p.2 #1 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
The A7CR and Q3 43 have been my main cameras for awhile these days, so here's my thoughts comparing the two:
Likes
- Build quality is excellent, it just feels super solid and premium. Buttons, knobs, body, you name it, they all feel like they could last a lifetime or hold up if you need to defend yourself from a bear using the camera.
- The 43 lens is easily my favorite of all time. I personally don't notice any sort of unnatural sharpness with it, at least compared to any of my better Sony lenses.
- Menu system is a breath of fresh air compared to Sony, as is how easy it is to customize the button functions. Though they did nerf some of this with the recent 4.0 update, hopefully they revert back to the previous method a bit in the next update.
- No more focus by wire, I really enjoy being able to reliably manual focus the Q3 43 just by feel and where the focus ring is in it's travel.
- The Leica App is far and away the best camera app out there, importing images is fast and easy.
- Since firmware 4.0 the AF has been vastly improved, still not Sony quality but I don;t miss nearly as many shots as I used to. Personally, I think the AF is just fine on the Q3 now, I've even has some surprisingly good results doing BIF photos.
- It makes me want to slow down and shoot more intentionally, and I even have started manual focusing a lot more too just to enjoy the experience.
Dislikes
- Ergonomics. A grip AND a thumb rest were a must for me right out of the gate. I mostly handhold my cameras while out shooting instead of using a strap all the time, and the Q series is (IMVHO) stupidly slippery and uncomfortable to hold without these two things. With those two items (I love the minimal IDS grip) it's a totally different experience and all the knobs and buttons feel right at home.
- RAW support in Lightroom. I shoot mainly B&W and some color now and then, and with my A7CR I can use creative looks while shooting RAW to see things in B&W and Lightroom will automatically convert the RAWs to B&W when I import. Importing RAWs from the Leica and they are always in color.
- The frame lines while cropping in camera are a love hate thing. Nice being able to see wider than the crop on the LCD sometimes, but I still wish we could zoom into the crop factor so it takes up the whole display at times too.
- Weight. It's still a pretty hefty camera to carry around all day, even though it's considered a compact camera by some.
- Video recording being limited to 30 minutes means I'll always need the A7CR still for the longer videos I need to do. Shame as the video option in the Q3 are otherwise more than enough for my needs.
- Can't use my Kase filters with the stock lens hood. There's other options out there for filters and hoods, but it would have been nice if they weren't required.
My last dislike is less of a dislike and more of a... heads up. Before I got my Q3 43 and was researching it, I kept seeing all these amazing images people were posting from the camera showing the "Leica look". However I never felt my RAW images had that same saturation and contrast like those images which was sort of a bummer. In fact, when I would show my other photographer friends RAWs of the same scene from the Q3 43 and the A7CR (with 40mm 2.5G) side by side for comparison, they would ALWAYS assume the Sony RAWs were from the Leica since they had a bit more contrast to them.
It wasn't until I went out one day intentionally shooting jpegs for the heck of it that I finally had that AHA! moment of seeing the look I had been chasing for so long. It's the processing that Leica does for the jpegs that (to me) really gives the images that stereotypically Leica look. This is fine with me as 61MP jpegs still leave a lot of flexibility for light editing, but for some people that might be an issue so I thought I would point it out.
Hope that helps, happy to answer any questions too.
p.2 #2 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
I have the Q3 43 and a1 and have been a Sony shooter for >10 years. I love both cameras. I find the fixed lens freeing on the Q3 43. No overthinking…you just shoot the amazing lens already on the camera.
The lens on the Q3 43 is stellar but also different from other Leica lenses I have used. Its rendering is most similar to my 100/2.8 APO macro in that its colors are very saturated, and the falloff to oof is more gradual, in the portrait range, at apertures that envelope your subject. This makes for very pleasing portraits that retain an environmental feel without becoming about the environment. In my opinion, it is not the system if you desire to make impressionistic images routinely. For that, get the 50/1.2 GM. It is, however, great for portraits, close ups, and landscape. Its AF is perfectly serviceable and comparable to the a7iii / a7Riii vintage, which already had eye-AF.
