p.8 #1 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
zeitlos wrote:
Absolutely, that’s why I want to buy the Q3 43 one day I had the Q2 for a short while and yes, I absolutely appreciated the viewfinder. But not the 28mm so really. I also had the 28mm GR once. Again, lovely but not the one for me. Having both GRIIIs makes sense.
Still, the GR is so pocketable and you can really shoot differently with it because of its size. A GR cannot replace a Q. But a Q can also not fully replace a GR.
For me, most of my shooting is in the 50mm range, so the Q3 43 was a no brainer. I've owned and sold every Q I've had because I was cropping 90% of my photos. What about the other 10%? I'm seriously thinking of picking up a GRIII (or wait for the GR IV which seems to be coming) to use for the situations where I need to go wider. It would be easy to just throw in my bag rather than carrying something like my SL3 and 21 APO.
p.8 #2 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
Luca101 wrote:
Please share pictures with this Q3 43 once its supporters get it in their hands. Good pictures are always welcome.
Let’s enjoy photography once again.
Here’s one showing the benefits of the Q3 43 crop modes when you have an APO lens. I had similar results on my SL2-S using the APO Summicron-SL lenses where you would think heavy cropping would be limited by resolution. It's raining, that's not some strange type of artifact in the image.
Cropped image vs. Original Image
LEICA Q3 43APO-SUMMICRON 1:2/43 ASPH. lens43mmf/2.01/2000s400 ISO-0.6 EV
LEICA Q3 43APO-SUMMICRON 1:2/43 ASPH. lens43mmf/2.01/2000s400 ISO-0.6 EV
p.8 #3 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
zeitlos wrote:
Speaking of the Batis 40 F2.0. I would really love to see the Zeiss Batis against this Leica 43mm F2.0 lens. Where would/do they differ?
In my experience the Batis line would fall behind a great deal in Chromatic Aberrations especially at wide apertures.
p.8 #4 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
johnvanr wrote:
But, see, I have both Ricoh GRIIIs and still don’t know which one is the one to carry. At least, with the Q28 you have enough cropping capacity to cover both focal lengths. And it has a real viewfinder, which the Ricohs sorely lack.
That is why I find it hard to read why so many would get a GRxxx. 8GB buffer is solid too and IV processor better than M11's. Plus they are APS-C. It must be mainly down to affordability. I can understand we all have budgets (and too much gear).
p.8 #5 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
stgrove wrote:
That is why I find it hard to read why so many would get a GRxxx. 8GB buffer is solid too and IV processor better than M11's. Plus they are APS-C. It must be mainly down to affordability. I can understand we all have budgets (and too much gear).
I probably shoot less than 10% of my images at anything wider than 35mm. I already own the SL3 and the 21mm APO Summicron-SL. For the amount of time I will be in that focal length range, and although in Leica Land all sense of fiscal responsibility usually goes out the window, I can't see spending another $6k for that limited use case. I would like a small camera to carry with the Q3 43 to cover the wider shot when needed, so the GR III (or GR IV) makes sense for me - or, if Leica can properly decouple AF Focus lock from the shutter half press, I could just stitch my wide shots.
p.8 #6 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
saxguy wrote:
I probably shoot less than 10% of my images at anything wider than 35mm. I already own the SL3 and the 21mm APO Summicron-SL. For the amount of time I will be in that focal length range, and although in Leica Land all sense of fiscal responsibility usually goes out the window, I can't see spending another $6k for that limited use case. I would like a small camera to carry with the Q3 43 to cover the wider shot when needed, so the GR III (or GR IV) makes sense for me - or, if Leica can properly decouple AF Focus lock from the shutter half press, I could just stitch my wide shots....Show more →
On my SL3's and Q3's it doesn't initiate re-focus if you keep the shutter half pressed between shots. Have you tried that on a Q3-48? I find handheld stitches a doodle on Leica cameras compared to other brands.
p.8 #7 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
johnvanr wrote:
But, see, I have both Ricoh GRIIIs and still don’t know which one is the one to carry. At least, with the Q28 you have enough cropping capacity to cover both focal lengths. And it has a real viewfinder, which the Ricohs sorely lack.
I am beginning to see signs that maybe you are a bit commitment shy...
p.8 #8 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
saxguy wrote:
Here’s one showing the benefits of the Q3 43 crop modes when you have an APO lens. I had similar results on my SL2-S using the APO Summicron-SL lenses where you would think heavy cropping would be limited by resolution. It's raining, that's not some strange type of artifact in the image.
