Leica is the camera brand that everyone desires, but few can afford. Premium is the word that best describes Leica. Crème de la crème, or perhaps Beste der Besten. If you can afford a Leica you buy a Leica, because every real photographer wants a Leica. It’s a status symbol, and it shows that you’ve arrived.
All of that is hyperbole, of course; however, there’s a good chance you’ve heard the sentiment before. An alternative yet similar statement is that Fujifilm is the poor man’s Leica. You only own a Fujifilm camera because you cannot afford a Leica model; if you could, you’d own a Leica instead.
I’ve wanted to try a Leica for some time now. The cameras are beautiful, there’s no question about it. But is it beauty over brawn? Are Leica cameras actually so good that the cost is justifiable? Would I—a long-time Fujifilm photographer—like a Leica enough to purchase one? Are Fujifilm cameras just cheap Leica knockoffs for those who cannot afford the real deal? Those are questions that I wanted to answer.
MPB is the sponsor of this article. They loaned me a Leica Q2 to try out for a couple of weeks. For those who don’t know, MPB is an online platform where you can buy, sell, or trade used photo and video gear. “At MPB, there’s something for everyone who wants to try something new, hone their skills, or pursue their passion—and it won’t cost the earth.” If you’re in the market for used camera gear, be sure to check out their platform—you can learn more about MPB here. Thank you, MPB, for making this article possible!
For those who don’t know, the Leica Q2 is a premium compact fixed-lens 47mp full-frame camera. It is simultaneously somewhat similar to the Fujifilm X100VI, Fujifilm X-E4, and Fujifilm X70, yet significantly divergent from all of those models in several aspects. It has a 28mm f/1.7 lens that is fast and sharp. The camera was released in 2019, and discontinued last year when it was succeeded by the Q3. The original MSRP of the Q2 was $5,800; the current used price is roughly $4,500 to $3,800, depending on the condition. The specific Leica Q2 that I picked from the MPB platform was exactly as described: the camera functioned like it was brand-new; the body had only extremely minor signs of wear, which I was well aware of due to the gear-specific ‘cosmetic condition’ rating (“Excellent” in this case) displayed on the platform.
Something that I was unexpectedly impressed with was the Leica box. I know this sounds strange, but Leica is head and shoulders above the other brands when it comes to packaging. I’d pay a little more to have my Fujifilm cameras come in functional boxes similar to what the Q2 came in. Sometimes the little things can be big things.
I didn’t know a whole lot about the Leica Q2 before this project. I was quite surprised by just how minimalistic the Q2 is. In this regard it is more like the Fujifilm X-E4, which is Fujifilm’s most minimalistic model in recent years, but even more so. There are not very many buttons and controls on the body. For a camera that begs to be used fully manually, it is incomprehensibly missing an ISO dial; however, it is possible to use the unmarked knob on the top plate as an ISO dial by programming the button on top of it to activate ISO. That’s not ideal, but it is certainly better than digging through the menu. On one hand I do like the clean approach, but on the other hand I found it to be a bit too minimalistic for my liking.
There’s no doubt that the Leica Q2 is a beautifully designed camera that is solidly built. While the body is just a tad larger than the Fujifilm X100VI, the lens is significantly larger, and the whole thing is definitely heavier. It’s easy to understand why it would be compared to the X100VI, but the Q2 is a little more similar to the X-E4 (just with a fixed lens instead of interchangeable, and more ruggedly built). The Q2’s 28mm lens is roughly equivalent to 18mm on Fujifilm X cameras, so that’s where a comparison to the long-discontinued X70 comes in. Probably the closest lens in the Fujifilm lineup to that of the Q2 is the Fujinon 18mm f/1.4. Overall, I think the Leica Q2 is dissimilar enough to any Fujifilm model that it’s really apples-to-oranges, yet similar enough that the correlations are understandable.
The Leica Q2 is best when used with a RAW workflow. It’s ok for straight-out-of-camera photography, but definitely much more limited in that regard than Fujifilm. The JPEG image quality is good-but-not-great. There are five profiles—three color and two B&W—which can only be customized to a small extent. For color, Standard is somewhat reminiscent of the Provia film simulation, Vivid can be made to fairly closely resemble factory-default Velvia, and Natural is like a cross between Eterna and PRO Neg. Std. I didn’t care much for Standard, and opted for Vivid the most, and Natural a distant second. For B&W, the two profiles are quite similar to each other, and are much more reminiscent of Monochrome than Acros (on Fujifilm). The High Contrast option has stronger shadows, but is otherwise similar to the standard B&W profile; it can be hard to tell the two apart sometimes. Since I stopped editing RAW files years ago, I only used the camera-made JPEGs.
