JTLeica Posted December 1, 2024 Share #81 Posted December 1, 2024 Advertisement (gone after registration) 4 hours ago, keithlaban.co.uk said: If Leica introduced a 21mm version Q I'd buy it like a shot to pair with my Q3 43. I could see it being a 24, they don’t make 24s often, would stretch the gap a little from the 43, it would not take away from any 24mm lens sales are there are none being made any more… far enough from the 21 and 28 for some to want both / all. This is my theory, at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 1, 2024 Posted December 1, 2024 Hi JTLeica, Take a look here The Q3 43mm and Q3(2,1) 28mm - an ideal combo?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Dr. G Posted December 3, 2024 Share #82 Posted December 3, 2024 On 12/1/2024 at 12:23 PM, keithlaban.co.uk said: If Leica introduced a 21mm version Q I'd buy it like a shot to pair with my Q3 43. I have the APO SL 21. I've been carrying it on the SL3 with the Q43 and I really don't need anything more 95% of the time. I just wish there was a smaller body to use with the 21 APO. I've thought multiple times about picking up a Panasonic S9 to use with it, but the lack of EVF and mechanical shutter keep me from pulling the trigger. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrgigi Posted February 1 Share #83 Posted February 1 (edited) I am a happy Q3 / Q2 monochrom shooter. But with this Q3 43 release, I just don't understand why Leica doesn't see that what people really would enjoy is an interchangeable Q system. Let's get over the issue of taking away from M sales and just accept that the Q is fantastic and we want one with interchangeable lenses! A new line of Q autofocusing lenses and an adapter for the traditional M manual focus lenses. Isn' that kind of what they had with the CL? I'm finding the Sony A7RV or A7CR with Zeiss Loxia and Voigtlander lenses almost gets there with the same sensor, but it would be nice to have something comparable from Leica with autofocus that is not as large and bulky as the SL3 system. I hope they are reading this... Edited February 1 by mrgigi 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 1 Share #84 Posted February 1 (edited) And to repeat what has been said many times before… The construction of the Q is like a Russian Doll. There is no lens mount. The lens is built into the camera body. The shutter is built into the lens. As is OIS. The sensor is placed in an optimum position for a fixed lens camera. The changes would require starting from scratch. And would you use the L-mount or go for something different? In addition to that cost, where is the money going to come from to design a range of compact, autofocus full frame lenses to satisfy the typical Leica buyer? And apart from the money how long would it take to get there? If you have answers to those questions, I’m sure Mr Kauffman would like to hear from you. Edited February 1 by Le Chef Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted February 1 Share #85 Posted February 1 18 hours ago, mrgigi said: Let's get over the issue of taking away from M sales What? They are two completely different products. The only thing they have in common is the shape of the body. For the rest, they couldn’t be more different. Even a Sony A7C is closer to the Q than a Leica M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted February 1 Share #86 Posted February 1 (edited) 16 hours ago, Le Chef said: And to repeat what has been said many times before… The construction of the Q is like a Russian Doll. There is no lens mount. The lens is built into the camera body. The shutter is built into the lens. As is OIS. The sensor is placed in an optimum position for a fixed lens camera. The changes would require starting from scratch. And would you use the L-mount or go for something different? We have that model already for the L mount, it’s the Panasonic S9, though as it is it’s too limited for still photography. A Leica version with an integrated EVF and a mechanical shutter wouldn’t be so far fetched. Edited February 1 by Simone_DF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted February 1 Share #87 Posted February 1 Advertisement (gone after registration) 16 hours ago, Le Chef said: In addition to that cost, where is the money going to come from to design a range of compact, autofocus full frame lenses to satisfy the typical Leica buyer? And apart from the money how long would it take to get there? If you have answers to those questions, I’m sure Mr Kauffman would like to hear from you. You said exactly the same things about the Q43, and we know how that went. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted February 1 Share #88 Posted February 1 1 hour ago, Simone_DF said: You said exactly the same things about the Q43, and we know how that went. A different scale of magnitude as I’m sure you can appreciate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrgigi Posted February 2 Share #89 Posted February 2 21 hours ago, Le Chef said: If you have answers to those questions, I’m sure Mr Kauffman would like to hear from you. Maybe I'll give him a call. Thanks for your comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrgigi Posted February 2 Share #90 Posted February 2 5 hours ago, Simone_DF said: What? They are two completely different products. The only thing they have in common is the shape of the body. For the rest, they couldn’t be more different. Even a Sony A7C is closer to the Q than a Leica M. That was actually my point exactly, they would be different products completely and possibly appeal to different customers. As a Q shooter myself, I have no interest in the M system. Not because I don't enjoy manual focus lenses, but because I don't enjoy the rangefinder focusing. