p.5 #1 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chiron wrote:
After reading your comments, I felt dissuaded from the Q3 43 rather than moved toward it. So I am perplexed a bit that you wholeheartedly recommend the camera. Is that based exclusively on the lens? You don't seem to like anything else about it and in fact your got rid of yours. What am I missing about why you recommend the camera over, for example, a Sony A7C R or an A1 series body?
BTW, although it doesn't have IBIS, the Q3 does have lens-based image stabilization. Not as good as most IBIS systems but still helpful.
The Q3/43's OIS is good for 2 to 3 stops. Quite helpful for stills photography; not so much for video.
p.5 #2 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
bhollis wrote:
I don't think anyone is arguing that zone focusing is a replacement for AF. But it does have it's place, and in certain situations, e.g., street photography where you're not trying to isolate your subject with shallow DOF, but rather trying to maximize speed and stealth, zone focusing is a great option.
If you don't want to use it, that's fine, but don't tell those of us who do use it on occasion that we're living in the past.
Sure, you can use whatever technique you want…but it seems like many poopoo autofocus because their heroes from the past created nice images without it. I use a dish washer today even though back in the day dishes were washes clean by hand.
p.5 #3 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
Sure, you can use whatever technique you want…but it seems like many poopoo autofocus because their heroes from the past created nice images without it. I use a dish washer today even though back in the day dishes were washes clean by hand.
When I build a cabinet today, I mostly use power tools. But for some tasks, a chisel, hand saw or hand plane may still be the best tool.
Oh, and when I've only got few dishes to wash, or I'm washing knives or fine china or crystal, I still wash them by hand.
p.5 #4 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
Right…but also great photographs should not be about out of focus images as well. Given a great sharp image and a great fuzzy image,,.sign me up for the sharp image.
So many people live in the past with the limitations that existed then.
What's the intent of the image, visual message and visual signature should all part of it. Some of the greatest photographs of war are the Omaha Beach images from Robert Capa. In Saving Private Ryan Spielberg was heavily influenced by those images because they captured the chaos of battle. Feeling over technical perfection. So sign me up for message and impact.
p.5 #5 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
Sure, you can use whatever technique you want…but it seems like many poopoo autofocus because their heroes from the past created nice images without it. I use a dish washer today even though back in the day dishes were washes clean by hand.
I don't use autofocus because manual focus fits the way I see and work. No other reason. If you want the gadgets fine. Nice to have choices. I guess those that think and work differently offend some.
p.5 #7 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
airfrogusmc wrote:
I don't use autofocus because manual focus fits the way I see and work. No other reason. If you want the gadgets fine. Nice to have choices. I guess those that are think and work differently offend some.
Someone calling Autofocus a gadget tells me enough about you. Seems like you resort to putting down one’s that work differently than you.
p.5 #8 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
Right…but also great photographs should not be about out of focus images as well. Given a great sharp image and a great fuzzy image,,.sign me up for the sharp image.
So many people live in the past with the limitations that existed then.
Why do you care if someone uses zone focus? This is a Leica thread and that can be part of that experience. If it doesn't work for you and the way you work that's fine. Lostsa room to move around. There is no one way to do any of this
p.5 #9 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
airfrogusmc wrote:
What's the intent of the image, visual message and visual signature should all part of it. Some of the greatest photographs of war are the Omaha Beach images from Robert Capa. In Saving Private Ryan Spielberg was heavily influenced by those images because they captured the chaos of battle. Feeling over technical perfection. So sign me up for message and impact.
So are you saying a sharp image cannot have message and impact?
p.5 #10 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
airfrogusmc wrote:
Why do you care if someone uses zone focus? This is a Leica thread and that can be part of that experience. If it doesn't work for you and the way you work that's fine. Lostsa room to move around. There is no one way to do any of this
No, this is a thread asking if the Q3 autofocus can keep up to the type of photography the OP wants to do. He even stated zone focus is not for him…but the troops still keep spilling it onto him.
p.5 #11 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
Someone calling Autofocus a gadget tells me enough about you. Seems like you resort to putting down one’s that work differently than you.
If you mean I don't need a lot of stuff to make photographs then I'll take that. Though I was actually referring to all the stuff most modern digital cameras have on them. Nice to have a different choice for those that might not want that. Interesting that you should care so much about what other photographers prefer.
p.5 #12 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
chez wrote:
No, this is a thread asking if the Q3 autofocus can keep up to the type of photography the OP wants to do. He even stated zone focus is not for him…but the troops still keep spilling it onto him.
Then Leica might not be for him. Nice to find those things out on forums but he probably wouldn't loose a ton of money if he bought a used one shot with it a while and then sold it.
p.5 #14 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
airfrogusmc wrote:
Then Leica might not be for him. Nice to find those things out on forums but he probably wouldn't loose a ton of money if he bought a used one shot with it a while and then sold it.
Right…so why shove zone focus down his throat as a solution when he already claimed it won’t work for him? No one cares if it works for your type of photography…this thread is about the oP’s type of photography and how the Q3 fits his needs…not your minimalistic needs.
p.5 #15 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
You seem to be the one that cares. I don't care if he uses zone focus or not. Makes me no difference. In fact it makes no difference to me what anyone photographs with. Holga, viewcamera whatever it takes to get what they are seeing. The images are what matter not if they use zone focus or autofocus. I do know what works best for me.
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."-Ernst Haas
But you do like to come into Leica threads a lot so maybe you should just get one a be done with it ha ha....
p.5 #19 · Considering a Leica Q3 43 but used to Sony
airfrogusmc wrote:
You seem to be the one that cares. I don't care if he uses zone focus or not. Makes me no difference. In fact it makes no difference to me what anyone photographs with. Holga, viewcamera whatever it takes to get what they are seeing. The images are what matter or if they use zone focus or autofocus. I do know what works best for me.
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE."-Ernst Haas
But you do like to come into Leica threads a lot so maybe you should just get one a be done with it ha ha.......Show more →
If you don’t care…why are you on this thread where people were discussing AF with the Q3? Seems to me you like to stick your head in and tell everyone how your approach to photography is the best…and then you always indicate you don’t care.