Two notable issues for using the camera for JPEG photography is that it quite obviously struggles with color banding, such as with clear blue sky, and there is some pronounced distortion from the wide-angle lens that the camera doesn’t fix for you. In some situations, simply adding faux grain might be enough to cover up the banding, but other times that won’t likely be enough. For the distortion, either you have to be ok with it, or you have to adjust it in-post, and, if you are doing that, you might as well just shoot RAW.
It was definitely fun to try out the Leica Q2. I can understand why people desire it, since the camera has a lovely retro design and a minimalism philosophy, two things that I personally appreciate. I think you have to know going into it that RAW editing is more-or-less essential. I’d love to see Fujifilm create a camera that could be more of an apples-to-apples comparison to the Q2, so that you could have a similar experience but paired with Fujifilm’s wonderful JPEG output; currently, no such camera exists.
The Leica Q2 is both beauty and brawn, but not nearly as much JPEG brawn as I had hoped for. I do find the price to be very difficult to justify; however, if it’s a camera that you really want—and you buy it used—it can probably be a worthwhile expenditure. I don’t intend to purchase one, personally, particularly since the JPEG output isn’t nearly as good as Fujifilm’s. While there are certainly some similarities between Leica and Fujifilm cameras, there are plenty of differences that produce notably divergent experiences. If the Leica Q2 experience is what you are after, you’ll just have to get the Q2.
Example photographs, all camera-made JPEGs captured with a Leica Q2:
Previously in this series:
Fujifilm X-Pro2 — The camera that got away (again)
Fujifilm X-T50 + Fujinon 23mm F/2 = Interchangeable-Lens Fujifilm X100VI??
Up next: Fujifilm X30 — Fujifilm’s Forgotten Retro Compact Zoom
I love my Q2 Monochrom. Not quite sure what you mean by the lens distorting. I’ve never seen any sort of distortion with it.
Pincushion distortion (barrel/pincushion distortion are common in wide-angle lenses, especially compact lenses). It’s most noticeable when you photograph brick walls, but can be seen in most situation with straight lines if you pay close attention. Easily fixed with software (Lightroom might even do it automatically, I’m not certain), but it is certainly there, and quite pronounced.
Hmm, interesting. You’re right that Lightroom does do it automatically but I’ve tried toggling it on and off and don’t see much of a difference. Or didn’t think I did. I’ll have to try it on something where it would be obvious.
I have to agree about wishing Fuji would do something similar. As an aside, I’ve noticed that there’s a lot of crossover between Fuji people and Leica people. It seems to be fairly common to have both, me included.
Googling it today, it looks like the distortion correction profile is baked into the Q2 RAW file and automatically applied in Adobe products, and it cannot be disabled (that’s why you don’t notice a difference when toggling on/off). Apparently it’s about 13% distortion, which is pretty significant.
I only had the camera for about two weeks, so everything I said about it should be viewed under that fact (it’s not a long-term review by any stretch, more of an initial impression). I can definitely understand the comparisons and crossovers between Leica and Fujifilm, because there are certainly some similarities. At the same time, it’s divergent enough that it seems like a different experience. I’m not saying one is “better” than the other, only different (at least a little). One may prefer one to the other (or not have strong opinions about the divergent experience… it simply is what it is…); my personal opinion (just my own take) from my short time with the camera is that I prefer the Fujifilm experience, mainly because I’m a JPEG shooter now, and Fujifilm is better for that than Leica. That’s not a dig on Leica (or anyone who owns the Q2), simply different strokes for different folks. It’s good that we have options—the world would be pretty boring if we didn’t.
If Fujifilm made a fixed-lens 18mm camera (X80, or an X100-like model with an 18mm lens) I’d definitely be interested in buying one. I hope they do.
Thanks for the comment!
I’m glad that there is a distinctive difference between Leicz and Fujifilm.
It would a shame that Fujifilm is simply a copycat of Leica.
Thus earning rightfully the the title of Leica if the poor.
