Filters for Q3 43

[aficionados]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, egrossman said:

Because batteries for the Leica are external and last time I checked, batteries were built into iPhones. Furthermore, Leica doesn't have a universal charger: the M10, M11 and Q3 batteries are all different. You would have a stronger argument if the batteries Leica made were all the same.

Erik

Now the counter argument point is that now you have a universal charger: a USB-C in the camera body. The camera body is acting as a charger.

I know your frustration, I share the same. But I don't think our unhappiness will change a thing.

[Advertisement]

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

[69xchange]

8 minutes ago, aficionados said:

I hope so, but I doubt they would though.

They put it in writing already, they can come out say: I told you so, and you still bought it, you suck it, it's not my problem.  🫠

Yeah, it’s a shame and like you said, it most likely won’t happen because it’s already been “warned” in the manuals. But this isn’t a deal breaker at all for me because the APO lens makes up for the design flaw.

[egrossman]

1 minute ago, aficionados said:

Now the counter argument point is that now you have a universal charger: a USB-C in the camera body. The camera body is acting as a charger.

I know your frustration, I share the same. But I don't think our unhappiness will change a thing.

If you say nothing, then nothing will happen. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Erik

[69xchange]

1 minute ago, egrossman said:

If you say nothing, then nothing will happen. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Erik

You can write to Leica, but honestly I don’t think anything will come out from it. They MAY send you a battery charger, but it would only be from good will. However I believe the hood issue may have a stronger argument and better outcome because every other camera brand allows the camera to be 100% functional even with filters and hoods on.

 

Sometimes you just want a filter whether it’s ND/ diffusion for creative or colored filter for B&W photography. 

[egrossman]

I agree with you about a replacement hood being more likely than getting a charger. Won't stop me trying.

Erik

[Dr. G]

51 minutes ago, egrossman said:

All we are asking is that the Q3 43 works the same as all other Q cameras that Leica has made in the past 10 years. This was absolutely form over function. Leica wanted to limit the total length of the lens (including hood) to be no longer than the 28. Just stupid.

Erik

It's still longer than the standard Q by a little bit anyway, isn't it?  The movement of the lens would have required a couple of millimeters, at most, to be added to the the lens barrel since only the inner most part moves. 

[egrossman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, aficionados said:

Now the counter argument point is that now you have a universal charger: a USB-C in the camera body. The camera body is acting as a charger.

I know your frustration, I share the same. But I don't think our unhappiness will change a thing.

This is a step backwards to every digital M sold to date. I know I’m not the only one who leaves a spare battery in the charger when I go out shooting for the day.

Erik

[egrossman]

The 43 is a little longer. CameraDecision has an image of them side by side: https://cameradecision.com/blog/New-Leica-Q3-43-Camera-with-43mm-F20-APO-Lens-Images-Leaked

Erik

[mcqinternational]

Haoge round hood  £45 on amazon any filter and away .

[Likaleica]

20 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Filters and Macro Mode on the Q3 43

hi there. I have had a discussion about this, and in macro mode the distance available is 0.7mm so no chance there. 
However, to have made a lens hood with room for a filter would have made it noticeably larger, and as many people do not use filters then it didn’t seem to be a good trade-off (I quite agree, but then I don’t use filters!). 

So, not an oversight at all. 

the simple work around is to take off the lens hood when shooting in macro mode. 
 

All the best

Unless you have ultra-thin filters (expensive, limited availability) you can't use regular filters, either.  It's not just macro mode.

[jonoslack]

14 hours ago, egrossman said:

All we are asking is that the Q3 43 works the same as all other Q cameras that Leica has made in the past 10 years. This was absolutely form over function. Leica wanted to limit the total length of the lens (including hood) to be no longer than the 28. Just stupid.

Erik

Hi Erik

It isn’t stupid for me, or for all those other people who choose not to compromise lens performance by adding an extra element.
 

Also, the lens hood protects the lens extremely well!

I do understand your point though, the solution- if you can’t bear unscrewing the lens hood for macro work is a different lens hood  

As for the charger- again, I see your point, but USB-C charging is so convenient  we are in Crete and it’s great to bring one charger block and a few USB-C cables rather than a bunch of chargers with their own power leads!

all the best

 

 

[jonoslack]

13 hours ago, egrossman said:

This is a step backwards to every digital M sold to date. I know I’m not the only one who leaves a spare battery in the charger when I go out shooting for the day.

Erik

Hi Erik

you can buy a charger separately. It’s not as if Leica was going to give it away free! (Or anyone else come to that!

[Barralad]

4 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Hi Erik

you can buy a charger separately. It’s not as if Leica was going to give it away free! (Or anyone else come to that!

