p.7 #3 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
While I may not always see eye to eye with Lloyd, I must admit that I am genuinely impressed by his sincere and transparent attitude!
I agree with you about his review. And also agree with his review. The lens is my least favorite part, again. They could've made it so good, but I wonder if they made a decision to keep it rather crippled as to not eat into their M/SL market?
p.7 #4 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
RustyRus wrote:
Going to check out the Q3 locally today.
I guess the dilemma I have is I already own the 28 Lux. Wouldn't get rid of it just because I love it on the M11 so much. I owned the Q2 and didn't fall in love with it but it was mostly the way I had to use it that jammed me up the most.
Charging it, transferring photos etc all where less than ideal. Just like with the M11, these are now fixed. I may end up giving it a shot if they have one locally today. Just don't tell my wife
This is a great question that I wish I had better answers for before I actually spent my money. But now that I have, and have extensive experience with both, I am happy to help, for whatever its worth
My first Leica was the original Q purchased back in early 2018. That was of course the gateway drug. Moved up to the Q2 in 2020. In addition to the Q series I have bought/sold a number of M cameras and have ultimately settled on the M10R/M10M combo with which I am completely satisfied. I purchased a 28mm Summilux-M in early 2022 after lusting after it for a long time.
Let me start by addressing that lens. The 28mm Summilux-M is maybe my favorite lens ever. It's almost always on my M and I have never for a moment regretted buying it. I love the pictures it takes and it's really that simple. Wide open, it has a specialness that is very, very different than what you get from the Q lens wide open. It vignettes pretty badly and there can be crazy CA. That being said, I don't care. The pictures look amazing. It also does not feel quite as wide as the Q lens and therefore, for me, it feels a little more versatile.
HOWEVER. It's not like after I got that lens I gave up on the Q2. The Q2 is my most used camera. It has been all over the world with me at this point, it's so beat up and sort of sentimental to me. There are days when I just know, this is a day to bring the Q2 versus the M. and it's a pleasure, the photos rock, and I love it. It is very easy to live with and use. And if I'm with my kids, I can give it to them to take photos and they can use it and enjoy it. The M is too much for them.
The Q2 lens feels much sharper than the 28 lux, especially when modestly stopped down. It also feels wider. The bokeh is not as pleasing. But some of the most important photos I've ever taken were taken with the Q and Q2. So, I love it, but it is very different than the 28 lux-M. The fact they are both 28mm almost feels coincidental because otherwise they are so different.
I have a Q3 on order and plan on beating that one up as well over the coming years. Excited about the USB charging and increased low light performance particularly. But the 28 lux-M isn't going anywhere and never will.
p.7 #5 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
The majority of Q shooters are generally not overly concerned about these technical details, and considering the camera's success, it appears to have been a smart decision by Leica. There are both advantages and disadvantages depending on the specific application.
For portrait photography, particularly environmental portraits with a wide angle lens, it is common practice to maintain a reasonable distance from the subject to minimize face/body distortion. In this case, the slight difference of 2mm in focal length would not pose a significant issue.
However, when it comes to shooting landscapes, that extra 2mm could be quite beneficial. It would provide a wider field of view, allowing for a broader perspective and capturing more of the scenic surroundings. In certain situations, I would even consider using the uncorrected 24mm FL DNG file, perhaps with only the removal of hard vignetting, specifically for landscapes. In specific scenes that lack a prominent horizon line, where the extreme barrel distortion is not a significant concern, using the "real" 24mm file could be a viable option.
I have not personally tested this, but considering that the stated 28mm focal length is not accurate, it is possible that the aperture is also not precisely f/1.7. For instance, It could potentially be closer to f/1.8, although marketing it as a "Lux" lens would be too much of a stretch.
