Q3 or Sony A7CR

[Simone_DF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

19 hours ago, Qwertynm said:

pretty sure the guys and gals at Leica right now ...

I think the lost sales are mostly on the SL platform, which is not exactly Leica's bestseller, given the amount of deals and freebies Leica throws us.

[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.

[SrMi]

5 hours ago, clasami said:

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.

The advantage of a7CR is that you can use it with several small APS-C lenses and still have sufficient MPs. I wish Leica would offer a small FF L-mount camera with high MP sensor.

[clasami]

vor 42 Minuten schrieb SrMi:

The advantage of a7CR is that you can use it with several small APS-C lenses and still have sufficient MPs. I wish Leica would offer a small FF L-mount camera with high MP sensor.

Why not use an a6xxx in the first place at much lower cost? And there are not that many APS-C lenses worth using on a 60MP sensor.

[SrMi]

23 minutes ago, clasami said:

Why not use an a6xxx in the first place at much lower cost? And there are not that many APS-C lenses worth using on a 60MP sensor.

The new 11, 15 are really good and I would use the 70-350 when needed occasionally while traveling. The 60MP sensor has the same pixel pitch as Sony's APS-C sensor. Therefore, if an APS-C lens performs well on APS-C camera, it will also perform well on the 60MP FF sensor (the output will be cropped to the resolution of the APS-C camera). a7rC has better IBIS than a6700 and can be used as FF camera as well (there are several lightweight FF Sony primes).

[adrianh]

I have ordered a silver A7cII as a backup for my A7Rv due to an upcoming safari and I will also order a Techart LM-EA9 AF Adapter and put my Summilux lenses on it. Wil be interesting to check the combo A7Cii+Techart+Summilux 35 1.4 ASPH against Leica Q3. Size, weight, AF performance, IQ :-). 

[SrMi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, adrianh said:

I have ordered a silver A7cII as a backup for my A7Rv due to an upcoming safari and I will also order a Techart LM-EA9 AF Adapter and put my Summilux lenses on it. Wil be interesting to check the combo A7Cii+Techart+Summilux 35 1.4 ASPH against Leica Q3. Size, weight, AF performance, IQ :-). 

I am pretty sure Q3’s AF performance is much better than a7cii + Techart adapter.

[adrianh]

I assume that too. It's more of an exercise of creating an approximation of digital M 🙂 . I need the camera anyway as a backup, I own already the Leica M lenses, so I will only need to add the Techart. 

[Terry Cioni]

On 9/4/2023 at 4:51 AM, FusionX.Photo said:

So now to try and win an argument you use a lens that’s f/2.5 when comparing to a camera with an f/1.7, how odd. It’s also an inferior lens when it comes to IQ. 

Unless you stop the 28mm Q Summicron down, it sucks big time...you Leica fans need a reality check starting with AF systems. Oh and by the way I am a Q1,2, and 3 owner. Lots of comments by people who haven't even seen the A7CR as was just released this past Thursday - so any statements are not based on personal experience, meaning they are not credible. I received the A7CR late Thursday (Sony's stated release date was Oct. 12th) and haven't really formed an opinion, but I have to say it doesn't have a RED DOT, what it does have is an excellent AF system and coupled with the Sony 40mm G F2.5 is very capable even with the lens wide-open. As an aside the Sony "Clear Zoom" function with HEIF files works well. Would I give up my Qs? No way, not going to happen as they are a totally different shooting experience.

[jaapv]

It sucks? Bollocks. And you are right that the cameras cannot be compared as they a a totally different concept. 

[Terry Cioni]

39 minutes ago, jaapv said:

It sucks? Bollocks. And you are right that the cameras cannot be compared as they a a totally different concept. 

🤣

Edited October 15, 2023 by Terry Cioni

[FusionX.Photo]

3 hours ago, Terry Cioni said:

Unless you stop the 28mm Q Summicron down, it sucks big time...you Leica fans need a reality check starting with AF systems. Oh and by the way I am a Q1,2, and 3 owner. Lots of comments by people who haven't even seen the A7CR as was just released this past Thursday - so any statements are not based on personal experience, meaning they are not credible. I received the A7CR late Thursday (Sony's stated release date was Oct. 12th) and haven't really formed an opinion, but I have to say it doesn't have a RED DOT, what it does have is an excellent AF system and coupled with the Sony 40mm G F2.5 is very capable even with the lens wide-open. As an aside the Sony "Clear Zoom" function with HEIF files works well. Would I give up my Qs? No way, not going to happen as they are a totally different shooting experience.

