Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #1 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
26mm vs. 35mm. It's widely reported that the Q3 has a lens that is closer to 24mm than a true 28mm. For any serious photography purpose, 26mm and 35mm are completely different focal lengths. They are not interchangeable. If I'm looking for a 26mm lens, I'm not going to consider a 35mm lens, and vice versa. Yes you can crop the 26mm file to get 35mm, but you are only getting 33MP vs. 40MP and I wouldn't pay 6k to mainly use it in a way that throws away almost half of the sensor (and its advantages).
The sizes are also not in the same category. The Q3 (743g) is of the size of a small body plus an independent lens (it's just that they are soldered together). But the X100VI (521g) is essentially flat. It makes a day and night difference in pocketability and in a crowded bag. A better comparison for the Q3 is a Sony A7CR with a 24/28mm lens, while for the X100VI a closer comparator is a Fuji X-E4 with a pancake 27/2.8 lens.
p.2 #2 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
RustyRus wrote:
I am not knocking the Fuji, we are comparing a 6k camera to a $1600 one but it’s really not a match IMO. You can argue that if you want to shoot JPG etc and play with recipes the Fuji can have a fun factor but thats take it or leave it for me with vs the Leica. I enjoy it but much prefer the raw files from the Leica and edit later.
I am in a position where I can and will own both for now but if I where to sell one, it will be the Fuji 10/10 times. The Fuji is a great little camera it just doesn’t stack up to the Leica Q3. If size or breaking the camera (sport activity) isn’t a concern when leaving the house, I grab will grab the Leica every time.
Component for component, the Leica should not be that much more expensive. It has a larger sensor and a larger lens, but that's not a $4500 difference in materials costs.
I think a lot of the price premium of the Leica is due to higher labor costs, as well as higher profit margin.
p.2 #3 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 wrote:
If I'm looking for a 26mm lens, I'm not going to consider a 35mm lens, and vice versa. Yes you can crop the 26mm file to get 35mm, but you are only getting 33MP vs. 40MP and I'm not going to pay 6k to mainly use it in a way that throws away almost half of the sensor (and its advantages).
The Leica Q3's 35mm crop mode offers a resolution of 39 megapixels, not 33 MP.
The benefits of a physically larger sensor are not negated if you crop in. The Q3's sensor has larger photo sites which provide better light gathering and improved dynamic range (particularly at base ISOs -- the Q3 can go down to ISO 50, compared to ISO 125 for the X100VI).
Whether that will make a difference for most people -- I doubt it. Not a lot of people are going to be using either camera to shoot scenes that require more dynamic range than what the X100VI can offer. Most people make decisions based on price and size, and the X100 is the clear winner there.
That being said, very few people out there would say the Q3's files are unexceptional.
p.2 #4 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
Mention has been made of the fact that the image stabilization in the Q3 is lens based and in the X100VI it is sensor based. Which is preferable, and why?
p.2 #5 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
Any thoughts on the Q2 vs X100VI? The Q3 looks great but probably out of my range for what I'd use it for. I really thought the Qs would drop more in price when the Q3 came out but demand and a higher price have kept the used market models pretty steady.
Mar 12, 2024 at 04:45 PM
foto16 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #6 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
The Leica Q3's 35mm crop mode offers a resolution of 39 megapixels, not 33 MP.
The benefits of a physically larger sensor are not negated if you crop in. The Q3's sensor has larger photo sites which provide better light gathering and improved dynamic range (particularly at base ISOs -- the Q3 can go down to ISO 50, compared to ISO 125 for the X100VI).
If one believes that the Q's lens is more like 26mm, as reported, than 28mm, its 35mm crop is likely to be 32.5mm. Otherwise the math doesn't add up.
Not sure about the second point. If you crop in, the benefits of a physically larger sensor IS negated simply because your final image is effectively only based on a smaller sensor, which has all the characteristics of of that smaller sensor. If you crop to APSC, the Q will have the same light gathering area and DR as an APSC sensor.
p.2 #7 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 wrote:
Not sure about the second point. If you crop in, the benefits of a physically larger sensor IS negated simply because your final image is effectively only based on a smaller sensor, which has all the characteristics of of that smaller sensor. If you crop to APSC, the Q will have the same light gathering area and DR as an APSC sensor.
