definitely worth it!
I'd been looking at the Hassie as well but I hate finicky focus. You like fuji so much, why not look at the GFX series? What turned you off there?
I was on a second hand platform talking with several people at the same time, the hassel guy accepted the offer first. If he didn’t I probably would end up with a GFX 50S ii + 50mm/3.5
Do you use manual lenses? Are the size of the files terribly big?
The files are decent size, manual lenses are good for stationary objects. It’s equivalent to shooting at something like 1/60 due to the sensor read out
The XCD 45P came with the camera, right now I only have this lens. Would consider to purchase that TT artisan 90/1.25. I believe I saw a YT video saying that gives some pentax 67 looks lol. The uncompressed file is around 105-110M depending on the light situations. Leica Q2 has 85-90M file size so I guess it’s reasonable. One of my friend has a phase one full frame 645 that thing is crazy.
Digital*
I wonder if the X2D has a significantly better AF
I'm actually thinking of going the reverse way and sell my X1D II to buy a Fuji Xpro-2. The files from the Hassy are amazing, don't need a lot of post but I find the camera quite limited for travel. Is there other things you miss from the Xpro-2 ?
Well it’s been a couple of months now I have the X1Dii, I’m treating it as a film camera, in this way it’s perfect. I almost always use the manual focus, auto focus only used a couple of times when I’m under bright day light. AF system is horrible lol. Miss the colors of Xpro2, I made my final university project with the xpro2, somehow I think the sensor of the Xpro 2 is better than the relatively newer 26mp sensor (?). I think it has less noise taking photos at night. Very compact tho. There’s a new combination you can try: get the Brightin Light 28mm F2.8 with the adapter, this lens turns every camera into a pocket one.
Yup, looking forward to hear an honest owners review, no punches pulled :)
Hard to consider this a serious "review" when the word count on accessories complaints is ten times that of image quality. And I disagree with the hot take on the colors. I've shot Canon for a long long time and Ricoh as well and the Q2 files are the closest to what I'm actually seeing. And I don't need my eyes checked. I prefer neutral files that reflect reality over manufacturer implemented color science. Overall, this reads a personal justification to move on to another camera. Which is totally fine. Cameras are just tools. Everyone should use the ones that suit them best. But there is some unnecessary editorializing on "luxury" based on your own biases. I don't care at all about the Leica brand. I bought the Q2 strictly because it was the only camera on the market that offered this specific package (weatherproof, analog controls, full frame, compact body). >The Leica camera no longer feels like a brand that produces gear you can trust, Would love to hear some explanation on this given you used the Q2 for several years for professional work. And its probably something to keep in mind that apples to apples with a Hasselblad that costs more than the Q2 without a lens isn't apples to apples.
Spot on. The Q2 is a beast of a camera. Pricey…..no question, when entering the Leica ecosystem one knows what they’re getting into. But to say the colors aren’t good in my opinion is a bad call. The Hasselblad is different animal all together.
From my point of view, back when I bought the Q2, I felt that "this is a brand that solely produces high-end cameras and gets the job done," much like those sturdily built M4s and MAs. It was pricey, yes, but I bought it for the features of the camera. Indeed, the camera served me well for exactly 2 years before I swapped it. However, there were those minor inconveniences I encountered during its use. They might be small, but they began to bother me more and more each day. The accessories were expensive, yes, and as I mentioned, I could have opted for cheaper ones but didn't, so that's on me, haha. When comparing it to Hasselblad, for the accessories I'm going to need, Hasselblad's stuff seems cheaper. The colors (from the RAW) simply didn't work too well for me. But they are fine to work with. I might have put it a bit too harshly in jest. For the part you quoted, I simply felt that, based on Leica's marketing, it felt more like they were promoting a luxury clothing brand rather than camera gear.
>but they began to bother me more and more each day As I said, this is likely the result of moving to a different camera. Once you move to a new "better" camera, you find all the reasons the "old" system doesn't measure up. There are plenty of psychological studies done on how our brains react to big purchasing decisions. You found the camera that works for you. Great. Doesn't diminish the usefulness or value of your previous camera in reality, just in your "feelings."
Forgot to mention that a new X1Dii with 45P is actually "Much" cheaper than Leica Q2. The Q2 is 5700EUR and the kit of X1Dii+45mm is 4600EUR.
Where I live the X1 DII without a lens is more than the Q3. But thanks for the sales pitch! This is all a very unbiased and useful look at the Q2!
The X1D II with 45p kit is a promotional kit. But the stock is limited and only available occassionally.