Maybe you should learn to read, I’ve stated that I’ve had lots of Sony gear with the latest AF system and GM glass so I’m more than qualified to comment on the differences. I also had the 40mm f2.5 and it was bang average, nothing special at all. You might also think about not being so rude in future.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

7 hours ago, Terry Cioni said:

Unless you stop the 28mm Q Summicron down, it sucks big time...you Leica fans need a reality check starting with AF systems. Oh and by the way I am a Q1,2, and 3 owner. Lots of comments by people who haven't even seen the A7CR as was just released this past Thursday - so any statements are not based on personal experience, meaning they are not credible. I received the A7CR late Thursday (Sony's stated release date was Oct. 12th) and haven't really formed an opinion, but I have to say it doesn't have a RED DOT, what it does have is an excellent AF system and coupled with the Sony 40mm G F2.5 is very capable even with the lens wide-open. As an aside the Sony "Clear Zoom" function with HEIF files works well. Would I give up my Qs? No way, not going to happen as they are a totally different shooting experience.

Well I do have both and I'm not agreeing with you.

1. It's a Summilux, not a Summicron. You have the Q1, 2 and 3 so you know that.....

2. The Sony AF is definitely superior but the AF in the Q3 detects people really well. It's miss rate is actually very low. What it doesn't have is subject detection anywhere near the Sony. But if you're shooting wildlife with a Q then you must really like a challenge. And it doesn't have birds, trains, planes and automobiles at all. Suitable for a lens designed for street and travel. But for people it's fast and accurate with a very high hit rate. I have cameras from every major manufacturer so I know what I'm comparing it to. You say we need a reality check. But you do realise that MANY Leica owners also shoot other systems. We don't live in a vacuum. Honestly to come here with your first post and assume we're oblivious to other systems is frankly, insulting. And incorrect. We just have different requirements from a camera and they don't always revolve around how fast the animal detect is.

3. There's NO equivalent lens in the Sony line up. The closest is the 28/2. My copy is very good indeed. The Q3 definitely shows noticeably more bite in the centre but the Sony is very close in the extreme corners. Especially close in the Q lens pulls ahead in the middle. The 28 isn't bad but the Q is better. Plus it draws better (the Q). The 24 and 35 GM are as sharp in the centre and a bit faster but significantly larger. The 2.5G lenses are very good but a full stop slower and they don't draw anything like the Q3 Summilux. The 24/1.8 is a nice option if you want something close(ish) to the Q's 26-27mm (actual). It's not perfect either but it draws in a really nice way. It goes well with the 55mm, which is my preferred main lens on the A7CR.

4. The A7CR was released on Oct 6 in Oz and I picked mine up on release day. I've put about 500 frames through it with a dozen lenses. I like it a lot. Mostly because I can change lenses and use my preferred 50mm. The eye AF is definitely superior (much like my A7RV) but I've not actually seen a real difference in the hit rate in areas where I'd want a 28mm lens.

5. The Q3 destroys the A7CR in build quality. The EVF and rear screen are vastly better. I tolerate the tiny low res EVF in the A7CR. That's the best I have to say about it. I prefer the flip screen to the flip out one on the Sony. The touch screen is more responsive. the Q3 has a built in macro mode which I really like. But mostly the build and tactile experience of the Q is on another level. the switch between AF/MF is sublime. It has a leaf shutter. A quiet leaf shutter. The A7CR might be the loudest camera I currently own.

Finally....

You do know that photography isn't all about how fast the Af is, right? Or about optical perfection all the time? I like the A7CR a LOT. It's a really really great little camera that when paired with the right lenses makes a fabulous little kit capable of sensation images. But it just doesn't have the X factor that the Q has. The Q (and most Leicas) are just more fun. More engaging. More tactile. Yes they're flawed. But flaws are the basis of personality, which is where Sony's and Canon sometimes (often) fall short. They make great images but you feel disconnected from the process. For some people the end result is all that matters. For others the process is as important as the result. That's who the Q3 is for.

I got the A7CR because Leica won't make me a 45-50mm Q. If they did I'd drop the Sony in a heartbeat. Mostly because of the Sony EVF decision. But they won't so I'll continue to enjoy the Sony.

Gordon

[bobtodrick]

3 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

 

You do know that photography isn't all about how fast the Af is, right? Or about optical perfection all the time? I like the A7CR a LOT. It's a really really great little camera that when paired with the right lenses makes a fabulous little kit capable of sensation images. But it just doesn't have the X factor that the Q has. The Q (and most Leicas) are just more fun. More engaging. More tactile. Yes they're flawed. But flaws are the basis of personality, which is where Sony's and Canon sometimes (often) fall short. They make great images but you feel disconnected from the process. For some people the end result is all that matters. For others the process is as important as the result. That's who the Q3 is for.

 

So agree with this.

My three year old Acura is in most ways a better car than my 1969 Alfa Romeo Spyder. 

The difference that makes the Alfa much more enjoyable is it has soul.  The Acura is utilitarian.

