Selling it all for 1 lens 1 camera.

D

dancook

Messages
6,800
Name
Dan
Edit My Images
No
I'm close to selling both my cameras and lenses (circa £9000 used value) and perhaps just buying a Leica Q as my one and only camera.

It's rather a large change, so I'd be interested to hear anyone's story of a similar nature..
 
If it's about the gear and scratching an itch, go for it. I don't wear an Omega watch because i think it's a more accurate clock or has more features than my plastic G-Shock (nope and nope), I wear it because I like the look and feel of it. (And there's some irrelevant-to-real-life nerdery about the co-axial movement). This is a fine and inarguable reason to do things.

On the other hand, if you think it'll let you take dramatically better pictures than you already do...

...probably not so much.
 
£9,000! Wow!

Personally I am a big fan of one camera & lens. For weddings I have 35 & 85 on a body each (not the same, I know) but for travel and everything I do of a personal nature now, I use either the Hasselblad & 80mm or the Leica M2 & 50mm (so pretty much the same focal length). I love the freedom it gives without having to think which lens to use now. I just grab a camera which already has a lens on and go shoot. I did 10 days in Iceland on the TP trip with just those two cameras and I love the way it made me shoot. Before I went I considered buying something wider because that was the norm, until i decided that's what pretty much everyone would be doing.

So, to summarise, I would wholeheartedly recommend doing it. Just get a camera and lens and shoot. After having a lot of lens choice, I found it such a refreshing change and still do.
 
I had an RX1R for a little while, my only wish was that the AF was quicker and it was easier to zone focus with.

The Leica Q fills that hole damn near perfectly, if the "RX2" was out I would have been considering that.

When choosing a 35mm lens for my A7S, I tried a Voigtlander 35mm 1.2, a Voitlander 35mm 2.5 now I have a 35mm 1.4 Zeiss (wanting AF with weddings in mind). It's annoying my idea of optical 'perfection' comes in such a large package without an MF distance gauge. I love the Leica lenses for their size as well as rendering.
 
Last edited:
minnnt said:
So if you have weddings in mind, why are you wanting 1 camera and 1 lens?
Click to expand...

There's a lady in America who I follow who shoots weddings with a 6D + 50mm lens. She produces beautiful work.
 
I only have one lens (a 35mm Summarit) but I use it with two cameras (one digital, one film). It's working out fine for me. But then again I don't do lots of different types of photography.
 
I used to use a Ricoh GR (fixed 28mm lens) during my globe trotting days and learned to love it but a fixed 28mm isn't for everyone. The Q does look nice though.
 
Raincloud said:
Why do you want to make this change if i may ask?
Click to expand...

Deciding not to shoot any more weddings has lifted a burden of needing the equipment available to do so. Lately I've only kept the Canon gear because I 'needed' to 'just in case'. I've grown bored of telephoto images.

The photography I enjoy is travel / street photography type stuff, everything else is starting to feel like work.I want a camera to carry with me everywhere, all the time.

Yes I could just use my Sony A7S, or lately I've been considering the A7R2 as well - and possible just use the Batis 25mm. But whilst as long as I'm no compromising on IQ, the smaller the better.
 
Last edited:
dancook said:
The photography I enjoy is travel / street photography type stuff, everything else is starting to feel like work.
Click to expand...

Then my point stands, IMO of course. One camera, one lens, make pictures. Does it have to be digital?
 
I don't get it. But then I don't get the whole Leica thing. I can just about understand the desire for a rangefinder for street work.

It's rather a short lens for portraits; ISTR that you do a fair bit of that kind of thing and were building a studio to do more of it?
 
I think you're making a bit of a mistake Dan......I know its up to you and when it comes to it yours is the choice that matters, but I think in 6 months you'll regret it
 
gazmorton2000 said:
Then my point stands, IMO of course. One camera, one lens, make pictures. Does it have to be digital?
Click to expand...

Yes :D I have no patience for film !

juggler said:
I don't get it. But then I don't get the whole Leica thing. I can just about understand the desire for a rangefinder for street work.

It's rather a short lens for portraits; ISTR that you do a fair bit of that kind of thing and were building a studio to do more of it?
Click to expand...

Environmental portraits will be fine, i'm not fussed about studio portraits any more - it's not what I want to do.

