Hi - I found this very interesting as I am looking to buy a used Q as an affordable entry point into the Leica realm. And have been wondering whether to just go for the Q2. One of the things that has drawn me to the Q's is the passion of the people who use them. They often have other high-end cameras and will speak of their specs and capabilities but not with the the same depth of passion as they do of their Leica. This is very interesting.
I was thinking of doing a video on why I ended-up choosing the Q2 over the Q-P, and really, how close a decision it was for me, since I was just talking with a friend who was in the same situation you describe; he ended-up going with a used first-gen Q. I like the aesthetic of the Q-P, but fundamentally, they're all very similar cameras and the main difference comes down to price and the ability to crop-in either in post or digital-zoom which I never utilized to the same degree before getting a 40+ MP sensor with a sharp lens. (I also continue to see X and X2s pop-up for ~$700-$800; but that's fairly old tech, slower, and noisier-so there's those trade-offs. They are smaller though, and take great pictures in a narrower envelope than in which the Qs will operate.) There's a simplicity, or purity, to using Leicas, which Leica shooters love and very few other cameras match, which leads to the passion of Leica shooters (those that don't feel the same passion shooting a Leica, tend to migrate to cheaper cameras, given the lack of perceived value). If you have the opportunity, I definitely suggest giving it a try and seeing into which camp you fall.
You’re not the only one suffering those Q problems brother. I’ve got a Q and Q2 and both suffer from freezing when trying to take a picture. Happens to me also once a week or so, losing all my pictures
I'm sorry to hear that-I've seen some others with the issue on forums over the last half-year (I'm surprised there wasn't more earlier given that it does seem to be a non-isolated issue). It doesn't seem to be isolated to any one memory card or brand. If you haven't done so-upgrade the Q2 to the v4.0 firmware (from May of last year). This has *significantly* improved things for me-I get some of of the "black screen" issues, which is annoying but is fixed with another attempt at the shutter activation, and some occasional issues immediately at power-on, but after the first couple seconds I no longer get the dropped-picture/hard lock-up issues. If you are still on earlier firmwares-try updating and see let me know if that improves things for you as well? If not, I'd be curious which memory cards you're using-I had seen some anecdotally better and worse brands; I also found keeping the burst rate off, on slow, or medium made the lock-ups less common, it happened almost constantly on the high/very-high settings. With v4 I've used these settings without issue. There are also some improvements in the video modes with v4 (or was it v3?); if you haven't upgraded since release, there's some different behaviour which I think improves things as well-such as not accidentally switching to video as you cycle through overlay settings-but the new video settings in the recent firmwares do complicate the menu settings for video formats slightly. Good luck!
Thanks for the video, I have had the Q2 sinced it was released and I use it as you described. I turn it off between shots and have never had the same issue as you had. I hope they fix it for you
Cool, thanks for sharing; as I said, most of the feedback I've gotten from other users is that they've never seen an issue, but I haven't gotten a clear idea of their usage pattern. To Leica's credit, they've been re-engaging rather actively (I waited a few days to edit and post in case I got a response, but it looks like it just took a little longer to work through triage on their side-subsequent responses, though, have been within 24H). They and I both recognize how frustrating the intermittent nature is as we try to diagnose it; but we're trying to find some pattern or isolate it to certain factors. I'd be ecstatic if, after having replaced the circuit board once, that the new problem is simply one of the cards, for instance (I've only had it happen once since I got it back, after having gone through multiple cards before the circuit board replacement).
Leica M bottom plate is awesome, puts an emphasis how the camera is built like a tank. No way I would want unprotected battery and memory card compartments.
The battery on the Q2 is supposedly some degree of weather sealed, as opposed to the M series which never are (since none of the lenses are anyway). I don't mind the baseplate on the digital M, it's still easier than replacing film in their analog counterparts, but I remember being bemused when I first saw it.
@@NottaPro Yeah, I meant with protection in that the physical protection. The base plate is like a strongbox. Remember I too was not amused it at first, but have learned to like it. It wont broke easy.
