Q3 or Sony A7CR

[CalStanford]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

You'll notice I also included the A7RC which is still nearly 1/2 the price and does have a 61MP sensor.

Good grief, the OP asked for a comparison between the the two brands, which as I stated, if he isn't aware of why you would purchase a Q3 likely means he would be better off with the Sony for it's versatility.  Like I said I've been a Leica user for 50 years...I still realize they aren't the be all and end all for every person.

I mean if we’re going by sensor size as the only criteria everyone should trade in their Q3 for the less expensive Fuji GFX 100.

How is the Fuji GFX 100 less expensive? It's $6000 at B&H right now. Body only. No lens. Good luck getting something useful out of that sensor without a lens attached to it.

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, CalStanford said:

How is the Fuji GFX 100 less expensive? It's $6000 at B&H right now. Body only. No lens. Good luck getting something useful out of that sensor without a lens attached to it.

The new trend is capturing ambient light without a lens, have you not heard? Especially good at 100mp.

[JTLeica]

How much does something cost? Does it cost what you pay for it, or is it just the cost of ownership?

I have a Z7, I paid £3300 for it, its currently worth around £1250, lets call is £1300, it has cost me £2000.

I bought a Leica Q2 for £4250 I kept it 2 years and sold it for £3500, it 'cost' me £750.

I bought a Leica 50mm Noctilux for £5500, and sold it 2 years later for £5500... It 'cost' me nothing.

You buy a Sony A7CR for £3200 and some lenses, and in 4 years sell them for under half of what you paid for them.

Cost of ownership of Leica is cheap, for those that want to take a step back and work it out

😘

Edited September 5, 2023 by JTLeica

[Voxen]

11 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

How much does something cost? Does it cost what you pay for it, or is it just the cost of ownership?

I have a Z7, I paid £3300 for it, its currently worth around £1250, lets call is £1300, it has cost me £2000.

I bought a Leica Q2 for £4250 I kept it 2 years and sold it for £3500, it 'cost' me £750.

I bought a Leica 50mm Noctilux for £5500, and sold it 2 years later for £5500... It 'cost' me nothing.

You buy a Sony A7CR for £3200 and some lenses, and in 4 years sell them for under half of what you paid for them.

Cost of ownership of Leica is cheap, for those that want to take a step back and work it out

😘

While it’s true the resell value is better on Leica products, this is not something one should prioritise.

You buy a camera for what it is capable to deliver, not for how much you can resell it. Otherwise you are not buying the best camera for your photography needs but the camera that will make you lose less money.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Voxen

[Simone_DF]

41 minutes ago, JTLeica said:

How much does something cost? Does it cost what you pay for it, or is it just the cost of ownership?

I have a Z7, I paid £3300 for it, its currently worth around £1250, lets call is £1300, it has cost me £2000.

I bought a Leica Q2 for £4250 I kept it 2 years and sold it for £3500, it 'cost' me £750.

I bought a Leica 50mm Noctilux for £5500, and sold it 2 years later for £5500... It 'cost' me nothing.

You buy a Sony A7CR for £3200 and some lenses, and in 4 years sell them for under half of what you paid for them.

Cost of ownership of Leica is cheap, for those that want to take a step back and work it out

😘

That depends on various factors. The Q is a sought after item, prices will be high, and same for the Noctilux. Currently used Fuji X100V cameras sell for more than retail price, because of a good marketing stunt by Fuji. For the last couple of years they couldn't keep it in stock and the waiting list is long.  

But on the Leica side, the SL2 is sold at 6800€, but you can find it for 4000 from professional sources, that makes it a 2800€ "loss", for lack of a better term.   

So it's not really a matter of brand, it's a matter of desirability and good marketing. 

[JTLeica]

45 minutes ago, Voxen said:

While it’s true the resell value is better on Leica products, this is not something one should prioritise.

You buy a camera for what it is capable to deliver, not for how much you can resell it. Otherwise you are not buying the best camera for your photography needs but the camera that will make you lose less money.

You need to look at what I said the other way around. I wouldn't ever buy a Leica just because it holds its value, but instead if I deemed a Leica to be the camera I wanted, the price difference can be justified by the value it retains. I have never kept a camera more than 5 years, so at some point the retained value is realised.

 

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

That depends on various factors. The Q is a sought after item, prices will be high, and same for the Noctilux. Currently used Fuji X100V cameras sell for more than retail price, because of a good marketing stunt by Fuji. For the last couple of years they couldn't keep it in stock and the waiting list is long.  

But on the Leica side, the SL2 is sold at 6800€, but you can find it for 4000 from professional sources, that makes it a 2800€ "loss", for lack of a better term.   

So it's not really a matter of brand, it's a matter of desirability and good marketing. 

I hear you, but you have to take out the X100V as that is a special case of influencer / YouTubers / marketing gone mad.

But it is about brand. Leica commonly holds much more value than other brands. Look at the M240, M9, etc, they have bottomed out at 2-2.5k after 10-15 years. Thats a huge retention of value, my Z7 in 5 years will be worthless, £500 maybe.

If you just take 'standard' Leica resale / residual values they are miles above other brands. Lenses go up in value if bought used, due to Leica price hikes and overall built quality.

The Q was no different, £2900 purchase price, sold for £2100 years later.

My Z7 has lost65-70% of its value, the SL2 30-40%. There is a big difference here.

 

[bobtodrick]

6 hours ago, CalStanford said:

How is the Fuji GFX 100 less expensive? It's $6000 at B&H right now. Body only. No lens. Good luck getting something useful out of that sensor without a lens attached to it.

