Leica Q3 ?

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

I would disagree. Having spent 40 years dealing with these issues on a day to day basis, you get to recognize the signs of distress.

Having spent 12 years on the forum, I've learned that most members are either professional photographers or highly experienced corporate marketing managers. 😉  

[Simone_DF]

20 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

A top of the line Sony/Canon/Nikon has as good or better performance any 1/2 the price and with a more extensive lens line.

Define "better performance". The only thing that Sony, Canon and Nikon have in terms of performance, imho, is autofocus, which is indeed quite far ahead (ex Sony shooter here), an issue that is allegedly fixed with the release of the S5II with PDAF. Apart from that, there's only the issue of having a heavy, big body without a tilt screen, which can be a dealbreaker for many, but the S5/S5II is a good alternative.  

For the lens line, I disagree. The L mount is second only to Sony for the amount of native lenses. Canon and Nikon shooters don't have as many options as we have. To provide an example, my most used focal length is 50mm, right now I can count 2x Leica, 1 rebadged Panasonic, 2x Panasonic, 2x Sigma native offerings to choose from. This is without counting the older Sigma Art 1.4, superseded a few months ago but still available to purchase new, and the 45mm. 

For Canon your only options are the Canon 1.8 or the 1.2 version. For Nikon you have one more, the 2.8 macro. 

The extensive lens line up is the reason why I eventually stayed with the L mount, despite the evident flaws of the SL bodies. 

[Le Chef]

If it takes 18 months to clear stocks using sales promotion tactics then I would say you have a problem with that product. That doesn’t mean Leica is at financial risk, just they recognize the product is not as competitive as it used to be.

As to using posts in a forum as a yardstick, that is not sound thinking. You don’t measure a brands actual sales success based on posts. We don’t know Leica’s sales split between products. We also don’t know whether one group of product owners is inclined to post more often, and others merely observe, nor do we know about ownership of multiple products.

[Le Chef]

12 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Define "better performance". The only thing that Sony, Canon and Nikon have in terms of performance, imho, is autofocus, which is indeed quite far ahead (ex Sony shooter here), an issue that is allegedly fixed with the release of the S5II with PDAF. Apart from that, there's only the issue of having a heavy, big body without a tilt screen, which can be a dealbreaker for many, but the S5/S5II is a good alternative.  

For the lens line, I disagree. The L mount is second only to Sony for the amount of native lenses. Canon and Nikon shooters don't have as many options as we have. To provide an example, my most used focal length is 50mm, right now I can count 2x Leica, 1 rebadged Panasonic, 2x Panasonic, 2x Sigma native offerings to choose from. This is without counting the older Sigma Art 1.4, superseded a few months ago but still available to purchase new, and the 45mm. 

For Canon your only options are the Canon 1.8 or the 1.2 version. For Nikon you have one more, the 2.8 macro. 

The extensive lens line up is the reason why I eventually stayed with the L mount, despite the evident flaws of the SL bodies. 

Perception is reality. If people read forums and reviews where the question is “Which one is better?” Then the SL tends to get criticized, not for its IQ, but weight and poor autofocus sufficiently often that it becomes unquestioned. And the S5/II is not a Leica. The trick may be to offer extended trials, as some car manufacturers have done, or to campaign on the fact that you’re not going to appreciate its virtues until you have used it for, say 2 weeks. Or simply use social media to get potential buyers to look at images on LFI.

As to the lenses I totally agree. Brilliant…but still pretty heavy to lug around.

[bobtodrick]

27 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

Define "better performance". The only thing that Sony, Canon and Nikon have in terms of performance, imho, is autofocus, which is indeed quite far ahead (ex Sony shooter here), an issue that is allegedly fixed with the release of the S5II with PDAF. Apart from that, there's only the issue of having a heavy, big body without a tilt screen, which can be a dealbreaker for many, but the S5/S5II is a good alternative.  

For the lens line, I disagree. The L mount is second only to Sony for the amount of native lenses. Canon and Nikon shooters don't have as many options as we have. To provide an example, my most used focal length is 50mm, right now I can count 2x Leica, 1 rebadged Panasonic, 2x Panasonic, 2x Sigma native offerings to choose from. This is without counting the older Sigma Art 1.4, superseded a few months ago but still available to purchase new, and the 45mm. 

For Canon your only options are the Canon 1.8 or the 1.2 version. For Nikon you have one more, the 2.8 macro. 

The extensive lens line up is the reason why I eventually stayed with the L mount, despite the evident flaws of the SL bodies. 

As I said, for the working pro it is a cost/benefit equation.  First, for many pros the better A/F is of prime importance.  Color rendering and such (one of the pluses of Leica) can be made up in post production…a missed focus shot because of inferior A/F cannot (for the most part).

Again, I was addressing why Leica has to make changes if they want the SL2 (or it’s replacement) to make serious inroads in the pro market.