I've not noticed any such sound with the Q2, and I'd suggest reaching out to Leica support. At most, if I put the camera right next to my ear, I might hear a faint, high pitched noise-much quieter than the sensor stabilization system on an Olympus camera, and nothing like you'd describe. The Q2 should be quiet.
Thanks for the reply. I would appreciate a video on the reasoning behind that final decision. On a different but I think relevant tangent, I find it hard to wade through the marketing myths that sometimes drive my decision making. For example, are the amount of pixels so crucial to my next purchase. I suspect I'm being manipulated but like the insect in a bugs life, I feel compelled...Anyway thanks for the content. Regards B
The benefit of a higher-resolution sensor comes int play in a few ways, but for most people, the most relevant is probably greater flexibility in cropping (either digital zoom, or in post). I was surprised how much detail (in the second photo zoom) the helicopter retained given this was a 28mm lens shot far away--obviously I wouldn't generally crop to that, but I think it shows how sharp the lens/sensor combo is and how less ridiculous crops are fully reasonable. The other times when it comes into play are, obviously, printing at large scale with the intent of viewing close-up; which isn't the normal case (either small form, up close; or large form, from a distance). With a suitably sharp lens, you can also work through some interpolation artifacts introduced by the Bayer filter--and you have more flexibility in post-processing noise reduction--but that's getting pretty deep into the weeds and practically speaking I expect everything in this paragraph is going to be less beneficial than the flexibility in cropping (which still doesn't beat the right focal length, if that's practical; obviously not an option on the Q series).
No worries. I did try a few, and it did get escalated with Leica when I mentioned it to them (a bit before I posted this video, but they didn't get back until after posting). Leica was pretty responsive at that point over a couple of days, asking for pictures/model numbers of the specific cards. They did suggest using a specific program (from the SD Association, scard.org) to format one of the cards. I haven't reproduced the issue since, and am cycling generally between two specific cards of the same type. The last card to have an issue, admittedly, is now being used elsewhere and hasn't had any issues. Occam's razor tells me a) there "was" a problem on the board I originally had, which was resolved when it was replaced, and b) I happened to have a specific card that was potentially in such a state as to trigger a similar problem in January, after it was replaced. I've now shot probably a few thousand shots again, over many days, without issue, since posting this.
Have you tried the CL? I here a lot of photographers very happy with it, small with interchangeable lenses. I have the q-p very happy but tempted to go for an m10 with an Apo 50 mm as a jewel kind of camera, to really take time in each picture. What do you think?
I've never used the CL/TL/T cameras. Part of it is admittedly bitterness with the perception that they killed the X line; but the other part is that they just don't seem attractive (as a tool). I'm sure they take great pictures. It was a hard decision for me between the Q2 and Q-P when I ordered by Q2, as they were so similar. What are you looking to get out of the CL vs. an M or your Q-P? Do you have specific lenses you like for the CL? The M, Q, and X lines all have dedicated aperture and shutter dials, which I really appreciate. It looks like the CL still uses unmarked dials (like Olympus, Canon, et al) which only let you change exposure settings while the camera's already one; and I find that frustrating for most of the shots I take (uncontrolled lighting, wildly different settings, usually sporadic shots at any one spot). I think the Q line offers a great value proposition: good resolution (even for the Q/Q-P) and noise handling, excellent ergonomics with much of the M-feel minus the rangefinder, ok AF, and weather sealing. I don't believe any of Leica's interchangeable lens systems are weather sealed. With the growth of the L-mount to Sigma and Panasonic, the future of the lens line-up is probably bright, and I did look at the Panasonic S1 for a moment. I find some degree of weather sealing to be important when buying into a new system (let's ignore that I bought digital Ms, but I already had lenses from the film Ms). I do love that Leica continues to use DNG as their native raw format, but I personally haven't been drawn to the CL.