I’m super happy when meeting fellow photographers with their Leica and initiate discussion.
It is indeed a matter of experience. And both are excellent.
And I’m also super happy to see many times the crossover.
This is in fact ideal to own both if you can and more so if you like the 2 systems / philosophies.
Ha the Q2 Monochrome!
If Fujifilm definitely never listen to its community begging for years for a monochrome body (X100 or XT), well in time when price will be right, I’ll be willing to grab one.
Enjoy yours 👍😎
I’ve been hoping that Fujifilm would make a black-and-white-only model for years. I hope they do. The Leica Monochom models are probably the best bet for that right now.
For sure. If Fuji had done it, I might not have bought the Q2m. I got it used but even then the price was a big stretch for me.
Richie that is a very interesting and honest, not biased article I think. Well done.
I think you just nailed it perfectly!
And I fully concur with you as I examined the subject myself over those 10 years.
Especially when I switched from my Nikon D3S equipment after many long years being with Nikon cameras (even be one a the 2 French Moderators for Nikonians for a couple of years) to Fujifilm:
Leica is beautiful and retro style with a strong and distinctive philosophy towards photography. Which is to get highly praised.
BUT, it is always a matter of taste, functionalities, how the product has been designed and is actually working (along of looking and its price – retail or secondhand).
I would say why I would still pick up a Fujifilm over a Leica (appart from the huge price difference) :
0) Leica cameras are exceptionally well built, but they are like tanks for me! Too German way in fact (with no offence, it’s simply the way it is 😉 and I have German family members). So way more heavier than Fujifilm (for the X mount that is, if you take a GFX that’s another story). So KO for my neck & back issue.
And I’ve tried many Leica.
This a clear trade off…
I prefer being lighter and be in APS-C format. The lenses are also lighter and smaller because of that. Law of optics and physics. Hence too cheaper…
Here Fujifilm do produce excellent lenses which many times can be compared to Leica ones (well this can be argued for sure). But Fujifilm, like Leica and Nikon have a very long experience in lenses design (Fujifilm is present in the cinema world with its cine lenses, Leica is not).
1) Doing only SOOC jpeg (1 of the 3 most important points for me), well you are indeed wasting quite a bunch of money with a Leica.
It is only worth the investment if you go all Raw. Leica is built around this concept since it went digital with Kodak and Panasonic help.
Do remember that without Kodak initial Full Frame sensor which was extra difficult to design and tune for Leica very specific M mount (especially the very small distance between film and lens) + Panasonic cooperation on electronic side (basically Panasonic teach Leica how to go to digital and produce complex electronic cameras along firmware and camera menus), Leica would not be the successful and still very renowned brand we know in 2024…
On the other hand Fujifilm severed it’s partnership with Nikon. Now since 10 years doing all alone to the exception of the Sony sensors it grabs and tweaks to a great extent both for the X-Trans and medium format (like Nikon is doing as both brands provide the hardware to Sony to creat the chips it builds thus both of them being able to pick the best ones after Sony itself).
So here again fully KO as when I switched from Nikon which has a better jpeg engine than Leica, the best in fact before Fujifilm came realy back in business with X series (do not forget Fujifilm success in compact cameras where they create the EXR technology and thus the ancestor of the X-Trans which still an exception in the market sensor technology), I was looking for a brand with the same jpeg quality or better, retro style controls (do be near my loved Nikon F3), much more advance color controls that what was offered at the time by Nikon, aka the film simulations that offered Fujifilm…
And I was shooting a LOT with Fujifilm stock film (Superia, Velvia, etc). So the digital look, grain (when going to high ISO) with a X-Trans sensor was a natural transition in fact… And still is.
At the time Leica was way behind…
In fact Nikon has still the best jpeg engine for me in the Full Frame camera market.
But if Fujifilm was to stop it’s photography business, I might not go back to Nikon… Not a fan of the Z mount. Never will…
2) As you point out Ritchie, Leica approach with it’s digital cameras is minimalist to say the least.
It is definitely a matter of taste here and a bit philosophical.
But for me is way too minimalistic to the point that many times the digital possiblities, aka controls offered are just framed by Leica designers / approach.
I just love all of the offered dials on the Fujis and the (hyper ?) customisation and controls that’s offering Fujifilm in its camera. You can do what you want and tune to the ‘bit’ if you want. Even like said many times FujiRumours to a standard DSLR with 2 dials (on the X-T 1 number that is). To the extent that’s the resulting configuration gives a unique camera.
