Survey: Are you planning to buy the new Leica Q3?

[robb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ordered it the week before the announcement.

Best things to me were the better sensor and the better viewfinder at 120 refresh rate.  And I still want a Q3 with a 50 lens…

Robb

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[george sulkowski]

8 hours ago, LUF Admin said:

Quick poll right after the announcement:

Are you planning to buy the new Leica Q3?

And:

What would most appeal to you about the Q3?

Looking forward to your comments!

Andreas

No plans to upgrade from Q2 as 47MP more than enough but the Q3’s articulating screen a temptation. 

[Rdf]

17 minutes ago, dno said:

I'm wondering what a fair price for a Q2 in excellent condition (with original box, etc) but for some slight cosmetic wear would be now, in order to leverage what's needed to trade up to a Q3. I was thinking about, say, $3400.00. Also wondering if that amount might change once Leica runs out of them. Thoughts?

I was quoted $2300 for a used as above Q2 reporter from a NYC dealer. (I’ll keep it). 

[ZealM]

Bought into Leica M precisely to avoid the complications of digital mirrorless zoom with auto everything.

[John A Fleming]

I have the Q-P, but don’t use it much. Instead I use my M11.  28mm is not my favorite focal length (35mm to 50mm is). I’ve read the IBS is limited.  I don’t envision where I’d use the Q3 extensively.  What attracts me to the Q3? The new sensor, the new processor, improved focusing, and the flippy screen, oh, and the weather sealing. My Q-P takes great photos and I suspect the Q3 will be an improvement. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by John A Fleming
Added comments

[wilfredo]

Other opinion:  Yes, I will most likely buy a Q3 when the Q3M version comes along.  For now, I will continue enjoying my Q2M.  

[PAG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Q3 seems to be being sold as a camera for street photography and there is no arguing with the fact that it looks good and the quality is there.

However, the body of the Q3 is quite large and looks to a novice/mugger like a professional camera (ie, worth mugging someone for) so something a bit smaller and more discrete would be more appropriate. The little red dot logo means nothing to muggers so that is not an issue (if you don't feel happy with it, you can always put some duct tape over it.

The fact that each time you buy a new Q camera, you are having to buy new glass is always a problem. Having one with an L-Mount lens would be better as you can invest in something like that gorgeous APO Asph 50mm summicron or whatever takes your fancy and know that you have the lens of your choice and you don't have to keep buying them.

Being able to process RAW images in-camera would be really useful - the computer in the camera does that already if you produce jpegs so the software is already in there (this is really useful if you have a Leica that does this - you can bring out shadows, change exposure and all sorts of things including producing multiple variants of the same image).

If the size determining issue is the physical size of the lens, having the same type of sensor as in the Q3/SL2-S but physically smaller such as 4/3rds would mean that your lenses would weigh literally an eighth oo the 24x36 lenses. You could pack a 28-75 zoom in there as well so you are never having to crop but make sure it is water resistant.

These would all be good things that would sell it to street photographers. I would buy that.

[Cogito]

3 hours ago, MindsEye said:

For those of you wishing for 35mm or 50mm on a Q body, keep in mind: The Q3 at 60MP offers you a 39MP sensor (close to Q2 rez) with a 35mm lens and a 19MP sensor with a 50mm lens (M9 size sensor)

ALSO, by using framelines/digital zoom, you are using the sweet spot of that fabulous lens!

This is the reason I have a keen interest in the Q3. I would never buy a fixed mount 28mm if that was my only choice. This is my perspective as a full time photographer selling primarily large prints and having to consider ROI with new gear purchases. It feels like 3 lenses/cameras in one.

Twenty years ago, I was selling 40x30 inch fine art prints from my 11MP Canon 1Ds. Granted, it took a ton of work using custom resizing formulas but 39MP (35mm lens on Q3) is more resolution than most people will ever need and 19MP (50mm on Q3) is plenty for sizable enlargements.

Just sayin' 😃

I agree, but it’d be far easier for me to compose if the image zoomed in the viewfinder, not just frame lines. I’m sure Leica could add this (it works this way for video, no?) 

[sinwen]

33 minutes ago, Cogito said:

I agree, but it’d be far easier for me to compose if the image zoomed in the viewfinder, not just frame lines. I’m sure Leica could add this (it works this way for video, no?) 

It works this way on many smartphones.....but not on a Leica

[liggy]

54 minutes ago, PAG said:

The Q3 seems to be being sold as a camera for street photography and there is no arguing with the fact that it looks good and the quality is there.

