Q3 or Sony A7CR

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, jaapv said:

I am a wildlife shooter and to me wildlife detect is a gimmick. The way to shoot wildlife is spot focus and put the cross on the eye. Or go manual.  Otherwise you get the well-known AF confusion of fur vs branches in front or misfocus on the tail.  Wildlife detect does not work when the animal is partly obscured and does not have an “animal shape”. Strictly for amateur use, no matter how good Sony is at it. Disclosure: I shoot an old SL and see no need for anything allegedly better. And have other systems as well.  

 

Now where have I heard this kind of stuff before??? Oh, that's right. From Leica photographers. *No working pro will ever let a camera focus for them*, they said. And shall we not bring up what happened to Leica when they though digital was a fad? Mirrorless won't replace the DSLR... Tell that to the S3.

I just got back from a trip to Mongolia where I spent a couple of weeks with the Kazak Eagle Hunters. The hit rate of a Sony A1 with a flying golden eagle is extraordinary. I don't care who holds the camera. With an SL2 a single shot in focus would be a fluke. Same with the Kazaks on their horses. When both the subject and its target are moving erratically, good luck... The A1 was a joy here. Definitely not flawless but nonetheless vastly higher than without the tech it offered. I have over a dozen sequences of 20-40 shots where every exposure of a flying eagle against a rocky outcrop background toward a hunter on a moving horse is in perfect focus. They launch the eagle from a rock outcrop and the bird is barely visible against the background but once the camera finds the bird it locks on like an angry puppy. Not a hope in hell you could manually focus for this. I could barely see the bird before the A1 found it and locked on.

I was also in Tanzania and Uganda in July with a Canon R5. It's not as good as the A1 for birds (although I do have sequences with some smaller species of Kingfisher diving that are really well focused) but it is slightly better with hominoid faces. Out of 200 shots of the mountain gorillas and 150 frames of chimpanzees I have less than a dozen that aren't perfectly focused on the eye. Could I do that on another camera? Sure. But not with the same hit rate and ease of use.

For slower moving animals like giraffe and elephant single shot or regular tracking worked well. Often better than animal detect. For the crossing sequences at the Mara river we used single shot or manual focus. But when something happened, I just had to press a button to engage tracking and detect. Like a Maribu Stork flying across the frame, a hippo charging suddenly to the water or a Silverback coming directly toward you. It's not like I don't know how to manually focus. I used to manually track brides walking down the aisle with an M. I also realise that great images have been made in the sports and wildlife space for decades. I worked at the Sydney Olympics where one of the shooters used a 6x17 to photograph the athletics. It's not that you can't. But it's certainly much harder with a much lower hit rate. This is my 7th trip to Africa (including a 20 month trip in the 90's) and by far, I have the highest hit rate and best culling options, in part because of the technology that's now available. On my next trip I'll definitely take the Sony over the Canon though.

If you set up these systems well you can have it all. Normal back button focus with one button. Detect and tracking with another. Punch in manual focus with a third. Change AF pattern with another. Personally I much preferred the A1 to the Canon R5. I'd give it a bird or the eye of a galloping horse and it locked on for dear life. Instead of one shot I get to choose from a dozen or so. The A1 also has no VF blackout at 20 or 30 fames per second. Also Sony and Canon make FAR better lens options for wildlife and sports shooters. The 2 Sigma options we have just don't compete with the other brands.

These systems are incredible and improving rapidly. To dismiss them as amateur is frankly, silly. And it plays into the outside world's image of Leica shooters. Stuck in the dark ages. Oblivious to what else is going on in the space. It really does work. It really is improving with every generation. My A7R5 knows when a person turns away or walks behind an object. You actually see the focus area change when it loses the eye. It's voodoo. But it's also very cool. And it's like that for animals except I can't give up the blackout free A1.

Like anything else, animal and bird detect is a tool. You learn how to use it and WHEN to use it.

Gordon

p.s. And next year, when the SL3 arrives with the AF system from the Panny S5II, there'll be dozens of threads gushing over the new and improved tracking focus of the camera. And a hundred bitching that the A7R5 is better.

p.p.s I find it interesting that in threads where they don't really need tracking (chasing the dog around the yard) they go on and on and on and on but a wildlife photographer, where it really is useful, dismisses it out of hand... Probably having not actually used any of the latest generation Canikonys to test.

