john clark

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 ;)

I had a G2 set for about 12 or so years. I loved that system, it had its quirks but the images were stunning and I became very good at working around it's occasional eccentricities. I sold it for around half what I paid (new) back in around 2013 or 2014, and still (occasionally) miss it. I'm now thinking of a Leica Q2, which - apart from not having removable lenses - strikes me as the modern (digital) successor to the G2.

 

Has anyone owned both the G2 and a Q2, and comment on any similarities or differences in the shooting experience? I've come to terms with the idea of a 'single lens' system (and working within those limitations) so - in my head - I'm wondering whether it will give me the same general experience that I got from G2+28/2.8 back in the day.....

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...

Hi folks.<br>

<br>

This perhaps isn't the best place for this post but it is a 5D mk2 and some of you might know. Basically, I am

finding the video capabilities of the camera surprisingly useful, as I have two young sons and the quality I get

out of the camera is nothing short of stunning considering that it is a camera and not a dedicated video camera.

<br><br>

Anyway, this brings me to my point. I'd like to find out how to maximise the video quality in terms of

end-result (in purely technical terms - compositionally, etc., is my own journey to make!). I have shot a few

videos in normal light and noticed some noise in the shadows, even at low ISO. I don't see this noise in some of

the other sample videos on the web, so I am wondering if there is a setting I have inadvertently missed which can

reduce this noise.

<br><br>

It's subtle but it is definitely there, and I am quite surprised given that stills do not show any noise at all.

Detail and tonality is otherwise absolutely bang-on, and viewed at 1080p is very impressive. HOwever, this

little niggle about the noise remains. Ordinarily, I wouldn't be too bothered (not a pixel peeper after all),

but I would like to try my hand at some short film work and therefore anything I can do to maximise the quality

is worthwhile - but I don't want to have to shell out for any additional hardware, etc.

<br><br>

I noticed that in Final Cut Pro, the imported video shows codec metadata information 'at low quality' or somesuch

(I'm away from my Mac right now so can't check the exact words). I wondered if it is a codec compression or

quality setting that is buried somewhere in the 5D's menus which allows the user to trade-off quality versus

storage? Or could it be something to do with how I get the video files from the 5D into the Mac (i.e. using a

card reader and copied directly onto the hard-drive). Perhaps there's a better workflow?

<br><br>

Viewing the video in-camera doesn't show the noise, but then it's being viewed on a much smaller screen so this

is not to say that the noise isn't there. It could be, and I just can't see it.

<br><br>

Apologies if this is of only passing relevance to a photography forum, but I've been here for over ten years and

trust the advice given here more than I'd necessarily trust A.N.Other forum, so if you can help, please do.

<br><br>

Thanks,

<br><br>

John

<br><br>

PS. For your entertainment, my baby son on our lawn (warning, large file):

<a href="http://www.oktapod.com/uploads/sorren-may-2010.mov" target=blank>On the lawn</a>

<p>I also recently bought a 5D Mk2 and have absolutely nothing but the highest praise for it. It exceeds my expectations. From this, I can only assume that you have a problem with your one, as I get nothing but razor sharp pictures from mine (albeit dependent on my own technique, which means all bets can and frequently will be off)...<br>

For what it's worth, I use only the centre AF point, and my lenses are 17-40/4L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8Macro USM and 70-200/4L (non IS). They all work beautifully with the camera, better than they did with the 10D it replaces.<br>

I wonder if it might be something to do with using multiple AF points? I never have and find that the 5D mk2 focuses quickly (albeit not quite as well as a friend's 1-series or my EOS 3) but many have criticised the focusing and I can only assume that it is due to failings with the multiple AF point focus method...</p>

<p>Interesting. I'd like to update my last post - it's actually ISO1600, not 3200 as I'd thought. Still exceptionally low noise, even in the colour version - and last night I was able to take some shots in near darkness with the 85/1.8 (although had to manually focus - the 5D2's AF isn't useful at all in very low light levels).</p>

<p>First image uploaded :-)<br>

<img src="http://www.oktapod.com/uploads/sorren-played-guitar-toned.jpg" alt="" /><br>

This is ISO3200, a square crop, 17-40/4L at f4, 1/30s. I desaturated and added a slight vignette and border, plus mild toning in PS3. Oh, and I didn't take this - it was my wife (I am the owner of the larger hand!)</p>