If I'm making run to the grocery store or going to work I take the Acura.

If I want to put a big smile on my face I take the Alfa.

[BobsFirstLeica]

1 hour ago, bobtodrick said:

So agree with this.

My three year old Acura is in most ways a better car than my 1969 Alfa Romeo Spyder. 

The difference that makes the Alfa much more enjoyable is it has soul.  The Acura is utilitarian.

If I'm making run to the grocery store or going to work I take the Acura.

If I want to put a big smile on my face I take the Alfa.

A little off topic but I owned a 1969 Alfa Berlina which got totaled on the Golden Gate Bridge in 1974.... however it saved my life and my 2 occupants with a nicely reinforced passenger cage.  I replaced it with a 1971 GTV which lasted a few years.  No one in my area to fix them so I sadly had to settle for more boring autos.

Bob

[SrMi]

My version of Godwin's law says that the probability of car comparisons increases as the camera and lens discussions grow longer. :).

Edited October 16, 2023 by SrMi

[Guest]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

My version of Godwin's law says that the probability of car comparisons increases as the camera and lens discussions grow longer. :).

Doesn't work, any car discussion will end with "Hitler invented the Volkswagen".

[SrMi]

4 minutes ago, Corius said:

Doesn't work, any car discussion will end with "Hitler invented the Volkswagen".

Now, you are quoting Elon Musk. Please don't do that ;-).

[jaapv]

10 hours ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Well I do have both and I'm not agreeing with you.

1. It's a Summilux, not a Summicron. You have the Q1, 2 and 3 so you know that.....

2. The Sony AF is definitely superior but the AF in the Q3 detects people really well. It's miss rate is actually very low. What it doesn't have is subject detection anywhere near the Sony. But if you're shooting wildlife with a Q then you must really like a challenge. And it doesn't have birds, trains, planes and automobiles at all. Suitable for a lens designed for street and travel. But for people it's fast and accurate with a very high hit rate. I have cameras from every major manufacturer so I know what I'm comparing it to. You say we need a reality check. But you do realise that MANY Leica owners also shoot other systems. We don't live in a vacuum. Honestly to come here with your first post and assume we're oblivious to other systems is frankly, insulting. And incorrect. We just have different requirements from a camera and they don't always revolve around how fast the animal detect is.

3. There's NO equivalent lens in the Sony line up. The closest is the 28/2. My copy is very good indeed. The Q3 definitely shows noticeably more bite in the centre but the Sony is very close in the extreme corners. Especially close in the Q lens pulls ahead in the middle. The 28 isn't bad but the Q is better. Plus it draws better (the Q). The 24 and 35 GM are as sharp in the centre and a bit faster but significantly larger. The 2.5G lenses are very good but a full stop slower and they don't draw anything like the Q3 Summilux. The 24/1.8 is a nice option if you want something close(ish) to the Q's 26-27mm (actual). It's not perfect either but it draws in a really nice way. It goes well with the 55mm, which is my preferred main lens on the A7CR.

4. The A7CR was released on Oct 6 in Oz and I picked mine up on release day. I've put about 500 frames through it with a dozen lenses. I like it a lot. Mostly because I can change lenses and use my preferred 50mm. The eye AF is definitely superior (much like my A7RV) but I've not actually seen a real difference in the hit rate in areas where I'd want a 28mm lens.

5. The Q3 destroys the A7CR in build quality. The EVF and rear screen are vastly better. I tolerate the tiny low res EVF in the A7CR. That's the best I have to say about it. I prefer the flip screen to the flip out one on the Sony. The touch screen is more responsive. the Q3 has a built in macro mode which I really like. But mostly the build and tactile experience of the Q is on another level. the switch between AF/MF is sublime. It has a leaf shutter. A quiet leaf shutter. The A7CR might be the loudest camera I currently own.

Finally....

You do know that photography isn't all about how fast the Af is, right? Or about optical perfection all the time? I like the A7CR a LOT. It's a really really great little camera that when paired with the right lenses makes a fabulous little kit capable of sensation images. But it just doesn't have the X factor that the Q has. The Q (and most Leicas) are just more fun. More engaging. More tactile. Yes they're flawed. But flaws are the basis of personality, which is where Sony's and Canon sometimes (often) fall short. They make great images but you feel disconnected from the process. For some people the end result is all that matters. For others the process is as important as the result. That's who the Q3 is for.

I got the A7CR because Leica won't make me a 45-50mm Q. If they did I'd drop the Sony in a heartbeat. Mostly because of the Sony EVF decision. But they won't so I'll continue to enjoy the Sony.

Gordon

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.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jaapv]

20 minutes ago, Corius said:

Doesn't work, any car discussion will end with "Hitler invented the Volkswagen".

He didn’t. Hans Ledwinka did.