Re: Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released!
Lukacs wrote:
I don't know why other manufacturers don't have minimalist, "purist" camera like Leica. I like M series, the small CL2, SL2, Q3 bodies. Hasselblad X2D is my other favourite. Also I loved my DP2 Quattro despite the strange form.
I'd like own a Q3 43, but it's insane that my A7RIV, 20 1.8G, 35GM, 50 1.2GM worth less despite the better sharpness, better AF, and three extremly good lens, the minimalism just can't justify this price for me.
You have to look beyond the technical performance capabilities and comparisons and be primarily concerned with the image creation experience itself. And ignore the price/cost difference.
The mainstream brands try to cater to everyone and are potentially roasted if they offer a premium niche product (Canon's R1 low MP sports-centric flagship body). Leica can't compete this way and has to work niches. They've built their brand in such a way that with low production volume they have to target customers willing to pay more for something 'different.' And that difference is often 'less for more,' meaning a simplified, 'purer,' user experience at a higher price. Worth and cost should also be clarified. Yes, Leica products cost more than the equivalents (as close as those can be, if they exist) from other brands. Worth or value, is what each user extracts/benefits/experiences from a given product. And it is precisely this that Leica targets in their marketing and product design: a user experience that does not exist with other brands. Whether photos with the same (or better) subjective and technical qualities can also be made with other brands is less the point; it's the user experience while making those photos where Leica wants its products to stand above the general photographic market. IMO it's not all marketing BS. When you enjoy using your equipment, rather than fighting with it, you're in a different mindset while visually exploring the world around you.
---------------------------------------------
SlowDriver wrote: Fred Miranda wrote:
It’s a smart move by Leica to offer the same camera with different focal lengths.
The demand has been there since Day 1. You can only wonder why it took Leica 9 years. I guess fear of cannibalizing themselves once more till Ricoh led the way and showed that that is a non-issue?
I've kind of wondered too... a Q trio of 28, 50 and 90 at the original Q's price point would have been around the price of buying each of those lenses for the M system, but you would have received a camera with each as well. In a way it would be an interesting alternative to the M system if you don't mind having a camera for each lens. Maybe there were also technical reasons. I feel like Leica's software capabilities have greatly improved over the past ~5 years, plus they now finally have access to PDAF, which IMO makes a bigger difference the longer the lens, compared to CDAF. Maybe in ~9 years we'll see a Q '90' but I feel like it would be the most niche of the Qs. The dilemma would be lens speed vs. size. The w/o bokeh fetishists will want a fast lens but that would make a Q 90 massive compared to the 28 and 43 (which already lost half a stop compared to the 28). Realistically to maintain the form/design I'd expect a Q 90 to be f/2.8 and collapsible when not in use. Maybe 90/2.8 will be too unsexy for many?
Sep 27, 2024 at 09:52 AM
Previous versions of rscheffler's message #16650506 « Official Announcement: Leica Q3 43 Digital Camera Released! »
