Q3 binned at 36MP vs A7C II

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, Corius said:

The ML is the little black box hanging off the back of the massive SL lenses

Ah. OK. So what about the E-M? The M with a built in EVF?

Leica should give up and let the forum design the camera.

[Voxen]

7 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

You are missing the real issue. After 8 years of Q then Q2 I don’t need another of the same with Q3 and won’t need a future Q4 with the exact same fixed lens. 
How many times should I buy the same Summilux-Q 28mm over and over again ? 

What can bring the concept forward is a QL : compact full frame with interchangeable compact lenses. 
Sony launched first the awesome RX1 but left it after second iteration for its interchangeable siblings. 
A7C is another step to bring back the compact form factor still with interchangeable lenses. And Sony made some pretty compact ones. SL lenses are behemoths next to them. 😢
 

Q3 is boring business as usual. 
A7C II & A7CR are the future, especially when you killed your APS-C line. 
Today Leica has neither compact full frame nor APS-C. Only big stuffs. 

After trolling all french forums with your Q3 anger now you try to convince the rest of the world that Leica did not built the perfect Q for YOU.

Can you stop spitting on the Q3 which obviously is not made for you. Go buy a Sony and live happy.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

45 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

You are missing the real issue. After 8 years of Q then Q2 I don’t need another of the same with Q3 and won’t need a future Q4 with the exact same fixed lens. 
How many times should I buy the same Summilux-Q 28mm over and over again ? 

What can bring the concept forward is a QL : compact full frame with interchangeable compact lenses. 
Sony launched first the awesome RX1 but left it after second iteration for its interchangeable siblings. 
A7C is another step to bring back the compact form factor still with interchangeable lenses. And Sony made some pretty compact ones. SL lenses are behemoths next to them. 😢

So if Leica does not cover your wishes there and there are other brands that do, why are you attempting to teach an  elephant to walz? A Q camera is one with an integrated lens-sensor unit allowing maximum quality at an acceptable price/size point.  A QL as you call it would not be a Leica Q but a run of the mill competitor in a crowded field. Maybe you can get Leica to rebrand Sony  Yes, SL lenses are large That is the very reason  that they are the best on the market. The lack of size restriction is the freedom for Peter Karbe to design them thus.

[Corius]

2 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Ah. OK. So what about the E-M? The M with a built in EVF?

Leica should give up and let the forum design the camera.

Ah, the E-M has an optional attachment ($550) that lets you mount cross hairs on the SL lenses. No-one needs an EVF!

[Voxen]

3 minutes ago, jaapv said:

So if Leica does not cover your wishes there and there are other brands that do, why are you attempting to teach an  elephant to walz? A Q camera is one with an integrated lens-sensor unit allowing maximum quality at an acceptable price/size point.  A QL as you call it would not be a Leica Q but a run of the mill competitor in a crowded field. Maybe you can get Leica to rebrand Sony  Yes, SL lenses are large That is the very reason  that they are the best. on the market. The lack of size restriction is the freedom for Peter Karbe to design them thus

Don’t waste your time, this guy is well known on french forums to troll as much as he can. Basically Leica should build a Q according to his personal wishes, otherwise the brand is lost.

Edited September 5, 2023 by Voxen

[JTLeica]

23 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

The Q is compromising on quality too. The lens is soft in the corners and it’s a fixed lens at 28mm. 

The Sigmas sure are small, I got two of them, but they don’t bring any money to Leica. Moreover, the SL2 is massive. 

So if the Q is compromising on quality and the lens is mated to the sensor, just think what sacrifices Leica would make to make lenses the size of the Q lens, whilst interchangeable.

Its not a possible outcome.

I was merely pointing out, that if you want a small FF system go with the Sony with Sigma lenses, if you want a fixed camera, go with a Q, X100 blah blah

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

27 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

You are missing the real issue. After 8 years of Q then Q2 I don’t need another of the same with Q3 and won’t need a future Q4 with the exact same fixed lens. 
How many times should I buy the same Summilux-Q 28mm over and over again ? 

What can bring the concept forward is a QL : compact full frame with interchangeable compact lenses. 
Sony launched first the awesome RX1 but left it after second iteration for its interchangeable siblings. 
A7C is another step to bring back the compact form factor still with interchangeable lenses. And Sony made some pretty compact ones. SL lenses are behemoths next to them. 😢
 

Q3 is boring business as usual. 
A7C II & A7CR are the future, especially when you killed your APS-C line. 
Today Leica has neither compact full frame nor APS-C. Only big stuffs. 

