New challenger : X100 VI vs Q3 in 35mm crop mode

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For 35mm fanatics we have now a new choice : Fujifilm X100 VI with 40MP and 6 stops IBIS at "only" 1,799€ VAT inc. instead of 

Weather resistant filter kit , optical adapters for 28mm and 50mm conversion are also available.

 

Q3 in 35mm is equivalent to 35mm f/2.1 in terms of depth of field. Whereas X100 VI is equivalent to 35mm f/3

Q3 in 35mm retains 39MP vs 40MP for the VI. 

Leica Q3 has a typical bayer filter instead of troublesome Fuji X-Trans layout. 

Q3 is only 4,150€ more including VAT. 😉 aka 3.3x times more.

Should I repeat that the X100 VI has a nicer tilting screen ? way thiner, almost invisible and faster to use requiring only a pinch from a finger. 

 

Edited February 20 by nicci78

[keeping_a_balance]

Just pre-ordered one to see what the hype is about.

Have the Q2 and never use it and can't really sell it for a reasonable price...

 

[Advertisement]

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

[nicci78]

I forgot X100 VI has in body 4x ND filter and a flash which is awesome with a leaf shutter camera. 

[darylgo]

Black or chrome choice.  
 

A great camera to buy and then upgrade to the Q3.  
 

The Q2 popularity created the stampede to the X100v, for its affordability. 

[jps1]

I much prefer the ergonomics and simplicity of the Q3.

[Chris W]

Love the 35mm equivalent, but the biggest issue for me would be the quality of the lens.

I had an X100T and a Q. When I looked at the images side by side the Q images were vastly superior - clear, deep colours, nice contrast etc. The X100T images looked like a much cheaper camera - which it is.

I know the X100VI has a version 2 lens, but I am still sceptical.

[JNK100]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have had a X100v and now have a Q3.

My view is that these are completely different cameras.

The EVF on the Fuji doesn't compare well to the Leica -nor does the handling. The Fuji lens, although decent, is no match nor can a 30 mp aps-c be compared to a 60 mp  FF sensor.

That doesn't make the Fuji a bad camera.

 

[David Wien]

Why is this even of interest on a Leica forum?

David

[tom0511]

I find it interesting to not only look at Leica products itself but also look at options and how things compare.

I dont know how good the new sensor and lens is, but I see it as follows:

Fuji:

+ smaller size

+ optical viewfinder

+ lower Price (still not that low)

Leica Q:

+full frame

+ 28mm but easy to crop to 35 if wanted due to high resolution

+better EVF (but no OVF)

+ nicer user interface and menue system (for my taste)

 

For my part I prefer the flexibility of a Leica M over both cameras, and as a small, fix focus camera I love the Ricoh GRIII(x), because you can put it in your pocket.

[Ad Dieleman]

I had a Fuji X100V for about 8 months, ditched it a week after I got the Q3 and I don't see myself going back to the newer X100VI. My main gripes with the X100V were the unreliable AF at f/5.6 and smaller, the bland colors which I couldn't get to my liking, too often the lack of pin-sharp detail and buttons and dials that were way to easy to knock inadvertently. I'm not at all sure that these things are improved in the X100VI.

[Stuart Richardson]

2 hours ago, darylgo said:

The Q2 popularity created the stampede to the X100v, for its affordability. 

Wait, what!? The X100 versions have been very popular since the first Q was but a glint in Kaufmann's eye...it was about five years before the original Q. I am curious as to what makes you think the Q2 had anything to do with the X100 popularity...all the variations seem to have been popular?

In any case, it is interesting to see that it is coming up with more resolution. Over the years I have had the X100F, Q2 and GRIII and GRIIIx. The only one left is the GRIIIx. The Fuji is a great camera to carry along on a hike or trip, but in my experience it is too big to be a camera to have with you all the time when the purpose was not photography specifically. I had the F version, and the lens was honestly not great. Either Ricoh is a large improvement over it. Hopefully the new one is better. The Q2 meanwhile is compact and has a great sensor and a decent lens (it is good, but no comparison to the L mount APO primes), but in my experience it is still like carrying a full sized camera, and in that case the SL2 and a prime lens are better in every way other than compactness and weight. So for me at least both the Fuji and Q were a bit neither here nor there. Too big to be compact, and not compelling enough in terms of image quality and handling compared to my main camera. I realize that this is not the experience of most people. But the fact that the X100VI is even bigger and thicker does not make it any more appealing to me at this point.

