More fuel for the different focal length debate

[Stuart Richardson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was browsing the rumor site to see if we might get a Ricoh GR Monochrome at some point, and I stumbled upon this interesting bit of information.

https://pentaxrumors.com/2024/01/15/the-ricoh-gr-iiix-is-the-best-selling-compact-camera-for-2023-at-yodobashi-camera-in-japan/#respond

Yodobashi Camera is a huge camera chain in Japan, similar to something like B&H. I just thought it was interesting to note that the Ricoh GRIIIx (40mm) outsold every other compact camera in 2023, despite being launched in September 2021, including the GRIII (28mm) and the Q3. It seemed to sell so much that it appeared twice on the top ten list...in number 1 and number 9, as a special edition. Now I am sure that part of this is due to some users already having a GRIII model, and subsequently buying a GRIIIx, but I would imagine most die hard GR people who wanted the second camera would have picked it up in 2021 or 2022. In any case, I think it is still interesting information about the relative popularity, at least in Japan, which is a major camera market. Both GR models outsold the Q3, but that is not surprising given the Q3 release date and the relative cost difference. Now, I am sure there are any number of caveats that can be found: this is only one store and in one market, the Q series is much more expensive and not as many people might buy both etc.

Anyway, I just found it interesting at least. I know that I love my GRIIIx, and I loved the Q2 body and sensor, but wished for a longer lens. It seems in Japan at least I am not alone!

Edited January 23 by Stuart Richardson

[Ad Dieleman]

Preference for focal lengths is a very personal thing of course. While I find that 40mm is very nice for snapshots, I'd feel too limited on the streets; the 35mm angle of view conforms to my natural vision and in the short time I own the Q3, I've grown fond of its field of view. Using the 35mm frame lines works well for me and still delivers great output. I certainly wouldn't buy a fixed 40mm lens camera as my main shooter and I hate carrying more than 1 camera (I tried, so I know).

If Leica decides to bring a 40mm Q-variant, that's fine, but I hope they will keep 28mm.

[Advertisement]

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

[Stuart Richardson]

26 minutes ago, Ad Dieleman said:

If Leica decides to bring a 40mm Q-variant, that's fine, but I hope they will keep 28mm.

I think that is an absolute certainty. No one is suggesting that they replace the 28mm, which is a wide angle that makes sense for many, many users. Any longer lens would be a supplement. There is a pretty long history of high end fixed lens cameras coming in two versions, usually roughly 28mm and 40mm equivalents.

In any case, I don't want to set off an angry debate or anything, I just thought it was an interesting bit of info that might be illustrative that there might be a market for an additional Q with a longer lens. Whether we get it or not is a completely different story.

Edited January 23 by Stuart Richardson

[jaapv]

Does this mean that there would be a preference for carrying multiple cameras instead of one body-one zoom - the Q being a zoom replacement - or one body and a few lenses?  

Japanese tourists used to be notorious for carrying a whole bunch of cameras, so maybe there is more of a multiple camera acceptance over there. 

[Stuart Richardson]

For me at least it would mean just one body, better suited to my usage. I think for some people it would mean two bodies, just like how some people like to use two bodies with different lenses on them in other systems. A Q zoom is another matter, and one I have not seen talked about too much. Most likely because a single focal length lens can still be made fairly compact, while a zoom in full frame would most likely be too large to fit with the "compact camera" segment. In APS maybe, but a full frame 24-90 at Leica quality would likely be too large. A 40mm f2 or 2.8, however, is likely to be very compact (See the 40mm Summicron, for example...clearly adding AF and modern lens design will make it larger, but most contemporary 28mm lenses were larger than the 40mm Summicron).

[Casey Jefferson]

I once had only the voigtlander 40/1.2 on Sony body for my entire Japan trip and didn't feel I need anything else.

I did the similar trip with RX1R and Q2 too and equally fine with them, I do admit the 40/1.2 was giving me a lot more room for creativity, but I really appreciate the extra coverage when I shoot family photo indoor, compared to e.g. 35 summicron on my M, that extra bit of fov made quite a difference.

With Leica making only the Q available it actually make life easier for me so that I don't need to make decision (or go with M or SL!). 🤪   

PS: With the RX1R ii now pretty outdated (with serious flaw that needed upgrade) there really isn't any camera in the same class to compete.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

For me at least it would mean just one body, better suited to my usage. I think for some people it would mean two bodies, just like how some people like to use two bodies with different lenses on them in other systems. A Q zoom is another matter, and one I have not seen talked about too much. Most likely because a single focal length lens can still be made fairly compact, while a zoom in full frame would most likely be too large to fit with the "compact camera" segment. In APS maybe, but a full frame 24-90 at Leica quality would likely be too large. A 40mm f2 or 2.8, however, is likely to be very compact (See the 40mm Summicron, for example...clearly adding AF and modern lens design will make it larger, but most contemporary 28mm lenses were larger than the 40mm Summicron).

