Leica Q1 - even more attractive in 2024

[irenedp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I gave my Q1 to a friend on permanent loan just because I wasn’t using it enough. It’s low light capabilities are decent -for me-, and I love the color. Have not tried ever a Q2 or Q3 but really not interested. My M9P, which is one of the cameras I use for work, doubles as a personal camera.  

Whilst I wouldn’t adventure any opinion about the newer Qs, sometimes we get a fixation with a particular tool and fall in love with it. I have cameras significantly more capable than the Q1 or the M9p, and still., the M9 is the only one I would keep regardless. 

For the record, the Q1 replaced in 2018 a Fuji X100f which I never resolved to sell but sits on a glass cabinet since. It was so much better… 

[Advertisement]

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

[AZach]

3 hours ago, Pelu2010 said:

My first camera ! 
with a 50 mm 1.8 for 3 years. 
then I bought a 90 mm 2.0 macro .And a 28 mm zuiko. 2.8.

My one and only as well from mid 70’s to late 90’s, with 35/2.8 and 85/2.0  Shot mainly Kodachrome 64 until availability and processing got difficult.

[thegobi]

9 hours ago, Miltz said:

Anyone who says that the Q is better than the Q3 never owned these cameras. Coming to a forum and trying to convince people that the Q is better than the Q3 is beyond ridiculous. If you own a camera and love it, that’s great, keep it at that. 

I think this discussion has become people just talking about older cameras that they love 🙂

…and there are many interpretations of the word ‘better’…

I always wanted a Canon T-90 😉

And I still have my EOS RT…. 🙂

[Miltz]

1 hour ago, gigithephotographer said:

I can’t agree with you. I’ve owned the Q2 and Q3 and while I loved the new features of the Q3, I preferred without a doubt the rendering from the lens/sensor combination on the Q3. 
This is also true for the M series, where I much prefer the rendering of my M10P over the look produced by my M11. 

I agree with the OP that both the M11 and Q3 are losing the "leica feel", and are getting closer to Sony in their output. 

Never have I ever picked my Q3 in the last 7 months and said this feels like a Sony. LOL. 

[Le Chef]

2 hours ago, gigithephotographer said:

M11 and Q3 are losing the "leica feel", and are getting closer to Sony in their output. 

Absolute cobblers! Would you care to show the difference between the Q2 and Q3 shooting the same subject at the same time with the same settings?

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, Miltz said:

Never have I ever picked my Q3 in the last 7 months and said this feels like a Sony. LOL. 

I think he is referring to the ‘feel’ (rendition) of the images.

Lots has been written that many feel that many of the high resolution sensors are losing character and becoming sterile (and Sony is often mentioned).

[Miltz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

55 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

I think he is referring to the ‘feel’ (rendition) of the images.

Lots has been written that many feel that many of the high resolution sensors are losing character and becoming sterile (and Sony is often mentioned).

Well the key word is "feeling". Feelings can't be wrong, because they are just feelings. Fact is the output of the Leica Q3 looks nothing like images that come out of a Sony camera. Just like my Nikon Z6 uses a Sony sensor yet the images look nothing like Sony's images with the same sensor. The only thing that's changed is the new Leica's have better more accurate color rendition. I prefer that over having images I have to color correct in post because my inaccurate colors are called "character" by some people. If "sterile" means color accurate sign me up. I rather change my colors in post than have them be wrong from the start. Leica's still retain their signature look and look nothing like other cameras. Nothing is worse than people spreading misinform to others in an effort to validate their feelings. (side note: Sony has been constantly tweaking their colors with every new camera body release for years now, so none of the models have the same exact colors.) 

[thegobi]

Colour me curious, but does all this mean that Leica Monochroms don't look like Leicas because the colours are not the same?  😉

Not sure why I am wasting all that money on expensive glass when it is just how the sensor renders colours that matters...  😜

I await the stern and serious reply rebutting my irreverent comment...   🤣

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, Miltz said:

Well the key word is "feeling". Feelings can't be wrong, because they are just feelings. Fact is the output of the Leica Q3 looks nothing like images that come out of a Sony camera. Just like my Nikon Z6 uses a Sony sensor yet the images look nothing like Sony's images with the same sensor. The only thing that's changed is the new Leica's have better more accurate color rendition. I prefer that over having images I have to color correct in post because my inaccurate colors are called "character" by some people. If "sterile" means color accurate sign me up. I rather change my colors in post than have them be wrong from the start. Leica's still retain their signature look and look nothing like other cameras. Nothing is worse than people spreading misinform to others in an effort to validate their feelings. (side note: Sony has been constantly tweaking their colors with every new camera body release for years now, so none of the models have the same exact colors.) 

You are right.   But that is exactly why some feel the Q to better than the Q2 or Q3…they ‘feel the rendition is more to their liking.

Neither is right or wrong…but just because specs say one camera is better than the other…doesn’t mean squat.

Case in point…Plus X was ‘better’ than Tri-X… but Tri-X was one of the most popular films, not because of its low light capability but because of its looks…which was entirely subjective.

[thegobi]

37 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

You are right.   But that is exactly why some feel the Q to better than the Q2 or Q3…they ‘feel the rendition is more to their liking.

Neither is right or wrong…but just because specs say one camera is better than the other…doesn’t mean squat.

Case in point…Plus X was ‘better’ than Tri-X… but Tri-X was one of the most popular films, not because of its low light capability but because of its looks…which was entirely subjective.

Some people still prefer the original Ricoh digital GR with its tiny (in size), 8mp sensor -- just for the look it gave in B&W images.
Daido Moriyama probably has a lot to do with that...
The same for Anton Corbijn and Tri-X...

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, thegobi said:

Some people still prefer the original Ricoh digital GR with its tiny (in size), 8mp sensor -- just for the look it gave in B&W images.
Daido Moriyama probably has a lot to do with that...
The same for Anton Corbijn and Tri-X...

Yup...some just don't realize...specs don't always tell the whole story.

[Qwertynm]

That‘s why the Q3 now comes with Leica Looks. So that your accurate images can now have more ‚character‘.