> take time in each picture. What do you think? I find focusing with the M much more relaxed, and the process of focusing/composing overlaps more since you're effectively able to compose while focusing (as opposed to an SLR/EVF where the image is out of focus until it's focus, and at least personally, I spend the focusing time often figuring out *what* it's focusing on or which AF point is selected). It's very different process with the M. Through a combination of practice, and zone focusing, it's quite possible to speed things up though--I definitely use my M10M to take pictures of my kids running around; as well as (zone focused/large DoF) street shots running around NYC, which was its only trip before travel ended :(
@@NottaPro I just heard a lot of user that use the cL for their SL backup end up taking out the cL more. They like the compact size. But for me I think if I don’t get the m10 with the Apo 50 I will always feel like I didn’t get into the real Leica experience or so does their good marketing make me think so. To shoot my kids I have a Sony a7r4 happy with the results.
I can see the CL as a back-up to the Leica SL or Panasonic DC-S lines, given they can all share the full-frame L lenses (while the CL can also use the APS-C lenses). I've also got micro-four-thirds cameras: I bought an OM-D E-M1X late in 2020 as a complement to the Q2, basically to attach telephoto lenses. There are a lot of small Micro Four Thirds cameras that make great complements in the same way. If you already have the Q-p, I don't think getting the CL makes sense unless you have a specific reason, such as a set lens or zoom lens you want to use with it; or if you are thinking about getting other L-mount cameras, so it'd be part of the system you're using. I do like that the CL has a built-in EVF, unlike the TL. I don't see the L-mount or medium format S cameras as really being the "genuine" Leica experience (I'm sure different people will interpret that differently). If you're looking at the M as the genuine experience, I think you're hard-pressed to find anything closer than the Q on the market today (there *were* a pair of digital Epson rangefinders, which when I went looking for a used copy recently was selling for more than a used digital M). If you get a chance, shoot with the CL; if possible, with the lens you think you'd use most often. See if it feels different than the Q-p, and then make your decision :)
I bough my X2 a few years back because I found it used, for a good price, and was curious about the same thing. There's something to be said for the quality of the lenses and all that, but in general it's the ability of the camera to simply get out of the way of shooting. A big part of that are the minimal set of controls, dedicated aperture and shutter dials which can be set at any time, and in the case of the Q and M, the ability to set the focusing distance as well while the camera is off so you can prep the camera at any time.
I haven't shot with an X-T4, and while the Fuji cameras are good in themselves, to address the X-T4 as a straight-up replacement for the Q2: For the flexibility of the single-lens, 47MP sensor where you can crop between 28mm and 75mm (ish); you're looking at getting the 16-55 f/2.8; with body that looks to be about $3,100 (US); so you could save some money. But you have a slower lens, and you don't have the flexibility to simply crop in post. I can't speak to the noise handling of the X-T4; it's fairly good on the Q2, and the ISO range on the X-T4 appears to top-out at 12,800 which leads me to believe it won't hold-up as well. That aside, the combination does provide the manual controls (shutter, aperture, ISO, focus, and it appears even EV-compensation) as dedicated dials. The Fuji 16-55 lacks DoF guides to help with zone focusing. It does seem like the combination would provide a lot of similar features at about 60% the price, but I wouldn't say that the X-T4 is a straight-up replacement. Adobe DNG-native RAW, the higher resolution convenience vis-a-vis zoom lens, probably better noise handling, and better manual focusing experience would still push me to the Q2. There's also the difference between FF f/1.7 vs. APS-C f/2.8, if that's important to you.
Hi - I found this very interesting as I am looking to buy a used Q as an affordable entry point into the Leica realm. And have been wondering whether to just go for the Q2. One of the things that has drawn me to the Q's is the passion of the people who use them. They often have other high-end cameras and will speak of their specs and capabilities but not with the the same depth of passion as they do of their Leica. This is very interesting.
I was thinking of doing a video on why I ended-up choosing the Q2 over the Q-P, and really, how close a decision it was for me, since I was just talking with a friend who was in the same situation you describe; he ended-up going with a used first-gen Q.
