So If I buy the Leica Q3 43, what do I do with my SL2-S?

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings!

I admit to enjoying owning Leica gear, regardless of whether or not it's technically superior to other brands, or if their lenses are measurably the best available.  My Nikon ownership (DSLR and Z mount) and Fuji X series gear provided good platforms for making images, but the complicated menu systems and myriad of buttons/knobs reduced the enjoyment of shooting and I sold them.

I settled on the SL2-S after owning several Ms (7,9,M-A,M-P) finding my aging eyes unable to get sharp focus with manual lenses.  That system works, but it's heavy and carrying several lenses isn't much fun.  I tried the 24-90, but sold it over the weight/balance issues.  

I had the original Q, but never bonded with the 28mm focal length and sold it.  Over 50 years of shooting my primary focal length is 50mm - with wider/longer shots mostly related to travel/family gatherings.  I've relied on my iPhone 14 Pro for the occasional wide angle/telephoto shots.  I prefer feel/haptics/quality of the SL2-S, but find that I leave it home more than I take it with me.  It can produce high quality images, but I find the "learning curve" of the many settings/screens very different from the prior M cameras that I had.  

I'm on a wait list for the Q3 43, but before pulling the trigger, I'm trying to decide if having the Q3 43 will do all I want it to do.  The pros are the "one and done" nature of owning the camera, but a 60MP sensor seems like overkill for most of what I do - I rarely print, and when I do it's often not very large.  When I had the original Q and cropped to a 50mm image I was frustrated that the perspective still looked like a 28 not a 50.  There was little depth of field nor bokeh.  It is partly my technique, partly lack of training and skill, but the result was I didn't like the shot.  Am I correct that the 43mm lens on the new Q3 will come closer to what I'm trying to capture?

And finally, I've learned that selling any Leica gear almost always results in a "Why did I do that?" feeling sometime in the future.  Do I just keep the SL2-S, which I bought with the Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH as a kit?  I don't expect to use it often, but it's depreciated to a level that seems to be worth keeping.  And, just to tease me, I still have a Nikon D5600 with a kit lens that I bought new refurbished from Nikon for $400! - less than the sales tax on my SL2-S.  I don't use it, but I'm VERY tempted to hold off on the Q3 and use it before committing to buying the new Q3 43.  Sorry for the long post, but the advice from this forum is always excellent, and I'm truly struggling with what to do, and I don't want to make an impulsive $7K purchase  and later find out that I didn't consider everything.

I welcome your thoughts, and thank you in advance.

Edited October 5, 2024 by lencap

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

5 minutes ago, lencap said:

 When I had the original Q and cropped to a 50mm image I was frustrated that the perspective still looked like a 28 not a 50.  

The ONLY way to change perspective is to change your camera/subject distance.  Cropping doesn’t change perspective, which is the relationship between near and far objects. Neither does changing focal length if you shoot from the same position. Moving your feet, however, works.

Jeff

[Barralad]

I have no experience with the SL range, being a Q3 owner, but I’m wondering if the only real difference between the Q43 and a 50mm on an SL will be the size and weight? Unless you think that the 7mm difference will be important, then I suspect the usability will be broadly similar. And if you’re not going to buy any more lenses for the SL, it seems to me that you would have two cameras with quite similar functionality. So, for me, the decision is whether it’s worth spending $7k on a camera that will only do what your current camera already does, pretty much. More pixels, possibly better quality lens (APO is the best, at least in some people’s opinions), but if you don’t need those pixels, and you’re happy with the 50mm then it feels unnecessary to buy the Q43 in my opinion.

[Viv]

3 hours ago, lencap said:

Greetings!

I admit to enjoying owning Leica gear, regardless of whether or not it's technically superior to other brands, or if their lenses are measurably the best available.  My Nikon ownership (DSLR and Z mount) and Fuji X series gear provided good platforms for making images, but the complicated menu systems and myriad of buttons/knobs reduced the enjoyment of shooting and I sold them.

I settled on the SL2-S after owning several Ms (7,9,M-A,M-P) finding my aging eyes unable to get sharp focus with manual lenses.  That system works, but it's heavy and carrying several lenses isn't much fun.  I tried the 24-90, but sold it over the weight/balance issues.  