A thumb grip and grip are likely essential, but you have a wealth of options to suit your personal preferences. The app is great but annoyingly is not ported to Mac computers…only devices. I can not tell you how little interest I have in editing on an iPad. Please, Leica, port your software to Mac OS. I would happily use that, instead of LR.
p.2 #4 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
dalegaspi wrote:
Leica Q3 43 AF and overall responsiveness is not great (mostly can be said about SL3 really)...not completely horrible...but it definitely feels like a step back in time when compared to my Nikon Z. more often than not i'd take the M11 over it.
its MF and zone focusing feature is overrated IMO and never felt the need to use them. the MF mechanism is not smooth and too tight (think Voigtlander lenses but worse) especially when you're used to M lenses. the Macro mode is irritating to use because you really only use it because in normal mode the MFD is around 0.6m...when you switch to macro mode 9/10 you will forget and then you find yourself fumbling why the AF is borked until you realize it was on macro mode.
that said, the lens is phenomenal...it's sharp with very very little CA (it is APO, after all) but the focus fall off is something i have only seen in SL/M APO lenses ..it is f2 but the falloff is like it's a faster lens ..i put up with the quirks of the camera because of the lens. and the menu system is above anything else which makes it tolerable to use..
p.2 #5 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
Why not just put a SIgma 45mm DGDN on your A1 and be done with it? It won’t look any bigger to your subject as your hand is the biggest thing they see anyway.
Since the firmware upgrades the Q and SL cameras have excellent AF. Personally I’d have no issues chasing my daft dog or screaming brats around but I shot my kids with an M and had no issues. Personally I don’t need every shot of Fido and his drool covered ball to be in critical focus anyway. But that’s just me.
In single shot you’ll likely notice little to no difference between the cameras. You will get a speed boot with a GM prime but then you need to carry them. The Q3 will be on par with the 45 2.5 or a Sigma. In continued the Leica is actaully very good now but not A1ii good. But what is.
But here’s the thing. A Q isn’t meant to be an alternative to an A1ii. It’s like the opposite end of the usability spectrum. You’re supposed to slow down and be a bit more considerate in your shooting. A Q will impact how you approach a subject. If you want a rattle gun it’s the wrong camera. A Q is designed to be a considered camera. It’s not for shooting 30fps and then pulling a frame. It’s about planning and waiting for a moment.
Generally a Q is more than fast enough but if you consider photographing your kids to be similar to shooting football, it’s the wrong camera for you.
p.2 #7 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
flash wrote:
Why not just put a SIgma 45mm DGDN on your A1 and be done with it? It won’t look any bigger to your subject as your hand is the biggest thing they see anyway.
Since the firmware upgrades the Q and SL cameras have excellent AF. Personally I’d have no issues chasing my daft dog or screaming brats around but I shot my kids with an M and had no issues. Personally I don’t need every shot of Fido and his drool covered ball to be in critical focus anyway. But that’s just me.
In single shot you’ll likely notice little to no difference between the cameras. You will get a speed boot with a GM prime but then you need to carry them. The Q3 will be on par with the 45 2.5 or a Sigma. In continued the Leica is actaully very good now but not A1ii good. But what is.
But here’s the thing. A Q isn’t meant to be an alternative to an A1ii. It’s like the opposite end of the usability spectrum. You’re supposed to slow down and be a bit more considerate in your shooting. A Q will impact how you approach a subject. If you want a rattle gun it’s the wrong camera. A Q is designed to be a considered camera. It’s not for shooting 30fps and then pulling a frame. It’s about planning and waiting for a moment.
Generally a Q is more than fast enough but if you consider photographing your kids to be similar to shooting football, it’s the wrong camera for you.
p.2 #8 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
dalegaspi wrote:
i think you'd be better off with a RX1R III, then...but take that with a grain of salt... i have not used an RX1R ... but given you're already in the Sony ecosystem this would suit you better...and from what I gather its AF is not that far off with the current generation of Sony ILC cameras.
and it has a Zeiss lens that's not APO so the rendering is probably up your alley.