[jaapv]

OK,I'll retract the amateurism remark. But I stand with my opinion. It depends on the wildlife, that is true. No Leica is very good at birds in flight for instance. I am trying out a dot sight which should mitigate the problem. The high-speed bursts on my S5 help too.  I’m sure a more advanced system will do much better. OTOH, wildlife in dense bush does not really work with animal recognition; spot AF or even MF works better, at least in my hands. For animals in the open it is all much of a muchness. That is where chasing the family dog in the backyard comes in  

I would wish for 8K pre-release bursts and post-focus rather than more AF complication. And as soon as AI is implemented in AF there will be a whole different ballgame anyway.  

Anyway I am on Michali’s reserve right now and will post some (marginally processed on the spot) in due course. With a vintage SL601 to boot. 

[bobtodrick]

2 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

 

Now where have I heard this kind of stuff before??? Oh, that's right. From Leica photographers. *No working pro will ever let a camera focus for them*, they said. And shall we not bring up what happened to Leica when they though digital was a fad? Mirrorless won't replace the DSLR... Tell that to the S3.

I just got back from a trip to Mongolia where I spent a couple of weeks with the Kazak Eagle Hunters. The hit rate of a Sony A1 with a flying golden eagle is extraordinary. I don't care who holds the camera. With an SL2 a single shot in focus would be a fluke. Same with the Kazaks on their horses. When both the subject and its target are moving erratically, good luck... The A1 was a joy here. Definitely not flawless but nonetheless vastly higher than without the tech it offered. I have over a dozen sequences of 20-40 shots where every exposure of a flying eagle against a rocky outcrop background toward a hunter on a moving horse is in perfect focus. They launch the eagle from a rock outcrop and the bird is barely visible against the background but once the camera finds the bird it locks on like an angry puppy. Not a hope in hell you could manually focus for this. I could barely see the bird before the A1 found it and locked on.

I was also in Tanzania and Uganda in July with a Canon R5. It's not as good as the A1 for birds (although I do have sequences with some smaller species of Kingfisher diving that are really well focused) but it is slightly better with hominoid faces. Out of 200 shots of the mountain gorillas and 150 frames of chimpanzees I have less than a dozen that aren't perfectly focused on the eye. Could I do that on another camera? Sure. But not with the same hit rate and ease of use.

For slower moving animals like giraffe and elephant single shot or regular tracking worked well. Often better than animal detect. For the crossing sequences at the Mara river we used single shot or manual focus. But when something happened, I just had to press a button to engage tracking and detect. Like a Maribu Stork flying across the frame, a hippo charging suddenly to the water or a Silverback coming directly toward you. It's not like I don't know how to manually focus. I used to manually track brides walking down the aisle with an M. I also realise that great images have been made in the sports and wildlife space for decades. I worked at the Sydney Olympics where one of the shooters used a 6x17 to photograph the athletics. It's not that you can't. But it's certainly much harder with a much lower hit rate. This is my 7th trip to Africa (including a 20 month trip in the 90's) and by far, I have the highest hit rate and best culling options, in part because of the technology that's now available. On my next trip I'll definitely take the Sony over the Canon though.

If you set up these systems well you can have it all. Normal back button focus with one button. Detect and tracking with another. Punch in manual focus with a third. Change AF pattern with another. Personally I much preferred the A1 to the Canon R5. I'd give it a bird or the eye of a galloping horse and it locked on for dear life. Instead of one shot I get to choose from a dozen or so. The A1 also has no VF blackout at 20 or 30 fames per second. Also Sony and Canon make FAR better lens options for wildlife and sports shooters. The 2 Sigma options we have just don't compete with the other brands.

These systems are incredible and improving rapidly. To dismiss them as amateur is frankly, silly. And it plays into the outside world's image of Leica shooters. Stuck in the dark ages. Oblivious to what else is going on in the space. It really does work. It really is improving with every generation. My A7R5 knows when a person turns away or walks behind an object. You actually see the focus area change when it loses the eye. It's voodoo. But it's also very cool. And it's like that for animals except I can't give up the blackout free A1.

