PeterHatt Posted October 6 Share #1 Posted October 6 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica Q3 43mm | Filter Problems" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/V4WLz8AVdEA?feature=oembed"> Excellent demonstration of the filter problem 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 6 Posted October 6 Hi PeterHatt, Take a look here Leica Q3 43 filter problem demonstration. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luetz Posted October 6 Share #2 Posted October 6 This will all be "sorted out" with the release of the Q3-35....... 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted October 6 Share #3 Posted October 6 Looks like a Leica lens cap recall is in order! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6 Share #4 Posted October 6 (edited) Just remove the lenshood or loosen it for some turns. Where is the problem here? Who in this world needs uv filters? If the lens would have been longer because of a larger hood the complaints would have been even worse! This guy with his unbearable accent - is he ever taking real world photos, or just doing ‚maths‘? Edited October 6 by wellknown Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisQ3 Posted October 6 Share #5 Posted October 6 If Leica Q3 43 users want a filter for protection or otherwise, and want to use the factory supplied rectangle lens hood, they cannot use any of the Leica filters; ironic! They are too thick… However, the 'extra-slim' filters by J&K Concept, from their Nano-K series, do work, and the factory supplied rectangle lens hood will fit.... BUT, the Marco ring still will not work.... I'm not sure how I feel about having such an inexpensive filter on such a stunning APO lens, thoughts? But better than it getting scratched? Should users want to use the Marco lens, they can simply unscrew the rectangle lens hood. Having a loose lens hood is not an option, as it moves constantly, is always crooked and then comes off. The lens hood from the Q3 28mm, does not align properly, so not an option. Buying the optional round lens hood works fine, but it’s an additional expense and in my opinion not as nice as the factory supplied rectangular hood. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. G Posted October 6 Share #6 Posted October 6 20 minutes ago, wellknown said: Just remove the lenshood or loosen it for some turns. Where is the problem here? Who in this world needs uv filters? If the lens would have been longer because of a larger hood the complaints would have been even worse! This guy with his unbearable accent - is he ever taking real world photos, or just doing ‚maths‘? I was out shooting an event yesterday with the q3 43. I was shooting wide open for subject isolation and needed to use a ND filter to keep the shutter in the mechanical range (1/2000 or under) to avoid rolling shutter. There were a lot of people around so I wanted to use a hood. I ended up using my haoge round hood, but I would have much rather used the stock design. I have an outdoor event in Cayman in January that I will be shooting as well and using a ND filter is pretty much necessary all day. Squarehood is apparently making something for the Q3 43 so I'll grab that one when it's available. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted October 7 Share #7 Posted October 7 Advertisement (gone after registration) 12 hours ago, wellknown said: Just remove the lenshood or loosen it for some turns. Where is the problem here? Who in this world needs uv filters? If the lens would have been longer because of a larger hood the complaints would have been even worse! This guy with his unbearable accent - is he ever taking real world photos, or just doing ‚maths‘? It's not just UV filters, which many use as a protection against scratches, water and dirt, but about NDs, polarizers, black pro mists and other filters that people use daily. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theseahawk Posted October 7 Share #8 Posted October 7 (edited) 19 hours ago, wellknown said: Just remove the lenshood or loosen it for some turns. Where is the problem here? Who in this world needs uv filters? If the lens would have been longer because of a larger hood the complaints would have been even worse! This guy with his unbearable accent - is he ever taking real world photos, or just doing ‚maths‘? There are several valid reasons to use a UV filter, the main one being to protect the front element of the lens, as @mathphotographer points out early in the video and others have here. As he and @Dr. G note, the problem also prevents use of ND and polarizing filters with the lens hood in place - and removing the lens hood makes the lens cap useless. Thanks, @PeterHatt for sharing the video, which like @mathphotographer’s others, are among the clearest and most informative videos on Leica cameras on YouTube. I’d submit having him weigh in will help persuade Leica to issue a revised lens hood, as he is influential enough that they rely on him to evaluate products before release. As to mocking his accent, @wellknown, we’re not in grade school anymore. Edited October 7 by theseahawk 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7 Share #9 Posted October 7 This is modern life I guess. Complaining and searching for mistakes and faults. Leica has made this decision for a reason. Just accept it as it is or get a different lenshood. There are several offerings out there. Just browse the internet - you did it before, searching for failures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. G Posted October 7 Share #10 Posted October 7 FWIW, I'm not sure fixing the hood issue makes that much of a difference with a polarizer. Turning a polarizer with the original Q28 hood on was very difficult without touching the glass. I'd still like the ability to keep my ND in place with the hood - and wouldn't mind if it extended out a little further to protect the front element from the rain a little better as well. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7 Share #11 Posted October 7 On 10/6/2024 at 4:09 PM, PeterHatt said: Excellent demonstration of the filter problem What does he say? The elephant in the room? Seriously? This is clickbait on the lowest level for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
theseahawk Posted October 7 Share #12 Posted October 7 1 hour ago, wellknown said: This is modern life I guess. Complaining and searching for mistakes and faults. Leica has made this decision for a reason. Just accept it as it is or get a different lenshood. There are several offerings out there. Just browse the internet - you did it before, searching for failures. The people reporting the faults are holding the camera in their hands. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7 Share #13 Posted October 7 1 minute ago, theseahawk said: The people reporting the faults are holding the camera in their hands. Just as I do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted October 7 Share #14 Posted October 7 2 hours ago, wellknown said: Leica has made this decision for a reason Yeah, and the reason is wrong. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 7 Share #15 Posted October 7 30 minutes ago, Simone_DF said: Yeah, and the reason is wrong. Well, that depends entirely upon the perspective. The reason obviously was keeping the same overall size as q3 28. One person calls that wrong, the other one right. The future will bring us lots of solutions solving that ‚problem’ for sure. No need to argue anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptSlevin Posted October 7 Share #16 Posted October 7 16 minutes ago, wellknown said: Well, that depends entirely upon the perspective. The reason obviously was keeping the same overall size as q3 28. One person calls that wrong, the other one right. The future will bring us lots of solutions solving that ‚problem’ for sure. No need to argue anyway. Drunken philosophy. It's not a design choice, it's an obvious flaw, people need filters for dust and moisture protection. If you make a hood without keeping that in mind - you are at best not qualified designer, at worst should be fired, Leica is not an indie company, it's a luxury brand. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 8 Share #17 Posted October 8 Sheesh…. Talk about storms in teacups. Who uses a filter for Macro? More risk of aberrations and reflections, minimal risk to the front element. And the hood casts a shadow on your subject. Naked lens territory. Polarizing filters are a pain with any hood. So just get an appropriate slim filter for all other use. And why do slim filters exist? Because the need is a design choice by many lens manufacturers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 8 Share #18 Posted October 8 On 10/6/2024 at 8:44 PM, ChrisQ3 said: If Leica Q3 43 users want a filter for protection or otherwise, and want to use the factory supplied rectangle lens hood, they cannot use any of the Leica filters; ironic! They are too thick… However, the 'extra-slim' filters by J&K Concept, from their Nano-K series, do work, and the factory supplied rectangle lens hood will fit.... BUT, the Marco ring still will not work.... I'm not sure how I feel about having such an inexpensive filter on such a stunning APO lens, thoughts? Leica certainly does not supply the best filter on the market. They are rebrands of good, but not the best, of B+W and other major suppliers aimed at the “everything must be Leica regardless of price “ customers. The Nano filters by J&K Concept have better coatings. In the end, a filter in front of the lens will have minimal to nil effect on image quality as long as it is at least minimally adequate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted October 8 Share #19 Posted October 8 14 hours ago, wellknown said: Well, that depends entirely upon the perspective. The reason obviously was keeping the same overall size as q3 28. One person calls that wrong, the other one right. The future will bring us lots of solutions solving that ‚problem’ for sure. No need to argue anyway. It's form over function. I'll wait for a third party hood, this looks like a good business niche for JJC, Haoge and all the other brands that produce third party accessories for Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simone_DF Posted October 8 Share #20 Posted October 8 2 hours ago, jaapv said: Sheesh…. Talk about storms in teacups. Who uses a filter for Macro? The issue is that it's not just Macro. I asked about filters when in non-Macro mode, and they do not fit either. An ultra-slim filter might fit, but definitely not NDs, polarizers or other thicker filters 1 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