I speculate that we are unlikely to come across such information from any YouTubers who have received a Q3 pre-production for review. Most of the videos tend to resemble advertisements for Leica rather than objective evaluations. It seems that the content creators may be more inclined to highlight the positive aspects of the camera rather than thoroughly exploring its potential drawbacks. (And let's admit, it can sometimes feel like watching an extended Leica commercial!) ...Show more →
I respect Lloyds observations, but only when he’s tested them himself. He does a lot of knee jerking when he’s looking at other people’s files. All I can say based on using the Q2, is the corners were sharper than they were with my M10-R and 28 Lux at the same apertures. Any loss of microcontrast near the edges is undetectable to me.
p.7 #6 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Sean Reid of Reid Reviews did a thorough first look at the Q3 and, unlike Digilloyd, came away impressed. As he typically does with a new camera, he will be reviewing, in detail, other aspects of the camera. His site is a pay site, but for anyone on the fence about buying a Q3, the cost of a one year subscription is couch change compared to the price of the camera, and I highly recommend his site, which has numerous samples and a very interesting and informed discussion of the Q3, along with all digital M and L mount cameras , a number of M lenses, and several Fuji cameras. Take a look at his samples and see the image quality of the Q3 for yourself.
p.7 #7 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
highdesertmesa wrote:
I respect Lloyds observations, but only when he’s tested them himself. He does a lot of knee jerking when he’s looking at other people’s files. All I can say based on using the Q2, is the corners were sharper than they were with my M10-R and 28 Lux at the same apertures. Any loss of microcontrast near the edges is undetectable to me.
Interesting! Do you have that comparison? I would love to see it.
p.7 #9 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
I don't think anyone is buying a large sensor fixed frame compact lens camera for ultimate sharpness - None of the options on the market today (RX1R II, X100V, Leica Q3, Ricoh GRIII) is as good as just buying a full frame mirrorless camera + lens. The Leica Q3 is probably the sharpest out of all these options and the Sony 35mm GM is probably the lens to beat if size isn't an issue.
p.7 #11 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
Interesting! Do you have that comparison? I would love to see it.
I was not fortunate enough to own them at the same time to do a side-by-side (proper) test, but I am a bit of a pixel peeper when it comes to corners. After the holiday weekend, I’ll find a shot taken with each to compare. Also worth noting that I’m taking strictly about infinity stopped down. I don’t know what Lloyd was looking at, but I have a feeling he was examining a closer shot and experiencing field curvature from f/1.7-f/4 that throws the edges out of focus — the very effect that makes close distance shots with central subjects taken with this lens so three-dimensional.
p.7 #12 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
tzhang4284 wrote:
I don't think anyone is buying a large sensor fixed frame compact lens camera for ultimate sharpness - None of the options on the market today (RX1R II, X100V, Leica Q3, Ricoh GRIII) is as good as just buying a full frame mirrorless camera + lens. The Leica Q3 is probably the sharpest out of all these options and the Sony 35mm GM is probably the lens to beat if size isn't an issue.
Exactly. If I wanted a perfect high res image with flat field, I’d be using the 28 Cron or 28 Ultron on the M11 or the SL 28 APO on an SL camera. But honestly for that kind of money, I’d prefer the GFX 100S and the GF 30.
p.7 #13 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
geddon_jt wrote:
This is a great question that I wish I had better answers for before I actually spent my money. But now that I have, and have extensive experience with both, I am happy to help, for whatever its worth
My first Leica was the original Q purchased back in early 2018. That was of course the gateway drug. Moved up to the Q2 in 2020. In addition to the Q series I have bought/sold a number of M cameras and have ultimately settled on the M10R/M10M combo with which I am completely satisfied. I purchased a 28mm Summilux-M in early 2022 after lusting after it for a long time.
Let me start by addressing that lens. The 28mm Summilux-M is maybe my favorite lens ever. It's almost always on my M and I have never for a moment regretted buying it. I love the pictures it takes and it's really that simple. Wide open, it has a specialness that is very, very different than what you get from the Q lens wide open. It vignettes pretty badly and there can be crazy CA. That being said, I don't care. The pictures look amazing. It also does not feel quite as wide as the Q lens and therefore, for me, it feels a little more versatile.