I like the aesthetic of the Q-P, but fundamentally, they're all very similar cameras and the main difference comes down to price and the ability to crop-in either in post or digital-zoom which I never utilized to the same degree before getting a 40+ MP sensor with a sharp lens. (I also continue to see X and X2s pop-up for ~$700-$800; but that's fairly old tech, slower, and noisier-so there's those trade-offs. They are smaller though, and take great pictures in a narrower envelope than in which the Qs will operate.)
There's a simplicity, or purity, to using Leicas, which Leica shooters love and very few other cameras match, which leads to the passion of Leica shooters (those that don't feel the same passion shooting a Leica, tend to migrate to cheaper cameras, given the lack of perceived value). If you have the opportunity, I definitely suggest giving it a try and seeing into which camp you fall.
Love your straightforwardness at the beginning of the video lol
You’re not the only one suffering those Q problems brother. I’ve got a Q and Q2 and both suffer from freezing when trying to take a picture. Happens to me also once a week or so, losing all my pictures
I'm sorry to hear that-I've seen some others with the issue on forums over the last half-year (I'm surprised there wasn't more earlier given that it does seem to be a non-isolated issue). It doesn't seem to be isolated to any one memory card or brand. If you haven't done so-upgrade the Q2 to the v4.0 firmware (from May of last year).
This has *significantly* improved things for me-I get some of of the "black screen" issues, which is annoying but is fixed with another attempt at the shutter activation, and some occasional issues immediately at power-on, but after the first couple seconds I no longer get the dropped-picture/hard lock-up issues.
If you are still on earlier firmwares-try updating and see let me know if that improves things for you as well?
If not, I'd be curious which memory cards you're using-I had seen some anecdotally better and worse brands; I also found keeping the burst rate off, on slow, or medium made the lock-ups less common, it happened almost constantly on the high/very-high settings. With v4 I've used these settings without issue.
There are also some improvements in the video modes with v4 (or was it v3?); if you haven't upgraded since release, there's some different behaviour which I think improves things as well-such as not accidentally switching to video as you cycle through overlay settings-but the new video settings in the recent firmwares do complicate the menu settings for video formats slightly.
Good luck!
Thanks for the video, I have had the Q2 sinced it was released and I use it as you described. I turn it off between shots and have never had the same issue as you had. I hope they fix it for you
Cool, thanks for sharing; as I said, most of the feedback I've gotten from other users is that they've never seen an issue, but I haven't gotten a clear idea of their usage pattern.
To Leica's credit, they've been re-engaging rather actively (I waited a few days to edit and post in case I got a response, but it looks like it just took a little longer to work through triage on their side-subsequent responses, though, have been within 24H). They and I both recognize how frustrating the intermittent nature is as we try to diagnose it; but we're trying to find some pattern or isolate it to certain factors.
I'd be ecstatic if, after having replaced the circuit board once, that the new problem is simply one of the cards, for instance (I've only had it happen once since I got it back, after having gone through multiple cards before the circuit board replacement).
But can you have two cameras connected via Bluetooth at the same time?
Leica's app will only connect to one camera at a time. I believe it pairs over Bluetooth, but then connects over a dedicated WiFi connection.
Love the intro!!
Thanks!
My exact thought too and why I gave the video the like already when it had barely begun!
Leica M bottom plate is awesome, puts an emphasis how the camera is built like a tank. No way I would want unprotected battery and memory card compartments.
The battery on the Q2 is supposedly some degree of weather sealed, as opposed to the M series which never are (since none of the lenses are anyway). I don't mind the baseplate on the digital M, it's still easier than replacing film in their analog counterparts, but I remember being bemused when I first saw it.
@@NottaPro Yeah, I meant with protection in that the physical protection. The base plate is like a strongbox. Remember I too was not amused it at first, but have learned to like it. It wont broke easy.
I get the Leica q2, noticed that it has a strange sound when I turn it on, as an engine kept going inside the camera, have you also noticed it?
