Q3 AF-L only locks for one shutter release?

[keithlaban.co.uk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've yet to install the latest firmware update on the Q3 43, was hoping for true BBF.

I've disabled auto magnification when using Manual focus. With peeking enabled there is no problem with pre-focus, but I can imagine it would be more of a problem with the 28mm versions.

Edited December 24, 2024 by keithlaban.co.uk

[Advertisement]

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

[bsmith]

On 11/4/2024 at 8:11 AM, Nitrox said:

If ONLY this camera had a fast way to focus

Both Q3s are the fastest focusing cameras ever made, but you need to skillfully choose your shot and not rely on fps luck. Set to AFS or AFC with only the square or the + focus spot chosen, then they seldom miss focus! They also “follow focus” reasonably well for the majority of situations including sports. Do they accurately AFC a fast 15 per second frame sequence with every frame in perfect focus every time? No, but neither do Canon , Nikon or Sony! 
But they do accurately and consistently get the first 3-5 frames perfect.  
The “ Spray and Pray” Sony crowd will never be satisfied with the Leica focus performance because they rely on luck from quantity, not craft or skill.  Nowadays, cameras have amazing functions automating many settings, but a photographer needs to look through the viewfinder and capture the “moment”.  Probably more than 90% of pictures don’t require AFC focus beyond the Q3 or Q43 current capabilities. 
Both Qs focus accurately faster than a blink of an eye 99% of the time. 
I have multiple Nikon pro bodies and lenses but use a SL or Q on most assignments.  “In focus” is the least of all my concerns. 
 

[jplaurel]

You may be right that 90% of photos don't need AFC, but I would argue that AFC can be very useful for over 90% of photos. Technology makes it possible. With an A1 or A7IV, AFC and tracking are so good that you can track something and move, reframe, get closer, back away, etc., leaving you free to focus on the critical moments. AFC/tracking that good and that reliable opens up new ways of working.

I agree that the Q3s autofocusing work reasonably well, especially in AFS with the field and spot patterns, but the dissatisfaction of the Sony crowd is well-justified. The autofocus performance of the Q3 cameras is not remotely comparable to even the A7III, which is now almost 7 years old, never mind the current entry level model, the A7IV, which itself has been in the market for over 3 years. The A1 autofocus system is on another planet entirely.

I see a Q almost as a fixed lens M with autofocus. With the v3 firmware, I can now work in the same way as I would with an M camera in most situations. I prefer working with the Q when I can because it feels so good in the hand, and its simplicity makes it a joy to use. The lens on the Q3 43 is something very special in the photographic world right now. The 43mm APO Summicron alone is worth the price. The Q brings other virtues to the table.

On 12/24/2024 at 11:06 AM, bsmith said:

Both Q3s are the fastest focusing cameras ever made, but you need to skillfully choose your shot and not rely on fps luck. Set to AFS or AFC with only the square or the + focus spot chosen, then they seldom miss focus! They also “follow focus” reasonably well for the majority of situations including sports. Do they accurately AFC a fast 15 per second frame sequence with every frame in perfect focus every time? No, but neither do Canon , Nikon or Sony! 
But they do accurately and consistently get the first 3-5 frames perfect.  
The “ Spray and Pray” Sony crowd will never be satisfied with the Leica focus performance because they rely on luck from quantity, not craft or skill.  Nowadays, cameras have amazing functions automating many settings, but a photographer needs to look through the viewfinder and capture the “moment”.  Probably more than 90% of pictures don’t require AFC focus beyond the Q3 or Q43 current capabilities. 
Both Qs focus accurately faster than a blink of an eye 99% of the time. 
I have multiple Nikon pro bodies and lenses but use a SL or Q on most assignments.  “In focus” is the least of all my concerns. 
 

 

[jjroroek]

On 6/22/2023 at 12:05 PM, hedleyw said:

I believe that for the Q2 a firmware update changed the behaviour of the AF-L function to remain locked through successive shutter releases until cancelled by the user. I sold my Q2 some time back so never got to try this out. On my Q3 I am unable to get this to work. Focus is locked for one shot only. Am I missing something?