I had the original Q, but never bonded with the 28mm focal length and sold it.  Over 50 years of shooting my primary focal length is 50mm - with wider/longer shots mostly related to travel/family gatherings.  I've relied on my iPhone 14 Pro for the occasional wide angle/telephoto shots.  I prefer feel/haptics/quality of the SL2-S, but find that I leave it home more than I take it with me.  It can produce high quality images, but I find the "learning curve" of the many settings/screens very different from the prior M cameras that I had.  

I'm on a wait list for the Q3 43, but before pulling the trigger, I'm trying to decide if having the Q3 43 will do all I want it to do.  The pros are the "one and done" nature of owning the camera, but a 60MP sensor seems like overkill for most of what I do - I rarely print, and when I do it's often not very large.  When I had the original Q and cropped to a 50mm image I was frustrated that the perspective still looked like a 28 not a 50.  There was little depth of field nor bokeh.  It is partly my technique, partly lack of training and skill, but the result was I didn't like the shot.  Am I correct that the 43mm lens on the new Q3 will come closer to what I'm trying to capture?

And finally, I've learned that selling any Leica gear almost always results in a "Why did I do that?" feeling sometime in the future.  Do I just keep the SL2-S, which I bought with the Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH as a kit?  I don't expect to use it often, but it's depreciated to a level that seems to be worth keeping.  And, just to tease me, I still have a Nikon D5600 with a kit lens that I bought new refurbished from Nikon for $400! - less than the sales tax on my SL2-S.  I don't use it, but I'm VERY tempted to hold off on the Q3 and use it before committing to buying the new Q3 43.  Sorry for the long post, but the advice from this forum is always excellent, and I'm truly struggling with what to do, and I don't want to make an impulsive $7K purchase  and later find out that I didn't consider everything.

I welcome your thoughts, and thank you in advance.

Like you, I am reluctant to sell Leica gear.

I tend to regard the money spent on cameras as a sunk cost, so I don't worry about resale.

I gave my Q to my daughter, who is a better photographer than I.

[student]

6 minutes ago, Barralad said:

I have no experience with the SL range, being a Q3 owner, but I’m wondering if the only real difference between the Q43 and a 50mm on an SL will be the size and weight? Unless you think that the 7mm difference will be important, then I suspect the usability will be broadly similar. And if you’re not going to buy any more lenses for the SL, it seems to me that you would have two cameras with quite similar functionality. So, for me, the decision is whether it’s worth spending $7k on a camera that will only do what your current camera already does, pretty much. More pixels, possibly better quality lens (APO is the best, at least in some people’s opinions), but if you don’t need those pixels, and you’re happy with the 50mm then it feels unnecessary to buy the Q43 in my opinion.

There is the additional issue of size and weight. Q3 43 is a much smaller and lighter package, and it is not clear how OP stands on this aspect

[Le Chef]

And according to those with better connections, there’s an SL3-S in the near future, likely with 47MP. Unless you see something that you really find a fatal flaw with the SL2-S, I would keep it and pass on the Q343.

Edited October 5, 2024 by Le Chef

[Markey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Going through a similar thought process as the OP.

I`ve had an SL2s for a number of years but only use it with the 90280 for equestrian work.

For all other uses I find it too heavy and awkward so use an M (246) or a CL

The new Q is therefore tempting as a lighter package for day to day.

It would replace my CL and could also act as a "colour M".

There is little residual value in my SL2s (its had a knock anyway which has jammed the top plate custom button).

Don`t know if these ramblings are of an assistance in helping the OP to come to a decision.

[Barralad]

32 minutes ago, student said:

There is the additional issue of size and weight. Q3 43 is a much smaller and lighter package, and it is not clear how OP stands on this aspect

Yes, these are the things I highlighted in my first sentence…..

[Biotar]

Grab a APO-Lanthar 35mm with close-up adapter for the SL and you won't miss the Q anymore.

[costa43]

Do you have an option to trial a q3 43 for a few days where you are located? I think this could help you come to a decision. 
 

4 hours ago, lencap said:

When I had the original Q and cropped to a 50mm image I was frustrated that the perspective still looked like a 28 not a 50.  There was little depth of field nor bokeh.  It is partly my technique, partly lack of training and skill, but the result was I didn't like the shot.  Am I correct that the 43mm lens on the new Q3 will come closer to what I'm trying to capture?

Like @Jeff S said. If you take the exact same shot from the same spot with a 28mm and crop to 50mm, the only thing you are losing is megapixels. The rest will look the same as taking it with a 50mm in the first place. I think what you are referring to is if you try framing the 28mm like you would be composing with a 50mm then you do not have the same ‘look’, and yes, the q3 43 will be closer to what you prefer in this instance. 