No rangefinder on the Leica Q, this is not about the Leica badge either. The spec, IQ, size and usability seem quite ideal to me.
 
Last edited:
What does the Q do that the A7S doesn't?
There are four reasons that I can think of for acquiring gear :
  1. To improve your images
  2. To extend the type of photos you can take
  3. You enjoy using the new gear more than the old
  4. You like acquiring gear
3 & 4 are valid reasons so long as you're not deluding yourself that you're doing it for 1 or 2.
 
dancook said:
Yes I could just use my Sony A7S, or lately I've been considering the A7R2 as well - and possible just use the Batis 25mm. But whilst as long as I'm no compromising on IQ, the smaller the better.
Click to expand...

Is there much difference is size?
 
juggler said:
What does the Q do that the A7S doesn't?
There are four reasons that I can think of for acquiring gear :
  1. To improve your images
  2. To extend the type of photos you can take
  3. You enjoy using the new gear more than the old
  4. You like acquiring gear
3 & 4 are valid reasons so long as you're not deluding yourself that you're doing it for 1 or 2.
Click to expand...

I need both AF and MF capability.
It's difficult to find a good lens with AF and a distance gauge for MF (no e-mount 35mm has both), I think my only option is the Batis 25mm f2 which has an OLED distance gauge.

Whilst this is definitely something I could consider, the Leica Q would still be smaller overall.

I enjoy having a discrete camera, the RX1R size was awesome :)
 
went through similar thing ( though much smaller scale ) going from a ton of canon gear to single lens on Fuji xe-1 ). kept it for around 8 months before eventually switching back to canon due to not being able to get on with the evf as the main reason.

just out of curiosity though what does the Leica Q have over the Sony 7R ll ? is that a worthy contender?
 
dean messenger said:
went through similar thing ( though much smaller scale ) going from a ton of canon gear to single lens on Fuji xe-1 ). kept it for around 8 months before eventually switching back to canon due to not being able to get on with the evf as the main reason.

just out of curiosity though what does the Leica Q have over the Sony 7R ll ? is that a worthy contender?
Click to expand...

It was definitely out for consideration, still got to buy a lens though.

The Sony A7RII without a lens is £2600
the Leica Q all in is £2900

Like the A7R2 the Leica Q does have image stabilisation which would be useful.
 
Sassafras said:
The difference isn't particularly significant, in my opinion. Unless you very much prefer the way the Q renders or handles, stick with the A7. Have you tried the Q?
Click to expand...

Did you look at the Batis 25mm? the Loxia 35mm isn't actually an option, it's just the Batis wasn't in the compare database.

I like the way the Q renders, but I have not handled one :D
 
boyfalldown said:
I think you're making a bit of a mistake Dan......I know its up to you and when it comes to it yours is the choice that matters, but I think in 6 months you'll regret it
Click to expand...

that - and i'd be very uncomfortable with just one camera however expensive... what if it breaks ... even if you aren't doing client work do you really want to be without a camera when something remarkable happens ?

Also 9k for one body and lens - f*** that - if I wanted lightweight and one lens option i'd be looking at high end compact for hundreds not thousands
 
I'd be looking at trying something like a Fuji X100. IQ might not be as great as the Leica, but you'd avoid having to sell all your other kit until you were certain you could live with a single focal length.
 
They are a lot of myth about famous photographers just using one camera one lens,but they owned more than just one camera,i would always want an backup laying around,and a camera with interchangeable lens no matter what make :)
 
big soft moose said:
that - and i'd be very uncomfortable with just one camera however expensive... what if it breaks ... even if you aren't doing client work do you really want to be without a camera when something remarkable happens ?

Also 9k for one body and lens - f*** that - if I wanted lightweight and one lens option i'd be looking at high end compact for hundreds not thousands
Click to expand...

It's not £9k, it's £2.9k for a Leica Q - £9k is an estimate of money I'd get from selling my gear - before I wonder whether I want to keep lighting equipment and lee filters.
 
Llamaman said:
I'd be looking at trying something like a Fuji X100. IQ might not be as great as the Leica, but you'd avoid having to sell all your other kit until you were certain you could live with a single focal length.
Click to expand...

I had the RX1R for a time which is like the Fuji X100 but better IQ.

I loved being on holiday with a single camera lens, so much freedom. The RX1R was just no good for spontaneous street stuff due to focussing limitations
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top