I've not noticed any such sound with the Q2, and I'd suggest reaching out to Leica support. At most, if I put the camera right next to my ear, I might hear a faint, high pitched noise-much quieter than the sensor stabilization system on an Olympus camera, and nothing like you'd describe. The Q2 should be quiet.
@@NottaPro Ok, thanks for the answer, I will contact Leica!
@@peterosterman5820 what did leica say? I have the same noise
Thanks for the reply. I would appreciate a video on the reasoning behind that final decision. On a different but I think relevant tangent, I find it hard to wade through the marketing myths that sometimes drive my decision making. For example, are the amount of pixels so crucial to my next purchase. I suspect I'm being manipulated but like the insect in a bugs life, I feel compelled...Anyway thanks for the content. Regards B
The benefit of a higher-resolution sensor comes int play in a few ways, but for most people, the most relevant is probably greater flexibility in cropping (either digital zoom, or in post). I was surprised how much detail (in the second photo zoom) the helicopter retained given this was a 28mm lens shot far away--obviously I wouldn't generally crop to that, but I think it shows how sharp the lens/sensor combo is and how less ridiculous crops are fully reasonable.
The other times when it comes into play are, obviously, printing at large scale with the intent of viewing close-up; which isn't the normal case (either small form, up close; or large form, from a distance). With a suitably sharp lens, you can also work through some interpolation artifacts introduced by the Bayer filter--and you have more flexibility in post-processing noise reduction--but that's getting pretty deep into the weeds and practically speaking I expect everything in this paragraph is going to be less beneficial than the flexibility in cropping (which still doesn't beat the right focal length, if that's practical; obviously not an option on the Q series).
The Q2 has some higher requirements for memory cards, you should look into trying a UHS-II card, and if you are currently, a different UHS-II card
Ah, just saw you went through other cards. Ignore!
No worries. I did try a few, and it did get escalated with Leica when I mentioned it to them (a bit before I posted this video, but they didn't get back until after posting). Leica was pretty responsive at that point over a couple of days, asking for pictures/model numbers of the specific cards.
They did suggest using a specific program (from the SD Association, scard.org) to format one of the cards. I haven't reproduced the issue since, and am cycling generally between two specific cards of the same type. The last card to have an issue, admittedly, is now being used elsewhere and hasn't had any issues.
Occam's razor tells me a) there "was" a problem on the board I originally had, which was resolved when it was replaced, and b) I happened to have a specific card that was potentially in such a state as to trigger a similar problem in January, after it was replaced. I've now shot probably a few thousand shots again, over many days, without issue, since posting this.
Have you tried the CL? I here a lot of photographers very happy with it, small with interchangeable lenses. I have the q-p very happy but tempted to go for an m10 with an Apo 50 mm as a jewel kind of camera, to really take time in each picture. What do you think?
I've never used the CL/TL/T cameras. Part of it is admittedly bitterness with the perception that they killed the X line; but the other part is that they just don't seem attractive (as a tool). I'm sure they take great pictures. It was a hard decision for me between the Q2 and Q-P when I ordered by Q2, as they were so similar. What are you looking to get out of the CL vs. an M or your Q-P? Do you have specific lenses you like for the CL?
The M, Q, and X lines all have dedicated aperture and shutter dials, which I really appreciate. It looks like the CL still uses unmarked dials (like Olympus, Canon, et al) which only let you change exposure settings while the camera's already one; and I find that frustrating for most of the shots I take (uncontrolled lighting, wildly different settings, usually sporadic shots at any one spot).
I think the Q line offers a great value proposition: good resolution (even for the Q/Q-P) and noise handling, excellent ergonomics with much of the M-feel minus the rangefinder, ok AF, and weather sealing. I don't believe any of Leica's interchangeable lens systems are weather sealed. With the growth of the L-mount to Sigma and Panasonic, the future of the lens line-up is probably bright, and I did look at the Panasonic S1 for a moment.
