Geoff CB wrote:
43 is the first one I've been interested in. 40mm is my favorite focal length for general photography and there are many times when I've just left the house with the Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 and been happy.
I like 40mm too, but I can’t imagine having it as my only lens. I liked the VL 40mm/1.2 on my M, but sold it because the M misses the frame lines for it. Just bought the version for Canon RF. A 40mm on a camera and a 28mm in a pocket sounds pretty good to me.
I'm a Leica M man and didn't quite take to the Q3 and went back happily to my RX1R2 for a smaller but no less excellent lens ..... my-o-my if only Sony would continue that series !
johnvanr wrote:
I like 40mm too, but I can’t imagine having it as my only lens. I liked the VL 40mm/1.2 on my M, but sold it because the M misses the frame lines for it. Just bought the version for Canon RF. A 40mm on a camera and a 28mm in a pocket sounds pretty good to me.
I mean it would never be my only lens, but if going out somewhere for a casual walk it would be enough for me.
I wonder if it would be possible to make a leaf shutter module (like a lens adapter) that could be attached to an ILC Q model that takes "M" lenses or a set of new leaf shutter "M" lenses without the module. I know, it's crazy thinking. Almost as crazy as adding a EVF to an "M" body
But back to the topic, if I had to choose, I'd go with a used Q3 28 and add the Q3 43 later when people realize the camera isn't for them
RustyBug wrote:
Leaf shutter M ... I dreamed of that fantasy years ago.
What we will get from a leaf shutter on an M besides the ability to sync flash at high shutter speeds. The flash/strobe options on M cameras is already so limited in choices that when I need those whether TTL in the street, or full manual in a studio setting, I normally choose to shoot another system. Now if at the same time we got the leaf shutter, we got great flash/strobe options I would be very interested.
I just dig on how smooth a leaf shutter is for hand holding and reduced shutter shock ... Evenly distributed radial force, vs. Linear start, stop, slam vibration.
RustyBug wrote:
I just dig on how smooth a leaf shutter is for hand holding and reduced shutter shock ... Evenly distributed radial force, vs. Linear start, stop, slam vibration.
True but an electronic shutter is even smoother, so all we really need is a fast sensor for that.
1bwana1 wrote:
True but an electronic shutter is even smoother, so all we really need is a fast sensor for that.
12 bit vs. 14 bit vs. 16 bit processing = more power = more heat = either slower processing to keep heat buildup minimal (noise, etc.), or larger heat dissipation capability.
A bit of a quid pro quo in how one approaches their "choose your poison".
M with leaf shutter lenses ... pure fantasy, while waiting for Moore's Law to get electronic shutters better performing.
I like the idea of the 43mm, very similar to my A7cr/40/2.5 but, I'm a 35mm guy. I think I'd have to have both and that's really not ever going to happen. I don't love the Q's....I love my M...It's my main body and I don't see that changing. I have an original Q (silver) and it works great, but, I don't use it much, I also have an SL2, if I need AF for a specific type of shoot I usually bring that.
For travel I use the m and an a7cr, which is way more versatile IMO
Matt Kerby wrote:
I like the idea of the 43mm, very similar to my A7cr/40/2.5 but, I'm a 35mm guy. I think I'd have to have both and that's really not ever going to happen. I don't love the Q's....I love my M...It's my main body and I don't see that changing. I have an original Q (silver) and it works great, but, I don't use it much, I also have an SL2, if I need AF for a specific type of shoot I usually bring that.
For travel I use the m and an a7cr, which is way more versatile IMO
Maybe more versatile, but not with a 5.7 EVF, 8 GB buffer and IV processing speed and for sure not with a UI like a Q3. Hey anyone from Bellevue can easily afford all the Q's he wants.
Just pare down your sets of wheels for your Porsche GT whatever and there you go-it can happen. I did and the rest is history.
stgrove wrote:
Maybe more versatile, but not with a 5.7 EVF, 8 GB buffer and IV processing speed and for sure not with a UI like a Q3. Hey anyone from Bellevue can easily afford all the Q's he wants.