If the Q3 is boring why are you wasting you time and everyone else's on this forum? If you come here to say how Sony A7C is the future, I suggest you head to a Sony forum and celebrate...

If you can't point out the Sony 28mm F1.7/1.8 lens that is the size and quality of the Q2/3 lens, let us know...

[JTLeica]

53 minutes ago, Voxen said:

Don’t waste your time, this guy is well known on french forums to troll as much as he can. Basically Leica should build a Q according to his personal wishes, otherwise the brand is lost.

If only Leica had his knowledge of optics they would make a 'QL' with tiny lenses. Shame

[Le Chef]

10 hours ago, nicci78 said:

what I really want is a QL with interchangeable lens in a compact body with a bunch of small SL lenses

Dream on! This has been discussed here many times before as you know. Never going to happen. 
If you want this hypothetical dream camera, why not ask Sony to build one exclusively for you? Then you would have nothing left to complain about and could move on to your own exclusive forum where only you could post.

[nicci78]

Why not ? Please note that I will never buy any SL in their current huge form factor. 

Just one question to everybody, would you be interested by an hypothetical QL ? 

As compact as the Q3 but slightly thicker, with focal plane mechanical shutter limited to 1/4000th, same EVF, basic IBIS and tilting screen (please make it more elegant 🙏).

And a few bunch of tiny Elmarit-SL to complement the rebranded Panasonic lenses (Summicron-SL)

Sounds attractive ? Everything listed above are technologically achievable. Obviously it can kill the Q, the SL and the M. But like Steve Jobs once said : it is better to cannibalised itself than being eaten by another. Hence the iPhone killing its popular iPod line up. 

QL has the potential to be much better than CL, Q, SL and M combined. Wetzlar just need some courage. 

Edited September 5, 2023 by nicci78

[nicci78]

2 hours ago, JTLeica said:

If the Q3 is boring why are you wasting you time and everyone else's on this forum? If you come here to say how Sony A7C is the future, I suggest you head to a Sony forum and celebrate...

If you can't point out the Sony 28mm F1.7/1.8 lens that is the size and quality of the Q2/3 lens, let us know...

I am not a Sony user. My last Sony was the RX1, an awesome camera, but I fell in love with the Q at its launch party. Q was a much superior camera than the RX1 at the time. 

So I never bought a Sony again in a decade. And I'd rather buy a QL than any ugly A7C. I am just impressed by what Sony can do in terms of compact bodies and compact (but high IQ) lenses. So if Sony can, Leica also, if it really wanted it.

A7C II and A7CR are just benchmarks that Leica can aspire to surpass with a hypothetical QL. 

NB : talking about Sony is not an insult to Leica. Bare in mind that Leica is currently using Sony Semicon sensors in every current products except SL2 and every Leica EVF products are using Sony Semicon OLED panels for years. The last non Sony ones were SL, Q and M typ 240 EVF. Quite a long time ago. 

Edited September 5, 2023 by nicci78

[nicci78]

Fun fact QL is quite an old request, since 2017, at the time it can be seen as a pipe dream, but A7C exists since 2020... 

In 2017 some dare asking for a Q Monochrom, guess what ? Wish was granted. 

If we never ask for anything it won't happen for sure. 

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Why not ? Please note that I will never buy any SL in their current huge form factor. 

Just one question to everybody, would you be interested by an hypothetical QL ? 

 

NO - Because it's not possible to have fast lenses as small as the Q that are interchangeable. As said many times, the smallest are the Sigma lenses for the Sony, / L mount, and they are F2/2.8/4 and are still larger than the Q. The Sony compact lenses are all F2.5 or 2.8. Go buy those is size is everything.

The SL is a no compromise system with image quality in the APO sum microns that is better than anything Sony has to offer.

It's not for me either, its too large, but I know some landscape photographers who are in love with it. 

 

[JTLeica]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

 

QL has the potential to be much better than CL, Q, SL and M combined. Wetzlar just need some courage. 

No they need Harry Potter and his magic wand.

[Miltz]

15 hours ago, nicci78 said:

What if the best competitor of Q3 is A7C II and not the A7RC ?

With interchangeable lens we won't need to rely on cropping anymore. 

For those using the Q3 in 36MP binned mode, what's the point anymore if you can just get a native 33MP camera ?