Edited October 5, 2024 by costa43

[darylgo]

4 hours ago, lencap said:

I settled on the SL2-S after owning several Ms (7,9,M-A,M-P) finding my aging eyes unable to get sharp focus with manual lenses.  That system works, but it's heavy and carrying several lenses isn't much fun.  I tried the 24-90, but sold it over the weight/balance issues.  

The 24-90 is a beast.  I sold mine despite it's superb imagining qualities.  

So, you mention two issues, eyes and weight.  Both would be solved by the Q3 43.  

The lens quality on 43 might not be too your liking as you mentioned the 28mm of the Q lacked some qualities.   That can only be determined with use or looking at images, possibly posted online images would answer that question.  

Nikon, a brand you mentioned, has the Z7ii that is not much bigger than a Q, add a 40mm Nikkor and you'll have similar Q qualities with lens interchangeability.

Regarding the SL2-S, the value doesn't hold up on this series bodies, I kept my original SL and added the smaller Panasonic lenses for portability, the 20-60 is cheap and the IQ superb for a kit lens.  

[drjonb]

My Leica journey started with an M3 and, over several decades, I have had every M body and every M lens, (and many Nikon and Canon bodies and lenses was my guilty sideline!) and I left a string of happy retailers in my wake. I never did find the perfect do-it-all camera/lens (or camera bag). I ended up with the SL2-S and 24-90 (a truly outstanding lens in every respect) but its combined bulk meant that it did not get out enough. So, long story short, I bought the Q3-28mm (I used to have the Q2 in an earlier incantation…), and a Nikon Z8 with various telephoto lenses, as well as the 40mm Z Nikkor mentioned in the previous comment. The wisdom of age(?) taught me that if you want to do wide angle photography and street, and capture wildlife and birds, you need two different bodies/lens and two different bags.

If you don’t do telephoto photography, don’t print A3, and don’t have an lens-optics measuring lab in the garage, part-ex the SL stuff, and buy a Q3 - either one - and a nice bag!

Enjoy taking the pictures.

[Dr. G]

I travel with my SL3.  I usually take my 21/35/75 APO SL and my 50 Lux-SL on trips.  I also own the 50 APO SL.  The only lens I’m selling after getting the Q3 43 is the 50 APO SL.  Understand, though, that the SL3 has more functionality than the Q3 and for the times I do commercial work I can’t get rid of it.  If you’re being very critical of performance, Hugh Brownstone tested the image quality of the 35 APO Summicron-SL against the Q3 43 and, although it was very close, the 35 APO still comes out ahead.  That being said, the two reasons I’m not selling that one is because it is integral in my standard SL kit and… I can’t bring myself to sell “the best lens Leica’s ever made.”

You mentioned you have the 50 Summicron SL.  The APO SL lens draws differently, be it on the SL series or with the Q3 43.  It’s not completely apparent until you start looking at the files.  You may or may not like the rendering, it comes down to personal preference.

Could I replace my SL3 35 APO and 50 APO with the Q3 43?  For travel and daily walk around, yes.  I like the way the 50 Lux SL and the 75 APO render when photographing people (the 75 may be my favorite lens to use on the SL system), so they’re not going anywhere. Obviously I can’t get a 21mm field of view on the Q3 43.  So a standard 21/35/75 kit for when I need it is pretty perfect, considering I also have a 32.5/52.5/112.5 kit with little loss of image quality.  
 

I’m still trying to find a small full frame body for the 21 APO SL.  That with the Q3 43 would make a killer travel kit.

Edited October 5, 2024 by Dr. G

[lencap]

Thanks for the replies.  I may not have been very clear about why I don't take the SL2-S with me everywhere - it's the weight/size that I'm trying to reduce.  I also find the SL series to be very capable, but a bit of overkill.  I don't use it for video, and the large number of menu choices and options is a bit overwhelming, especially so compared to an M body.  For those reasons I've not mastered the controls well enough to easily take any shot I want to take, which the M body does very well.  It's me, not the camera.  The Q is my attempt to replicate the M shooting experience - lighter weight, no need to carry additional lenses - a simpler lighter weight kit in place of the SL setup.  And, yes, I do have the Panasonic 20-60 zoom which gives some flexibility, but I prefer the Leica branded lenses - all of which are heavier and bulky.

