Smogg wrote:
BBF is always under the thumb, there is no need to look for it, the thumb is activated at a certain moment and for the required time.
Again, that is simply a muscle memory and preference thing. What we are discussing here is ways to handle the same situation efficiently and successfully without BBF. You keep going back to trying to explain why the way you like to do this is somehow better. I specifically mentioned that this is not the point of the discussion as we all agree that is a personal preference thing only.
1bwana1 wrote:
Well under that scenario wouldn't you have to hold the BBF button down too? Just a question of which digit gets tired?
In such a situation I would have configured the camera differently so that no button had to be held down. Maybe even Manual focus, and waited comfortably with gloves on for Juliet to finish her drink and look out the widow. On the Q3 that can be done with a button click or a simple click on the lens itself.
I don't have to hold down anything; the focus remains on the window after releasing the BBF button. And I don't have to waste time switching to manual mode and back. I'll instantly take a shot with the window in the upper left corner in focus (with Juliet peeking out from the lower right), then, without wasting time or switching anything, I'll focus on Juliet and take another shot if needed. And I'll always maintain the same focus mode and focus frame size in any situation. Because if Juliet later trips when she comes out the door and falls into the open hatch, only her feet will be sticking out, and I'll take another shot, even though the camera won't be able to reliably recognize a person by their feet.
RustyRus wrote:
Exactly my point that set off everyone about the BBF and the smallest button on the Q3-
The only button you could really use you can barely feel without gloves much less with anything on your fingers-
Photo of how little its rasied- Could you imagine trying to focus all the time with that? Or with a glove on? No chance
I use a thumb-up accessory and glued a small bump (like a furniture bumper) onto the button. This allows me to easily find the button even when wearing gloves.
Smogg wrote:
I don't have to hold down anything; the focus remains on the window after releasing the BBF button. And I don't have to waste time switching to manual mode and back. I'll instantly take a shot with the window in the upper left corner in focus (with Juliet peeking out from the lower right), then, without wasting time or switching anything, I'll focus on Juliet and take another shot if needed. And I'll always maintain the same focus mode and focus frame size in any situation. Because if Juliet later trips when she comes out the door and falls into the open hatch, only her feet will be sticking out, and I'll take another shot, even though the camera won't be able to reliably recognize a person by their feet....Show more →
Honestly, I only see a different work flow in your system, not an innate advantage. There are many scenarios where single focus is just not going to get the results that another setup would.
Smogg wrote:
I use a thumb-up accessory and glued a small bump (like a furniture bumper) onto the button. This allows me to easily find the button even when wearing gloves.
I have seen people do that and did it myself back when I shot the D850 DSLR for wildlife in Africa. Mirrorless changed my workflow and I was able to get shot reliably that I never would with DSLR.
It all comes down to preferences. i shoot street which is a very dynamic environment almost every day. Most of the time with a manual focus M camera. Sometimes with an SL3 AF camera. Both give me excellent results. Just slightly different workflows. There is no right or wrong way, probably not even a "best" for everyone. As long as you are getting your shots, and enjoying the process, it is the right way for you. That is my only point.
1bwana1 wrote:
Honestly, I only see a different work flow in your system, not an innate advantage. There are many scenarios where single focus is just not going to get the results that another setup would.
That's right, it's a different technique. I use it because it allows me to not have to think about focus mode at all and avoid the crutch of profiles.
Smogg wrote:
That's right, it's a different technique. I use it because it allows me to not have to think about focus mode at all and avoid the crutch of profiles.
Why the pejorative use of "crutch" when it comes to using profiles. Leica and many others see it as a tool to be leveraged to make a camera a more powerful tool. Almost all manufactures have implemented similar capabilities. In my opinion Leica "User Profiles" is one of the more elegant of these implementations.
This is exactly why I was hesitant to pick up your initial request for this discussion. It is why I tried to set the tone of not trying to show which way was best.