However, the body of the Q3 is quite large and looks to a novice/mugger like a professional camera (ie, worth mugging someone for) so something a bit smaller and more discrete would be more appropriate. The little red dot logo means nothing to muggers so that is not an issue (if you don't feel happy with it, you can always put some duct tape over it.

The fact that each time you buy a new Q camera, you are having to buy new glass is always a problem. Having one with an L-Mount lens would be better as you can invest in something like that gorgeous APO Asph 50mm summicron or whatever takes your fancy and know that you have the lens of your choice and you don't have to keep buying them.

Being able to process RAW images in-camera would be really useful - the computer in the camera does that already if you produce jpegs so the software is already in there (this is really useful if you have a Leica that does this - you can bring out shadows, change exposure and all sorts of things including producing multiple variants of the same image).

If the size determining issue is the physical size of the lens, having the same type of sensor as in the Q3/SL2-S but physically smaller such as 4/3rds would mean that your lenses would weigh literally an eighth oo the 24x36 lenses. You could pack a 28-75 zoom in there as well so you are never having to crop but make sure it is water resistant.

These would all be good things that would sell it to street photographers. I would buy that.

You sound like a good candidate for an X100V.  

Great jpegs, in camera RAW processing, smaller and less $$$ looking than a Q and personally the 35mm full frame equivalent for my use would make a better "street" focal length.  I feel like I need to be uncomfortably close at 28.  I am not really a street shooter though.

For casual shooting on my Fujis I'll sometimes choose film simulation bracketing creating multiple jpegs SOOC.  Pretty neat. 

[RM8]

7 hours ago, GaryBNE said:

Definitely NOT.    After a long time saving I bought a CL, then saved some more to buy lenses.   Then I find you have abandoned CL and CL  lenses.    I thought I was dealing with a trusted company but no.   You left me with an orphan camera and I will never trust Leica again.

+1

[RM8]

1 hour ago, PAG said:

The Q3 seems to be being sold as a camera for street photography and there is no arguing with the fact that it looks good and the quality is there.

However, the body of the Q3 is quite large and looks to a novice/mugger like a professional camera (ie, worth mugging someone for) so something a bit smaller and more discrete would be more appropriate. The little red dot logo means nothing to muggers so that is not an issue (if you don't feel happy with it, you can always put some duct tape over it.

The fact that each time you buy a new Q camera, you are having to buy new glass is always a problem. Having one with an L-Mount lens would be better as you can invest in something like that gorgeous APO Asph 50mm summicron or whatever takes your fancy and know that you have the lens of your choice and you don't have to keep buying them.

Being able to process RAW images in-camera would be really useful - the computer in the camera does that already if you produce jpegs so the software is already in there (this is really useful if you have a Leica that does this - you can bring out shadows, change exposure and all sorts of things including producing multiple variants of the same image).

If the size determining issue is the physical size of the lens, having the same type of sensor as in the Q3/SL2-S but physically smaller such as 4/3rds would mean that your lenses would weigh literally an eighth oo the 24x36 lenses. You could pack a 28-75 zoom in there as well so you are never having to crop but make sure it is water resistant.

These would all be good things that would sell it to street photographers. I would buy that.

New glass? I think the Q3 is fixed lens 

[Driften]

I sent off my Q2 reporter to MPB and sold some other gear to have the money for a Q3. After some Leica dealers saying I should expect a 6mo wait time, I decided it tell MPB to return my Q2 and I'll wait until next year for a Q3. While I like the new features, I would rather use my Leica in the mean time. Besides there always seems to be something to fix in the initial firmware. Maybe when they have the Q3 Reporter I'll swap then.

[gotium]

3 hours ago, Marc B-C said:

I am saddened to see the Q3 go the way of becoming akin to a Sony / Fuji computer.

The more Leica and Fuji converge, the more likely I am to get a Fuji. I recently had an X-T5 with the superb Fujinon 18/1.4 for a month, and I honestly think that lens bests the one on the Q series, and even bests my favorite 28 on the M11. I don't see much downside in the crop sensor either, with the excellent IBIS. I prefer the Leica gear for other reasons, but that's apparently subject to change. 

Like others above, I'd planned to build a CL kit, but that's that. 

[sinwen]

17 minutes ago, RM8 said:

Definitely NOT.    After a long time saving I bought a CL, then saved some more to buy lenses.   Then I find you have abandoned CL and CL  lenses.    I thought I was dealing with a trusted company but no.   You left me with an orphan camera and I will never trust Leica again.