Like anything else, animal and bird detect is a tool. You learn how to use it and WHEN to use it.

Gordon

p.s. And next year, when the SL3 arrives with the AF system from the Panny S5II, there'll be dozens of threads gushing over the new and improved tracking focus of the camera. And a hundred bitching that the A7R5 is better.

p.p.s I find it interesting that in threads where they don't really need tracking (chasing the dog around the yard) they go on and on and on and on but a wildlife photographer, where it really is useful, dismisses it out of hand... Probably having not actually used any of the latest generation Canikonys to test.

I don’t get these threads.   Leica knows their market well…street and documentary, portrait (especially low light), travel and vacation.

I sell all brands…not many sports or wildlife shooters come in asking for Leica.

So what?  Land Rover doesn’t purport to be a Ferrari or vice versa.  But in cameras many seem to feel that every camera should do everything.

Again…I don’t get it.

[Le Chef]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Like anything else, animal and bird detect is a tool. You learn how to use it and WHEN to use it.

I’d buy a microwave and be happy. I’m sure it will do everything you ask it to.

[SrMi]

12 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

 

Now where have I heard this kind of stuff before??? Oh, that's right. From Leica photographers. *No working pro will ever let a camera focus for them*, they said. And shall we not bring up what happened to Leica when they though digital was a fad? Mirrorless won't replace the DSLR... Tell that to the S3.

I just got back from a trip to Mongolia where I spent a couple of weeks with the Kazak Eagle Hunters. The hit rate of a Sony A1 with a flying golden eagle is extraordinary. I don't care who holds the camera. With an SL2 a single shot in focus would be a fluke. Same with the Kazaks on their horses. When both the subject and its target are moving erratically, good luck... The A1 was a joy here. Definitely not flawless but nonetheless vastly higher than without the tech it offered. I have over a dozen sequences of 20-40 shots where every exposure of a flying eagle against a rocky outcrop background toward a hunter on a moving horse is in perfect focus. They launch the eagle from a rock outcrop and the bird is barely visible against the background but once the camera finds the bird it locks on like an angry puppy. Not a hope in hell you could manually focus for this. I could barely see the bird before the A1 found it and locked on.

I was also in Tanzania and Uganda in July with a Canon R5. It's not as good as the A1 for birds (although I do have sequences with some smaller species of Kingfisher diving that are really well focused) but it is slightly better with hominoid faces. Out of 200 shots of the mountain gorillas and 150 frames of chimpanzees I have less than a dozen that aren't perfectly focused on the eye. Could I do that on another camera? Sure. But not with the same hit rate and ease of use.

For slower moving animals like giraffe and elephant single shot or regular tracking worked well. Often better than animal detect. For the crossing sequences at the Mara river we used single shot or manual focus. But when something happened, I just had to press a button to engage tracking and detect. Like a Maribu Stork flying across the frame, a hippo charging suddenly to the water or a Silverback coming directly toward you. It's not like I don't know how to manually focus. I used to manually track brides walking down the aisle with an M. I also realise that great images have been made in the sports and wildlife space for decades. I worked at the Sydney Olympics where one of the shooters used a 6x17 to photograph the athletics. It's not that you can't. But it's certainly much harder with a much lower hit rate. This is my 7th trip to Africa (including a 20 month trip in the 90's) and by far, I have the highest hit rate and best culling options, in part because of the technology that's now available. On my next trip I'll definitely take the Sony over the Canon though.

If you set up these systems well you can have it all. Normal back button focus with one button. Detect and tracking with another. Punch in manual focus with a third. Change AF pattern with another. Personally I much preferred the A1 to the Canon R5. I'd give it a bird or the eye of a galloping horse and it locked on for dear life. Instead of one shot I get to choose from a dozen or so. The A1 also has no VF blackout at 20 or 30 fames per second. Also Sony and Canon make FAR better lens options for wildlife and sports shooters. The 2 Sigma options we have just don't compete with the other brands.