1bwana1 wrote:
I have seen people do that and did it myself back when I shot the D850 DSLR for wildlife in Africa. Mirrorless changed my workflow and I was able to get shot reliably that I never would with DSLR.
It all comes down to preferences. i shoot street which is a very dynamic environment almost every day. Most of the time with a manual focus M camera. Sometimes with an SL3 AF camera. Both give me excellent results. Just slightly different workflows. There is no right or wrong way, probably not even a "best" for everyone. As long as you are getting your shots, and enjoying the process, it is the right way for you. That is my only point....Show more →
I also often use the M11 for street photography. But what's forgivable for the M11 (its manual focus is significantly faster than the manual focus on the Q3/Q3 43) is completely unforgivable for an autofocus camera.
KLaban wrote:
Which is exactly why I suggested you look at Smogg's posts #15 & #17 and answer the question he directed at you.
I think now you see why I was hesitant and had to be prodded to go down this path. I am grateful that Smogg is generally a very respectful person to discuss things withe. But we are not getting much participation form others in this discussion either.
1bwana1 wrote:
Why the pejorative use of "crutch" when it comes to using profiles. Leica and many others see it as a tool to be leveraged to make a camera a more powerful tool. Almost all manufactures have implemented similar capabilities. In my opinion Leica "User Profiles" is one of the more elegant of these implementations.
This is exactly why I was hesitant to pick up your initial request for this discussion. It is why I tried to set the tone of not trying to show which way was best.
I have an X2D2, a Sony A7R5, a GFX100RF, an M11-P, a Ricoh GRIIIx, and a Sony RX1RIII. I don't use profiles or menus on any of them. They're all set to the universal mode. I only couldn't do this on the SL3 and Q3 43. Incidentally, that was one of the reasons I sold the SL3.
Smogg wrote:
I also often use the M11 for street photography. But what's forgivable for the M11 (its manual focus is significantly faster than the manual focus on the Q3/Q3 43) is completely unforgivable for an autofocus camera.
I guess I don't see that a manufacturer taking an approach different from my preferences as "forgivable" or "unforgivable". I just see that maybe one camera is better suited for my preferences than another.
1bwana1 wrote:
I think now you see why I was hesitant and had to be prodded to go down this path. I am grateful that Smogg is generally a very respectful person to discuss things withe. But we are not getting much participation form others in this discussion either.
You're right, I'd love to hear other opinions too. It's never too late to learn.
Smogg wrote:
I have an X2D2, a Sony A7R5, a GFX100RF, an M11-P, a Ricoh GRIIIx, and a Sony RX1RIII. I don't use profiles or menus on any of them. They're all set to the universal mode. I only couldn't do this on the SL3 and Q3 43. Incidentally, that was one of the reasons I sold the SL3.
Wow, that is a lot of cemers and by extension probably lenses. My goals are different. I want as few things to manage as possible that I am able to accomplish my goals with. This extends to my whole life, not just cameras.
So you have a large library of cameras that you have setup to operate the exact same way. Why then so many cameras? The great thing is that there are so many that work well for you. Leica seems not to. Why is that "unforgivable"?
1bwana1 wrote:
I guess I don't see that a manufacturer taking an approach different from my preferences as "forgivable" or "unforgivable". I just see that maybe one camera is better suited for my preferences than another.
I also agree with you. If I didn't like the Q3 43 at all, I wouldn't even be discussing it. However, it's a shame that for my convenience, it lacks a couple of simple features that could easily be implemented in the firmware, giving the user the choice of whether to use them or not. Moreover, these functions are widely available from other manufacturers.
Smogg wrote:
I also agree with you. If I didn't like the Q3 43 at all, I wouldn't even be discussing it. However, it's a shame that for my convenience, it lacks a couple of simple features that could easily be implemented in the firmware, giving the user the choice of whether to use them or not. Moreover, these functions are widely available from other manufacturers.