Many times, when handing over my camera to a fellow Fujifilm user during an event, well the guy is … just lost with my setup 😂
I cannot achieve this with a Leica despite trying on each of their M or Q series (not talking of SL series which are way to big and heavy for me).
This is the second main reasons for me of picking a Fujifilm over a Leica.
2nd most important reason for me.
3) The Fujifilm film simulations and tremendous recipies possibilities.
Well no brainer here, once you tasted and play with them, its one way road (like David Vincent 😁). As you wrote Ritchie in a previous article, Nikon is now going that road too. But Fujifilm is still way ahead for now.
And Fujifilm regonized at last recipies + promoting clearly now its film simulation on the new X-T50 dedicated knob. Great (better later than never).
Thus Leica minimalist approach including in its firmware & menus, well to have retro style calera + (digital) film experience along the price tag required, I way prefer Fujifilm over Leica!
3rd most important reason for me.
4) I would like to talk also about innovation. Fujifilm is trying a lot of things over those 10 years, while keeping its core values / concepts. Of course there is the big discussion of the fork path which brought the GFX line with the PASM bodies over the knobs line. But you cannot approach the DSLR pros and users with retro style cameras as until now it is still the norme in the profession (which is still very conservative, funny as it cales from knobs usage at the very start!). Norm which is gradually changing like the acceptation of doing SOOC jpeg only.
This is a major difference between the 2 brands. Along being minimalist, Leica is pretty very concervative. Too much here also for my taste.
While though I would hate Fujifilm go only PSAM and loose the retro style.
I’m not liking too that the X-T 1 digit line is not anymore the top of the line. The H line is now, which share the sale body design as the GFX line. But you video now to take into account, etc…
But market is the market. You need also sell and expend (which Fujifilm is going very well especially with the GFX medium format). You can see for exemple since the release of the GFX50R, no updated version of it has been produced. The R had a certain success but mainly on advanced users side (its retail price was on par to a Leica Q by the way). Not for the pro ones, even if Fujifilm try hard at that time to keep it’s retro style concept in GFX. It learned its leason.
And with latest GFX 100 series, a bunch of GFX 50R do hit now the second market (lucky me 😉) as every GFX user (pro and advanced users) are now migrating to the new 100 MP sensor with IBIS, phase detection AF… Technology gap is there too. Quite huge with latest iteration.
To be honest, with all the Fujifilm gear I now own since 10 years, IF I was to resell everything, I could easily afford a Q3 or a M with a couple of lenses…
But I will not do so!
5) On body design, it’s clear with the X100V and X100VI + X-T50 and X-E4 that Fujifilm looked down heavily on Leica design.
Well I’m more than happy Fujifilm is doing so! The resulting designs are just awesome and gives me an even more pleasant tactil + usage + visual experience 😋
Fujifilm might very well the Leica of the poor, but I way prefer the global and SOOC jpeg with film simulation experience that is giving me Fujifilm than Leica.
6) And cherry on the cake : Fujifilm costs way less than a Leica!
So as many advised, I can spend the ‘saved’ money on purchasing extra Fujifilm (and third parties) lenses for my system than I could with Leica 😉
7) Finally, I’ve more affinity on the ways Fujifilm approach photography and how to take pictures with their products than Leica (in digital era).
That’s how it is coming from film era.
It’s at the same time a very logical sum of choices but also ‘philosophical’ ones (To be SOOC or RAW that is the question 😉) aka a way of doing things.
This was a clear choice 10 years ago. Your present article Ritchie just continues to confirm it. Among many others considerations.
Thought 3 remarks :
A) As pointed by now our 2 PetaPixel companieros in their recent YouTube videos, the monochromes output of Leica along Fujifilm are just awesome and the best ones in the league.
So a Monochrome body, well you know 😉
B) Appart price resell over (a long) time, were Leica is Leica.
But we can now see that Fujifilm second market price is still high and more so rising. Even a worned X-T1 with all its knowned issues (possible light leaks, rubber going out, WR status being questionable, etc) continue to sold at a too high price for my taste. This not counting on present hyper hip and so huge success with X100 series.
Upon reselling my X100V to go to the VI and just a couple of days ago reslling my XF16-80 for the new XF16-50, I was more than very happy for the very first time not loose money on the resell. Thanks Tilk Tok!