<p>Received my 5D mkII body, only my second dSLR after the 10D I bought in 2003. <br>

I have to say that it's extremely early days to be posting anything at all, as by the time I got in from work, unpacked and fully charged the battery, it was 8pm and the light was going. Nevertheless, I was very impressed by hand-held photos in very dim light - ISO 6400 with my 50/1.4 at f2 seems immensely usable. Sure, low light AF isn't great, but with care it can be done and it seems to hunt less than the 10D would so it's an incremental improvement even if not a revolutionary step forward.<br>

I wanted to thank everyone who helped me make the decision, and to those who whet my appetite to make the (not inexpensive) jump. I am sure going to have fun with this one!<br>

john</p>

<p>Well, I have two sons, but even the eldest isn't quite 3.5 yet, so it's a bit early to give him a dSLR. He does, however, have a Fisher Price camera (or somesuch) which he sometimes uses. Bit of a jump up to the 10D :)<br>

As to suggestions to buy a compact or an EOS 3 - I have a compact digital and an EOS 3 already, and plenty rarely-used film bodies, so it's more likely to be a case of keep the 10D or sell it (without replacing it with anything else) although the idea of using it as a 'kick-about' spare body for those occasions when a pricy 5D mkII is more risk than I'm comfortable with is a good one...</p>

<p>Hi folks.<br /><br />Last night I ordered a shiny new 5D mkII, after living with my 10D outfit for a shade under seven years. In that time it's served me well, and rarely let me down. However, I'd long lusted after a full-frame body and better high ISO performance, and the 5D mkII is that body.<br /><br />So, the thing is this: my wife is fine about the 5D purchase, but she is suggesting that we should sell on the 10D, perhaps with a 28-135IS lens that I took in part-ex against something unrelated.<br /><br />My question is this: given the relatively low asking price of 10Ds in the marketplace (in the UK, between £100 and £150 seems to be the norm), is it really worth selling? The money isn't really the issue - we can afford to keep it - rather, the fact that it might never get used and therefore ends up being a bit of a paperweight is what concerns me.<br /><br />That said, it works fine, is in pretty good condition and is no less a camera today than it was in 2003. Which makes me wonder whether I might find a use for it.<br /><br />I'm sure I'm not the first to go through this sort of thought process; I considered having it converted to infra-red, but to be honest that's throwing more money at an old camera for a relatively niche purpose, and I doubt I'd take to IR digital photography beyond the initial curiosity phase. I've asked a few friends and family but nobody seems particularly interested in it, given that those who have any photographic interest already have a dSLR or similar, and those who don't are happy with their compact digicams. I don't want to EBay it as it's more hassle than it's worth, and I'd get diddly squat part-exchanging it against something - and there's not much I need, photographically speaking (I'm happy with my brace of glass!)<br /><br />Anyone else been through this sort of dilemma recently?<br /><br />john</p>

<p>Have just bought from Mifsud. A tad above the very cheapest, but they responded quickly to my email enquiries and guarantee non-gray import stock.</p>

<p>Thanks, Guys. I've now enough to feel comfortable ordering. Just need to decide from where :)</p>

<p>Hi folks.<br /><br />I'm poised to buy a 5D mkII any day now. I've come to terms with the price, and accept that it's not going to be as fast as a 7D. However, one small question remains:<br /><br />I have an EOS 10D and an EOS 3. The '3 has good AF, but I never really took to multiple focus points, so always use the central sensor and recompose. This works for me very reliably, and it hasn't let me down.<br /><br />The 10D I find a bit sluggish in the AF, but even having said that it generally works fine for my focus/recompose technique.<br /><br />I'm wondering whether there would be much of a difference between a 5DmkII and a 7D or even 1DsmkIII in terms of how it focuses IF only using the centre sensor? <br /><br />The criticism I've generally read about the 5DmkII AF is concerned with the lack of sensors (not a problem to me) and how well they work for moving subjects (again, not an issue - I'm the focus-recompose guy, remember?). Before I splurge the readies down, I want a bit of reassurance or otherwise...<br /><br />Also, slightly off-topic, is the 5D mkII fussy about its CF cards, and what would people recommend for mixed stills and (perhaps) occasional HD video use? I read somewhere about 133x minimum, and I'd probably prefer to run two 16Gb cards than one 32Gb, but beyond that I have no plans (my existing 10D cards will be too old/slow for video I would think). At what point does the write speed of the 5D mkII max out (in terms of card speed) - I'm guessing that above this point a faster card is wasted, no?<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />John</p>