I’m not sure that’s why people are complaining. Chargers used to be included with the Q3. Now they are not included with the Q3 43. I suspect what some people - especially those outside Europe - are asking is why can’t they continue to have the charger included in the expensive (more expensive than the Q3, no less) camera they’ve purchased outside of Europe where European law doesn’t apply?
 

EU law aside, asking people to shell out thousands of £/$/€ on a camera and then inviting them to spend even more on a charger (which used to be included) and a different lens hood (in order to make the camera work as it should) feels unreasonable. I still can’t get over the cock-up around the lens hood.

Consider the following hypothetical discussion at Leica HQ….

Does the camera have a macro function on the lens? Yes, it’s an important feature/selling point for this model.

Will users of the camera like to shoot using a filter? Why, yes, of course they will, we know that; that’s why we include a thread on the lens.

Q. Shall we include:

[a] a lens hood that will allow someone using a filter to shoot in macro mode?

or

[b] a lens hood that means they won’t be able to do that?

Any thoughts, ladies and gentlemen?

“I propose we go with [b]”

”OK, [b] it is then!”

That must, surely, be so far from the truth that what probably happened was someone dropped the ball and they caught the mistake too late to design and make a new lens hood but early enough to add a note to the user manual.

[jonoslack]

2 minutes ago, Barralad said:

I’m not sure that’s why people are complaining. Chargers used to be included with the Q3. Now they are not included with the Q3 43. I suspect what some people - especially those outside Europe - are asking is why can’t they continue to have the charger included in the expensive (more expensive than the Q3, no less) camera they’ve purchased outside of Europe where European law doesn’t apply?
 

EU law aside, asking people to shell out thousands of £/$/€ on a camera and then inviting them to spend even more on a charger (which used to be included) and a different lens hood (in order to make the camera work as it should) feels unreasonable. I still can’t get over the cock-up around the lens hood.

Consider the following hypothetical discussion at Leica HQ….

Does the camera have a macro function on the lens? Yes, it’s an important feature/selling point for this model.

Will users of the camera like to shoot using a filter? Why, yes, of course they will, we know that; that’s why we include a thread on the lens.

Q. Shall we include:

[a] a lens hood that will allow someone using a filter to shoot in macro mode?

or

[b] a lens hood that means they won’t be able to do that?

Any thoughts, ladies and gentlemen?

“I propose we go with [b]”

”OK, [b] it is then!”

That must, surely, be so far from the truth that what probably happened was someone dropped the ball and they caught the mistake too late to design and make a new lens hood but early enough to add a note to the user manual.

Two things

if they supplied a charger then the price would be increased accordingly- the new camera is more expensive largely because it has a much better lens. It wouldn’t have been a freebie and many people already have more than one and would prefer not to pay for another. 
 

and I was not party to the discussion, but I imagine it went more along the lines of:

“Market research shows that most users do not add filters to colour cameras

many also understand that it has a negative effect on image quality. 

so we can make the lens the same size as the Q3 (length) with a limitation in macro mode or we can make it 2 mm longer (with possible added issues with vignetting). 

so let’s make it smaller - there are third party hoods available and of course it’s the work of a moment to unscrew it when shooting macro”

Don’t you think?
 

[haelio]

14 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

“Market research shows that most users do not add filters to colour cameras

many also understand that it has a negative effect on image quality. 

I agree with you 100% on the charger front. If people want to charge outside of camera there are options for that, and you can use the camera while plugged into a battery pack in a pinch.

On the topic of filters, I think your line of discussion is plausible, but relies on the two highlighted assumptions above.

I doubt there is (at least I haven't found) any objective evidence that the presence of a protection filter causes perceptible image degradation when a decent quality filter is in use. Also, while colour filters aren't required like they are on monochrome sensors, there are other non-protective filters that are objectively useful such as polarizers, mist filters and ND filters for video and longer exposures. So I think 'using filters' is more than some niche obsession

Now considering that Leica could have extended the hood by 1-2 mm to allow for slim filters to be used with macro mode, or at least made some structural modifications to allow the current size to be supported (as purported by someone who claims to have made these changes in another thread in this forum), this situation still boils down to oversight, incompetence or mis-judging the needs of at least some of their customers.

Anyway, on another note, I absolutely love the Q3 43. The lens is a marvel and it pairs well with my Q3 28. So overall I'm really happy with what Leica is doing here. I'll just be happier once I can sort out my filter issue.

[Dr. G]

The need for a front filter extends beyond lens protection.  On the SL3 there is noticeable rolling shutter if you use the electronic shutter.  I've even had it happen with dynamic portraits using the 75mm APO.  I often use a ND filter just to keep the shutter in the mechanical range, which on the SL3 is 1/8000.  On the Q3/Q3 43 it's 1/2000 for the mechanical shutter limit.  I shoot wide open in bright light at times, so I'd like to use an ND filter in that situation to keep things under 1/2000.  I don't particularly like the round hood's form and question the level of protection it offers over the rectangular hood.