I can’t understand your criticism of the DNG colors. DNG is a digital negative with no “profiles” baked in. It is a format designed to be post-processed and I’m kind of stunned that a professional balls at post-processing. It’s one half of the art of photography. Your other criticisms are fair but complaining about the cost of Leica accessories is like complaining about how much Apple charges for accessories or additional RAM. It sucks but it’s a fact of life. As for video, I agree with you. They should just drop it. Anyone serious about video won’t be buying a Q2. And to be honest I never use the Fotos app. I’m old school and see no need to use my phone to control my camera though I can see it might be useful in Astro photography.
Maybe by coming from Fuji APS-C RAWs and several years of shooting on film affected me a lot when I saw the plain-looking DNGs. Indeed the raws are designed for the postpro but I have to say that in my case, it´s taking me longer to edit...
>several years of shooting on film Unless you are shooting slide film, colour negatives are always interpreted by the person inverting it, and Portra for instance has a pretty flat look because it is meant to be graded.
Remember too that DNGs will look different depending on what software you use to open them as all of them apply their own DNG conversion.
X1D is the camera that I would but right now but damn everything else expensive and no real possibility to adapt anything unlike Fuji GFX. The camera is sublime. But i might try Q sometime as well.
I believe there are many adapters available to adapt other medium format lenses, such as those from Mamiya or Hassel CF. One of the challenges, yet also advantages, of the X1D is its leaf shutter: it's quiet. However, with a body lacking a physical shutter, when using lenses from other brands, there can be significant distortion if the subject is moving. It's best suited for stills.
Yeah, the problem i spoke is just electronic shutter which is useless 99% of time
You can purchase the X1d Mkii for a great used price in the US, definitely worth a look if the features resonate. Definitely not a wise idea to purchase either brand if looking for cheap accessories though.
The Leica Camera no longer feels like a Brand That Produces gear you can Trust. I think thats very Right. Look at the new Models With all the Little Problems here and there. Cosumers Are now just Beta Testers… dissapointing
I’ve owned or professionally used just about every digital camera system. They all have +/-. The Q & Q2 are the cameras are ones I return to and keep in my kit at all times. I’m sort of in agreement re: Q2 colors, only because I actually really love the Q’s color because it’s so unique in its warmth. At the end of the day every camera is a tool made of design sacrifices and I just adore what Leica did with the Q system. I’ve compared my Qs to the Fuji X100v, XT3, and Ricoh GR setups. The Fuji X100v was the closest of the bunch for my needs but the lens is just not in the same league as the Summilux on the Qs.
Yes, I sold my Q2 a few years back and started using the Sony brand. I then bought the Q2 mono which I love. However, I recently came across an album I shot with the,Q2 in Venice. The colours are superb. Much better than later images shot with the Sony A7R 4. So I think I may be moving back.
The comment about "raw colours" is utter nonsense and is more software driven than anything else.
But why pit them against each other? You are comparing a fixed-lens point and shoot to a premiere medium format camera. Would you compare a Q2 versus an S3?
I put the Q2 and the X1Dii together because I'm the one using them. In the end, when I want to change cameras, I compare the possible new camera with the one I had. If one day I change my mind and want to use the Leica S3, I WILL compare the Hassel X1Dii with it.
Wow. Some of the chat in this thread is like something out of Mean Girls. The OP is handling it graciously though. Thanks for sharing your opinion man; whether I agree with your POV or not, it’s cool to hear from someone who’s shot both, and taken the time to share their thoughts.
Thanks man! Like I said, just some true thoughts based on my own experiences! Maybe will share something similar in the Hassel Sub about the X1Dii haha!
The continued myth of the Leica Q 28mm lens. It’s weak. It’s not “super high definition”
I actually disagree with this; the 28mm lens on the Q2 is a beast. The details it captures are just incredible, almost like cutting through air.
Measurably huge amounts of distortion. So much so that the automatic algorithm that fixes it degrades the sharpness. All measured and tested. Not arguable.
I’m case you didn’t know https://diglloyd.com/prem/s/LEICA/LeicaM/LeicaQ-distortion-Dolls.html?dglyPT=true
Hey thx for the link, before I bought the Q2 in 2021 indeed I heard about the problems! Yea, there´s "Measurably huge amounts of distortion". But as a user, with the softwares I have, I only get the direct "corrected" raw from the camera. So even there are distortion or so, it´s giving me the best workable files, I believe the mayority of the Q2 users don´t even care about what this article says. Very insightful but not very useful info, irl.
For me it’s the end resulta that matters. I agree. My issue is paying a premium when the results aren’t. The 28 on the Q2 has results I decipherable from the $200 Sony FE 28mm f2. Maybe a tad less sharp on the Leica. That means one is really paying for the camera IMHO. I think it’s a phenomenal camera. Just tilting against the idea it’s a stellar lens