HOWEVER. It's not like after I got that lens I gave up on the Q2. The Q2 is my most used camera. It has been all over the world with me at this point, it's so beat up and sort of sentimental to me. There are days when I just know, this is a day to bring the Q2 versus the M. and it's a pleasure, the photos rock, and I love it. It is very easy to live with and use. And if I'm with my kids, I can give it to them to take photos and they can use it and enjoy it. The M is too much for them.
The Q2 lens feels much sharper than the 28 lux, especially when modestly stopped down. It also feels wider. The bokeh is not as pleasing. But some of the most important photos I've ever taken were taken with the Q and Q2. So, I love it, but it is very different than the 28 lux-M. The fact they are both 28mm almost feels coincidental because otherwise they are so different.
I have a Q3 on order and plan on beating that one up as well over the coming years. Excited about the USB charging and increased low light performance particularly. But the 28 lux-M isn't going anywhere and never will.
It’s hard to put the 28 Lux and Q together as a comparison. For me, the 28 Lux on an M body was a bit of a commitment due to the weight as well as restrictive MFD when compared to the Q. And although people love to pain-point the Q lens distortion, the 28 Lux is no saint. In high contrast backlit conditions, the 28 Lux can deliver truly cringeworthy purple fringing that I never noticed with the Q. The bokeh from the 28 Lux at mid-distance with busy backgrounds is also what I would call an acquired taste.
p.7 #14 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
highdesertmesa wrote:
I was not fortunate enough to own them at the same time to do a side-by-side (proper) test, but I am a bit of a pixel peeper when it comes to corners. After the holiday weekend, I’ll find a shot taken with each to compare. Also worth noting that I’m taking strictly about infinity stopped down. I don’t know what Lloyd was looking at, but I have a feeling he was examining a closer shot and experiencing field curvature from f/1.7-f/4 that throws the edges out of focus — the very effect that makes close distance shots with central subjects taken with this lens so three-dimensional....Show more →
Thanks for letting me know. I may do this comparison in the future. Regarding the Leica 28mm f/1.4 Summilux lens, I find its design to be quite complex, and there appears to be some variation among copies. Personally, I have had the opportunity to try two newer batches of this lens, and their performance differed somewhat. While both were well-centered, one exhibited softer corners in comparison to the other. Having ultimately chosen the latter copy, I would have felt somewhat disappointed had I only tried one version of the lens.
p.7 #15 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for letting me know. I may do this comparison in the future. Regarding the Leica 28mm f/1.4 Summilux lens, I find its design to be quite complex, and there appears to be some variation among copies. Personally, I have had the opportunity to try two newer batches of this lens, and their performance differed somewhat. While both were well-centered, one exhibited softer corners in comparison to the other. Having ultimately chosen the latter copy, I would have felt somewhat disappointed had I only tried one version of the lens.
Interesting! I noticed the same thing with the Q lens. My last two copies of the Q2 Reporter where noticeably better in the corners than every other copy I’ve had (1 regular Q2, a Q2M, and two copies of the original Q). This is really why it’s hard to trust someone like me comparing what could be a copy of the 28 Lux that was weaker in the corners with an exceptional copy of the Q2 lens. With the high variance in M lens quality control in general (Leica and CV both), it can be difficult to draw hard conclusions at all between lenses where the variables are only visible at 1:1 magnification anyway.
p.7 #16 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
patotts wrote:
I do understand the various benefits and perhaps non-issues with 26mm vs 28mm, and f/1.7 vs f/1.8, but I want/demand/expect Leica to be honest, open and accurate in their product descriptions. I think this is a major faux-pas in the trust department for the brand.
Legally speaking, this is probably a non-issue in the US, but a number of European countries have much stronger consumer protection and false advertising laws than the US, thus there is a risk that this might bite Leica, but I doubt some entitity will bother pursuing it.