It's still the same sensor whether you use crop mode or not.
Crop mode just simulates different focal lengths by outputting a cropped JPG (the original uncropped file is saved as a DNG).
Therefore, all the benefits of a physically larger sensor (better DR, better noise handling, possibly better tonality, etc) are retained.
Mar 13, 2024 at 08:48 AM
foto16 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #8 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
mdude85 wrote:
It's still the same sensor whether you use crop mode or not.
Crop mode just simulates different focal lengths by outputting a cropped JPG (the original uncropped file is saved as a DNG).
Therefore, all the benefits of a physically larger sensor (better DR, better noise handling, possibly better tonality, etc) are retained.
Sure the original uncropped file has all the benefits of a larger sensor since it uses the whole FF sensor area.
But we are talking about the cropped output. The original uncropped file is irrelevant here since that has a 26mm angle of view and we want 35mm angle of view: cropping is not a simulation. You are literally throwing the rest of the sensor area away. You will not use the rest of the image area any more in your output. If you crop, it is the same as if you were shooting will a smaller sensor camera. The result will have lower DR and higher noise as these are linked to the sensor size.
p.2 #9 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 wrote:
Sure the original uncropped file has all the benefits of a larger sensor since it uses the whole FF sensor area.
But we are talking about the cropped output. The original uncropped file is irrelevant here since that has a 26mm angle of view and we want 35mm angle of view: cropping is not a simulation. You are literally throwing the rest of the sensor area away. You will not use the rest of the image area any more in your output. If you crop, it is the same as if you were shooting will a smaller sensor camera. The result will have lower DR and higher noise as these are linked to the sensor size. ...Show more →
See here for an explanation of Q2's crop mode. (It works the same on the Q3).
In addition to the uncropped 28 mm focal length of the camera lens, a crop factor can be chosen to simulate exposures made with focal lengths of 35, 50 or 75 millimetres. The selected crop is displayed as a bright-line frame in the viewfinder and on the rear display panel. The cropped image from the framing selected is saved in JPEG format with correspondingly reduced resolutions of 47.3, 30, 14.7, or 6.6 megapixels. The uncropped image is always saved simultaneously as a DNG file with the full resolution of 47.3 megapixels.
Using crop mode on the Q3 is *not* the same as shooting on a smaller sensor camera. It's the same as cropping in post.
Mar 13, 2024 at 10:06 AM
foto16 Offline • • [X]
p.2 #10 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
mdude85 wrote:
See here for an explanation of Q2's crop mode. (It works the same on the Q3).
In addition to the uncropped 28 mm focal length of the camera lens, a crop factor can be chosen to simulate exposures made with focal lengths of 35, 50 or 75 millimetres. The selected crop is displayed as a bright-line frame in the viewfinder and on the rear display panel. The cropped image from the framing selected is saved in JPEG format with correspondingly reduced resolutions of 47.3, 30, 14.7, or 6.6 megapixels. The uncropped image is always saved simultaneously as a DNG file with the full resolution of 47.3 megapixels.
Using crop mode on the Q3 is *not* the same as shooting on a smaller sensor camera. It's the same as cropping in post....Show more →
Thanks. I think we can keep the difference :-) When you reduce the size of a larger sensor's image (keeping the same angle of view, so not cropping), you will preserve the benefits of that sensor size. However, the image quality from cropping a larger sensor's image in post is exactly the same as shooting with a smaller sensor.
p.2 #11 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 wrote:
Thanks. I think we can keep the difference :-) The image quality from cropping a larger sensor's image in post is exactly the same as shooting with a smaller sensor.
Nope -- if you crop the image, it will have the same field of view as the smaller sensor, but not the same "quality". Despite its name, a "crop sensor" is not just a cropped version of a full-frame sensor.
