So… The Leica Q F1 Special Edition… Nice. May I Suggest An Alternative?
Warning: Personal opinion and nonsense rambling ahead.
A while back I wrote a post about the Leica Q 43.
I was impressed. But let me back up.
I once had the OG Leica Q.
A lovely thing and served as a much needed distraction as I struggled to cope with the decline of my Father’s health.
But after some time I let it go. Nothing wrong with the camera. What had once served as a coping mechanism transitioned into a reminder. Add with that a return of some measure of reason. Suddenly the prospect of carrying around such a precious commodity as a daily driver jangled my nerves a bit. Especially after an episode where I briefly misplaced it while running errands. Through the kindness of store employees who put it in a safe it was returned. And that was it for me. My nerves could not take it any more. Clearly that is my fault, not the cameras. But I am not built for carrying around such a precious bit of kit.
In all honesty such a wide focal length was less than ideal for me.
Then came the Q 43. Problem solved, right?
But I had moved on. After a myriad of posts and lenses the closest lens seemed to be the Sony 40mm f/2.5.
Close,…
…but no cigar. The IQ was not quite what I wanted. The focal length was not exactly what I wanted. 40mm felt more like a 35mm lens in use than an alternative to my favorite all time daily carry focal length. 50mm, or a bit longer.
I rocked with the Sony ZEISS Sonnar T* FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA for a bit,…
…but in the end it did not quite cut it. I did not understand why at the time, but it became clear later as I will explain below.
A while back I owned many Sony normal-ish all at once.
Some (<cough>… FE 50mm f/1.8… <cough>) were not that good. Some were close but no cigar. None stayed around for the long haul. Four swipes at it and Sony whiffed each ultimately.
Hold up… Where was I? Right. F1 Q.
Let’s get the obvious out of the way first. This is a bog standard Q 43 in a carbon fiber applique F1 frock.
That is not a ding or slight. It is what it is. And I have no issue with it. I would be a hypocrite if I did. My main issue? Personally? That staggering price of entry. The standard issue Q 43 is not what anyone would call inexpensive,…
…but it is a screaming bargain compared to the F1 fancy dress variant.
Me? I would go with the Sony build a bear option. But more on that later. For me specs ultimately come before provenance. And there is one camera that gives the Q a run for its money. The Sony A7CR.
Another 60MP rangefinder shaped mirrorless camera. But a camera is nothing without a lens. The Leica comes with an awesome lens. And up until recently Sony’s issue was a proper lens to go with it. But Viltrox came through. Not once…
…but twice.
And with this you get comparable focal lengths to both Q cameras at once…
…for considerably less spend all in.
Price for Sony A7CR and the two Viltrox lenses.
Sure, one can get the non F1 Q 43 for less. But for me the A7C II, with it’s 33MP that I prefer for a daily driver, costs even less.
What of the camera dress up I mentioned earlier? I am glad I imagined that you asked. No carbon fiber frock is available, but I recently tried and fell for a Small Rig wooden grip and eye cup…
…that not only makes the kit look better, but improves the handling of the camera also. Then combine this fancy dress with the Viltrox lenses to finish the look.
So… quantifiable metrics covered why these lenses? What of the part that really sold me on these lenses? The things that cannot be spelled out on a spec sheet. The things that would have be do something so daft as to compare a legendary image capturing name to a relative upstart? <Leica adherents, look away. Nothing to see here.>
<ahem> Ultimately I do not care about a brand name.
Similar to a blog post I wrote…
…about how I ended up pivoting away from another Leica legend…
…to another brand…
…that I found more satisfying and more versatile solution for less spend.
Bottom line experience means more to me than brand name.
The same applies here.
Yes, of course, the Leica glass is excellent.
And so are the Viltrox lenses. Both showed how great they were out of the box.
One of the first images taken with the EVO 26mm f/2.8.
One of the first images taken with the EVO 55mm f/1.8.
I mean… Wow.
There is an aspect of image quality that I can see that I have always had a hard time quantifying or putting to words. If forced to?
Richness.
Depth.
Warmth.
So much emphasis is put on the sensor, but the lens has such a massive impact. And those words above? I have never applied them to a single Sony lens. Even the best of the best 50mm f/1.2 G Master.
Sharp with impressive bokeh? Yes. But warmth, richness, and depth? Not so much.
Leica lenses,…
… (Non Sony co-branded) ZEISS lenses,…
and Voigtlander lenses?
Yes, yes, and yes.
And the same applies with the Viltrox lenses. This goes for the EVO 85mm f/2 lens also.
This gives an added level of flexibility no Q can match. But for this post and for this comparison I will stick to the 26mm and 55mm EVO lenses.
They are stellar. And this is without having Lightroom presets yet. At most I have applied a slight adjustment to to 26mm images to offset barrel distortion, but other wise they are pristine. That is something that cannot be said for a number of Sony lenses that depend on in camera corrections.
This is the only kit I used recently at live events.
And I want to mention one thing. I once was once kind of obsessed with finding a bootleg Leica Q replacement. Then over time I gave up. No lens did the trick. This Viltrox kit was brough together with a single thought about the Leica Q. Then recently it dawned on me.
I had stumbled across a Leica Q alternative kit that better suited me. At any price I would be pleased. Add in the fact that this is a more versatile solution for less spend and even better.
Now make no mistake…
If you have or aspire to a Leica Q, I get it. A great camera. More power to you.
But this is my preference.
Well done Viltrox. You managed to turn an also ran competent image capturing solution into a camera that I now actually want to use for fun. Not just for practical reasons.
Addendum:
After I wrote this I thought I might also address the what abouts.
(A reminder. Personal opinion.)
What about the Sony Rx1R III?
Easy. Compared to the A7C series.
- Too expensive for what it is.
- It is like Sony forgot that they make the A7C series.
- No gyroscopic stabilization.
- For video post processing.
- No IBIS.
- No articulation to its screen.
- 5.0 fps vs faster fps on A7C models.
- Shorter battery life.
- No headphone port.
- No weather sealing.
- No pixel shift high res mode.
Many of those features I do not use admittedly, but it still bugs me that they are charging thousands more for fewer features. And while we are at it the Q 43 shares many of the advantages above.
So… that is a nope.
What about the Fujifilm X100VI?
Honestly?…
If you are determined to have a fixed lens camera and you are ok with an APS-C sensor as compared to all cameras mentioned above the X100VI is the way to go. I do not have a bad thing to say about it. In fact even at its current increased price it still offers stellar value all things considered. In my opinion anyway. Viltrox (There they go again.) even makes fantastic, reasonably priced adapters…
…that add 28mmm and 50mm equivalent focal lengths to the party. The one issue?
- Good luck getting your hands on one.
- Maybe this is why.
What about the RICOG GR series?
I will let if off of the hook. Very capable, but a specialist tool of stealth in my opinion purposefully stripped of features to meet this end and not meant to compete directly with other image capturing solutions.
Anyhoo.
Happy capturing.
-ELW
