amiletich wrote:
I am currently shooting with the R6 and mostly using the 28-70/2.8 lens. Sometimes I want something a bit smaller and more incognito to be able to take out with the family and friends.
Curious to hear people's thoughts on the Q3? Would still like relatively quick auto focus and eye tracking for the kids and wife when they are moving around and not just posing, but was thinking something like the Q3 or X2D would be interesting options to try. Should I consider something like the X100V as well? Thoughts?
I've had the Leica Q3 a couple of times and the Fuji X100V and X100VI a few times too. Neither cameras stuck to me for a variety of reasons but for "Sometimes I want something a bit smaller and more incognito to be able to take out with the family and friends" I think the X100VI is significantly better for this because it's much smaller and looks a lot less expensive in its build.
The Leica Q3 in my opinion has a bit more of a bling factor and looks expensive based on its build - it's not really incognito. The alternative from a size profile is a small mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. Image quality is better on the Q3 but I think the lens on the Q3 is average compared to other full frame mirrorless lenses - its not bad but I don't think its anywhere close to the best Leica has to offer. I have the same opinion of the X100VI lens btw relative to Fuji's line up. AF performance are comparable between Fuji and Leica and usable but are behind Sony/Canon/Nikon particularly for video - the focus hunts quite a bit.
If you are comfortable with the size profile of the Leica Q3 and want better image quality than the X100VI, consider a Fuji X-T5 with the 18mm or 23mm f1.4 WR lenses. The Sony A7C II/CR is also worth considering with the 24mm or 40mm G lenses. In my opinion, these combos deliver good image quality and are much more unassuming.
For what it's worth, I landed on the Fuji X-S20 since I wanted a capable video camera but if I didn't care about that, I probably would've held on to the X100VI or X-T5. My stills camera is a Leica M11 as a reference point.
I've had the Q2 for more than a year, but I've always find it to be a hit or miss. For a travel camera, it's as great as it gets - you don't need to worry about dusts ruining your pictures, which focal length to choose, shutter that caught attentions, and not able to take videos with your M.
However I recently acquired a 28/1.4 lens and the true 28mm is a lot easier to shoot with, in terms of getting perspective correct, Q lens always end up irregular on all 4 sides, like irregular trapezoid. And that extra half a stop really make a difference in terms of dof, the Q lens is *almost* as useful but one really need to get close.
But nothing can really compete with it in what it can do really. Rent or borrow one to try.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I've had the Q2 for more than a year, but I've always find it to be a hit or miss. For a travel camera, it's as great as it gets - you don't need to worry about dusts ruining your pictures, which focal length to choose, shutter that caught attentions, and not able to take videos with your M.
That's it. It's very reliable. I love the 28mm focal length, and I'm pleased that the Q lens is actually slightly wider. When traveling with the family and facing unpredictable situations, I find it to be the best solution. Once I'm familiar with the location, I can always return and experiment with different focal lengths using my other M if I want. But I know I'll get great shots with the Q2.
I just returned from Europe and took thousands of shots. The Q2 didn't have a single hiccup and the best part is that it's weather resistant.
The Q3 is a great camera and you certainly can get good portraits with it if you know how to use the lens properties to your advantage. I had the Q, Q2 and Q3 and sold them all because I don't like 28mm. So when I say what I'm about to say, understand that I am a Leica user and have the SL3 with the 21/35/50/75 APO Summicron SL lenses and the 50mm Summilux-SL...
I still think the best travel camera for portraiture would be an updated RX1R series. Full frame, 35mm, smaller than the Q series and the newer Sony color science is much easier to work with.
Don't be afraid to crop. With 60mp the q3 cnan crop to a 50mm equivalent and atill have around 19mp. I did a dew comparisons with the highly regarded fuji 33 1.4 and 56 1.2 (mk2). The q3 holds its own pretty well imo. So for a primary portrait canera obviously the q3 wouldn't be my choice. But for a versatile camera that also does excellent portraits, it's superb.
Get R10 and a small prime that you probably already have. It will run circles around all Leicas and Hasselblads in terms of AF and ease to use. Get Leica if you want to scratch that itch, but remember it comes with a lot of compromises in everything that you take for granted with pretty much any other camera.
Somebody above brought this thread back from 2024. I assume the OP has already made a decision on this but these threads live long.
Good news is since this thread began Leica has introduced the Q3 43 with a 43mm lens and Sony has a new version of the RX1R III with a 35mm lens. I consider those focal length better for people shots than 28mm though some photographers can do magic with the 28mm.
treacle wrote:
Somebody above brought this thread back from 2024. I assume the OP has already made a decision on this but these threads live long.
Good news is since this thread began Leica has introduced the Q3 43 with a 43mm lens and Sony has a new version of the RX1R III with a 35mm lens. I consider those focal length better for people shots than 28mm though some photographers can do magic with the 28mm.
And also the Q3 cameras received a massive AF update. Any comment on the AF from 2 years ago is completely irrelevant. I've seen physical model updates with less change than the Q3 got through firmware.
treacle wrote:
Somebody above brought this thread back from 2024. I assume the OP has already made a decision on this but these threads live long.
Good news is since this thread began Leica has introduced the Q3 43 with a 43mm lens and Sony has a new version of the RX1R III with a 35mm lens. I consider those focal length better for people shots than 28mm though some photographers can do magic with the 28mm.
Ooh, well.
I have a whole bunch of cameras on hands at the moment. Personally, I take q3 on a walk only when I want to take pictures with q3. If I travel locally or with family it is a7r6 + 24-50 time. About the same size as q3, easier to use, and infinitely better opportunities creator.
chez wrote:
I've never used the Q3...but what I've read about it from various members and other forums, the eye AF tracking leaves something to be desired if your subject is not stationary. Personally, if I was to lay down the cash for the Q3...I'd rent it before to ensure you are getting what you want. From what you describe and what I've read...I'd don't feel you have a match here.
I have q3-43 and full disclosure - I am definitely not as talented as others here. I did take my camera to Portugal recently. It was a perfect choice. Now there were very few times where I felt I needed to go wider but the ease of carrying the camera and the ability to just whip it out far outweighs those few times I needed to go wider.
I have some Canon L lenses and Canon body - but I would have never take as many pics as I did if I had to take it out.
Go for it. Even for someone as inexperienced as me, Leica is a gateway drug and I am already lusting for SL3-P.
Yes, but I don't think the Q is more 'incognito' than most other cameras. The lens is still quite pronounced and that's the part that stares into people's faces. Other than that, if you like that style of camera, add a grip and have the cash, you'll be fine.
But you'll be fine with many other cheaper cameras as well.