Because it's a physically smaller sensor, the photosites must be smaller and packed more closely together in order to retain the desired resolution -- it's the size and the density of these sites that can impact dynamic range, tonality and noise.
p.2 #12 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
mdude85 wrote:
Nope -- it will be the same field of view, but not the same "quality".
I think we are venturing into digital camera 101 area. You can verify it yourself: in post crop a FF senor image to a 10 pixels x 10 pixels cropped image. Tell yourself it has the same DR and noise performance of the original uncropped full frame image. It will have the same per-pixel noise because they have the same pixel density, but the cropped image as a whole image will have worse DR and noise level, just liking shooting with a sensor with 10 pixels x 10 pixels with the same pixel density.
p.2 #13 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
foto16 wrote:
I think we are venturing into digital camera 101 area. You can verify it yourself: in post crop a FF senor image to a 10 pixels x 10 pixels cropped image. Tell yourself it has the same DR and noise performance of the original uncropped full frame image.
The properties of the sensor determine how much noise, dynamic range and tonality the final image will have.
Therefore, two identical captures from the same sensor will have exactly the same noise, recoverable dynamic range and tonality, regardless of how much one of them has been cropped.
The Q3's crop mode does not resize or up-sample its images. All it does is crop them. It captures the raw DNG image, crops the edges, then saves it as a JPG (the JPG compression obviously degrades image quality slightly but that's tangential to this discussion). If anything, the Q3's crop mode is more of a gimmick than anything else, because it only performs in-camera what's normally done in post.
p.2 #14 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
I have a Q2M and a Fuji x100v. I see no need to upgrade either to their newer versions (once the Q3M arrives), since both are already great at what they’re meant for. I’ve always thought the Qs are very nice cameras, but too expensive (esp. new). And like the x100-whatever, they are just gorgeous pieces of gear with a limited range of use cases.
To me the cropping ability is only of marginal value, as you retain the depth-of-field of the wide angle lenses. I’d rather use my MFT kit with small longer lenses than use a crop mode on a wide angle lens.
p.2 #15 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
johnvanr wrote:
To me the cropping ability is only of marginal value, as you retain the depth-of-field of the wide angle lenses. I’d rather use my MFT kit with small longer lenses than use a crop mode on a wide angle lens.
Yes, that's definitely worth underlining.
At some point in the future, it would not surprise me if cameras use AI tools that can better simulate the depth of field and distortion of a telephoto image when using a crop mode. They might even become so good that they eliminate the need for multiple lenses for some users.
p.2 #16 · Those who have Q3 and Fuji 100V1…..detailed impressions?
Wow. I see this thread is old now, but i stumbled upon it and i have had the x100vi and own a q3 28. I can assure you the q3 cropped to the same fov of the x100vi is better in every way. Sharper, cleaner, similar final resolution. But the extra sharpness makes it more hard to compare. I can crop the q3 to 50mm ff and crop the x100vi to match and the q3 is still better. You can upscale the q3 with no ai and you would think it was higher res than the x100 due to the lens being better. Colors are more rich. Tonal transitions are smoother. The x100vi is superb and how big these differences are to you will vary. To me the q3 makes obviously nicer images.
I even have plenty of comparisons I've done with fuji lenses better than the x100vi (18 1.4, 23 2.4, 33 1.4, 56 1.2) on my xt5 and the q3 easily compares up to about the 33 1.4 lens @f2 in terms of separation. After that the cropping just can't compare truly with the optics. You can still get a nice 85mm equiv at roughly f4 separation but you stsr getting into the sub 20mp range. Absolutely usable, but depends on your use case. The frame lines are also not as easy to use at that zoom if you are using crop mode.
As for the crop being a gimmick. All it does is let you compose in camera and that saves time and changes the workflow and experience. Whether that's a gimmick is probably somewhat subjective. If it showed the cropped pov in camera it would be a lot better imo. But for 35mm (x100 equiv) the crop lines are decent and actually function like a rangefinder in that you can see outside the frame for composition. Anyhow, if anyone wants to see fuji lenses vs the q3 let me know.