<p>Yeah, I appreciate everyone recommending overseas options such as BH, but bear in mind that I am in the UK so I almost certainly WILL have to pay import duty and VAT. Which makes the import of a grey camera (such as one from the US would be from the perspective of an EU purchaser) far less attractive.<br>

So, to reiterate, I'm looking for a recommendation for a UK (or EU) supplier only, given that I can reclaim the UK VAT (which is 17.5%) as this camera will be used for professional purposes*.<br>

* note: I'm not a pro photographer but run a small web business, so I'm VAT registered and as I'm keeping my old 10D for personal use, the 5D mkII will be (cough) officially company-only. Plan is to develop a new sideline for the business which should give it something to fall back upon in tough times...</p>

<p>Because I can't reclaim the VAT on a used camera - £1600 less the VAT = £1362.</p>

<p>Hi folks.<br>

Where would people recommend I purchase a 5D mkII body? I have no local stores so it will be mail order for me, which opens up the can-of-worms that is internet-purchasing.<br>

I've found one place, hdew cameras, which offers the 5D at what appears to be the lowest price, and they seem to have it in stock, but I don't know them at all and wouldn't mind hearing from anyone else who might know them and have some feedback on them. Warehouse express is another option, a hundred notes more expensive but they are reputable and well known, although it's out of stock there and I would really need to make the payment before the end of the tax year (April 4th) for various complicated reasons.<br>

Anywhere else I should consider? Not really interested in a grey-import or taking my chances with Ebay, given that I can reclaim the UK VAT, which evens things up quite a bit.<br>

Thanks,<br>

John</p>

<p>Thanks, folks, some great responses.<br /><br />Though a used 1D(s) mk(2/3) would make sense, to be honest I think they're too big and I'd rather a 'lesser' camera that's around my neck than a 'top of line' camera that's sitting on a shelf because it's too big to take. To be honest, sometimes the 10D/17-40 falls into the latter bracket when I'm out with the family, but a 1 series would be worse for me. Not to mention that my wife uses the 1Ds mk3 at work and finds it a bit unweildy.<br /><br />So, I think my mind is made up: 5D mk2. Sure, I could wait for a mk3 (but could be waiting a while) but full frame is what I really want, and whilst a used 5D is a tempting alternative, the HD video capability would allow me to scratch an itch (not quite in a Vincent LaForet way admittedly).<br /><br />As to the lenses: well, I like and use all of them though the 28-135IS I took as a part-exchange for something else and it's good on the EOS 3. <br /><br />The '5Dmk2 @ 3200 better than 300 @ 100' claim is quite difficult to believe, though. I'd be DELIGHTED if it were true, even if the 5Dmk2 @ 1600 were as good as the 10D @ 400, I'd be happy.<br /><br />I briefy contemplated selling the lot (my Contax G2, the 10D and lenses and a few other bits and bobs) and pushing towards a Leica M9, but the price is crazy for what it is. A very very very high price to pay for a somewhat smaller system. But that's a discussion for another day :)</p>