These systems are incredible and improving rapidly. To dismiss them as amateur is frankly, silly. And it plays into the outside world's image of Leica shooters. Stuck in the dark ages. Oblivious to what else is going on in the space. It really does work. It really is improving with every generation. My A7R5 knows when a person turns away or walks behind an object. You actually see the focus area change when it loses the eye. It's voodoo. But it's also very cool. And it's like that for animals except I can't give up the blackout free A1.

Like anything else, animal and bird detect is a tool. You learn how to use it and WHEN to use it.

Gordon

p.s. And next year, when the SL3 arrives with the AF system from the Panny S5II, there'll be dozens of threads gushing over the new and improved tracking focus of the camera. And a hundred bitching that the A7R5 is better.

p.p.s I find it interesting that in threads where they don't really need tracking (chasing the dog around the yard) they go on and on and on and on but a wildlife photographer, where it really is useful, dismisses it out of hand... Probably having not actually used any of the latest generation Canikonys to test.

+1

I had the most challenging time focusing when shooting macaws in a sinkhole in Brazil. I used a Nikon D4 with 9-group AF, which required moving the focus point with the joystick. Shooting birds sitting on a branch was simple, but those are less satisfying images. Catching birds as they take off or land were the most satisfying shots. The whole morning was wasted as I could not focus on time. However, I got useful shots when I learned to anticipate the birds' behavior. I would have been much less exhausted at the end of the day if I had a camera like Z 8 or A 1. Also, the number of useful images would have been higher.

Of course, it is possible to make great wildlife photos with SL2 and its current AF implementation, but adding subject detection and better tracking would expand its envelope.

Edited October 17, 2023 by SrMi

[clasami]

Am 10.10.2023 um 13:04 schrieb clasami:

No a7CR for me. If, then the a7C2. Just about the right amount of MPs. The Q3 has a lens that is no where to be found in the Sony space. But the a7c2 can take on UAW and short tele lenses, which is what I use my Sony cameras for on top of the Q3. It would take a better EVF and an excellent 28mm f2 lens for me to consider the teh a7CR.

Change of mind 🙂 Got the a7cR today. Why? I have read a great article about cropping and the Q: https://www.macfilos.com/2023/06/07/digital-zoom-part-ii-the-crop-to-zoom-debate-continues-as-leica-q3-adds-yet-another-telephoto-crop/  There are links to other articles and they all convinced me that the future of my photography is in cameras with plenty of MPs and cropping. Turning excellent lenses into dual or tri-focal lenses. But it is not a replacement for the Q3. It is an extension for tele and UAW. Or when the 16-35PZ can be turned into a 16-70, possibly 105. Holding the a7cR I am amazed at how small and light it is.

Not looking to duplcate the Q3 - but the I might give the FE28f2 another try.

[Qwertynm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am 15.10.2023 um 15:22 schrieb Terry Cioni:

Unless you stop the 28mm Q Summicron down, it sucks big time...

Wow, what a way to introduce yourself 🤣

I disagree. It's already sharp in the center at F/1.7 and it's pretty flare resistant too. I compared it against my Canon TS-E 24L II and Canon EF 28 IS USM stopped down and it's plenty sharp. There is probably more detail than a print on Hahnemühle will show anyway. Although I agree the AF of the Q3 could be better it's not that bad with Spot-AF, even against the sun. As you state yourself the shooting experience is totally different and a comparison (imho) misses the point. If Sony would introduce a RX1R3 on the other hand...

[adrianh]

My A7CII arrived today so I took some quick pics with different lenses attached to check the size differences.

 

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!

[Cogito]

10 minutes ago, adrianh said:

My A7CII arrived today so I took some quick pics with different lenses attached to check the size differences.

 

 

Thanks, very helpful. The Sony is compact. Wondering why you chose CII rather than CR? Please let us know your thoughts after you’ve used it.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Cogito
poor formatting

[adrianh]

It's going to serve as backup camera for my A7RV on the next safari. It'll be combined in the car with the 35-150 Tamron, the A7RV will have the Tamron 150-500 attached to it. For street I'll either use a 16-35 or a 20-70, or a small prime. Therefore I do not need 60 Mpix. 

