It took some getting used to, but I love my R3 and how fast it can focus and track my subjects. I do find it cumbersome though and my kids seem to hate when I haul it out to take their pictures. My go to walk around lens is a 28-70 f/2. I was thinking of selling that lens and purchasing a Q3 43. I would keep the R3 for other action photography (wildlife, kids sports, etc.) but use the Q3 43 as my walk around camera with the hopes I would get more pictures day to day. Anyone else have thoughts on that or done something similar?
I’ve done this. I shoot combat sports professionally on an R5 (with a couple lenses, but generally the 28-70 f2), but did not want to ever travel with such a bulky mirrorless set up.
I have migrated over to the M system completely as I prefer a rangefinder, but the Q3 43 is a perfect day to day carry. It’s bigger than you might be expecting, but is certainly smaller than your Canon set up.
Editing to say that the Q3 43 just had an update to auto focus. I can’t imagine it’s as great as the Canon, but it will be more than enough for day to day.
Of course. The zone focusing can get you there, but I think with kids you will appreciate the AF of the Q series. If you haven’t held one in person, see if you are able to check one out. It is not small enough to put into a pocket (except perhaps a large jacket pocket) so you’ll have to be intentional about taking it out and bringing with you. However the image quality is incredible and well worth it. Happy to answer any other questions.
Q3 43 has the sharpest apo lens, but even with latest eye af update, af is still not as good as the other manufacturers. Leica just added the animal eye af and the focus point needs to be close to pick up the eye af. Fuji X100VI was like that initially with people eye af and they managed to improve it with firmware that now it picks up the eye much better. Fuji X100VI has the best IBIS and the dual optical / evf pair. It has a 40MP apsc sensor with digital/optical conversion options. If you want the smallest option with better af, Sony RX1R III is also a good camera. It has same 60MP Sony sensor as Q3 but wide open the older lens shows its limits. The lens is sharp stopped down. Also there is no IBIS/tiltable lcd with RX1R III and has smallest evf...
It depends on what you shoot with it. I prefer the RX1R III due to its smaller size, but you need higher shutter speeds/ISO which is fine for moving subjects, not for landscapes... All has the af speed limitation due to their fixed lenses in comparison to latest mirrorless af lenses....
I use all with a halfcase with a grip + thumb grip as they are like a box... I also use the tele/wide converters that makes it f2 wide and tele options in addition to the digital conversion, so they cover the similar range to 28-70mm f/2... It might best to try them yourself which size or af is best for your use as it is more personal...
Thank you. I plan to use it mostly for pictures of family, landscapes, walk around lens. Sometimes the kids can be moving pretty quick, they are 10 and 8. I'm leaning towards the Leica but will look at the Sony. I have bigger hands so would think something larger may be better. I've thought about renting one to try out but also thought of buying used and reselling if I don't like it. The file sizes seem enormous compared to the R3.
IIRC, the Q3 also has the ability for "Triple Resolution" ... for choosing smaller file sizes. I don't think the large file size would be a deal breaker, since there are options for something smaller. But, it would be nice to have the pixels / data available to help with cropping that 43 when needed (which in part facilitates the "single" carry).
My biggest question regarding the Q3 43 APO is how folks contend with the wider (e.g. less than 35mm) side of things?
2nd body - Q with 28mm
2nd body - M with ILC
2nd body - m43 ILC
2nd body - Pocketable Fixed (like GR III)
WA Filter / Adapter
Cell Phone
Other
Can I ask, bluntly? Is it just the size you want to shrink or is the X factor of Leica a lure as well?
You could pick up R6iii and a 45mm 1.2 and have a smaller set up and stay within the Canon ecosystem.
As for the Q3-43, for me it’s an absolute joy. I have the Rx1Rii and won’t upgrade because without IBIS it’s limited. And the Q3-43 IQ is astounding. The lens is better than your 28-70 nat wider apertures and you also get all that extra resolution. If you’re happy with the R1’s 24MP you could take advantage of the in camera crop functions.
I would budget for a thumb grip or regular grip as well. Don’t get the Leica one. I got an exact copy off Amazon for 1/3 the price. Also if you intend to use filters the hood needs to be removed or upgraded to an aftermarket one as the factory hood doesn’t leave enough room except for ultra thin filters.
The Q3 v4 firmware is significant. CAF is now very good. It’s not as good as the top Canikonys but it’s as good or better than any Fuji camera I own. Leica uses Panasonic af tech so you’re basically getting the same performance as the S1Rii (although that has a different sensor).
The Q3 system has it’s own learning curve and I wouldn’t expect you images to be better but it is, as you wish, less off putting than a big honking R1. You will need to adapt you shooting technique with a Leica Q. It’s a very different shooting experience but there’s a reason that, as expensive as they are, they’re so popular.
I think it's a bit of both. I've wanted more of a walk around body for some time now. I want something smaller and something that I want to take with me all the time. There are moments on vacations and also around the house and other events where I just don't like pulling out the big body and lens for just regular day to day photographs but i want something significanlty better then my phone. I'm in a spot in my life where I can afford the Leica and it feels like it could be a good fit. I don't doubt there will be some learning involved but I think i'll enjoy the journey and experience when I see the pictures. I do a slide show for the family every year and when I played it last night, that's what got me thinking, "why not now?" Kids are only around these younger ages for a few more years.
Do you mind sharing the link to the thumb grip and regular grip you found on Amazon? If that is allowed on this forum.
I've never used filters so don't plan on doing that.
mattchu wrote:
The file sizes seem enormous compared to the R3.