But I would prefer that people keeps their head cool!
Already it seems to gives very bad ideas to Fujifilm sales department and top managers (see last interview of the CEO and the prices asked for XF16-50, the X-T50 and its kit) we are beginning to be light years away when the X series began!
But Fujifilm evolved technologicaly a lot since 10 years (remember the original X100) and we have inflation + components shortage + high demands.
3) Most important reaon for me where one would definitely pick up a Leica instead a Fujifilm or another brand : Repairs !
Even a very old Leica, can be repaired. And Leica will repair it and give it back to you in a perfect working order.
Leica will still manufacture the missing parts. This is a mentra for Leica.
I will cost you a hell, but you can be sure that a broken Leica can be fixed.
No other brand is doing this.
I would wish Fujifilm do the same. But it cannot afford it.
Just weeks ago Fujifilm announced the end of support of ‘old’ bodies…
No more spare parts, no more official repairs.
Unless you find the same camera you own to scavenger and someone knowledge + capable enough to repair it, you’re scrued.
So if your loved X-Pro1 & 2, X-T1 to 3, X-E1 to 3, etc brokes and go dead, your only solution now is too find a secondhand one (and hope it will keep working too) or upgrade to a still supporting one…
Very capitalist way…
We do know that a working order X-Pro1 is still of great value and good pretender in 2024. Even if 10 years old.
But no guarantee that in another 10 years it will still function even with extra care…
This not a Nikon F1, F2, F3 for exemple…
Thought it can happen with a Leica too, it’s still a delicate peace of gear, especially a digital one!
But your Leica will be able to
be repaired by a Leica official.
This is the greatest added value of a Leica camera in my point of view appart the hype of the brand.
Reason that may, depending on where Fujifilm goes in the next 10 years, make me or not go to Leica after all…
For the moment I’m ‘touching wood’. All my Fujis are still in perfect working order and are not falling apart. Even my X-Pro3 LCD screen 😉
I’m taking extra great care of all of them (and not using my X-Pro3 LCD screen 😂).
Anyhow, for those owning a Leica (or any other brand), I’m wishing them a lot of pleasure and happy shooting with their camera. Like I have every single time with my Fujis.
This is way the most important in fact.
You make a lot of great points, and I appreciate your feedback. You’ve obviously put a lot of thought into this comment. 😀
A few things:
I think Leica’s commitment to be always available to fix a broken camera (no matter how old) is significant, especially for something that costs so much and you hope to keep for a very long time. That’s a great approach—kudos to them!
I think one factor that might help someone determine if they should buy a Leica or a Fujifilm is whether or not they prefer RAW or JPEG. If it’s JPEG, Fujifilm is tops; if it’s RAW, it could go either way (or both).
I agree that the most important factor of all is how much the camera is a pleasure to use. The more one enjoys the gear they have, the more they’ll want to use it, and I think it definitely has an affect on the images that one will (or will not) produce.
Thanks so much for the input!
I use mine as a B&W camera. And then they release a Q2M a year later 🙁
Only bring it when on holiday in “safe” countries.
I would love a B&W-only camera. I used my X100V like that for about eight or nine months a couple years back (only programmed B&W Recipes…), and really enjoyed the experience.
Well, sounds like Fuji needs to get an updated 18/2 done! If so, the XE-5 could become the Q3 killer! 😀
I agree that the 18mm f/2 desperately needs to be updated. If/when they do that and someday (hopefully) release an X-E5… that would be a compelling combo, for sure, but I don’t think it would be a “Q3 killer” necessarily.
No word about how no Fujifilm lens comes even close to the Summilux. Jpeg, JPEG, JPG.. WTF.
X-E4 is bloated mess, there’re so many options that it makes the camera cumbersome. Although, I still use it mainly because I enjoy the XF 35/1.4 so much. 9 of 10 times I grab the Q2, and no regrets. not even once.
I would say that Leica lenses are pretty renown for their amazing quality and are pretty consistently so. Fujifilm lenses are pretty good, too, and some fairly well equal to Leica; however, there is more variance (less consistency) with Fujinon: some are excellent, some are very good, some are just good, and some are so-so. I didn’t notice any sharpness or lens quality advantage from the Q2 vs the (new version) Fujinon 56mm f/1.2 on the X-T5 (for example) when I used them both in Bisbee, AZ; while the focal lengths were obviously much different, the actual quality was on par for certain.