Just pare down your sets of wheels for your Porsche GT whatever and there you go-it can happen. I did and the rest is history.
lol..wow...You pegged me
It's not really the $, it's the fact that I don't really like fixed lens cameras...I know they are the rage right now, i just can't gel.
Some comparisons have been made between the Q3 28mm and 43mm lenses, as well as with the SL APO lenses. It's unclear whether copy variation or differences in test methodology influenced the results, but the findings are quite interesting.
Now I have my camera in hand I am pleased it's basically what I'd hoped for. I think the lens is excellent. Not that being APO is absolutely critical 99% of the time. The focal length feels completely natural to me. A bit more width and less height than the 55mm Hasselblad, which is what happens when you measure the diagonal for *equivalence*.
I'm keeping my Q3-28 and I've set up my A7CR with a DGDN 90mm for a complete set. Honestly this is all I really need in small format. It's immediately obvious that the 43mm will be the most used, by far, for me. The 50mm APO on the SL3 *might* be 1% better, maybe. I don't see any useful differences. Nor do I care. I'll have a use for my SL3's still. Long lenses and all that.
I'm going to try and shoot accessory free on the Q3-43. No grips, giant hoods, filters etc. Just a thin strap or a wrist strap. Adding a grip or Thumb extension I may as well use the Hasselblad.
My M11's are in a bit of trouble. I've basically decided to move on the M11 and now I'm considering what to do with the M11-M.
Regardless of all the commentary about the price, the lens, the *corrections*, blah blah blah and the stupid boring sensor readout rubbish, I've been waiting for a camera like this for ages. Longer than 35, excellent (really excellent) IQ, aperture on the lens and a dead simple UI. A camera that sees like I see and one that just gets out of the way. Fabuluos!
flash wrote:
...I'm going to try and shoot accessory free on the Q3-43. No grips, giant hoods, filters etc. Just a thin strap or a wrist strap. Adding a grip or Thumb extension I may as well use the Hasselblad...
Gordon
I've always used wrist straps on all of my cameras but I understand your desire to keep the camera accessory free and that was my initial aim. Unfortunately, in practice, that didn't last long. Being used to cameras with secure grips meant I found the Q3 43 to be less than stable in my hand. I've now added a LIMs half case with a wonderfully secure grip. I've also added a thumbs up and together with the grip it makes handling the camera so much easier, particularly when shooting speedily, discretely and one-handed using the rear screen.
Everything on the camera is now black apart from a tiny amount of the grey and even that now looks virtually black. My wife says it now looks like a stealth bomber rather than bling bling.
Loving the camera and lens. My other cameras feel rather abandoned.
newyork wrote:
Do the Qs have the option for back button focus or is it half press only ?
Certainly the Q3 and Q3 43 don't have true Back Button Focus.
That said, I've used BBF on all of my cameras for many years, but happily I haven't had any problems switching back to half press shutter on the Q3 43. Surprisingly I haven't missed it!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Some comparisons have been made between the Q3 28mm and 43mm lenses, as well as with the SL APO lenses. It's unclear whether copy variation or differences in test methodology influenced the results, but the findings are quite interesting.
I watched a little bit of that-
I feel that are spot on with the comparison to the 50 APO/35 APO m-
I have never used the SL primes but this lens is really really nice. I want to try it for long exposure night shots with the sky to get a real feel for it. The 50 APO was great in that regard.
I’ve been very pleased with the new Q3 so far, although I haven’t yet had an opportunity to shoot it in decent light.
The 43mm is a very interesting focal length… what you see with the naked eye is almost precisely what you get in your image in terms of distortion/perspective. There is little to no thinking required once you visualize your framing… you simply look through the viewfinder and make the image… no requirement to move around and to get the elements of the image lined up the way you want them in the frame, as you would with a wide or telephoto lens.
For that reason, I think it is an excellent camera for documenting one’s daily life… you see it and you can capture it… and just as you saw it in the moment.
Where it may fall short a bit, in terms of engaging your creativity, is that the lens can’t really add anything to the image… you can’t really exaggerate leading lines or compress more elements into your image… what you see is very nearly what you get.
For that reason, I’m on the hunt for a Q3/Q2 as my second camera body… two cameras that can capture 90% of what I could ever ask for.