The Q3 43 has the option to save images as 36 or 18MP in addition to full 60MP resolution. This can be a good option for 'non-critial' images where you don't want or need the full resolution and/or the storage impacts.
What I'm not sure about, and maybe something Gordon/flash could comment on, is whether the Q3's DNG files are lossless compressed or non-compressed. I have the impression that many Leica non-M cameras are DNG non-compressed, which would mean massive DNG file sizes, especially at full resolution.
The Q3 would certainly be a less bulky alternative for family photos and generally less intimidating for people photos in more casual settings. But as Gordon suggested, you could find options within the Canon system. As suggested the R6III could be a good body, or even an R8 if you want as small as possible. Rather than the 45/1.2, other options would be the VCM f/1.4 primes if you prefer the higher technical image quality than what the 45/1.2 offers. The 45 also has focus shift when stopped down until around f/5.6, which Canon default camera settings won't compensate for. But there is a setting - exposure simulation with DOF preview - that will force the camera to focus stopped down, which will then eliminate the focus shift problem. For an ultra compact lens option, the RF 28/2.8 would be worth considering. It's not going to be quite the optical magic of a 28mm lens like that in the regular Q3.
Otherwise I'd say don't be afraid of the M system's lack of AF. A little bit of practice and you can manually follow focus moving subjects. Also, it helps to accept that you only need one photo in focus most of the time, so as long as you get one, you're good. Rather than having the pick of nearly everything in focus at 30fps from the R3. I'd say a nice used M10-P and start with a couple Voigtlander M lenses of whatever focal lengths you prefer. The side benefit of the M system is that many of the standard medium speed focal length options are quite small physically, meaning the lens portion of the kit will be smaller than the lens on the Q3. Plus the M aesthetic is a bit more retro and even less off-putting for some subjects.
For sure, if you have the budget, YOLO and the kids are only getting older as we debate options.
The lens on the 43 is among the best I own, and I have several Sony GMs and used to have an M 35 APO Cron. I couldn’t say the same about the 28mm lens in the original Q3.
Despite “only” having lens based stabilization, the combination of that and the gentle shutter button on the 43 more than dampen issues I have with a bit of a hand tremor. That was a pleasant surprise. Even prior to the new firmware, the eye detection of subjects was pretty good…though it is off by default, causing multiple YouTube chuckle heads to erroneously complain about its quality. It was about comparable to the eyeAF on the Sony a7iii, prior to the new firmware - no slouch. I have not had a chance to test the new firmware.
The 43 is a solid camera, both in build but also weight. It is not a featherweight RX1Riii, but its build plus a handgrip (I really like the Helium H3) makes it a formidable camera. Would I chase kids with it? It all depends. I did so, decades ago, with a P&S Olympus digicam and got plenty of good shots…far inferior to today’s AF. Would it be better at that than your Canon? Unlikely. Would you enjoy using it more? Maybe. Totally a personal preference.
All that I can say is that it is the first all in one camera that I feel comfortable leaving the house with just that camera and lens combo. Maybe the lack of options to second guess the lens helps. It is a wonderful camera.
Thanks to all that have responded. I may post this in the Canon section as well. I do have pause with the autofocus not being what I'm used to on the R3. Kids are fast and always in motion no matter what we are doing! I don't really want to get another canon body, even though it would be smaller, just seems to defeat the intent of having essentially an extremely competent point and shoot.
Curious what you ended up doing? I've got an R1 and R3 I use for sports (primarily with the 100-300 2.8 + 400 2.8), but I've had the 28-70/2, ended up selling it and just picking up the much lighter RF 24-70 2.8.
The 28-70 was amazing, and as much as I love the ergonomics on the R3, I couldn't imagine that combo as an everyday family camera.
I also have a Q3 43 and a Q3M. I'm considering selling the Q3 43 because when it comes to photography for "me", I prefer the monochrom sensor. I've got an X-E5 and a GRIV which can fit in for family stuff, as well as a R52 / R62, and I like those with the EF 50 1.2 or 24-70 for general stuff or family shooting.
The Q3 (and in particular Q3 43) are fantastic options, but as others have mentioned, AF is not even in the same ballpark as the R3 (or even R6II to be honest). It's obviously simpler, lighter.. but if it was going to be my all-around general photography camera, I'd probably prefer a different option.
If you can accept APS-C IQ, maybe try the XE-5? Fuji film simulations are a lot of fun and the X-system has a huge set of lenses to choose from. It'll get you Q3 sizing, arguably better AF, better video (if needed), and ability to change lenses which can still be very small and lightweight. Plus you have the option of the 80's/90's analog EVF information display, which I can't get enough of..
Haven't made a final decision yet, but I'm 90% sure I will go with a Q3; standard version. Seems like the best fit for my needs with a full frame sensor and an ability to crop for longer reach when I need it. Thank you for the suggestion of the Fuji but I don't think I would gravitate towards that as much and don't really want to have to decide on lenses to swap in and out.
The Q3 is a fine camera, but for quick family photos it seems like overkill. I would have thought that a smaller or lower mp sensor would be much more than enough. The X100VI and especially the GR III/IV are far more convenient to carry and both operate just as fast and accurately giving you files for very large prints, if that is what you want.
I'd say a nice used M10-P and start with a couple Voigtlander M lenses of whatever focal lengths you prefer. The side benefit of the M system is that many of the standard medium speed focal length options are quite small physically, meaning the lens portion of the kit will be smaller than the lens on the Q3. Plus the M aesthetic is a bit more retro and even less off-putting for some subjects. 