<p>Hi folks.<br /><br />First, some very brief history. Bought a 10D plus 17-40/4L in 2003, have enjoyed it ever since but its limitations are beginning to frustrate me: iso 800 and up is noisy, the crop-factor bugs me (as it means large lenses given that this is pre-EF-S), it's general sluggishness and little niggles like that. <br /><br />I'm thinking about a 5D mk2, which in the UK is hovering around the £1600-1700 price mark ($2400-$2600). So, not a small investment and I'm keen to make sure I'm doing the right thing here.<br /><br />What I want to do is to ensure that the 5D represents an improvement over the 10D in all areas - and to try to get a handle on how much of an improvement.<br /><br />The big unknown for me is AF. The 10D felt fine when it was new in 2003 but compared to my EOS 3 it feels very sluggish, especially in lower light. That's not to say it's unusable - far from it - but there are times when it doesn't lock on as well as it ought, or hunts a bit. <br /><br />The other thing is high ISO performance. Much of my photography is in-doors, and I find ISO800 and ISO1600 to be a tad noisy on the 10D. I'm wondering if it'd be possible to get a handle on comparable ISOs - e.g. things along the lines of 'ISO 800 on the 5Dmk2 has roughly the same noise as ISO200 on the 10D' (say).<br /><br />Lastly, ergonomics. I've found the 10D to be actually quite rugged - it's well made and a good weight. However, I'm wary of anything significantly larger or heavier. Specs suggest the 5D mk2 is probably about the same size and heft as a 10D, but how do they compare in terms of build quality, balance in the hand, durability of finish (the 10D being particularly good here) and so forth.<br /><br />The wildcard option might be to sell the 17-40/4L and get a 7D with a quality EF-S wide-angle (my other lenses are: 28-135IS, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 Macro and 70-200/4L (non IS)) - I'd save roughly £700 and the impression I get is that the 7D is the better at AF and 'responsiveness' although being crop-factor that might continue to frustrate me...<br /><br />Anyone been in this situation before? Making a jump from a (comparatively) ancient dSLR to a 5D mk2? How did that work out for you? Do you ever use the old body?<br /><br />Thanks!</p>

<p>I own both a T2 and a G2 system. There is no comparison in my mind - whilst the T2 is capable of very fine photographs, it lacks the absolute image quality and flexibility of the G2. I wouldn't hesitate to sell my T2 if a buyer were interested (which is unlikely as it's well used) but the G2 is a keeper, even if it doesn't really get used so much these days...</p>

<p>Hi folks.</p>

<p>My stash of colour print film has run out and I'm about to take the plunge. Normally, I've used Reala 100 as my 'stock', with whatever 400 film is current for my odd deviation away from 100. </p>

<p>Anyway, I wondered what commonly available colour print films are worth checking out? I see there's a Kodak Ektar and a whole plethora of Fuji Pro print films. Which of these would give the best results for general outdoor photography in mixed lighting conditions, on either a Contax G2 rangefinder or Canon EOS 3? I like a sharp, detailed film which isn't too contrasty (which the Reala sometimes is) and low grain.</p>

<p>All suggestions welcome.</p>

<p>Thanks,</p>

<p>John</p>

<p>Christopher: yes, I would say my external FW400 drive (3.5" 7200rpm 16Mb cache) is quicker than either of the 2.5" drives, and to be honest I don't see a huge difference in the performance of the 320Gb from the 120Gb internal drives. But I said that already... mind you, I'd still plump for the 7200rpm option if I were to do it again. I reckon it will be faster for large files, such as movies, and it's also got a bigger standard cache than my previous drive.</p>

<p>What is worth noting is that my battery life hasn't noticeably reduced on moving from a 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm drive. I expected a hit but I really am not seeing it. I still get 2 hours or so (from my two-and-a-bit-year-old Macbook battery)</p>

<p>In fairness, Laura, the 1000F is an old camera and was an entry level model at the time. If it's going to be problematic, I'd advise looking out for another model - the EOS 5 (not the digital 5D) is a much better film camera and is available used for next to no cost; further up the food chain, the EOS 3 is a great camera with AF which apparently still outperforms all but the (very expensive) 1D digital slrs of today.</p>

<p>I've always believed that there comes a point where a repair doesn't make sense - to fix a camera which (in functioning form) is more or less worthless anyway makes me wonder whether you might be better with another body - perhaps one of the ones I suggested.</p>

<p>Scott - thanks for the link, I'll go and check it out now :-)</p>

<p>I've recently 'bumped' my BlackBook C2D (2GHz model from late 2006) by upping the RAM to 4Gb (of which only 3.3Gb is usable due to architecture) and changing its 5400rpm 120Gb internal drive with a 320Gb 7200rpm drive with bigger buffer.</p>

<p>I have to admit that it doesn't really feel any faster in drive access times, contrary to what others are claiming, but the extra RAM makes a bit of a difference for things like Photoshop and Parallels.</p>

<p>How do you find it compares to the G2 with 45mm lens in IQ terms? I have the G2 with 28,35 and 45mm lenses (had the 90mm lens but didn't like it) and I sometimes wonder whether a smaller camera than a dSLR would allow me to replace my dSLR <em>and</em> my G2...</p>