The Q3 is not a camera for me as I draw the line at either having interchangeable lenses or at least a broad FL zoom on a fixed lens camera.
As I have repeatedly said in our discussion I also think that such a choice would be a positive. Why not appeal to as broad a user base as possible.
I will note that I think all of the cameras, (except I don't know about the MF ones) implement their own version of profiles because here are so many that want that. Just not you. Not "unforgivable" in my opinion.
1bwana1 wrote:
Wow, that is a lot of cemers and by extension probably lenses. My goals are different. I want as few things to manage as possible that I am able to accomplish my goals with. This extends to my whole life, not just cameras.
So you have a large library of cameras that you have setup to operate the exact same way. Why then so many cameras? The great thing is that there are so many that work well for you. Leica seems not to. Why is that "unforgivable"?
I shoot in a fairly narrow focal length range (28-70). The 100RF is my main camera for daylight hours. I don't hesitate to crop it to the equivalent of 50mm, and I'm happy with its quality even in these situations. So, it covers the 28-50 range for me. The RX1RIII is for the evening and as a backup camera on trips. The X2D2 is for those times when I know exactly what I'll be shooting before leaving the house and I want absolute quality. The A7r5 is for children's parties, but I plan to sell it after buying the HB 35-100, since the X2D2 is now perfectly capable of handling children's parties. The Ricoh is for those times when I don't want to take a bag with me and can take the camera straight from my jacket pocket. The M11-P is for the soul, when I want to feel the shot with my heart. I hardly use the Q3 43, but I still hope Leica will make it more practical with new firmware.
Smogg wrote:
I shoot in a fairly narrow focal length range (28-70). The 100RF is my main camera for daylight hours. I don't hesitate to crop it to the equivalent of 50mm, and I'm happy with its quality even in these situations. So, it covers the 28-50 range for me. The RX1RIII is for the evening and as a backup camera on trips. The X2D2 is for those times when I know exactly what I'll be shooting before leaving the house and I want absolute quality. The A7r5 is for children's parties, but I plan to sell it after buying the HB 35-100, since the X2D2 is now perfectly capable of handling children's parties. The Ricoh is for those times when I don't want to take a bag with me and can take the camera straight from my jacket pocket. The M11-P is for the soul, when I want to feel the shot with my heart. I hardly use the Q3 43, but I still hope Leica will make it more practical with new firmware....Show more →
That is a lot of cameras for such a narrow set of use cases. Is it distribution channels that is driving your need for this? Meaning digital, print, or super large gallery prints?
Maybe just a hobby for fun?
I know people who collect cars, and houses, like that too.
This year I relocated to Italy for a while. The amount of stuff I had to give away, throw away, sell cheap, or store, after living in the same house for more that 25 years has me saying I will never buy anything again. Keeping it simple is real freedom.
1bwana1 wrote:
That is a lot of cameras for such a narrow set of use cases. Is it distribution channels that is driving your need for this? Meaning digital, print, or super large gallery prints?
Maybe just a hobby for fun?
I know people who collect cars, and houses, like that too.
This year I relocated to Italy for a while. The amount of stuff I had to give away, throw away, sell cheap, or store, after living in the same house for more that 25 years has me saying I will never buy anything again. Keeping it simple is real freedom.
After a certain age, it becomes easier and easier to replace a passion for women with something else. I took up photography as a hobby.🤣
1bwana1 wrote:
That is a lot of cameras for such a narrow set of use cases. Is it distribution channels that is driving your need for this? Meaning digital, print, or super large gallery prints?
Maybe just a hobby for fun?
I know people who collect cars, and houses, like that too.
This year I relocated to Italy for a while. The amount of stuff I had to give away, throw away, sell cheap, or store, after living in the same house for more that 25 years has me saying I will never buy anything again. Keeping it simple is real freedom.
A very wise decision! We don't need many things for a comfortable life. However, we've already gone far beyond the BBF. Nevertheless, the conversation was interesting. Thank you!