[anonymoose]

2 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I travel with my SL3.  I usually take my 21/35/75 APO SL and my 50 Lux-SL on trips.  I also own the 50 APO SL.  The only lens I’m selling after getting the Q3 43 is the 50 APO SL.  Understand, though, that the SL3 has more functionality than the Q3 and for the times I do commercial work I can’t get rid of it.  If you’re being very critical of performance, Hugh Brownstone tested the image quality of the 35 APO Summicron-SL against the Q3 43 and, although it was very close, the 35 APO still comes out ahead.  That being said, the two reasons I’m not selling that one is because it is integral in my standard SL kit and… I can’t bring myself to sell “the best lens Leica’s ever made.”

You mentioned you have the 50 Summicron SL.  The APO SL lens draws differently, be it on the SL series or with the Q3 43.  It’s not completely apparent until you start looking at the files.  You may or may not like the rendering, it comes down to personal preference.

Could I replace my SL3 35 APO and 50 APO with the Q3 43?  For travel and daily walk around, yes.  I like the way the 50 Lux SL and the 75 APO render when photographing people (the 75 may be my favorite lens to use on the SL system), so they’re not going anywhere. Obviously I can’t get a 21mm field of view on the Q3 43.  So a standard 21/35/75 kit for when I need it is pretty perfect, considering I also have a 32.5/52.5/112.5 kit with little loss of image quality.  
 

I’m still trying to find a small full frame body for the 21 APO SL.  That with the Q3 43 would make a killer travel kit.

Do you have any comparison pictures you can share to demonstrate the difference in rendering between the Q3 43, 35 APO, and 50 APO?

I currently have a Q3 and Sony A1 + 35mm GM f/1.4. I'm considering getting the SL3 + 35 APO to replace the Sony, but also considering swapping the Q3 for the Q3 43. Very torn over here.

[ynp]

10 hours ago, lencap said:

ts in a "Why did I do that?" feeling sometime in the future.  Do I just keep the SL2-S, which I bought with the Leica SL-Summicron 50mm f/2.0 ASPH as a kit?

Keep the lens and buy the Panasonic S5II. instead of your SL2$. 

[bobtodrick]

6 hours ago, drjonb said:

My Leica journey started with an M3 and, over several decades, I have had every M body and every M lens, (and many Nikon and Canon bodies and lenses was my guilty sideline!) and I left a string of happy retailers in my wake. 

Gotta admit, I have a few customers like you who have put my kids through university 😂

[drjonb]

Just now, bobtodrick said:

Gotta admit, I have a few customers like you who have put my kids through university 😂

Glad to hear that! I hope they got great grades to justify my investment 😂

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[2M6TTLs]

9 hours ago, Markey said:

Going through a similar thought process as the OP.

I`ve had an SL2s for a number of years but only use it with the 90280 for equestrian work.

For all other uses I find it too heavy and awkward so use an M (246) or a CL

The new Q is therefore tempting as a lighter package for day to day.

It would replace my CL and could also act as a "colour M".

There is little residual value in my SL2s (its had a knock anyway which has jammed the top plate custom button).

Don`t know if these ramblings are of an assistance in helping the OP to come to a decision.

 

9 hours ago, Markey said:

Going through a similar thought process as the OP.

I`ve had an SL2s for a number of years but only use it with the 90280 for equestrian work.

For all other uses I find it too heavy and awkward so use an M (246) or a CL

The new Q is therefore tempting as a lighter package for day to day.

It would replace my CL and could also act as a "colour M".

There is little residual value in my SL2s (its had a knock anyway which has jammed the top plate custom button).

Don`t know if these ramblings are of an assistance in helping the OP to come to a decision.

The SL2s is not heavy and awkward if you use compact lenses on it. For AF you can use the Sigma contemporary series or lightweight Lumix series ( plasticky but good optically ) or you could use a used 40mm lens originally designed for the CL from the film days with an adaptor. That would be only 3mm difference from the Q3 43's lens.

[Olaf_ZG]

@Lenscap: you seriously have to make up your mind. There are many threads of yours which camera/lens to choose. I have read most of them as I had similar questions.

I answered them by defining what I want/need a camera for.

- the SL2 plus lux is for portraits in the studio

- the SL2s plus its zooms for events/equine

- the m10m I technically don’t need, but would regret selling it, so with some lenses this is my b/w travel cam

- for all the rest, the new Q will be my cam. I won’t carry the SL daily, but the Q would fit the bill.

You will loose significantly if you now sell your SL. Buy the Q, keep the SL at least 6 months, and then, if not used you can sell it…