Drawn to the Q2...

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by john clark, Aug 12, 2022.

  1. Hi folks, I'm a long time member (can't believe I've been here (or on the old site) since 1999!) but been away from the site for a good few years. Now that I'm rekindling an interest in photography I'm exploring what I really need and how to keep things simple.

    I'm drawn to the idea of the Leica Q2, as much because it will remove some of the choice from photography (i.e. which lens to take) and let me get away from the multi-buttoned confusion that is my current camera (Fuji XT2). One lens, simple controls, high quality, something that will get out of the way of the image creation process. Q2 is that camera.

    I just wanted to hear from other Q2 users about their daily experiences with the camera - good bits, bad bits, whether you'd buy it again, that kind of thing. Specifically from the angle of a tool that gets out of the way.

    My favourite compositional form is the square, and the high res full-frame sensor gives me lots of cropping options for high quality square-format photos. I'd be especially pleased to hear from Q2 users that prefer to crop to the square. Do you find it works well for this (by my calculations the 28mm becomes roughly a 50mm effective focal length when cropped to the square).

    I enjoy my XT2 but the mistake I made was adding loads of lenses, and I always seem to end up taking a single lens with me when I head out. And its many buttons still occasionally land me in hot water (even after having the camera for around six years). I'll keep it, but sell some of the lenses, to help fund the Q2. One of my all-time favourite cameras I owned was the Contax G2 - I loved that camera, and in a way I see the Q2 as sort of the digital successor to the G2, strange though that sounds. I hope that the Q2 can 'get out of the way' in the way I always found the G2 could back in the film days....

    Thanks!

    PS. Not sure if this is the best place for the question, given that the Q2 is a Leica but is not a rangefinder...
     
  2. I hope someone will pitch in. The price of the Q2 is too high for me to play along, but I certainly see the attraction and understand your argument for going that route.
    My more economic approach was to get an X100f and do a set-and-forget configuration. It is set up as a X100F "monocrome". The many buttons won't go away but I don't have to think about anything. If I really had taken on to digital, I would probably have considered the Q2 but film photography is still what gives me most enjoyment, despite all its shortcomings.
     
  3. First up, have you considered the original Q? It has the exact same lens. And the sensor is pretty good. You will end up with a 16Mpx file once you've cropped it - but that is more resolution than you think it is. I've only just recently swapped over from 16Mpx cameras to 20Mpx cameras.

    The thing about the Q series is that it is much better value than an M if you want a complement to your other gear. For example, I shoot with Olympus cameras. But, I thought maybe I could get an M and a couple of short lenses for, say, parties or what not, where I'm close to what I'm shooting. OTOH, why not just get a Q? Sure, you could do the same photos with a phone, but you aren't getting any latitude in the case of poor exposure, or low ambient light, or high contrast scenes, etc.

    The 116 is probably cheaper than either an M9 or an M 240. And you get the lens with it.

    As to NHSN's point, I would be shooting more film if it didn't cost so damned much to process and scan properly. I almost thought of buying an M4 or M7 for the situations I mentioned above. But what made me change my mind wasn't the cost of the cameras, it was the cost of the film.
     
  4. Similar to yourself I have been away from photography for a few years and rekindling the hobby, I was a original Q user at the time and have come with the Q2 as my camera of choice.

    So simply put if you want a sealed camera this is the one to get, if you want the quality of the lens then a Q will do an amazing job, the major benefit of the Q2 for me is the ability to crop as you have outlined. I have posted a pic on photo of the week which was taken from a fair distance.

    So brass tax if you have lots of money get the Q2 if you want to sell a few lenses and put some cash in your pocket get the Q - honestly just get the Q2 and ignore my sensible advice you will love it.
     
  5. The closest that I will ever get to owning a Q2 is my toy Canon PowerShot G1X , purchased used :D:D:D.
    Those who have one ENJOY.
     
  6. Love the Qs. I'm waiting for the Q3, but doubt I'll be able or willing to buy it. I'm stupid, but for the price I'd like it to be 20MP at 75mm - which I suspect the Q3 will be.
     
  7. I’m still wavering! Currently wishing there was a Q2-P since I prefer the stealth look of the Q-P but am not convinced by the olive colour of the Q2 Reporter. Actually, what I want is a Q2 Monochrom that’s actually got a colour sensor ;)
     
  8.  
  9. Went through the same thing a couple years ago.
    I just didn’t seem to be able to find a digital camera I clicked with and after 25 years of film photography I drifted away about 2005.
    Then three years ago a friend let me play with his Q…I was hooked and purchased one within a week.
    Love it. After years of hauling around a 20lb camera bag I find the one lens concept very freeing…instead of sweating over which lens to use I look at a scene and decide how to shoot it to best effect with the lens on the camera.
    I’ve owned an M6 kit, R3 kit and various Nikon’s…the Q rates with the best of them.
     
    andy_de_groot|4 likes this.

Share This Page

1111