Edited October 18, 2023 by adrianh

[Qwertynm]

What about the Q3? Are you a working pro or how do you "justify" having tied up so much money in gear? I'm more asking for myself than anything. feel free to ignore this question if it doesn't apply to you 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

11 hours ago, Qwertynm said:

What about the Q3? Are you a working pro or how do you "justify" having tied up so much money in gear? I'm more asking for myself than anything. feel free to ignore this question if it doesn't apply to you 

It's your money. Buy whatever you want. I was a working pro. But I'm mostly retired now. When I was working I chose exactly the gear I needed. Now I choose any gear I feel like trying out because it does no harm and I can afford it. I have cupboards full of cameras and they still cost less that 1 new Ferrari. That's all the justification I need....

Gordon

[student]

9 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have cupboards full of cameras and they still cost less that 1 new Ferrari. That's all the justification I need....

Excellent point; and helpful too!

[bobtodrick]

10 hours ago, student said:

Excellent point; and helpful too!

You purchase according to your income.  I have a good friend who is a world renowned heart surgeon...and makes the according well deserved income (many people owe their lives to him)

He recently purchased a home B&O home entertainment system worth about $65000.  When I mentioned that was a lot of money he casually said "yes, it was nearly a months wages".

I couldn't help but laugh 🤣

[viramati]

All I'm afraid it's going to be bye-bye Leica once again for me as after picking up a used Zeiss Batis 25mm/f2 lens yesterday and using it on the the Sony A1 I will be trading my Q2 Monday for the Sony A7r5. I like the idea of the small size the A7Cr but it really is just too handicapped in comparison to the A7r5 (low quality EVF, flippy out screen and lack of customisable buttons) which is really not that much bigger. As ever I will miss the simplicity of the the Q2 and the Q3 is so expensive and really not that much of an improvement 

[Rdf]

1 hour ago, viramati said:

All I'm afraid it's going to be bye-bye Leica once again for me as after picking up a used Zeiss Batis 25mm/f2 lens yesterday and using it on the the Sony A1 I will be trading my Q2 Monday for the Sony A7r5. I like the idea of the small size the A7Cr but it really is just too handicapped in comparison to the A7r5 (low quality EVF, flippy out screen and lack of customisable buttons) which is really not that much bigger. As ever I will miss the simplicity of the the Q2 and the Q3 is so expensive and really not that much of an improvement 

Hope you enjoy the change (Zeiss lenses are remarkable). Hope you don’t miss the Q, once gone, as others, including myself, experienced. 

[Rdf]

9 minutes ago, Rdf said:

Hope you enjoy the change (Zeiss lenses are remarkable). Hope you don’t miss the Q, once gone, as others, including myself, experienced. 

PS. Maybe consider the Zeiss Batis 40mm. 😊

[viramati]

26 minutes ago, Rdf said:

Hope you enjoy the change (Zeiss lenses are remarkable). Hope you don’t miss the Q, once gone, as others, including myself, experienced. 

In a way I'm sure I will. I sold my original Q and after a couple of years gave in and bought the Q2 but as much as I like it it can be so frustrating on certain levels especially when it comes to AF compared to the Sony's. The Batis 25 is ever so slightly wider than the Q series 28mm lens but it really is a great performer. I'm always trying to simplify my system and I think the A7r5 along with the A1 will more than meet my needs. In my Leica M days I basically worked with 2 bodies and a 50mm and 28mm lens but now it will be the Batis 25 on one and 50/1.4GM on the other body for casual shooting 

Edited October 21, 2023 by viramati

[Rdf]

6 minutes ago, viramati said:

In a way I'm sure I will. I sold my original Q and after a couple of years gave in and bought the Q2 but as much as I like it it can be so frustrating on certain levels especially when it comes to AF compared to the Sony's. The Batis 25 is ever so slightly wider than the Q series 28mm lens but it really is a great performer. I'm always trying to simplify my system and I think the A7r5 along with the A1 will more than meet my needs

I hope they bring you joy. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Cogito]

40 minutes ago, Rdf said:

PS. Maybe consider the Zeiss Batis 40mm. 😊

my favorite is the Batis 85mm, believe it or not, for street. got incredible shots at demonstrations and rallys.