You’re the first person I’ve ever heard describe the X-E4 as a “bloated mess”… most of the complaints have been the opposite: it is too minimalistic, and should have been more “bloated” (so to speak). I think, though, that speaks of the divergent experiences of Fujifilm vs. Leica… there is definitely a difference, and one might prefer one over the other. Personally, I’d choose the X-E4 “nine out of 10 times” over the Q2 for the size/weight difference and ability to change lenses, but that is just what works best for me. Everyone is different, and has divergent preferences. If one considers the X-E4 to be a “bloated mess” that is a strong indication that the Fujifilm experience might not be the best one for that particular person. Different strokes for different folks.
I mean- it’s a valid complaint, and I think you’re taking it a bit personally by telling the commenter that the camera may not be for them because they think to OS is bloated when the point of the camera is minimalist.
I appreciate these cameras- that go back to the basics and allow you to think.
I didn’t mean it as any sort of personal attack; only that it illustrates what I mean by divergent experiences. Fujifilm and Leica offer different experiences, and one might appreciate one over the other. The commenter seems to indicate which one that person prefers. That’s great that they found it! I personally prefer Fujifilm’s experience, but that’s just me. We’re all different—different strokes for different folks. I’m sorry that I wasn’t clear what my point was.
Really useful review for me, I’m shopping for a FF or MF camera. I think this is making me realize I need to stay in the Fuji clan as I like recipes. Thanks for the post
You are very welcome!
Great write up! How did you like the Lecia operating system?
Thanks! The Leica camera menu system was easier, largely because it is less complex (fewer options, less customizable). I was able to find whatever it was I was looking for without too much trouble. Fujifilm has a tendency to hide things in the menu or put them in strange places… didn’t experience that with Leica.
My prob with Fuji right now is that I have been waiting six months for the X100 VI with more time to come. A newer model will be released before I get my camera. I am considering the Leica D-Lux 8 instead at this point. Same price but a Leica.
The X100VI had unprecedented record-breaking demand. Literally everyone wants one, and so obviously a lot of people are waiting for their chance. With patience you will get it. The X100VI has not been out for six months, “only” four-and-a-half months. The Leica D-Lux 8 is just a Panasonic LX100 II from 2018 with Leica’s software inside and a few small changes. The X100VI and D-Lux 8 are vastly different. Interestingly, you can get the Panasonic version for under $1,000 (which still seems high for what it is).
Good article and comments for and against.
I ordered the X100VI on February 20th and received it two weeks ago.(6 months ) Meanwhile, while I was waiting, I bought a Q2, to brlng on a two month trip to SE Asia. So now I have both but haven’t made any judgements as to which one I prefer.
I also have many Fujifilm X bodies and lenses starting with the XT1 through XT5, which is a current favorite in that line.
Definitely post back (if you happen to think about it) once you’re back from your trip with your impressions. Would love to hear.
I love the Leica “Film Simulations” or looks (Natural, Vivid, Chrome, Eterna). I use the Leica Lux app to get these on my iphone and they,re beautiful. Is there a way to reproduce them with Fujis “jpg recipes”? I think fuji velvia is far from leica vivid and for eterna there isnt any suitable counterpart….
I only had the camera for a short time and it didn’t have the four new profiles (Classic, Chrome, and Eternal are very Fuji-sounding names…). I had created a “Recipe” for the Vivid profile that made it match pretty closely to the factory-default Velvia film simulation, and I was going to publish it… but I lost the settings when I moved (if I find it, I’ll still publish it). I didn’t do it the other way around (Fuji Recipe to mimic factory-default Leica Vivid), but I’m certain it’s possible.
Chrome is very similar to Classic Chrome (not identical, but the resemblance is obvious). Classic is kind of like Classic Negative, there are a couple Recipes already in the ballpark, but I’m not certain if it can be completely matched. Eternal is nothing like Eterna, probably more similar to Velvia than any other film simulation, but not exactly like it. Contemporary is probably most similar to Reala Ace, and could possibly be mimicked with it or PRO Neg. Std. If I ever have $7,000 burning a hole in my pocket, I’ll buy the camera and take a closer look. Right now it’s well outside my budget. 🤣
These images are sooc?
Yes