Yes, you are right and I was very excited about the RX1R III and I actually pre-ordered one when it was announced. But then I discovered that they had made it without IBIS, and that is a very important feature for me because I like to be able to shoot at very low shutter speeds often enough and the lack of IBIS seemed like a limitation. I am also fond of the lens and it rendering.
p.2 #9 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
Tarekith wrote:
The A7CR and Q3 43 have been my main cameras for awhile these days, so here's my thoughts comparing the two:
Likes
- Build quality is excellent, it just feels super solid and premium. Buttons, knobs, body, you name it, they all feel like they could last a lifetime or hold up if you need to defend yourself from a bear using the camera.
- The 43 lens is easily my favorite of all time. I personally don't notice any sort of unnatural sharpness with it, at least compared to any of my better Sony lenses.
- Menu system is a breath of fresh air compared to Sony, as is how easy it is to customize the button functions. Though they did nerf some of this with the recent 4.0 update, hopefully they revert back to the previous method a bit in the next update.
- No more focus by wire, I really enjoy being able to reliably manual focus the Q3 43 just by feel and where the focus ring is in it's travel.
- The Leica App is far and away the best camera app out there, importing images is fast and easy.
- Since firmware 4.0 the AF has been vastly improved, still not Sony quality but I don;t miss nearly as many shots as I used to. Personally, I think the AF is just fine on the Q3 now, I've even has some surprisingly good results doing BIF photos.
- It makes me want to slow down and shoot more intentionally, and I even have started manual focusing a lot more too just to enjoy the experience.
Dislikes
- Ergonomics. A grip AND a thumb rest were a must for me right out of the gate. I mostly handhold my cameras while out shooting instead of using a strap all the time, and the Q series is (IMVHO) stupidly slippery and uncomfortable to hold without these two things. With those two items (I love the minimal IDS grip) it's a totally different experience and all the knobs and buttons feel right at home.
- RAW support in Lightroom. I shoot mainly B&W and some color now and then, and with my A7CR I can use creative looks while shooting RAW to see things in B&W and Lightroom will automatically convert the RAWs to B&W when I import. Importing RAWs from the Leica and they are always in color.
- The frame lines while cropping in camera are a love hate thing. Nice being able to see wider than the crop on the LCD sometimes, but I still wish we could zoom into the crop factor so it takes up the whole display at times too.
- Weight. It's still a pretty hefty camera to carry around all day, even though it's considered a compact camera by some.
- Video recording being limited to 30 minutes means I'll always need the A7CR still for the longer videos I need to do. Shame as the video option in the Q3 are otherwise more than enough for my needs.
- Can't use my Kase filters with the stock lens hood. There's other options out there for filters and hoods, but it would have been nice if they weren't required.
My last dislike is less of a dislike and more of a... heads up. Before I got my Q3 43 and was researching it, I kept seeing all these amazing images people were posting from the camera showing the "Leica look". However I never felt my RAW images had that same saturation and contrast like those images which was sort of a bummer. In fact, when I would show my other photographer friends RAWs of the same scene from the Q3 43 and the A7CR (with 40mm 2.5G) side by side for comparison, they would ALWAYS assume the Sony RAWs were from the Leica since they had a bit more contrast to them.
It wasn't until I went out one day intentionally shooting jpegs for the heck of it that I finally had that AHA! moment of seeing the look I had been chasing for so long. It's the processing that Leica does for the jpegs that (to me) really gives the images that stereotypically Leica look. This is fine with me as 61MP jpegs still leave a lot of flexibility for light editing, but for some people that might be an issue so I thought I would point it out.
Hope that helps, happy to answer any questions too. ...Show more →
Excellent insights! Thank you for the detailed response.
Wonderful images. Very striking and pleasurable to look at.
I would be most interested to know how the Q3 43 contributed to you getting the images and whether you think another camera would not have done as well. My imagining of things when I posted my original question was that the Q3 43 would be helpful in getting those kinds of street & travel images, but a number of the replies have made me think that is not so. Therefore, I would be very interested in your take on how (and whether) the Q3 43 contributed to taking these particular images.
p.2 #11 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
flash wrote:
Why not just put a SIgma 45mm DGDN on your A1 and be done with it? It won’t look any bigger to your subject as your hand is the biggest thing they see anyway.
