Q3 Monochrom ...Yes / NO

[luetz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, Le Chef said:

What didn’t work for the Q-M?

Price is higher with less features(no colour).  Special editions fetch more because of their limited productions. Enthusiasts will buy "special feature cameras, especially Leica" and pay more, because of their exclusivity.

[Le Chef]

Non sequitur. Does the Q-M have video?

[mhasman]

7 hours ago, luetz said:

Price is higher with less features(no colour).  Special editions fetch more because of their limited productions. Enthusiasts will buy "special feature cameras, especially Leica" and pay more, because of their exclusivity.

What about M Monochrom? Even less features for much more money  

Sure, only enthusiasts buy such of cameras, but IMO choosing it for unique technology, pure picture quality and stunning design. 

[thegobi]

10 hours ago, luetz said:

Price is higher with less features(no colour).  Special editions fetch more because of their limited productions. Enthusiasts will buy "special feature cameras, especially Leica" and pay more, because of their exclusivity.

I bought one… and nothing you said is accurate…. 🤣

[Herr Barnack]

 

 

Q3 Monochrom:

Yes, Leica will make it

Yes, people will buy it

Yes, I would buy it

 

Apparently I am a "yes man."  I've been called worse and lived to tell.

 

Edited February 11, 2024 by Herr Barnack

[Aram Langhans]

Interesting thread.  Yes they will make it because why continue with two different technologies when one will do.  Got to be cheaper to only tool up for one system both physically and electronically.  And if there is as much difference in the results as between the Q2 and Q2 M then I am sure it will sell.  Would I buy it.  Probably not.  I love monochrome, but I could not I spent my wad on the Q3 and could not justify a second camera for B&W only, though if someone wanted to give me one I would certainly not refuse. 😄

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/8/2024 at 8:48 PM, mhasman said:

What about M Monochrom? Even less features for much more money  

Sure, only enthusiasts buy such of cameras, but IMO choosing it for unique technology, pure picture quality and stunning design. 

Best feature you could ask for--improved image quality. The other bells and whistles, who cares? 

[PaulJohn]

I would definitely want a Q3m (mostly for the aesthetic) but would not buy one. I would argue that once you add filters the benefits are mostly negated. The orange filter (most common) for example cuts out 2 stops of light which is approx the high ISO benefit you get from the monochrom sensor over the regular sensor. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I had the Q2m and now have the Q3. I've taken similar photos (not at very high ISO) and am very happy that the Q3 holds its own for tonal gradation. Actually I find that high ISO noise is much more pleasing on higher resolution cameras anyway. I've also come to prefer the channel mixing to easily change the tones of grass or sky with exact control and without the need for masks. I have spent quite some time creating LR presets to mimic various filters and found some surprises such as purple filters which I find quite useful.

[ERW]

On 1/17/2024 at 8:24 PM, RobW0 said:

I agree with all of your listed improvements except the battery, because the new "more juice" battery can be used in the Q2 also. I like the Q3 improvements but I agree with some about the sensor. Just for reference I also have an M11P and had the Q2 before Q3. 

The Q2 Monochrom is pretty close to perfect for me.  The ability to charge in-camera with USB-C would be great.  One less thing to bring along when traveling...

[jaapv]

It wouldn’t work for me. I am out using the camera with one extra battery  whist a spare battery is charging up in the hotel room. The third one gets charged overnight. 

[Le Chef]

4 hours ago, ERW said:

The Q2 Monochrom is pretty close to perfect for me.  The ability to charge in-camera with USB-C would be great.  One less thing to bring along when traveling...

If the battery fails while you’re out shooting, you’re fooked. But if you carry spare and a charger you’re OK.

[RobW0]

2 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

If the battery fails while you’re out shooting, you’re fooked. But if you carry spare and a charger you’re OK.

I wish Leica would make a charger the size of the M11 one and USB-C for the Q3. I have had inconsistent results from the Nitecore too where I don't want to trust it when traveling.  

[Le Chef]

I have had no issue using Nitecore chargers on the CL, Q2 and Q3. So far (about 5 years of use) they do what they’re supposed to do

[ERW]

13 hours ago, Le Chef said:

If the battery fails while you’re out shooting, you’re fooked. But if you carry spare and a charger you’re OK.

Amen.  Just ordered the new BP-SCL6, which I learned about here 🙂

[Olaf_ZG]

Don’t get this fuzz about big chargers. While traveling, you can fit them anywhere. A second or third spare is always handy, and not bigger than a roll of film.

It would be nice though if all batteries where compatible, but they aren’t.

on topic: having a monochrom M, to me, a Q should be in colour, though the first two iterations were terrible for low light and indoor. A monochrom would have been much better for such situations. Guess the question is where and what are you photographing…

[Pelu2010]

On 3/3/2024 at 3:29 PM, Le Chef said:

I have had no issue using Nitecore chargers on the CL, Q2 and Q3. So far (about 5 years of use) they do what they’re supposed to do

Me too- 

I generally only use the nitecore. 

And ever half year I also use the Leica charger. 

And I also charge in camera a lot with just an USB-C cable and the camera on the table. 

[Mikep996]

Although I'd like a reason to buy a monochrome Leica, I just haven't seen any objective comparisons where I can detect any advantage to a monochrome camera for the type of photos I take.  I've never needed to shoot an image using an ISO above 3200 so the "high ISO" technical advantage doesn't exist for me and the pics converted to BW from my Q2/M10R look great - at least at the typical print size I hang on the wall - usually around 16x24.

That being said...I still think about acquiring a used Q2M...

[Qwertynm]

The Q2M has one of the greatest camera designs ever in my opinion. Leica could just sell me a body upgrade @ 1k$ for my Q3 to mimic the Q2M design. It’s just a black box with a lens attached. Perfection. 

[ksrhee]

The minute it is announced, I will order one.  If the price for the Q2 M drops a huge amount, then I have to debate myself . . . If the past is any indication, I would expect the Q3 M sometime late 2024 (Novemberish) . . .

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Dr. G]

On 2/14/2024 at 12:16 PM, PaulJohn said:

I would definitely want a Q3m (mostly for the aesthetic) but would not buy one. I would argue that once you add filters the benefits are mostly negated. The orange filter (most common) for example cuts out 2 stops of light which is approx the high ISO benefit you get from the monochrom sensor over the regular sensor. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I had the Q2m and now have the Q3. I've taken similar photos (not at very high ISO) and am very happy that the Q3 holds its own for tonal gradation. Actually I find that high ISO noise is much more pleasing on higher resolution cameras anyway. I've also come to prefer the channel mixing to easily change the tones of grass or sky with exact control and without the need for masks. I have spent quite some time creating LR presets to mimic various filters and found some surprises such as purple filters which I find quite useful.

Have you found that your Q2M still appears to be higher resolution even though it has less Mp than the Q3?  With the absence of the Bayer filter you're theroetically seeing "true" 47MP in your images.