mrds
4245
Leica M or Q? I need a little help from the serious guys.
I have been toying with the idea to get a "real" camera for many years. I have discarded cameras about 10 years ago and moved to iPhone only, as probably many did. However, the itch does never quite go away.
I am considering buying a camera to shoot on trips, holidays and around town. Mainly street and landscape/cityscape. There could be the occasional portrait but this is not a focus. No studio shots for sure.
What is important to me:
- I want a good camera that will keep me happy for the next 10 years. Initial outlay is less important than longevity.
- Digital
- Not too bulky, ie not an SLR with huge lens
- Versatile, ie should be a good companion in many different type of settings (and not too bulky)
- I look forward to spend time with it, learn how to use it to get the best out of it. If the learning curve is flat, I'll invest the time to get to a satisfactory level.
- The reward should be pictures that I couldn't, or wouldn't take with an iPhone
What I did like about the M:
- The engagement of the photographer with the picture he's about to take
- The feel of the camera
- Availability of different lenses, so you can grow your repertoire one step at a time
- The fallback scenario: if it turns out to be not an ideal choice, you can resell the equipment at a manageable loss
What I liked about the Q:
- The ability to go AF so you can take a picture quickly if need be
- A well-made, versatile package with a good sensor and enough resolution to "zoom" by cropping a picture
- The feel of the camera
- About half the price of an M with 1-2 lenses (but probably a deeper cut when deciding to sell)
(Full disclosure, I originally also considered the Hasselblad X2D but I think this is too bulky a package compared to the Leicas.)
I have not enough experience with serious photography to make a good decision, so I'd like to invite the opinions of the great bunch of contributors to this forum. Any experience with both systems?
Thank you!