Since the firmware upgrades the Q and SL cameras have excellent AF. Personally I’d have no issues chasing my daft dog or screaming brats around but I shot my kids with an M and had no issues. Personally I don’t need every shot of Fido and his drool covered ball to be in critical focus anyway. But that’s just me.
In single shot you’ll likely notice little to no difference between the cameras. You will get a speed boot with a GM prime but then you need to carry them. The Q3 will be on par with the 45 2.5 or a Sigma. In continued the Leica is actaully very good now but not A1ii good. But what is.
But here’s the thing. A Q isn’t meant to be an alternative to an A1ii. It’s like the opposite end of the usability spectrum. You’re supposed to slow down and be a bit more considerate in your shooting. A Q will impact how you approach a subject. If you want a rattle gun it’s the wrong camera. A Q is designed to be a considered camera. It’s not for shooting 30fps and then pulling a frame. It’s about planning and waiting for a moment.
Generally a Q is more than fast enough but if you consider photographing your kids to be similar to shooting football, it’s the wrong camera for you.
Very helpful response. Thank you. My Sigma 45mm is on my A1 II, where it usually is, as I write this. But I think you misunderstand what I am looking for a bit. I have never shot more than a single frame at a time, my cameras have never been set to multiple FPS. And I never gun photos. As I said, somewhere above, I take both slow, considered shots but I also often try to capture something that is there for only a second, like the right expression or alignment. I do want a camea to be responsive so that I can get those fleeting moments, and I thought the Q3 43 might be a bit like an M set to zone and ready for anything that happens in the proper range. I am getting the impression that the Q3 43 operates a bit more like a GFX100S II. Excellent image quality, decent AF and IBIS, but a little pokey. I love my GFX, and use it often, but I was looking for a different experience with the Q3 that I imagined might be more Leica M-like (other than the rangefinder aspect of the M) but with the gifts that electronics bring.
p.2 #12 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
RustyRus wrote:
I wanted to type this a few times and you said it perfectly-
If you want a fast run and gun, he a already owns it. The Leica Q3 is the exact opposite of that!!!!
What did I say that makes you think I want a run and gun camera? I never shoot that way. Never do sports. My cameras have only ever been set to single shot. I value the A1 series for its responsiveness, AF, IBIS, its stacked, fast read sensor, and its image quality. Responsiveness is a very different quality than FPS. I do want a camera that is quick enough in start up and AF to catch a fleeting moment, as well as one that works for more slowly considered shots. The challenge is a camera that does both, with a simple, smooth, tranparent, congenial interface.
p.2 #13 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
Tarekith wrote:
The A7CR and Q3 43 have been my main cameras for awhile these days, so here's my thoughts comparing the two:
Likes
- Build quality is excellent, it just feels super solid and premium. Buttons, knobs, body, you name it, they all feel like they could last a lifetime or hold up if you need to defend yourself from a bear using the camera.
- The 43 lens is easily my favorite of all time. I personally don't notice any sort of unnatural sharpness with it, at least compared to any of my better Sony lenses.
- Menu system is a breath of fresh air compared to Sony, as is how easy it is to customize the button functions. Though they did nerf some of this with the recent 4.0 update, hopefully they revert back to the previous method a bit in the next update.
- No more focus by wire, I really enjoy being able to reliably manual focus the Q3 43 just by feel and where the focus ring is in it's travel.
- The Leica App is far and away the best camera app out there, importing images is fast and easy.
- Since firmware 4.0 the AF has been vastly improved, still not Sony quality but I don;t miss nearly as many shots as I used to. Personally, I think the AF is just fine on the Q3 now, I've even has some surprisingly good results doing BIF photos.
- It makes me want to slow down and shoot more intentionally, and I even have started manual focusing a lot more too just to enjoy the experience.
Dislikes
- Ergonomics. A grip AND a thumb rest were a must for me right out of the gate. I mostly handhold my cameras while out shooting instead of using a strap all the time, and the Q series is (IMVHO) stupidly slippery and uncomfortable to hold without these two things. With those two items (I love the minimal IDS grip) it's a totally different experience and all the knobs and buttons feel right at home.