Again, I’ve been selling to pros for thirty years (in a city of well over a million).  I’ve sold quite a few M/Q to pros as their personal cameras.  The number of them who have bought into the SL2 system as their working camera can literally be count on two fingers.

That’s the reality.

[LocalHero1953]

But it’s the amateur market where camera and lens money is made, for all mainstream brands. They all trumpet the pros that use their kit - because that encourages the amateurs to buy. And Leica are more biased to amateurs than other brands (whatever their marketing department says about the SL system). If I were Leica I wouldn’t worry about just two pros buying a camera as long as the amateurs were still buying it. (Although if the pros were famous then Leica would want a photo of them with the cameras). 

[bobtodrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

But it’s the amateur market where camera and lens money is made, for all mainstream brands. They all trumpet the pros that use their kit - because that encourages the amateurs to buy. And Leica are more biased to amateurs than other brands (whatever their marketing department says about the SL system). If I were Leica I wouldn’t worry about just two pros buying a camera as long as the amateurs were still buying it. (Although if the pros were famous then Leica would want a photo of them with the cameras). 

You are completely correct…my original point was what would need to be done to make the SL2 appeal more to pros.

And as you say, the more people see a particular camera in a pros hands, the more amateurs will buy.

And it's not just cameras...years ago when Ferrari was owned by Fiat it used to be said that if Ferrari won a Grand Prix on Sunday, the following Monday there was an increase in Fiat sales 😄

Brass tacks…Leica has to make the SL2 more visible…the M’s and Q’s far outsell the SL2 because a lot of ‘pro’ documentary and street (if there is such a thing as a pro street photographer) use M’s and Q’s.

The SL2 is a very good camera…but the Z9/R3/Alpha 1 are all all on par and less expensive (especially when you factor in lenses).

Steve McCurry, who is a bit of a Leica SL2 ambassador, still favors his Nikons for his day to day work.

I truly hope the SL3 when it comes out is a true winner. 

Edited April 16, 2023 by bobtodrick

[Le Chef]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

I truly hope the SL3 when it comes out is a true winner. 

No one wants to see the SL3 fail, but how high the bar is, is being set by Sony, Nikon etc when it comes to capturing the shot, not Leica.

[Daniel C.1975]

vor 9 Stunden schrieb Le Chef:

 

As to using posts in a forum as a yardstick, that is not sound thinking. You don’t measure a brands actual sales success based on posts.

No it‘s not and was mend as a joke. Thought this was obvious.

 

[Daniel C.1975]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Le Chef:

No one wants to see the SL3 fail, but how high the bar is, is being set by Sony, Nikon etc when it comes to capturing the shot, not Leica.

Yep, they set the bar and the YouTubers over emphasising usability or non usability of certain functions  

I believe it‘s mostly the AF-System many brag about. If this is being fixed, and the latest Panasonic releases clearly point into this direction, there is no real objective reason left to dislike the SL-System. Than it‘s more about taste of the UI, lens selection, costs and some subjective likes or dislikes.

I personally like the SL-System very much and I don‘t want to use the others. They all fall short on topics I personally value over the best AF performance, which for my use cases is good enough. If you need or want to have the best performing AF-System, than the SL-System is currently clearly not the right choice.

We will see.

[LocalHero1953]

3 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

And as you say, the more people see a particular camera in a famous pros hands, the more amateurs will buy.

My amendment. I don't think a wedding photographer, product photographer, or commercial ad photographer buying a SL will make the slightest difference to sales to amateurs.

[Chris W]

After watching numerous videos over the years, I'm not seeing many pros using the SL system. I know a few busy pros and none are using the SL system.

I've never read that the SL is superior to an equivalent Canon, Nikon or Sony. It's not good enough to cost more and be equal to your competition.

I don't know, maybe Sony and Nikon are more in touch with professionals, and Leicas are aloof. You read stories of people having failures and having to wait weeks to get their camera back, without an offer of an instant replacement. One active YouTuber has returned his fourth defective M11 body.

I mostly see professionals owning and using an M system or a Q system as their second camera, or for their personal projects (fun and inspiration).

[Chris W]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I don't think a wedding photographer, product photographer, or commercial ad photographer buying a SL will make the slightest difference to sales to amateurs.

In many industries endorsements are common. An endorsement raises the awareness of the product in the market place. If there are enough endorsements the public perceive that as a vote of confidence. If the product is reliable enough for heavy day to day use and is good enough for a professional - it is good enough for me.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Anything by Leica outside of the M system has always been niche, and even the M system itself is niche. Success is not going to be measured on the basis of how well the SL competes with Sony in specs. The more mainstream cameras have a huge advantage in terms of potential specs because they have more money for R&D and in the case of Sony, they literally make the sensors for most of the industry, so they have home field advantage there as well. The advantage Leica has is that they can put more money into materials, tolerances and precision components. But ultimately it is their design and design decisions that set them apart. Since they do not have to cater as much to the mainstream, they can be a bit more assertive in their choices...not having to worry as much about making it brainlessly easy for dad's photographing their kids or having things like "sunset mode", which always amused me when I had a Sony. I don't have anything against those things or people who need them, but they do not need to be in a high end pro camera. As we all know, Leica's lens design is also significantly better as a whole. Whether that is because of their experience, manufacturing ability or their willingness to build more expensive, heavier and larger lenses is in most ways irrelevant. As for success or failure for Leica itself, I don't think it really matters. Leica talks with their releases. They released an SL2S with seeming success and they are releasing L mount lenses frequently, no matter if they are Sigma or Panasonic rebrands or not. They have not released an S lens in ten years. That speaks louder to me than any promise they make about keeping the system afloat. The same with the CL. It is over. The SL system is decidedly not over.