I ame sure that Leica looked at the most popular zoom focal range when setting the requirements for the Q. And that would be 28-70 The average customer, comparing to other high-quality compacts, would certainly regard the "lack" of a wide end as a minus point. To be honest, I have a 35-70 4.0 R lens on my SL as standard and there certainly were occasions that I would have preferred it to be wider.

[R4p70r]

2 hours ago, Casey Jefferson said:

I once had only the voigtlander 40/1.2 on Sony body for my entire Japan trip and didn't feel I need anything else.

I did the similar trip with RX1R and Q2 too and equally fine with them, I do admit the 40/1.2 was giving me a lot more room for creativity, but I really appreciate the extra coverage when I shoot family photo indoor, compared to e.g. 35 summicron on my M, that extra bit of fov made quite a difference.

With Leica making only the Q available it actually make life easier for me so that I don't need to make decision (or go with M or SL!). 🤪   

PS: With the RX1R ii now pretty outdated (with serious flaw that needed upgrade) there really isn't any camera in the same class to compete.

We probably never ever talk about Zeiss' competition with their the ZX1 again.
That thing could have been a hit, but the delays, the camera body design, implementing Lightroom in its camera OS and only SSD as a storage medium were too much for the targeted audience. 

I have some friends who take the Sony route and buy a Sony A7C/A7Cm2 or A7CR and for lenses they pair those compact G lenses with aperture rings: FE 40 mm F2.5 G, FE 50 mm F2.5 G and FE 24 mm F2.8 G. 

[Casey Jefferson]

1 hour ago, R4p70r said:

We probably never ever talk about Zeiss' competition with their the ZX1 again.
That thing could have been a hit, but the delays, the camera body design, implementing Lightroom in its camera OS and only SSD as a storage medium were too much for the targeted audience. 

I have some friends who take the Sony route and buy a Sony A7C/A7Cm2 or A7CR and for lenses they pair those compact G lenses with aperture rings: FE 40 mm F2.5 G, FE 50 mm F2.5 G and FE 24 mm F2.8 G. 

I intentionally left out the Zeiss 🤪 

I have to admit though, once I went Leica it's difficult to move to other system - not even the RX1R come close to the rendering of a Leica.

I would build a Nikon zf with 40/2 today if I hadn't went for Leica, hard to go back once I'm hooked with the rendering...

[Simone_DF]

9 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I just thought it was interesting to note that the Ricoh GRIIIx (40mm) outsold every other compact camera in 2023, despite being launched in September 2021, including the GRIII (28mm) and the Q3.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Le Chef]

What we don’t know is how many of the GR3X sales were add ons to existing GR3 sales and how many were unique purchases. You also have to remember the GR3 pricepoint is 1/6th of the Q3 so almost an impulse purchase whereas you would have to believe a Q3 was very much a considered purchase.

[SrMi]

10 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I was browsing the rumor site to see if we might get a Ricoh GR Monochrome at some point, and I stumbled upon this interesting bit of information.

https://pentaxrumors.com/2024/01/15/the-ricoh-gr-iiix-is-the-best-selling-compact-camera-for-2023-at-yodobashi-camera-in-japan/#respond

Yodobashi Camera is a huge camera chain in Japan, similar to something like B&H. I just thought it was interesting to note that the Ricoh GRIIIx (40mm) outsold every other compact camera in 2023, despite being launched in September 2021, including the GRIII (28mm) and the Q3. It seemed to sell so much that it appeared twice on the top ten list...in number 1 and number 9, as a special edition. Now I am sure that part of this is due to some users already having a GRIII model, and subsequently buying a GRIIIx, but I would imagine most die hard GR people who wanted the second camera would have picked it up in 2021 or 2022. In any case, I think it is still interesting information about the relative popularity, at least in Japan, which is a major camera market. Both GR models outsold the Q3, but that is not surprising given the Q3 release date and the relative cost difference. Now, I am sure there are any number of caveats that can be found: this is only one store and in one market, the Q series is much more expensive and not as many people might buy both etc.

Anyway, I just found it interesting at least. I know that I love my GRIIIx, and I loved the Q2 body and sensor, but wished for a longer lens. It seems in Japan at least I am not alone!

Leica Q3 came in 7th. But that ranking does not say enough. Unrealistically, but possibly with rankings, Q3 could have sold 0.05% fewer units than GRIIIx :).

[Stuart Richardson]

Yes, you’re right guys. I guess I will have to have Scientific American retract my paper. Apologies. Probably shouldn’t have had Ken Rockwell peer review it…

[FusionX.Photo]

24 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Yes, you’re right guys. I guess I will have to have Scientific American retract my paper. Apologies. Probably shouldn’t have had Ken Rockwell peer review it…

Could be worse, at least you didn’t ask the gruesome twosome I’ll say anything for a dollar shills the Northrup’s.