- RAW support in Lightroom. I shoot mainly B&W and some color now and then, and with my A7CR I can use creative looks while shooting RAW to see things in B&W and Lightroom will automatically convert the RAWs to B&W when I import. Importing RAWs from the Leica and they are always in color.
- The frame lines while cropping in camera are a love hate thing. Nice being able to see wider than the crop on the LCD sometimes, but I still wish we could zoom into the crop factor so it takes up the whole display at times too.
- Weight. It's still a pretty hefty camera to carry around all day, even though it's considered a compact camera by some.
- Video recording being limited to 30 minutes means I'll always need the A7CR still for the longer videos I need to do. Shame as the video option in the Q3 are otherwise more than enough for my needs.
- Can't use my Kase filters with the stock lens hood. There's other options out there for filters and hoods, but it would have been nice if they weren't required.
My last dislike is less of a dislike and more of a... heads up. Before I got my Q3 43 and was researching it, I kept seeing all these amazing images people were posting from the camera showing the "Leica look". However I never felt my RAW images had that same saturation and contrast like those images which was sort of a bummer. In fact, when I would show my other photographer friends RAWs of the same scene from the Q3 43 and the A7CR (with 40mm 2.5G) side by side for comparison, they would ALWAYS assume the Sony RAWs were from the Leica since they had a bit more contrast to them.
It wasn't until I went out one day intentionally shooting jpegs for the heck of it that I finally had that AHA! moment of seeing the look I had been chasing for so long. It's the processing that Leica does for the jpegs that (to me) really gives the images that stereotypically Leica look. This is fine with me as 61MP jpegs still leave a lot of flexibility for light editing, but for some people that might be an issue so I thought I would point it out.
Hope that helps, happy to answer any questions too. ...Show more →
A question: In your personal use and experience, what kinds of pictures does the Q3 43 help you to get and which ones does it tend to miss or make more difficult? And the same for the A7C R--which pictures does it help you to get and which does it make more difficult? Thanks!
p.2 #14 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
I love my Q2M, but there is no way I would pay that kind of money for a color version when I could take the money and buy a CV lens to mount on the Sony, with the rest of the money going toward a trip ... or a second Sony body that has been converted to full spectrum mono, an area that the Q2M (with its aggressive IR filter) does not cover.
And as much as the Sony menu system sucks, the C and Fn buttons can be customized to the point where I rarely need to enter the full menu.
p.2 #15 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chiron wrote:
Very helpful response. Thank you. My Sigma 45mm is on my A1 II, where it usually is, as I write this. But I think you misunderstand what I am looking for a bit. I have never shot more than a single frame at a time, my cameras have never been set to multiple FPS. And I never gun photos. As I said, somewhere above, I take both slow, considered shots but I also often try to capture something that is there for only a second, like the right expression or alignment. I do want a camea to be responsive so that I can get those fleeting moments, and I thought the Q3 43 might be a bit like an M set to zone and ready for anything that happens in the proper range. I am getting the impression that the Q3 43 operates a bit more like a GFX100S II. Excellent image quality, decent AF and IBIS, but a little pokey. I love my GFX, and use it often, but I was looking for a different experience with the Q3 that I imagined might be more Leica M-like (other than the rangefinder aspect of the M) but with the gifts that electronics bring....Show more →
The Q3-43 is faster than your GFX. And it’s fine for zone focusing.
Based on your response to me I think you’ll be perfectly fine with the Q3. But I’d rent one first if possible. If you have access to a Leica store go there and spend some time with the camera. Some will even blow you have a wander for an hour. Leica stores are a huge part of the appeal big the brand and I highly encourage you to utilise their expertise if possible.
p.2 #16 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chiron wrote:
A question: In your personal use and experience, what kinds of pictures does the Q3 43 help you to get and which ones does it tend to miss or make more difficult? And the same for the A7C R--which pictures does it help you to get and which does it make more difficult? Thanks!
Prior to firmware 4.0 for the Q3, the only real issue I was having was that the camera would show me the AF was locked on to what I thought, but then when I would get home and review the images the focus was actually a little in front or behind where I expected. Firmware 4.0 fixed most of this, and made the AF lock on time a bit speedier too.