If I had bought from Bob, I would have been the third finger on his hand for buying as a professional. I have shot Sony, Nikon, Canon and Panasonic DSLR's or mirrorless cameras in the past, but I always come back to Leica. The reason being that the overall package is more than the sum of its parts, and the results are just better. The experience using the cameras is better, and the results are better. I don't think I have once been using the SL2 and thought "if only the AF were better". I am fully willing to admit, however, that I am not doing events or sports/wildlife where AFc matters. The AF has never stopped me with people either. Frankly I find the endless complaining about it really tiresome. Now I am resigned to having an SL3 with more banding because the loudest amateurs in the room need phase detect for their cats and model mayhem victims.

Edited April 16, 2023 by Stuart Richardson

[bobtodrick]

4 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Anything by Leica outside of the M system has always been niche, and even the M system itself is niche. Success is not going to be measured on the basis of how well the SL competes with Sony in specs. The more mainstream cameras have a huge advantage in terms of potential specs because they have more money for R&D and in the case of Sony, they literally make the sensors for most of the industry, so they have home field advantage there as well. The advantage Leica has is that they can put more money into materials, tolerances and precision components. But ultimately it is their design and design decisions that set them apart. Since they do not have to cater as much to the mainstream, they can be a bit more assertive in their choices...not having to worry as much about making it brainlessly easy for dad's photographing their kids or having things like "sunset mode", which always amused me when I had a Sony. I don't have anything against those things or people who need them, but they do not need to be in a high end pro camera. As we all know, Leica's lens design is also significantly better as a whole. Whether that is because of their experience, manufacturing ability or their willingness to build more expensive, heavier and larger lenses is in most ways irrelevant. As for success or failure for Leica itself, I don't think it really matters. Leica talks with their releases. They released an SL2S with seeming success and they are releasing L mount lenses frequently, no matter if they are Sigma or Panasonic rebrands or not. They have not released an S lens in ten years. That speaks louder to me than any promise they make about keeping the system afloat. The same with the CL. It is over. The SL system is decidedly not over.

If I had bought from Bob, I would have been the third finger on his hand for buying as a professional. I have shot Sony, Nikon, Canon and Panasonic DSLR's or mirrorless cameras in the past, but I always come back to Leica. The reason being that the overall package is more than the sum of its parts, and the results are just better. The experience using the cameras is better, and the results are better. I don't think I have once been using the SL2 and thought "if only the AF were better". I am fully willing to admit, however, that I am not doing events or sports/wildlife where AFc matters. The AF has never stopped me with people either. Frankly I find the endless complaining about it really tiresome. Now I am resigned to having an SL3 with more banding because the loudest amateurs in the room need phase detect for their cats and model mayhem victims.

Hey Stuart…I would have given you a great price on that SL2 😂😂

But I do agree with everything you say…any of the current crop of cameras will fulfil the needs of ANY photographer out there if they learn the nuances of the camera.

It truly comes down to what feels comfortable to the individual.

Having used film M’s for 35 years, and favouring wide angles the Q felt right.

I tried the Fuji X100…it could do everything I asked of it…it just didn’t feel…right!

[HansiMustermann]

I give you a hint: I have bought a new Q2 right now, I hope it will arrive next week. So you can be sure Leica will present a new Q3 at the end of next week. 🤷‍♂️

[Le Chef]

Apparently there is new firmware for the Q2 that has become available in China. If this turns out to be genuine, and is offered for download by Leica to the rest of the world, you can pretty much expect no Q3 for another 6 months or more.

[Oliver_2208]

vor 10 Stunden schrieb Le Chef:

Apparently there is new firmware for the Q2 that has become available in China. If this turns out to be genuine, and is offered for download by Leica to the rest of the world, you can pretty much expect no Q3 for another 6 months or more.

Just found on google … 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Chris W]

17 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

 

Having used film M’s for 35 years, and favouring wide angles the Q felt right.

I tried the Fuji X100…it could do everything I asked of it…it just didn’t feel…right!

I had both and looked at the files. The Q files looked much nicer than the Fuji X.

There ARE differences between cameras that are more than just 'feel', but yes, most cameras can achieve a good enough image for a professional level.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[LocalHero1953]

But sadly that does not lead to a relevant page. It looks like a typo rather than an accidentally released announcement.