Cropped image vs. Original Image
The detail you see in the cropped image is primarily due to the high sensor resolution rather than the lens being APO, especially when converting your files to black and white. While APO lenses generally provide higher resolution and contrast than non-APO lenses at the same settings, the initial resolution (in megapixels) is more critical when cropping.
p.8 #9 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
johnvanr wrote:
But, see, I have both Ricoh GRIIIs and still don’t know which one is the one to carry. At least, with the Q28 you have enough cropping capacity to cover both focal lengths. And it has a real viewfinder, which the Ricohs sorely lack.
I agree with this. The 28mm version, with its ability to crop, is more versatile since it covers the 28-40mm range. However, the new 43mm will provide higher image quality at 43mm and when cropped. It really depends on whether your main use for the camera requires the ultimate image quality or if high image quality is sufficient. Also if rarely shoot wider than 40mm, the Q3 43 makes more sense.
That said, I hate cropping images. If I don't get the composition right, the image goes to the garbage can. So for me, the choice is much simpler: do I prefer a camera with a built-in 28mm or 43mm lens?
p.8 #10 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I agree with this. The 28mm version, with its ability to crop, is more versatile since it covers the 28-40mm range. However, the new 43mm will provide higher image quality at 43mm and when cropped. It really depends on whether your main use for the camera requires the ultimate image quality or if high image quality is sufficient. Also if rarely shoot wider than 40mm, the Q3 43 makes more sense.
That said, I hate cropping images. If I don't get the composition right, the image goes to the garbage can. So for me, the choice is much simpler: do I prefer a camera with a built-in 28mm or 43mm lens? ...Show more →
There was no way I could have gotten that shot from where I was sitting without either a zoom or a crop
I know part of the equation is the resolution of the sensor but to my eyes, and maybe I'm very wrong, the resulting image after the crop has subject separation that wouldn't immediately lead you to believe it was cropped in so heavily. Can we at least compromise and acknowledge that part of that comes from the way Leica's APO lenses render images and how they create a transition zone that makes subjects look like they were captured with a wider aperture lens?
p.8 #11 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
flash wrote:
On my SL3's and Q3's it doesn't initiate re-focus if you keep the shutter half pressed between shots. Have you tried that on a Q3-48? I find handheld stitches a doodle on Leica cameras compared to other brands.
Gordon
I was under the impression that with the Q you could only take two shots in succession like that.
p.8 #12 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
It's a good example also of the fact that you always retain 43mm focus fade characteristics; even at f2, DOF ensures the horse hair is sharp at this camera-subject distance, with the knight appearing as an overlay on the horse.
It works pretty well thanks to the facial expression and the armor, but you won't be getting the fade character of 85mm images or even 65mm images with crops, regardless of what Leica tell you. This is the topmost feature in their blurb:
"capabilities to simulate working with different focal length lenses: a 1.4x crop simulates a 60mm focal length, a 1.7x crop simulates a 75mm focal length, a 2x crop simulates a 90mm focal length, a 2.8x crop simulates a 120mm lens, and a 3.5x crop simulates a 150mm focal length."
It will be interesting to see how portraits work at the typical distances one stands at for strangers (2-3m), often in situations where you want to blur the background (roads, crowds, etc).
p.8 #13 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
philip_pj wrote:
It works pretty well thanks to the facial expression and the armor, but you won't be getting the fade character of 85mm images or even 65mm images with crops, regardless of what Leica tell you.
One of the reasons my SL3/75mm APO Summicron-SL aren't going anywhere.
p.8 #14 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
saxguy wrote:
There was no way I could have gotten that shot from where I was sitting without either a zoom or a crop
I know part of the equation is the resolution of the sensor but to my eyes, and maybe I'm very wrong, the resulting image after the crop has subject separation that wouldn't immediately lead you to believe it was cropped in so heavily. Can we at least compromise and acknowledge that part of that comes from the way Leica's APO lenses render images and how they create a transition zone that makes subjects look like they were captured with a wider aperture lens?...Show more →
That's quite a significant crop! It looks like you cropped the 60MP image from the 43mm lens to an equivalent of about 210mm, which goes beyond the crop modes on the Q3 43. As a result, your image has a depth of field of around f/10.
So, your final image is about 2.56MP, right? Still great for web sharing.