The cost saving can buy you more or better lenses than with A7CR

Well first I like having the option of shooting at all 3 resolutions. Like if I’m shooting a party with friends I’m using S-DNG. If I’m just walking around shooting in using M-DNG. If I’m going to work with clients who I know demand 60 Megapixels or if I’m going to shoot landscapes I’m going to use L-DNG. It’s a beautiful feature.

Additionally there’s an image quality benefit at M-DNG of about 1 stop of dynamic range so I’m not complaining here. The Sony feels like S… to use and in the hand so it’s not even a question. 

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, Miltz said:

Well first I like having the option of shooting at all 3 resolutions. Like if I’m shooting a party with friends I’m using S-DNG. If I’m just walking around shooting in using M-DNG. If I’m going to work with clients who I know demand 60 Megapixels or if I’m going to shoot landscapes I’m going to use L-DNG. It’s a beautiful feature.

Additionally there’s an image quality benefit at M-DNG of about 1 stop of dynamic range so I’m not complaining here. The Sony feels like S… to use and in the hand so it’s not even a question. 

As has been discussed plenty, and confirmed by Leica, there is no DR benefit of lower resolution, except when looking at 100%. That can be achieved with L-DNG and resizing in post.

[Miltz]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

As has been discussed plenty, and confirmed by Leica, there is no DR benefit of lower resolution, except when looking at 100%. That can be achieved with L-DNG and resizing in post.

I definitely notice a difference in the shadows, especially the blacks are more true to color black and have less noise in them. There is also an excellent video by math photographer on YouTube which I’m sure you’ve heard of which proves it as well. Where exactly did Leica say this? I’ve seen them say the opposite actually. resizing in post technically can’t increase dynamic range only noise performance. I hope photons to photos tests the sensor as well with all 3 DNG settings for further confirmation.

[SrMi]

34 minutes ago, Miltz said:

I definitely notice a difference in the shadows, especially the blacks are more true to color black and have less noise in them. There is also an excellent video by math photographer on YouTube which I’m sure you’ve heard of which proves it as well. Where exactly did Leica say this? I’ve seen them say the opposite actually. resizing in post technically can’t increase dynamic range only noise performance. I hope photons to photos tests the sensor as well with all 3 DNG settings for further confirmation.

Reducing image size reduces noise. It should be easily observable.

I gave up early on MathPhotographer's video as he was too often wrong (discussed elsewhere in this forum). I guess he did not compare the outputs at the same size and instead looked at 100% views (not a useful way to look at DR).

Leica Tech Talk: A Legend Reinvented. Discover the Leica M11

at 43:10, Jesko Von Oeyenhausen:

... if you capture 60 megapixels and downsize with lightroom or capture one to lower resolution you get a really similar result.
 

 

Edited September 6, 2023 by SrMi

[Miltz]

1 hour ago, SrMi said:

Reducing image size reduces noise. It should be easily observable.

I gave up early on MathPhotographer's video as he was too often wrong (discussed elsewhere in this forum). I guess he did not compare the outputs at the same size and instead looked at 100% views (not a useful way to look at DR).

Leica Tech Talk: A Legend Reinvented. Discover the Leica M11

at 43:10, Jesko Von Oeyenhausen:

... if you capture 60 megapixels and downsize with lightroom or capture one to lower resolution you get a really similar result.
 

 

Thank you for sharing this. I’m going to do some more testing and see if indeed the images look similar or if the in camera processing has an edge. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Miltz]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

Reducing image size reduces noise. It should be easily observable.

I gave up early on MathPhotographer's video as he was too often wrong (discussed elsewhere in this forum). I guess he did not compare the outputs at the same size and instead looked at 100% views (not a useful way to look at DR).

Leica Tech Talk: A Legend Reinvented. Discover the Leica M11

at 43:10, Jesko Von Oeyenhausen:

... if you capture 60 megapixels and downsize with lightroom or capture one to lower resolution you get a really similar result.
 

 

I just did some testing and I can confirm that there is definitely an increase in DR using M-DNG over L-DNG and resizing in Lightroom or photograph. I took 4 different images and all 4 show the exact same results. The L-DNG file is brighter and the histogram is different than the M-DNG file. I was able to recover more highlights and get cleaner shadows with the M-DNG vs L-DNG and then resizing in to the exact same size in photoshop. The histogram and image brightness surprised me but it makes sense. I'm glad I tried this out. What I can't measure is the amount of DR difference but if I had to estimate I would say around 1 stop which math photographer was able to confirm. (I know you don't like his methods but my results confirm his and disprove the resize later theory)