[Miltz]

This isn’t surprising. A camera for $999 outselling a camera for $6000 is expected. Especially when that camera is super niche and excellent. I had the griii and it was great. I’m sure the Fuji 100v would outsell the Q3 too if it was in stock as it’s only $1,399 compared to $6,000

[thegobi]

18 hours ago, jaapv said:

Does this mean that there would be a preference for carrying multiple cameras instead of one body-one zoom - the Q being a zoom replacement - or one body and a few lenses?  

Japanese tourists used to be notorious for carrying a whole bunch of cameras, so maybe there is more of a multiple camera acceptance over there. 

GRs have always been outrageously popular in Japan—especially Tokyo. I have walked past Yodobashi in Shinjuku where employees were standing on the street waving placards announcing a new model 😆

It’s only in recent years, when they want to APS sensors, that the rest of the world really noticed them. I am not sure this is a lens thing or just a new GR (!) thing. I certainly have more than one and I don’t carry them all at once 😉

You can’t really translate sales figures from Japan like that.

example: The original Panasonic GF-1 became a runaway success after Craig Mod’s famous  Himalayan photo trip—it was the compact M43 travel camera of choice for a while there.

Everyone was waiting with bated breath for the GF-2! It was going to be soooo good! Crashing disappointment when it came out—they changed everything and got rid of features that people had been so exited about…!

‘What happened? Why did they ruin our camera!?’

Well, because it wasn’t their camera in the first place. It was designed to be a small M43 camera that could fit into a ladies bag—that was the target audience in Japan… not western travel photographers. That was just coincidence.

The new model was much better for Japanese ladies and their handbags 🤣

[Stuart Richardson]

3 hours ago, Miltz said:

This isn’t surprising. A camera for $999 outselling a camera for $6000 is expected. Especially when that camera is super niche and excellent. I had the griii and it was great. I’m sure the Fuji 100v would outsell the Q3 too if it was in stock as it’s only $1,399 compared to $6,000

Yes, that was not my point. My point was that the 40mm version of the GRIII handily outsold the 28mm version, even more than a year after it was released. I think everyone knows that the Q sells in lower numbers because of its super high price. If anything, this list shows how popular the Q is. The issue at hand is that a number of photographers have expressed interest in ADDING (not replacing) a Q with a normal lens to the lineup. For photographers who do not often shoot wides, it would allow much better image quality, and in the same way that someone shooting a Q3 can crop down, a longer version could do the same and allow portraits or telephoto perspectives without the large loss in resolution that occurs with the 26/28mm version of the Q lens.

[thegobi]

Apparently I use abnormal lenses in my photography 🤣

[JoshuaRothman]

One way to interpret this is to say that a Q with a longer lens would sell well, perhaps even to people who already own a 28mm Q. But another way to approach it is to ask: What would happen if the GR III had a 47 or 60 megapixel sensor, allowing it to crop to zoom? How big would the market for a camera like the IIIx be, if you could painlessly crop a 28mm GR to 35, 50, and 75mm-equivalent fields of view?

I ask this because I owned both a GR III and a GR IIIx at the same time. (I've owned GR series cameras ever since the original GR Digital.) The IIIx was a fantastic camera. But eventually I remembered—because of my Q2—that I could map the GR III's cropping function to an easily reachable button (in my case, the Wi-fi button). This enabled me to crop the GR III to 35mm while still retaining a roughly 18-megapixel resolution. After doing some comparisons, I sold the IIIx. I don't carry a GR for ultimate image quality anyway; it's more for convenience. And owning two GR cameras was against the ethos of the system, for me. The 35mm and even 50mm crops on the GR III were serviceable for my purposes, even for portraits.

I know only a little about camera design, but my main hope for the GR series is that the GR IV will use one of the higher-resolution APS-C sensors, like the one that Fuji is using in the X-T5, enabling Q-like crop-to-zoom from a pocket camera. (And Ricoh's implementation of this is simpler than Leica's, because they just zoom the whole rear screen to the crop.) None of this is to say that I disagree with your basic point! But I think it's Ricoh who ought to be emulating Leica, not vice versa.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jaapv]

2 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

Yes, that was not my point. My point was that the 40mm version of the GRIII handily outsold the 28mm version, even more than a year after it was released. I think everyone knows that the Q sells in lower numbers because of its super high price. If anything, this list shows how popular the Q is. The issue at hand is that a number of photographers have expressed interest in ADDING (not replacing) a Q with a normal lens to the lineup. For photographers who do not often shoot wides, it would allow much better image quality, and in the same way that someone shooting a Q3 can crop down, a longer version could do the same and allow portraits or telephoto perspectives without the large loss in resolution that occurs with the 26/28mm version of the Q lens.

I am sure that Leica is contemplating that market and until now has not seen an economically viable way of bringing out such a camera. After all, it would take considerable R&D to redesign the lens-shutter- sensor unit.