Assuming I'm using the 40mm G lens on the A7CR, I don't think there's any real difference in the kinds of photos I would be able to get with either camera. For all intents in terms of the end result they are identical, especially with the same sensor and being able to crop the same amount in post. These days the A7CR gets reserved for when I want to do some telephoto or macro work, or anything related to video or timelapse.
The benefit of the Q3 is being more hands on and deliberate with how I shoot, versus just relying on a more general purpose setting using burst shooting with auto ISO minimum SS and the Sony excellent AF performance. With the Q3 I'm more likely to manually be changing my settings for each shot, really getting hands on with controls without thinking about it or even looking at them now that I'm used to them. I guess the only other real hardware benefit I can think of is the 43 lens just being so damn nice, the blown out backgrounds at shallower depths of field are sooo nice in a way the Sony 40G just can't do (though I still like it for that too). I will say there was a good learning curve adapting to the way the Leica works coming from a Sony background, even though it's technically a simpler camera to operate.
A couple more things that came to mind as I was thinking about this today. I was really looking forward to having a better EVF on the Q3, but in use I rarely find it makes any difference in how I use the camera or what I can see in the EVF. Yes the Q3 EVF is nicer, but it really doesn't make as much difference for me as I thought it might. Then again I don;t hate the A7CR EVF as much as some people seem to.
Lastly, while the Q3 43 is probably the one camera I would keep as my desert island camera, it's also something I've been close to selling SOOO many times too. There's just so much overlap with the A7CR and what it can do that it really does feel like a bit excessive when you factor in the cost. I love the handling and deliberate nature of the Q3 43, but I have to ask myself frequently is it really worth thousands and thousands more than the A7CR? For now I still say yes, but mainly because it was a once in a lifetime splurge as a 50th birthday gift to myself and I was able to get it before the latest tariffs raised the price even more. If it was stolen and I had to get it again, I would have to have a long think about it this time around. Well, an even longer think about it
p.2 #17 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
Reading about your thinking reminds me of my own patterns. I already had a nice Canon kit and a very large MFT kit, but didn't like the large Canon lenses and the perceived limitations of MFT. This struck home when I was in Holland a few years ago on a dreary autumn day and decided MFT didn't cut it and needed a small kit with a large sensor.
Enter Leica.
I won't go into details, but I now own a M11, a bunch of M mount lenses and all kinds of adapters to also use those lenses on my Canon, Fuji GFX, Fuji X and Nikon cameras. I've owned Qs and SLs as well. At first it was those small lenses and small camera that brought me on this path and then it also became the perceived user experience, the slower pace, the nicer menu, those special lens renderings, etc. etc.
What I discovered was that I still enjoyed shooting most when I took my OM-1 II with a fast zoom or a simple small camera that offered flexibility. So, over time, the Q became too much of a one-trick pony. The M11 is also too limited for me, esp. considering its price. The Nikon Z6III that I bought to use with those M lenses, is too large, really.
In the end, I picked up a small Canon R8, the new Shoten M-RF adapter and that's my 'Leica'-manual setup going forward.
The M11, the Fuji X, the Nikon Z, they will all be sold. A bunch of that M glass will go too, because in reality I don't really see the 'specialness' of it in my images. And I will use my MFT kit a lot more.
I will still have more kit than I really need, but it will be based on real use and not what I expected something would do for me. Those perceptions just became a chain around my photographic neck.
Not saying this is true for you as well, as for some a Leica Q or M really makes an enormous difference, but it was for me.
Afterword: I keep my Leica D-Lux8, but that's because it's a small camera with a fastish lens, not because of any 'feelings.'
p.2 #18 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chiron wrote:
Wonderful images. Very striking and pleasurable to look at.
I would be most interested to know how the Q3 43 contributed to you getting the images and whether you think another camera would not have done as well. My imagining of things when I posted my original question was that the Q3 43 would be helpful in getting those kinds of street & travel images, but a number of the replies have made me think that is not so. Therefore, I would be very interested in your take on how (and whether) the Q3 43 contributed to taking these particular images.
Many thanks for your kind comments, they are much appreciated.