[Barralad]

41 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

Two things

if they supplied a charger then the price would be increased accordingly- the new camera is more expensive largely because it has a much better lens. It wouldn’t have been a freebie and many people already have more than one and would prefer not to pay for another. 
 

and I was not party to the discussion, but I imagine it went more along the lines of:

“Market research shows that most users do not add filters to colour cameras

many also understand that it has a negative effect on image quality. 

so we can make the lens the same size as the Q3 (length) with a limitation in macro mode or we can make it 2 mm longer (with possible added issues with vignetting). 

so let’s make it smaller - there are third party hoods available and of course it’s the work of a moment to unscrew it when shooting macro”

Don’t you think?
 

No, sorry, I can’t agree. That suggests that Leica designers were not able to design a lens hood that allowed for the macro mode to be used whilst using a filter. Suggesting that it’s not a problem to remove the lens hood to switch to macro and then replace it when the macro ring is moved back - every time you want to do this - suggests that the designers at Leica intentionally designed the camera to be used that way, and I struggle to accept that was how it played out. If that is/was their thinking, they should be embarrassed. We’ve now got people applying sticky tape to their brand new expensive camera to make it function as it should. It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetically sad.

[jonoslack]

39 minutes ago, Dr. G said:

The need for a front filter extends beyond lens protection.  On the SL3 there is noticeable rolling shutter if you use the electronic shutter.  I've even had it happen with dynamic portraits using the 75mm APO.  I often use a ND filter just to keep the shutter in the mechanical range, which on the SL3 is 1/8000.  On the Q3/Q3 43 it's 1/2000 for the mechanical shutter limit.  I shoot wide open in bright light at times, so I'd like to use an ND filter in that situation to keep things under 1/2000.  I don't particularly like the round hood's form and question the level of protection it offers over the rectangular hood.

Hi There

Of course - I quite understand that - an I might often do it myself as well - your ND filter option is a good one

But you have to take the lens hood off then anyway - and it’s unlikely to be a permanent edition, so no problem to put the lens hood in your bag whilst you’re using it (and you couldn’t really use a circular polariser with the lens hood on anyway. 

All the best

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jonoslack]

21 minutes ago, Barralad said:

No, sorry, I can’t agree. That suggests that Leica designers were not able to design a lens hood that allowed for the macro mode to be used whilst using a filter. Suggesting that it’s not a problem to remove the lens hood to switch to macro and then replace it when the macro ring is moved back - every time you want to do this - suggests that the designers at Leica intentionally designed the camera to be used that way, and I struggle to accept that was how it played out. If that is/was their thinking, they should be embarrassed. We’ve now got people applying sticky tape to their brand new expensive camera to make it function as it should. It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so pathetically sad.

Of course they could have designed a lens hood - but it would have been bigger, the designers at Leica were very keen to keep the lens as close to the size of the Q3 lens as possible. 

Camera design is full of compromises, and compromises always irritate somebody, but that does not suggest incompetence. Other users who don’t use UV filters will be pleased to have a smaller lens. I can only suggest that you give it a try - I’ve not used filters for protection and the money I’ve saved over the years would certainly of repaired quite a few front elements (which I’ve never damaged)

Right - I don’t think I can say anything else worthwhile here, and I’m clearly irritating you! So I’ll bail out and go back to my holiday

All the best

Jonathan

[jgeenen]

vor einer Stunde schrieb jonoslack:

and I was not party to the discussion, but I imagine it went more along the lines of:

“Market research shows …

Don’t you think?
 

Attention - satire!

I was not party of the discussion either, but being native German with engineering background I could imagine it went more along the lines of:

• the (very experienced) engineer proudly designed a perfect hood with two baffles, the perfect coverage and headroom for the macro mode
• After spending weeks at the drawing board overthinking every aspect and refining the prototype, he presented it to the almighty board of directors 
• the VP for marketing looked at it and mumbled: „too big“, the VP for efficiency added: „too expensive“, all other decision takers nodding with a notion of „you should have known this, didn‘t you?“ (virtual slap in the face of the engineer)
• the engineer went back into his workshop, took the good old Oscar Barnack‘s metal saw from the wall display and … (with a faint smile on his lips and a glimpse to his retirement plan) … zzzzipppp … done!
• months later the VP of marketing looked up the instagram stats, saw the negative replies and asked the VP of engineering how to proceed
• „dunno, our expert is on early retirement. let‘s hire a junior engineer from university, he will do a master thesis on that topic for free…“