LBJ2 wrote:
Ouh là là, these Q3 specs are looking very impressive! I’m thinking this camera will probably bring in record numbers of new-to-Leica customers. Can’t wait to see how the new PDAF/DFD system performs with the new Maestro IV processor too.
All eyes on this new Q3..coming announcement next week then?
Leica is enhancing their video specifications as well, attracting more people to join their community. The Q acts as a gateway 'drug' to the Leica system.
One missing feature for video is microphone input though. Video recording is also limited to 30m.
"The Leica Q3 camera will be priced at €5,950 in Europe (Germany). For comparison, the price of the Leica Q2 in Germany is currently €5,650 at Calumet and Foto Koch and is already €300 off at Meister Camera. This is a price increase of €300.
highdesertmesa wrote:
I think the biggest improvement is going to be seen in continuous AF mode / tracking. For a while, the Q3 is going to be better than the SL cameras at AF. Crazy thought.
Really, who cares about tracking on a 24mm equivalent lens? Everything’s in focus anyway.
hsiunghsiung wrote:
...anyone know if the dust sensor issue from the Q1 was fixed in the Q2? Or is it recommended to tape/cover the mic holes on the top
This half-true rumor just won't die. The dust on a few early original Q sensors was quickly remedied then was never a problem in later production. But people keep taping up the mic holes on the weather sealed Q2 thinking it helps something.
goodbokeh wrote:
Yes, and I read a earlier rumors report the Q3 has even more advanced AF algorithms to offer. Even the Q2 has Eye AF with the recent Firmware 5.0.
Improved Eye AF with phase detect AF, including animal AF, is expected in the new Q3. However, the speed of autofocus remains uncertain as the lens' focusing motor is likely unchanged from previous versions.
I wish that Leica had upgraded the lens for a "true" 28mm FL optical design.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Improved Eye AF with phase detect AF, including animal AF, is expected in the new Q3. However, the speed of autofocus remains uncertain as the lens' focusing motor is likely unchanged from previous versions.
I wish that Leica had upgraded the lens for a "true" 28mm FL optical design.
Agreed on the last point. Or they could stop lying and just say what focal length the lens really is…
Another concern is, Leica sensors traditionally have poorer DR and are noisier than Sony and Nikon's equivalent sensors.
So as much as I welcome Leica's bump up to 60+MP (especially it makes cropping to 35MP a viable alternative), but I can't help to think these old weaknesses may resurface again.
FMTopFan wrote:
Another concern is, Leica sensors traditionally have poorer DR and are noisier than Sony and Nikon's equivalent sensors.
So as much as I welcome Leica's bump up to 60+MP (especially it makes cropping to 35MP a viable alternative), but I can't help to think these old weaknesses may resurface again.
Has Leica overcome these traditional limitations?
Looks functionally very close to Sony's latest sensor with this resolution. Many say it is the same sensor with some Leica mods.
1bwana1 wrote:
Looks functionally very close to Sony's latest sensor with this resolution. Many say it is the same sensor with some Leica mods.
Hmm.. M11 PDR looks pretty good when compared to A7R5.
If same sensor, I wonder why Lecia has a 0.5 stop disadvantage from 100-200, and then 0.3 stop disadvantage between 400-800 or so.
The difference is probably negligible when viewing images, now I am curious about Leica's ISO invariance too.
Original I was thinking of getting A7R5 with a tiny 28/32/35 lens for silent street shooting, but Q3 seems like a better candidate if its AF is acceptable, assuming sensor quality is not too far behind from the Sony?
FMTopFan wrote:
Hmm.. M11 PDR looks pretty good when compared to A7R5.
If same sensor, I wonder why Lecia has a 0.5 stop disadvantage from 100-200, and then 0.3 stop disadvantage between 400-800 or so.
The difference is probably negligible when viewing images, but another important factor is ISO invaraince too.
The sensors are tuned slightly differently with the Leica version having a base ISO of 64, and the Sony A7RV having a base ISO of 100. The M11 has the advantage below ISO 100.
I have been very happy with the M11 DR, colors, and noise handling for such a high resolution sensor.
My hope was a dual model release 28mm "Original" and a new 35mm / 40mm "Urban" model. I do like the sliding back screen for those low angle shots but not enough to get me to bite. I keep fighting that 28mm fov
FMTopFan wrote:
Hmm.. M11 PDR looks pretty good when compared to A7R5.
If same sensor, I wonder why Lecia has a 0.5 stop disadvantage from 100-200, and then 0.3 stop disadvantage between 400-800 or so.
The difference is probably negligible when viewing images, now I am curious about Leica's ISO invariance too.
Original I was thinking of getting A7R5 with a tiny 28/32/35 lens for silent street shooting, but Q3 seems like a better candidate if its AF is acceptable, assuming sensor quality is not too far behind from the Sony?
Below 0.5 stop difference can be within the margin of error for the P2P chart. But if accurate, it could be something as simple as the M11 sensor is exposed to slightly higher internal temperatures.
And as was mentioned, the M11 has a lower base ISO, which means the dual gain kicks in at a different ISO.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Below 0.5 stop difference can be within the margin of error for the P2P chart. But if accurate, it could be something as simple as the M11 sensor is exposed to slightly higher internal temperatures.
And as was mentioned, the M11 has a lower base ISO, which means the dual gain kicks in at a different ISO.
If the Q3 sensor retains the characteristics of M11 sensor, and adds some Q3-specific enhancements, I think it will be a really strong camera.
Being a previous Q1 owner/user, who had to sell it due to its lack of weather sealing, I think Q3 may re-ignite my passion for 28mm shooting again.
Just curious, does anyone think Q3 will get those crazy 7 or 8-stop IBIS?
Leaked specs back a few posts show no IBIS, just the same lens-based OIS. The leaf shutter in the Q lens makes it pretty easy to shoot at slower shutter speeds. IBIS would have been nice, but they probably weren’t able to get it to fit.
highdesertmesa wrote:
This half-true rumor just won't die. The dust on a few early original Q sensors was quickly remedied then was never a problem in later production. But people keep taping up the mic holes on the weather sealed Q2 thinking it helps something.