A successful fraud case like that could change the way the industry labels everything. You wouldn't be able to buy a Summilux-M 28/1.4 anymore. It would have to be relabeled Summilux-M Approximately 28mm (at infinity*) Approximately f/1.4 *when used as the manufacturer intended. Canon's RF 16/2.8 will become an RF 13mm Semi-Fisheye Corrected* to Approximately 16mm Approximately f/2.8 *when used as the manufacturer intended. From what I've seen in patents, that's the last place a design's actual focal length and maximum aperture are discussed. How they get labeled for production is more a matter of fitting an expected type than precise focal length or speed.
p.7 #18 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
Great post. I love to read the views of folks who can just enjoy their gear for its particular strengths.
geddon_jt wrote:
This is a great question that I wish I had better answers for before I actually spent my money. But now that I have, and have extensive experience with both, I am happy to help, for whatever its worth
My first Leica was the original Q purchased back in early 2018. That was of course the gateway drug. Moved up to the Q2 in 2020. In addition to the Q series I have bought/sold a number of M cameras and have ultimately settled on the M10R/M10M combo with which I am completely satisfied. I purchased a 28mm Summilux-M in early 2022 after lusting after it for a long time.
Let me start by addressing that lens. The 28mm Summilux-M is maybe my favorite lens ever. It's almost always on my M and I have never for a moment regretted buying it. I love the pictures it takes and it's really that simple. Wide open, it has a specialness that is very, very different than what you get from the Q lens wide open. It vignettes pretty badly and there can be crazy CA. That being said, I don't care. The pictures look amazing. It also does not feel quite as wide as the Q lens and therefore, for me, it feels a little more versatile.
HOWEVER. It's not like after I got that lens I gave up on the Q2. The Q2 is my most used camera. It has been all over the world with me at this point, it's so beat up and sort of sentimental to me. There are days when I just know, this is a day to bring the Q2 versus the M. and it's a pleasure, the photos rock, and I love it. It is very easy to live with and use. And if I'm with my kids, I can give it to them to take photos and they can use it and enjoy it. The M is too much for them.
The Q2 lens feels much sharper than the 28 lux, especially when modestly stopped down. It also feels wider. The bokeh is not as pleasing. But some of the most important photos I've ever taken were taken with the Q and Q2. So, I love it, but it is very different than the 28 lux-M. The fact they are both 28mm almost feels coincidental because otherwise they are so different.
I have a Q3 on order and plan on beating that one up as well over the coming years. Excited about the USB charging and increased low light performance particularly. But the 28 lux-M isn't going anywhere and never will.
p.7 #19 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
highdesertmesa wrote:
Interesting! I noticed the same thing with the Q lens. My last two copies of the Q2 Reporter where noticeably better in the corners than every other copy I’ve had (1 regular Q2, a Q2M, and two copies of the original Q). This is really why it’s hard to trust someone like me comparing what could be a copy of the 28 Lux that was weaker in the corners with an exceptional copy of the Q2 lens. With the high variance in M lens quality control in general (Leica and CV both), it can be difficult to draw hard conclusions at all between lenses where the variables are only visible at 1:1 magnification anyway....Show more →
Given the close proximity of the rear element to the sensor, achieving accurate centering becomes even more imperative. I encountered a similar experience with the RX1 II, which is why they were assembled in Japan with higher quality control.
p.7 #20 · Official: Leica Q3 Unveiled, Now Open for Pre-Orders
sounds like someone is salty because they didn't get a review sample. My dng files in LRC show 9520x6336 which is 60MP and this is with the profile applied already. The lens is the same as in the Q and Q2 and while it's not an APO it is a fine lens and suits the Q system well imho. Sharp in the center at 1.7 and decent troughout the frame stopped down. Noise at ISO 12800 looks better than my R5 from the brief tests I did and the Eye AF works good. I'm happy with my purchase and am not photographing any brick walls any time soon, so... I'm happy with the Q3 so far