I find some degree of weather sealing to be important when buying into a new system (let's ignore that I bought digital Ms, but I already had lenses from the film Ms). I do love that Leica continues to use DNG as their native raw format, but I personally haven't been drawn to the CL.
> take time in each picture. What do you think?
I find focusing with the M much more relaxed, and the process of focusing/composing overlaps more since you're effectively able to compose while focusing (as opposed to an SLR/EVF where the image is out of focus until it's focus, and at least personally, I spend the focusing time often figuring out *what* it's focusing on or which AF point is selected).
It's very different process with the M. Through a combination of practice, and zone focusing, it's quite possible to speed things up though--I definitely use my M10M to take pictures of my kids running around; as well as (zone focused/large DoF) street shots running around NYC, which was its only trip before travel ended :(
@@NottaPro yes, that’s what I feel when focusing manually, it’s my yoga ; )
@@NottaPro I just heard a lot of user that use the cL for their SL backup end up taking out the cL more. They like the compact size. But for me I think if I don’t get the m10 with the Apo 50 I will always feel like I didn’t get into the real Leica experience or so does their good marketing make me think so. To shoot my kids I have a Sony a7r4 happy with the results.
I can see the CL as a back-up to the Leica SL or Panasonic DC-S lines, given they can all share the full-frame L lenses (while the CL can also use the APS-C lenses). I've also got micro-four-thirds cameras: I bought an OM-D E-M1X late in 2020 as a complement to the Q2, basically to attach telephoto lenses. There are a lot of small Micro Four Thirds cameras that make great complements in the same way.
If you already have the Q-p, I don't think getting the CL makes sense unless you have a specific reason, such as a set lens or zoom lens you want to use with it; or if you are thinking about getting other L-mount cameras, so it'd be part of the system you're using.
I do like that the CL has a built-in EVF, unlike the TL. I don't see the L-mount or medium format S cameras as really being the "genuine" Leica experience (I'm sure different people will interpret that differently). If you're looking at the M as the genuine experience, I think you're hard-pressed to find anything closer than the Q on the market today (there *were* a pair of digital Epson rangefinders, which when I went looking for a used copy recently was selling for more than a used digital M).
If you get a chance, shoot with the CL; if possible, with the lens you think you'd use most often. See if it feels different than the Q-p, and then make your decision :)
I don't understand why people buy Leicas.
I bough my X2 a few years back because I found it used, for a good price, and was curious about the same thing. There's something to be said for the quality of the lenses and all that, but in general it's the ability of the camera to simply get out of the way of shooting. A big part of that are the minimal set of controls, dedicated aperture and shutter dials which can be set at any time, and in the case of the Q and M, the ability to set the focusing distance as well while the camera is off so you can prep the camera at any time.
@@NottaPro Get an X-T4 and use it on auto
I haven't shot with an X-T4, and while the Fuji cameras are good in themselves, to address the X-T4 as a straight-up replacement for the Q2:
For the flexibility of the single-lens, 47MP sensor where you can crop between 28mm and 75mm (ish); you're looking at getting the 16-55 f/2.8; with body that looks to be about $3,100 (US); so you could save some money. But you have a slower lens, and you don't have the flexibility to simply crop in post. I can't speak to the noise handling of the X-T4; it's fairly good on the Q2, and the ISO range on the X-T4 appears to top-out at 12,800 which leads me to believe it won't hold-up as well.
That aside, the combination does provide the manual controls (shutter, aperture, ISO, focus, and it appears even EV-compensation) as dedicated dials. The Fuji 16-55 lacks DoF guides to help with zone focusing.
It does seem like the combination would provide a lot of similar features at about 60% the price, but I wouldn't say that the X-T4 is a straight-up replacement. Adobe DNG-native RAW, the higher resolution convenience vis-a-vis zoom lens, probably better noise handling, and better manual focusing experience would still push me to the Q2.
There's also the difference between FF f/1.7 vs. APS-C f/2.8, if that's important to you.
@@NottaPro Canon R5 then
@@NottaPro fuji 50mmf2 is the best /sharpest lense offuji