[Marc B-C]

Having had the X100F and now the Q2, whilst I enjoyed the Fuji, I want to pick up the Q2 and use it much much more than I ever did the Fuji. The Fuji was a good camera, but the handling is not a patch on the Q2 - in my opinion.

[JoshuaRothman]

1 hour ago, Ad Dieleman said:

I had a Fuji X100V for about 8 months, ditched it a week after I got the Q3 and I don't see myself going back to the newer X100VI. My main gripes with the X100V were the unreliable AF at f/5.6 and smaller, the bland colors which I couldn't get to my liking, too often the lack of pin-sharp detail and buttons and dials that were way to easy to knock inadvertently. I'm not at all sure that these things are improved in the X100VI.

I agree with this (although a recent search through my Lightroom catalog revealed many X100 images that looked wonderful). I'll add to your list the noisy focus motor: when you hold an X100V up to your eye, you can hear the motor churning as it searches for focus. When I owned one, it drove me crazy.

I shot with the X100T, F, and V before moving to Leica M via the Q2. As soon as I saw the X100VI I began thinking seriously about selling my Q2 and Ricoh GR III to buy one. I spent many happy years owning only an X100-series camera and using it everywhere . . . . But the thing about this type of camera (compact, fixed-lens) is that it's all compromises and trade-offs and you have to figure out EXACTLY where you want to be and how the camera will fit into your life. The X100s are bigger than the GRs, but they have viewfinders and manual controls and superior autofocus; they're smaller than the Qs, but they have fiddly ergonomics and don't produce as beautiful images and have ludicrously complicated menus. The new X100VI further complicates the picture by adding a usable 50mm crop and modern AF that definitely beats the Q2 and looks to be competitive with the Q3.

Being well-aware of all the trade-offs among these various cameras, I think I'm going to place a pre-order for the VI and try one out. My Q2 and GR III basically sit on my shelf, and I suspect that the new Fuji could replace both of them cost-effectively.

Edited February 20 by JoshuaRothman

[Mr Perceptive]

I’m a big fan of the Fuji’s - still own an original X100 and only just recently ‘upgraded’ my X100F to a Leica Q3 - I’m sure the new cameras will be good and the Fuji’s have some nice touches like the built in ND filter, but I don’t regret my choice one bit, the 28mm Summilux is just in a different world, as is the tactile feel of using the camera.

[FrozenInTime]

Fuji is in my mind Leica's biggest threat, killing the TL/CL made this even more so.

I am very happy with the X100V, so will continue to use it alongside my film and digital M bodies.

I will risk the Fuji in rain and sea spray - where a Leica would or should not go. As a bonus, with the front filter on the camera is essentially silent.

The Q series falls short for me as it is not jacket pocketable, so I might as well take a M10 and Summilux.

[bobtodrick]

Started with two of the X100 early models, but moves to the Q for the full frame and what for me is a more pleasing colour palette,

That being said the Fuji was (and is) an excellent camera that I’d still be happily shooting with if not for the introduction of the Q.

My son has the X100v and given that he is far more comfortable than I in the digital ‘darkroom’ his finished prints are easily the equal of mine.

[Chris W]

1 hour ago, FrozenInTime said:

Fuji is in my mind Leica's biggest threat, killing the TL/CL made this even more so.

 

I don't think so. Different market. Fuji is 'everyday', Leica is 'premium'.

Both make great cameras however.

[FocusDot]

I am one of those who changed to Q2 after having X100V. No regrets. Nevertheless it was a great little camera...
X100VI seems to be even better implementing some 40 Mp sensor and some interesting features seen in XT-5

For those interested - a very nice review:

https://jonasraskphotography.com/2024/02/20/returning-to-form-the-fujifilm-x100vi-review/

[FocusDot]

3 hours ago, Ad Dieleman said:

I had a Fuji X100V for about 8 months, ditched it a week after I got the Q3 and I don't see myself going back to the newer X100VI. My main gripes with the X100V were the unreliable AF at f/5.6 and smaller, the bland colors which I couldn't get to my liking, too often the lack of pin-sharp detail and buttons and dials that were way to easy to knock inadvertently. I'm not at all sure that these things are improved in the X100VI.

Hmm...I really liked the colors from X100V and especially from XT-3 that I tested for a week or so...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[M11 for me]

.

Edited February 20 by M11 for me