Jump to content

Q3 with 43mm APO f2

costa43

By costa43
in Leica Q3 / Leica Q2 / Leica Q

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 822
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Stuart Richardson
Stuart Richardson

I work as a landscape photographer and about 80% of my photos are with lenses about 40mm or longer. I think I do just fine without superwides. I have some but rarely use them. Here are some of my favo

Stuart Richardson
Stuart Richardson

It is not really an odd choice. Fixed lens cameras have a long long history of offering two versions: one close to 28mm and one close to 40mm. Leica's own fixed lens cameras in the film days were ofte

JimmyCheng
JimmyCheng

So it’s real after all :)

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!

Posted Images

Kwokaun

Kwokaun

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

And in Japan you would pay Y 1.5 million.  The number is only a factor of the currency.

AUD 12k is about USD8.2k and EUR 7.4k from current exchange rates. So it does look a bit more expensive down under!

Edited by Kwokaun
Link to post
Share on other sites
TnTMaN

TnTMaN

Posted
Posted
Just now, Kwokaun said:

Thanks mate. I was expecting it to be around the same price as the SL3 (AUD 11.79k) at most. So it's higher than I expected!

Value wise, I think a SL3 with any lens is a better choice? Lets just think, SL3 + Sigma 35mm F2 or 50mm F2  is a nice combo that could almost rival the Q3? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kwokaun

Kwokaun

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, TnTMaN said:

Value wise, I think a SL3 with any lens is a better choice? Lets just think, SL3 + Sigma 35mm F2 or 50mm F2  is a nice combo that could almost rival the Q3? 

I've got my trusty SL2s. I tried the SL3 briefly and sold it because of recent setting in of arthritis. I've got my Q3 up for sale, wanting to shift to something less wide. Might have to rethink it now. First world problems, I know!

Edited by Kwokaun
Link to post
Share on other sites
LocalHero1953

LocalHero1953

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, TnTMaN said:

Value wise, I think a SL3 with any lens is a better choice? Lets just think, SL3 + Sigma 35mm F2 or 50mm F2  is a nice combo that could almost rival the Q3? 

You're comparing apples with 3 o'clock.

The SL3 and any lens will easily beat the Q3 for weight and bulk - so buy the SL3.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TnTMaN

TnTMaN

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

You're comparing apples with 3 o'clock.

The SL3 and any lens will easily beat the Q3 for weight and bulk - so buy the SL3.

Without taking in weight and bulk as the factor, I was referring to image quality and versatility. Yes they are different, but the sensor is the same or very similar. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
adrianh

adrianh

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, TnTMaN said:

Value wise, I think a SL3 with any lens is a better choice? Lets just think, SL3 + Sigma 35mm F2 or 50mm F2  is a nice combo that could almost rival the Q3? 

There is no point in comparing those 2 only because both bodies come from Leica. The lenses you are mentioning are not even close in IQ to what the Leica APO 43 will deliver, so sensors being similar does not help much here. A Sony A7CR with the 35GM 1.4 would be a much closer competitor (both in terms of IQ and also in terms of wight/size). Yes there are still huge differences that would push the decision in one or the other direction (EVF, Menus, color rendition, etc.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
db24fps

db24fps

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, wlaidlaw said:

Best to get in quick before VAT goes up. 

Wilson

Hah. I'm actually torn over various choices if I am to come back to digital Leicas in any fashion. There's the conundrum of 28 vs 43 as far as the Q is concerned, possible thoughts about owning an SL2-S again, or the financially nuclear option of accepting that I find EVFs deeply irritating and buying an M11-P.

The 28 Q still holds my favour the most I think. I'm a 50mm person who does like going wider on occasion, so you'd think the 43mm would actually be the perfect compromise but I'm not so sure. I worry about going for the 43 and then finding myself in situations where I regret it. The option of the 28, and the crop resolutions at 35 and 50 (the latter of which really makes it no different to what I had with the M9 way back when) feels like the more versatile choice for me as I'm also fond of the 35mm focal length, however with my glasses prescription it was never a focal length I've been able to enjoy on an M since they upped the magnification on the viewfinder with the M10/11 (M9 and 240 were fine).

Decisions, decisions, compromises, compromises...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
T25UFO

T25UFO

Posted
Posted

Leica's product strategy is clever.  None of the main model lines, M, Q or SL compete directly with each other.  The only common factor is they all have exceptional image quality.  If we can afford it, we buy more than one of the products because we have different use cases.  Yes, it's possible to adapt very long lenses to the M, but using the SL is more practical.  

The Q is a nice camera, and a cheap package by Leica standards, but you can't go wider than 28mm and its footprint is still larger than the M with equivalent 28mm lens.  The Q is also good for anyone who finds rangefinder focusing difficult, but don't get fooled by the 'crop factor'  The M11 with a 28mm lens can just as easily be cropped to 90mm and you can preview the effect with the frame line selector.  Cropping is nothing new!

Link to post
Share on other sites
newtoleica

newtoleica

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Matrix.Reloaded said:

thank you for your feedback (re: RX1)!

I’ve had an RX1R I and II and use an M and a Q2. The feedback is all correct, but in addition the battery life on the II is ludicrous. You need a pocket full for a days shooting, to the extent it’s really annoying. Biggest benefits of the Q series are better AF and better EVF by far. The Leica also shares a ‘look’ with M lenses which is great if you also use an M. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
hillavoider

hillavoider

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Kwokaun said:

AUD 12k is about USD8.2k and EUR 7.4k from current exchange rates. So it does look a bit more expensive down under!

Leica Australia are so cunning and literally evil they make sure they get every cent they can get when compared to overseas prices they even include the shipping costs you would have to pay if you ordered from say B&H if you wanted to evade the horrible people 

they don’t charge a simple conversion of currency they add in what it would cost you to bring it in from overseas on top 

pretty disgusting 

Edited by hillavoider
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...