'this is solved with the new update 3.0.0

[bsmith]

14 hours ago, jplaurel said:

You may be right that 90% of photos don't need AFC, but I would argue that AFC can be very useful for over 90% of photos. Technology makes it possible. With an A1 or A7IV, AFC and tracking are so good that you can track something and move, reframe, get closer, back away, etc., leaving you free to focus on the critical moments. AFC/tracking that good and that reliable opens up new ways of working.

I agree that the Q3s autofocusing work reasonably well, especially in AFS with the field and spot patterns, but the dissatisfaction of the Sony crowd is well-justified. The autofocus performance of the Q3 cameras is not remotely comparable to even the A7III, which is now almost 7 years old, never mind the current entry level model, the A7IV, which itself has been in the market for over 3 years. The A1 autofocus system is on another planet entirely.

I see a Q almost as a fixed lens M with autofocus. With the v3 firmware, I can now work in the same way as I would with an M camera in most situations. I prefer working with the Q when I can because it feels so good in the hand, and its simplicity makes it a joy to use. The lens on the Q3 43 is something very special in the photographic world right now. The 43mm APO Summicron alone is worth the price. The Q brings other virtues to the table.

 

I think you missed my point. What I'm saying is although a Q3/43 cannot follow focus as good as a Nikon/Canon/Sony in AFC meaning,  if you rely on getting a good frame by "spraying machine gun" style at 15-30 fps (15 on Leica) and expect all frames to be in focus, you will be disappointed. But it's not made for that!  If you follow focus using AFC and fully depress the shutter at "your decisive moment", I have found that with the new update my Q3 and my Q43 accurately focuses including on fast moving subjects. ie NBA players running full speed, 20 feet from me then flying through the air. Night after night,  90% of the time AFC works. And the missed 10% is often user (me ) error caused by switching from my down court camera. Q's are remarkable faster than my SL's which are perfectly usable for any assignment I have encountered. If you shoot 75 shots on every play and need focus protection in case of a fumble etc, then Nikon/Canon/Sony is a better choice. But of all the things that can go wrong in capturing a moment, focus with a Q is pretty far down the list. 

[bsmith]

Remember, If you shoot and focus at high speed you can't see the "moment". Generally the first frame is the best in sports or street. The best "moments happen in a split split second . The Q's never miss that first, second or third AFC shot in my daily  experience. Good pictures happen because of craft, not AFC and pray. 

[jplaurel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 12/29/2024 at 4:37 PM, bsmith said:

Remember, If you shoot and focus at high speed you can't see the "moment". Generally the first frame is the best in sports or street. The best "moments happen in a split split second . The Q's never miss that first, second or third AFC shot in my daily  experience. Good pictures happen because of craft, not AFC and pray. 

We must be comparing different cameras.

The Q3s have many virtues, and are unique products in the market. There is nothing else like them. I prefer them to my Sonys for the pure enjoyment of photography. But let's not get carried away with assertions like "Both Q3s are the fastest focusing cameras ever made", and "my Q3 and my Q43 accurately focuses including on fast moving subjects. ie NBA players running full speed, 20 feet from me then flying through the air."

Getting back to the OP, the new firmware update does exactly what I asked for in my emails to Leica and I'm thankful that they implemented it. With that in place, the Qs work well enough for me to work. I really consider them as a variant of and a good compliment to the M camera. An M and a Q together cover a considerably broad set of circumstances.

The AF is good enough for my purposes, but it wouldn't be my first choice for a 7' tall basketball player running toward me at full tilt, especially if I'm looking for a single decisive moment. An Alpha 1, on the other hand, makes short work of that scenario, and with extremely predictable results. The Q just isn't made for that kind of thing, and that's fine with me. We have different tools for different jobs.

Edited January 17 by jplaurel