+1

This happened to me when Leica switched to digital. I had an R with 4 lenses and an M3 & M6 with three lenses. They droped the R line altogether and told us they will be no M full frame, it was impossible to make they said, so they came out with that BS m8.....but full blast money wise... as usual ! They nearly went belly up, actually their partnership with Pana saved them.

I sold all my leica gear and never turned back.

It is a pity because they are the only ones who understand the photographic haptic.

This Q3 woud be all what I need IF you could zoom the crop in full into the screen and viewfinder and IF of course the price was not a rip-off, like all Leica cameras nowdays. I could understand spending huge money when it was precision micro mecanic but now it is consumer electronic modules, are you kidding me !  I could start consider it at 2000 at the most, because for that price you can get interchangeable lens cameras.

Leica was luxury, electronic is no luxury, they can lure people for a while, they will be left with a handful of the ones who buy "names only", so after all if they are happy with this clientele, they should jack up the prices even more.

[Driften]

13 minutes ago, gotium said:

The more Leica and Fuji converge, the more likely I am to get a Fuji. I recently had an X-T5 with the superb Fujinon 18/1.4 for a month, and I honestly think that lens bests the one on the Q series, and even bests my favorite 28 on the M11. I don't see much downside in the crop sensor either, with the excellent IBIS. I prefer the Leica gear for other reasons, but that's apparently subject to change. 

Like others above, I'd planned to build a CL kit, but that's that. 

I liked the CL but to be really useful it needed IBIS for me. When I decided to hold off the Q3 and keep the Q2 I bought an x-t5 with a sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 zoom lens. The combo weighs the same as my Q2 and I get IBIS and optical 27-75mm 40mp with no crop and three way tilt screen. Yea it's a stop slower in light gathering and not as nice to use as a Q2/3 but it also can take a 27mm pancake lens and fit in a coat pocket. It won't fully replace the Q2 I love, but I think my Nikon Z50 should be worried.

[gotium]

3 minutes ago, Driften said:

I liked the CL but to be really useful it needed IBIS for me. When I decided to hold off the Q3 and keep the Q2 I bought an x-t5 with a sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 zoom lens. The combo weighs the same as my Q2 and I get IBIS and optical 27-75mm 40mp with no crop and three way tilt screen. Yea it's a stop slower in light gathering and not as nice to use as a Q2/3 but it also can take a 27mm pancake lens and fit in a coat pocket. It won't fully replace the Q2 I love, but I think my Nikon Z50 should be worried.

Do you see an improvement in auto-focus with the new firmware? That's something I did not like with the X-T5, preferred the Q2 for both AF and MF. 

[Driften]

1 minute ago, gotium said:

Do you see an improvement in auto-focus with the new firmware? That's something I did not like with the X-T5, preferred the Q2 for both AF and MF. 

I've only had it a few days and only a few hours with the old firmware. The autofocus isn't up to the standards of my Canon r7/r6m2 but it's better than my Nikon for subject detection. For the pics I've taken of my dogs and cat the eye autofocus has been spot on and sharp, but I didn't buy the x-t5 for that I got it for a bigger selection of faster lens sized for an aps-c sensor. I still need to visit The Museum of Flight and test it on some of the dark moody areas that the Q2 ruled. I would need to take 3-4 prime lens with my Canon to do what the Q2 could do there. I could get the fuji 18/1.4 like you said but I would miss having the frame lines of the Q2 to visualize my crops. The zoom takes care of that with no crop.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[kkdanamatt]

I still shoot with my Q and it’s quite enough for my needs. I also have the SL but it sits idle most of the time because of its size and weight. I don’t really need l60MP or video or the tilting screen. But I applaud Leica for designing another Q that will keep their coffers filled with profits for several more years. 

Edited June 1, 2023 by kkdanamatt

[Phil75]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb sinwen:

Leica was luxury, electronic is no luxury, they can lure people for a while, they will be left with a handful of the ones who buy "names only", so after all if they are happy with this clientele, they should jack up the prices even more.

In fact only the luxury goods strategy ensures an increasing, well-funded clientele and company growth, you can see that with millions buying horrendously overpriced iPhones (or similar) that in production cost probably 1/10th of their MSRP; or even worse: bags. I’d be surprised, if a 7-8k Chanel bag had direct costs much higher than 100 USD. And the stores are crowded.