Leica Q3 or Fujifilm XT-5 with 18/1,4

[pacnwleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As I responded on another forum, I'm someone who has a Fuji XT3 (with multiple lens) and a X100V, I added the Q2M to my collection and I'm greatly enjoying it. Having a monochrome camera is very special and has improved my photography as I have been going down the path of more B&W images.

Still using my Fuji's also.

 

[luetz]

12 hours ago, GREG PLAT said:

I am planning to travel in cities I love and create books A4. I must be light and minimalistic. One camera one lens. I will shot street photography in BW , cities and some landscape photography (Iceland. etc) in color. Everyday I will shot 500 photos minimum, RAW and JPEG.

I have XT-5 with Fuji lens 10-24/4 WR, 35/2 WR, 16-80/4.  So I am thinking to buy Leica Q3 or to buy Fuji lens 18/1,4. 6.000$ VS 1.000$. I have the money. If I buy 18/1.4 I will have 5.000$ for trips.

Never had a Leica before.

Prefer to take photos than editing in Lr. When i will publish my books I ll edit from RAW all the photos I print.

XT-5 I like

JPEG, I love Acros with red filter and Chrome can use them without editing 

Fantastic lens 18/1.4, maybe the best of Fuji primes.

5.000$ more for trips ( Iceland and Cuba)

I dont like

Its little bigger than Q3 with 18/1.4 

Its not full frame, its not big deal for my project.

 

Q3 I like

Minimal design, great lens

I dont like

AWB is not stable

JPEG are not so good like Fuji

Carrying 6.000$ all day is a risk 

...................................

My dilemma is

Buy Leica q3

or

Stay with Fuji XT5 and maybe buy 18/1.4 and Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN to be more light the 16-80/4 is too big and the best lens

I am not interesting for other camera (No Fuji x100VI, not Sony....).

I cant test, rent Q3, I saw it before 1 month in a store. I liked but it is more heavier than I expected.

Would you like please to send me your opinion about this dilemma? Which you would prefer Leica Q3 or Fuji XΤ5 and why?

https://camerasize.com/compact/#820,900.981,ha,t

 

P.S.

I know its a Leica forum, I just want your honest opinions.....

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!

To me it's a bit like comparing a VW to a Porsche, both will get you to a destination, but the journey is more exhilarating with the latter.  Also comparing a fixed lens camera to an interchangeable lens camera are worlds apart, especially in the shooter's comfort zone.  I came from the Fuji system with many lenses and after years realised that fixed lens cameras are more a "purist" attempt at creating images without changing FL.

After acquiring a Q2 and, now Q3 my expectations for creating images have been met,  but each for it's own...

[bobtodrick]

2 hours ago, luetz said:

To me it's a bit like comparing a VW to a Porsche, both will get you to a destination, but the journey is more exhilarating with the latter.  Also comparing a fixed lens camera to an interchangeable lens camera are worlds apart, especially in the shooter's comfort zone.  I came from the Fuji system with many lenses and after years realised that fixed lens cameras are more a "purist" attempt at creating images without changing FL.

After acquiring a Q2 and, now Q3 my expectations for creating images have been met,  but each for it's own...

Actually a great analogy.

The VW will get you there just as well as the Porsche...but the experience is more enjoyable in the Porsche.  I own a '69 Alfa Romeo and a new Acura SUV.  They both get me where I want to go...but the Alfa is more fun...if you are willing to put up with it's quirks...like deciding to not start for no reason whatsoever 😆

Same with cameras...if the end result is solely the photo the Fuji will produce the same as a Q.  If you want the quirks of a single focal length camera...the trip ;can be much more enjoyable.

Boils down to what kind of person you are...is the destination all that counts...or the trip itself getting there?

[Chris W]

I would suggest buying a slightly used Q2.

I took an original Q on a long overseas trip, loved using it and the images I made were fantastic. I owned an XT4 and never gelled with it.

But if you already have an XT5 and enjoy using it - why change?

[Viv]

For what it's worth, I have a Q2 and a Fuji XT-3.

I almost never use the Fuji. The Q2 provides a nicer shooting experience.

[Photon42]

Of course the Q3. This is a Leica forum.

[David Wien]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

18 minutes ago, Photon42 said:

Of course the Q3. This is a Leica forum.

I dont know why people are even bothering to discuss inferior cameras on this forum! Let the OP work it out for himself.

[Simone_DF]

17 hours ago, tom.w.bn said:

Why compare the Q3 with the XT5 or X100? the closer comparison would be the Q2.