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted February 3 Share #91 Posted February 3 An interchangeable Q will only be a viable possibility imo when sensor and optical technology allows manufacturers to make smaller lenses. You can’t make a small enough setup at the moment unless you go for a lineup of slower lenses and then it’s a challenge to sell them at a price that would work for Leica and I’m not sure the market will buy them in droves regardless. The Q platform as it is works great. I’d be happier if they scrapped the macro function if it could help make the standard lens smaller and give the camera an IP54 rating. Off topic but often discussed. An EVF only M with intuitive manual focusing implantations. it could run alongside the current M. This would work better than a Q with adapter setup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv Posted February 3 Share #92 Posted February 3 Carry the Q2, crop if necessary. Job done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dsalamena Posted February 3 Share #93 Posted February 3 (edited) On 2/2/2025 at 5:20 AM, Simone_DF said: We have that model already for the L mount, it’s the Panasonic S9, though as it is it’s too limited for still photography. A Leica version with an integrated EVF and a mechanical shutter wouldn’t be so far fetched. I believe that sooner or later we will see a small interchangeable camera with L mount from Leica. It's obviously possible from a technical point of view to produce it, as Panasonic S9, Sigma Flp and even Leica CL cameras already demonstrate. The point is to understand when Leica will decide to sell such a camera, I'm afraid they need first to sell enough SL3 and Q3 cameras (and possibly monochrome/special edition). As for the lenses, with a small L-mount camera I would love to use the TL zooms (11-23, 18-56 and 55-15), TL prime lenses (35 and 60 APO macro), Leica SL 35/50 ASPH (non APO), Leica M lensens and maybe Sigma contemporary full frame primes. So many options... Edited February 3 by dsalamena 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted February 3 Share #94 Posted February 3 13 hours ago, costa43 said: An interchangeable Q will only be a viable possibility imo when sensor and optical technology allows manufacturers to make smaller lenses. You can’t make a small enough setup at the moment unless you go for a lineup of slower lenses and then it’s a challenge to sell them at a price that would work for Leica and I’m not sure the market will buy them in droves regardless. The Sigma Contemporary line is small and with high performance lenses. The Panasonics are not as small, but they are light. Most Sony lenses are really small and lightweight too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted February 3 Share #95 Posted February 3 1 minute ago, Simone_DF said: The Sigma Contemporary line is small and with high performance lenses. The Panasonics are not as small, but they are light. Most Sony lenses are really small and lightweight too. Sure but for context, the 28mm f1.7 is really small for its capability. I’ve never seen a standalone FF lens anywhere near that size for its aperture/focal length. How many people will drop 3k or whatever it will take for slowish AF Leica glass. I just don’t see a viable business there. Not one of significant volume anyhow. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted February 3 Share #96 Posted February 3 2 minutes ago, costa43 said: Sure but for context, the 28mm f1.7 is really small for its capability. I’ve never seen a standalone FF lens anywhere near that size for its aperture/focal length. How many people will drop 3k or whatever it will take for slowish AF Leica glass. I just don’t see a viable business there. Not one of significant volume anyhow. I would. I don't need f1.7 on all my lenses. F2 is more than enough. Besides, what's next for the L mount in terms of Leica lenses? With the release of the 21mm APO in 2023, the line of APO lenses is now complete. Surely Leica cannot keep rebadging Sigma and Panasonic lenses forever. A line of compact and lightweight primes would be beneficial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
costa43 Posted February 3 Share #97 Posted February 3 49 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: I would. I don't need f1.7 on all my lenses. F2 is more than enough. Besides, what's next for the L mount in terms of Leica lenses? With the release of the 21mm APO in 2023, the line of APO lenses is now complete. Surely Leica cannot keep rebadging Sigma and Panasonic lenses forever. A line of compact and lightweight primes would be beneficial. I do agree that small L mount lenses are missing from the catalogue, I’m just not sure how profitable the SL line is for Leica in general and whether they will spend the money on R&D to develop them. I think they will continue to focus on the big ticket items and rebadge lower end gear. They do need to be present in the FF mirrorless ILC space but it’s not their golden goose. The real focus seems to be elsewhere. The lack of ambition in the recent SL3s release is a good indicator of this (to me). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpino Posted March 2 Share #98 Posted March 2 On 9/28/2024 at 12:05 PM, PaulJohn said: My combo this year has been a Q3 and an M11 + 50 lux. This has felt the wrong way around. I would prefer a 28 on my M11 and a 50 (or 43) Q because focusing a 28 wide open using a rangefinder is much easier than a 50. My Q3 43 arrives in one hour. I then need to decide whether the Q3 goes or the M11 goes. Do I get a 28 cron/elmarit for my M11 or keep the Q3 28 and sell the M11? Some experimentation should give me the answer. Wondering what you finally did! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now