Well not to belabor the point but the GFX100 with GF 35-70 is $9000(CDN) as opposed to $9000 for the Q3…so with lens (so you can take a picture 😂)…the same price…and 40 more of your precious MP’s.

 

Edited September 5, 2023 by bobtodrick

[idusidusi]

6 hours ago, Voxen said:

This is exactly what I mean when I say camera vs computer. It is more of a feeling than a reality though.

Yes the Q3 has a lot of technology which makes it a computer too, but it remains simple to use, it has simple buttons layout, has much simpler menus and still looks like an old good Leica camera.

Voxon: Well today I looked at the Sony A7C with a small lens, I also picked up an original Q. Within a few minutes I knew the Q3 is for me and not the Sony. I agree with what vdev said about the Sony - definitely not for me. 

vdev: I identify with this: I like Sony technology. I like some of their products, (in my case Hifi, TV) - but no matter how good their cameras are, I can't use those cameras. I am annoyed by the scattering of buttons like rhinestones on a schoolgirl's dress. I don't like the viewfinder. I start to panic when I get to the menu.
but it is a very very versatile camera. but not for me (and not for me).

 

[FusionX.Photo]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

Well not to belabor the point but the GFX100 with GF 35-70 is $9000(CDN) as opposed to $9000 for the Q3…so with lens (so you can take a picture 😂)…the same price…and 40 more of your precious MP’s.

 

Using a cheap kits lens to prove a point is ……pointless

[frame-it]

9 minutes ago, FusionX.Photo said:

Using a cheap kits lens to prove a point is ……pointless

which GFX body & lenses do You have?

[Simone_DF]

7 hours ago, Voxen said:

This is exactly what I mean when I say camera vs computer. It is more of a feeling than a reality though.

Yes the Q3 has a lot of technology which makes it a computer too, but it remains simple to use, it has simple buttons layout, has much simpler menus and still looks like an old good Leica camera.

Perhaps it’s just me, but to me Sonys are more like point&shoot. The AF is so good that you literally point it somewhere, click the shutter button and magically your photo is where you wanted it. Basically you can focus on composition and the picture you had in mind, then just click. To me it doesn’t get simpler than that. 
With the Leica Q2 that I had for a while it was much more frustrating due to the poor AF capabilities. It’s better with my SL2-S, but it still require more fine tuning from my side. 
That said, I get what you’re talking about, I prefer Leicas to Sonys, I sold my A7RIV two years ago and never looked back. But I have to say that the A7CII is making me reconsider. I’ll probably play the wait and see game, I think Leica may surprise us with a smaller SL3-S as a full frame replacement for the CL, or perhaps that’s just wishful thinking. 

[SrMi]

8 hours ago, Voxen said:

This is exactly what I mean when I say camera vs computer. It is more of a feeling than a reality though.

Yes the Q3 has a lot of technology which makes it a computer too, but it remains simple to use, it has simple buttons layout, has much simpler menus and still looks like an old good Leica camera.

There is something special about a simpler camera, something relaxing and focusing. I feel it leads to making better photos. I certainly think that choosing cameras by spec does not lead to better images.

[Voxen]

4 minutes ago, SrMi said:

There is something special about a simpler camera, something relaxing and focusing. I feel it leads to making better photos. I certainly think that choosing cameras by spec does not lead to better images.

I was much more inspired using the Leica Q than any other camera I ever owned, except film cameras in my early days as a photographer.

[JTLeica]

48 minutes ago, Voxen said:

I was much more inspired using the Leica Q than any other camera I ever owned, except film cameras in my early days as a photographer.

And that is an immeasurably important part of photography. If you are inspired to go out with your camera, that is half the battle. If you are using something you dislike or are in a location that doesnt inspire you (like everywhere within 50 miles of my house 😆) that photography and the results from it arent going to be good.

[FusionX.Photo]

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

which GFX body & lenses do You have?

I’ve had the 50S II and 35-70, didn’t excite me so sold it. 

[Guest]

I've studied this thread in great detail and can now give the OP the answer they originally asked for...

• Some people prefer their Q3
• Some people prefer the Q3 they don't have yet
• Some people think they might prefer the Sony
• Some people think a medium format is the right choice
• Some people don't like computers
• Some people just enjoy a good argument discussion.

There we go. Question answered!

[Rdf]

On 9/4/2023 at 10:18 AM, nicelynice said:

Ahh, super helpful, will give that a try! Would love for Leica to make a 40mm Q, though I'm going to give 28mm a good try

FWIW. For those who like 40mm — I had a Sony a7c with a 40mm f2 Zeiss batis that took very nice photos, but the camera?, (or my other lens, a Sony zoom) admitted dust. 

[colonel]

On 9/3/2023 at 9:40 AM, CalStanford said:

 

I was waiting for Sony to come out with an RX1R3. Slightly larger body, add IBIS or lens stabilization. Change the sensor up to the newer 61MP. Bit bigger battery. New lower power processor and displays. Basically update the tech since the eight years of RX1R2 release. Boom. But they abandoned the RX series. The A7C series isn't a replacement. 

ay karumba 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[StefanoGili]

Here the sony A7CR it's 3700euros and that 61mpx sensor needs a great glass in front of it, the 16-35 Gm II 2.8 costs 2700€, so the price is higher than the one for a brand new Q3.

 

I switched from Sony A7IV to Q3 for the portability....A7CR would be a great deal... but i love the idea to do not have dust on sensor and a more compact body that mantains value in the years.