Because the user has already a XT5, but not a 28mm equivalent lens, and because the X100 is 1/4th of the price of a Q3 and offer some distinct advantages and disadvantages over a Q. 
Q2 is a mediocre camera compared to the three listed above, imho. 

[Simone_DF]

3 minutes ago, David Wien said:

I dont know why people are even bothering to discuss inferior cameras on this forum! Let the OP work it out for himself.

inferior for you, but not for others. 
I find many advantages on the X100VI over a Q

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, David Wien said:

I dont know why people are even bothering to discuss inferior cameras on this forum! Let the OP work it out for himself.

Yeah…🤨
In case it’s not clear…sarcasm!!!

Edited March 5, 2024 by bobtodrick

[Olaf_ZG]

14 hours ago, bobtodrick said:

...if you are willing to put up with it's quirks...like deciding to not start for no reason whatsoever 😆

 

Translated: camera freezes?

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

inferior for you, but not for others. 
I find many advantages on the X100VI over a Q

And vice versa ...

[Le Chef]

8 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Q2 is a mediocre camera compared to the three listed above,

Well done! Great sarcasm!

[Simone_DF]

40 minutes ago, SrMi said:

And vice versa ...

Yes, that too. My point is that it’s not inferior in any significant way. It’s just different, and can be a better tool (or worse) than a Q depending on the user’s needs.
For example I sold my Q2 after less than 3 months, since I didn’t find it a good camera for MY needs, and I replaced it with a SL2-S, which I’ve been using since it was released. 

[Simone_DF]

14 minutes ago, Le Chef said:

Well done! Great sarcasm!

I’m serious. The best day I had with a Q2 was the day I sold it. I never liked it and purchasing it was a mistake. 
The Q3 seems to address most concerns though, except the 28mm lens. 

Edited March 5, 2024 by Simone_DF

[gotium]

8 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

I find many advantages on the X100VI over a Q

What are they for you? Curious what you think. 

[gotium]

On 3/4/2024 at 3:09 AM, GREG PLAT said:

...My dilemma is

Buy Leica q3

or

Stay with Fuji XT5 and maybe buy 18/1.4 and Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN to be more light the 16-80/4 is too big and the best lens...

For what it's worth, I used an XT-5 with the 18/1.4 side-by-side with a Q2 for a few months last year and ultimately kept the Q2 because of size and also because the Fuji AF misses really annoyed me. In terms of image quality however I personally think the Fuji is a much better lens, really spectacular. 

[Simone_DF]

3 minutes ago, gotium said:

What are they for you? Curious what you think. 

Smaller, lighter, can fit in your jacket, integrated ND filter, more stealthy, IBIS is more effective than OIS, option of OVF and EVF, better out of camera JPGs, supports wide angle and 50mm adapters (with caveats), body has a small grip which I greatly prefer to the Q flatness, price is 1/4th of a Q3, and finally I prefer 35 to 28mm. 
The Q3 has its advantages too: full frame, sharper lens at least in the centre, colors out of camera closer to my SL - easier for me to have a consistent look - better skin tones, high iso looks slightly better, fully weather sealed without the needs of an add on, EVF is nicer than the one on the X100VI, aperture ring on the lens barrell is nice to have. 
This is MY list. Other people may have different reasons to pick one over the other. 

[SrMi]

9 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

Because the user has already a XT5, but not a 28mm equivalent lens, and because the X100 is 1/4th of the price of a Q3 and offer some distinct advantages and disadvantages over a Q. 
Q2 is a mediocre camera compared to the three listed above, imho. 

I have the X-T5 (about to sell it), X100VI, and Q2/Q3. Q2 and Q3 are without doubts the best cameras of those listed.

I will keep X100VI because of the OVF only. Everything else is worse than the Qs.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[SrMi]

19 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

IBIS is more effective than OIS

Have you tried it? For me, the 1/15 sec is the lowest safe shutter speed for both Q3 and X00VI (when pixel peeping).

I can shoot with both cameras less than 1/15th, but then I need to be very careful.

Q3 is much more solid, better looking camera, with ergonomics vastly superior to Fuji. Manual focusing is way better than with Fuji. EVF is not even comparable. I assume that Q3 will produce images with less noise, but I have not tested it.

The only thing that works for X100 is OVF. Without OVF, I would never consider it. I would rather use an X2, CL, or Ricoh GR III (when size and weight is an issue).

 

Edited March 5, 2024 by SrMi