Peter Karble mentioned in an interview that as we move past 60/100MP sensors, photography will allow cropping anywhere in the image while still producing good results, especially with high-quality lenses. While this is exciting for many, I think it’s better to frame your shot properly at the start rather than rely on cropping later. That said, it seems to have worked well for you, and I’m glad you’re happy with the result!
p.8 #15 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
flash wrote:
On my SL3's and Q3's it doesn't initiate re-focus if you keep the shutter half pressed between shots. Have you tried that on a Q3-48? I find handheld stitches a doodle on Leica cameras compared to other brands.
Gordon
Take a look at one of the first 2 Q3 tutorials the Mathphotographer has where he shows what you ask.
p.8 #16 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's quite a significant crop! It looks like you cropped the 60MP image from the 43mm lens to an equivalent of about 210mm, which goes beyond the crop modes on the Q3 43. As a result, your image has a depth of field of around f/10.
So, your final image is about 2.56MP, right? Still great for web sharing.
Peter Karble mentioned in an interview that as we move past 60/100MP sensors, photography will allow cropping anywhere in the image while still producing good results, especially with high-quality lenses. While this is exciting for many, I think it’s better to frame your shot properly at the start rather than rely on cropping later. That said, it seems to have worked well for you, and I’m glad you’re happy with the result! ...Show more →
I'm not arguing the merits of framing properly in the first place. In fact that's the whole reason I got the Q3 45. With my Q3 I was cropping to 35 or 50 most of the time, which is why I sold it and went to pretty much always using, spoiler alert, my SL3 with the 35 and either the 50 APO-SL or the Summulix-SL
I also just checked it by reframing it and using the crop modes of the camera. It's very slightly tighter than the 150mm framing. I agree, though, it's a small image perfect for online sharing, but I certainly wouldn't print it.
p.8 #17 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
saxguy wrote:
It's very slightly tighter than the 150mm framing. I agree, though, it's a small image perfect for online sharing, but I certainly wouldn't print it.
Sounds similar to my experience with cropping my Q2. By that, I mean that Leica advocates crop values from 28 > 75. But, 75 (appx 3X from the native 26mm) was a bit much for my taste. I tapped out around 2X for "keepers". Many of my crops were a combination of not only "tighter framing", but also incurring some rotation, as needed for some "hip" shots.
I figure that will hold true for the 43 > 90 / 105 range being "keeper" territory. 135 and longer are "doable", and the APO certainly helps push the envelope a bit, so maybe 2.5X will hold up pretty well, still.
That said, everyone will have their own sense of case-use on how deep they'll crop (or not). The salient point being ... it is a handy option, and I think the whole point of the Q ... is, the "handy" convenience it offers in a single package unit, to a given level of expectation.
p.8 #18 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
It will be a good exercise to identify what compositions work best with the digital zoom, that and camera-subject distances. And that is a very educational and rewarding process. But certainly the lens is very good indeed.
p.8 #19 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
stgrove wrote:
That is why I find it hard to read why so many would get a GRxxx. 8GB buffer is solid too and IV processor better than M11's. Plus they are APS-C. It must be mainly down to affordability. I can understand we all have budgets (and too much gear).
The Ricohs are amazing little cameras and the output is stunning. But personally I can’t live without a viewfinder, esp. not since my eyesight requires different strength glasses for far and arm’s length. So, I hardly take them anywhere. Planning to sell them.
p.8 #20 · Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
1bwana1 wrote:
I am beginning to see signs that maybe you are a bit commitment shy...
In terms of cameras, probably, but I think there’s more to it. I started photography with a photojournalism interest, thus seeking to carry gear that can capture whatever gets thrown at you. But I also hate carrying too much. I also find myself often looking for tele shots. That’s for example why I get some of my best street stuff when I combine a wide lens on a FF camera with the tiny 45mm (90mm equivalent) on an Olympus, so I get the typical street stuff and details. And the fact that I’m dividing my time between the flat landscapes of Holland, the grandeur and people of Vienna and, soon, the narrow streets and wide seascapes of Valencia. I’ll get there, but fear the M11 is one of the first ones to go.
Don’t know if you follow Nick Carver on YT or saw the Andalusia series from various photographers, including him. I’m like him, wanting to have gear to do a lot of stuff (in his case, a Texas Leica, wide panoramic film and 4x5 film), but I want to carry the gear that GrainyDays carries for the same thing (just one camera).
I had the Q2 for a short while and yes, I absolutely appreciated the viewfinder. But not the 28mm so really. I also had the 28mm GR once. Again, lovely but not the one for me. Having both GRIIIs makes sense. 