I'll start with a bit of history. I've owned and used many cameras over the years, including Nikon film, Hasselblad film and digital and more recently Leica M cameras, but sadly health and eyesight issues mean that I've had to look elsewhere to replace the Leica M cameras. I also use couple of Nikon Z7 bodies which I still use to this day.
I'll add a little here about how and why I shoot. Always RAW, often due to the nature of my subjects I have a maximum of a handful of seconds to see and capture images, but that said, my approach is always considered and very rarely using anything other than single shot capture. My enjoyment comes from capturing my subjects in difficult circumstances and processing each file on a completely individual basis - no pre-baked profiles for this tog. It always amuses me that I often spend mere seconds capturing the files and then can spend hours processing them. Anyone looking for OOC files should look elsewhere!
I've always admired the Q cameras but the 28mm is simply not my bag, preferring as I do 'standard' focal length lenses. For years I was praying that Leica would introduce a longer focal length version of the Q and I consequently pressed the button on the first day of release and bought the Q3 43. Happy days. This was to be my main travel option, lightweight, reasonably compact and above all else just pure simplicity. It hasn't disappointed. Discretion is key when I'm shooting in the street.
The lens is everything I hoped for, whether used wide open or stopped down, as good as anything I used on the M cameras. The 60MP sensor gives me the option to crop when necessary. I see the fixed lens as a positive, it's that SIMPLICITY thing again, just zoom with the feet. The profiles are useful but in reality I keep everything as simple as possible, hence all my concentration is focused on the subjects; my wife would say simple things for simple minds. Again, the menu UI is pure simplicity, or was until Leica introduced the latest firmware update, thankfully I resisted updating to FW 4. The Q3 43 is certainly not a speed machine, but neither am I. Horses for courses. I’ve nothing to add to comparisons with other cameras and will leave that to others.
I’ll end by saying I’d also buy a Leica Q3 90 in a heartbeat should it ever materialise.
p.2 #20 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
KLaban wrote:
Many thanks for your kind comments, they are much appreciated.
I'll start with a bit of history. I've owned and used many cameras over the years, including Nikon film, Hasselblad film and digital and more recently Leica M cameras, but sadly health and eyesight issues mean that I've had to look elsewhere to replace the Leica M cameras. I also use couple of Nikon Z7 bodies which I still use to this day.
I'll add a little here about how and why I shoot. Always RAW, often due to the nature of my subjects I have a maximum of a handful of seconds to see and capture images, but that said, my approach is always considered and very rarely using anything other than single shot capture. My enjoyment comes from capturing my subjects in difficult circumstances and processing each file on a completely individual basis - no pre-baked profiles for this tog. It always amuses me that I often spend mere seconds capturing the files and then can spend hours processing them. Anyone looking for OOC files should look elsewhere!
I've always admired the Q cameras but the 28mm is simply not my bag, preferring as I do 'standard' focal length lenses. For years I was praying that Leica would introduce a longer focal length version of the Q and I consequently pressed the button on the first day of release and bought the Q3 43. Happy days. This was to be my main travel option, lightweight, reasonably compact and above all else just pure simplicity. It hasn't disappointed. Discretion is key when I'm shooting in the street.
The lens is everything I hoped for, whether used wide open or stopped down, as good as anything I used on the M cameras. The 60MP sensor gives me the option to crop when necessary. I see the fixed lens as a positive, it's that SIMPLICITY thing again, just zoom with the feet. The profiles are useful but in reality I keep everything as simple as possible, hence all my concentration is focused on the subjects; my wife would say simple things for simple minds. Again, the menu UI is pure simplicity, or was until Leica introduced the latest firmware update, thankfully I resisted updating to FW 4. The Q3 43 is certainly not a speed machine, but neither am I. Horses for courses. I’ve nothing to add to comparisons with other cameras and will leave that to others.
I’ll end by saying I’d also buy a Leica Q3 90 in a heartbeat should it ever materialise. ...Show more →
There are no UI downsides to 4.xx. You lose the quick menu but you can now customise the home menu much more. It’s a wash. The camera operates much better. Faster AF. Faster startup. More responsive generally. I’d never go back to 3.xx.
