Which is Better Q lens, the 28 or the 43?

[Ko.Fe.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 hours ago, Richard K said:

I would guess that they’re both great but thoughts appreciated.

For Toronto 43 is tele. Just as 50, which I outgrown on Toronto streets. 

But even used 90mm where TVO and CT HQ are. Walking down pass Englinton, I would switch to 35 and south of Bloor - 21.

So, 28 with crops is useful.

43 is if you can't take environmental photography,  but stick in narrow vision. 

Oh, also, if misbalanced kit doesn't bother you.  

IMO.

Edited November 15, 2024 by Ko.Fe.

[Richard K]

7 hours ago, Qwertynm said:

The more interesting question to answer would be

how much better is the 43 over the 28 cropped to 43 and then downscaled to a web-friendly dimension like 1800x1200.

maybe James @Sparkassenkunde and other with both cameras could chime in?

Yup, that’s a good question. Answers?

[helged]

For me and my use of a Q-type of camera, 28mm is more applicable than 43mm: I have been looking after a camera that is sufficiently small that it can be carried and used almost everywhere, is weather protected, can be operated by one hand, can be used in fully manual or automatic mode, has stabilisation embedded, has close focus ability, generates high-quality images and - which is the point that differentiates 28 and 43mm focal lengths for me - is useful to document daily life in small spaces (in living rooms, in the garden, from a ladder, in the greenhouse, creeping in the attick) as well as useful for wide/open landscapes. 

The 28mm Q-lens is clearly not up to the level of the SL primes, but it is still more than good for my use. I tested the Lumix S9 with Sigma DG DN 24mm for some months prior to the purchase of Q3, but I didn't fall in love with S9. 

In addition to Q3, I have the SL3 providing the flexibility (and quality) if/when needed.

When hiking in the forest/mountain, I always bring Q3-28, and often SL3 w/the outstanding Sigma 70-200mm (or eg SL21 or SL50Lux); some fine and convenient combinations there, I think.

Regarding Q3, I like it a lot (but it have to go to Wetzlar one day due to a biggie dust-something about centered on the sensor...). 

Edited November 16, 2024 by helged

[JNK100]

In my view, it is is simply the case of which lens suits better. The 28mm is excellent and I have not found it lacking in quality. 

Is a 43 f2 or a 28 f1.7 preferred is the only question.

 

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

The only correct answer is to have both.

Gordon

[PluckinTones]

The 43mm f/2 might be technically "better" pixel-for-pixel, but for my one-camera, one-lens, carry-everywhere approach, I prefer the versatility of the 28mm on the Q. It allows me to crop when needed while retaining the wide-angle option. The 28mm also has a unique hyperreal quality and can be also very interesting in close-up shots. All in all, I've captured far more interesting images with the Q2 than I ever did when I was carrying a 50mm lens as my only lens.

Edited November 16, 2024 by PluckinTones

[JTLeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/15/2024 at 3:54 AM, Richard K said:

I would guess that they’re both great but thoughts appreciated.

The best lens is the 43mm if you are asking from a technical standpoint. It’s most perfect, corner to corner sharpness, with low to no fringing. It makes shooting with it really enjoyable and to be being plum in the middle of my two favourite focal lengths I think it’s a winner for me.

That said I have the Q3 too, and do not plan on selling it. It’s an exceptional lens in the centre 75% of the image, really incredible in face considering Leica designed it ten years so. Well done Leica.

The real answer is of course based on focal length needs but, the 43 lens is better than the 28. 

[Simone_DF]

On 11/15/2024 at 3:57 PM, ramarren said:

Just a comment on the bolded bit above ... Leica M owners have been shooting with 75, 90, and 135 mm lenses for decades without image stabilization very successfully.  It simply means learning how to hold the camera steadily and/or using a support (tripod, camera stand, leaning against a brick wall) occasionally when needed. 

 

 

On 11/15/2024 at 4:41 PM, bobtodrick said:

I'm always amazed by newer photographers who can't see how you can survive without A/F, image stabilization and the ability to add 20 custom functions, as though there aren't thousands (millions??) of amazing photographs that were pre 2000 when none of this stuff was common.

Imagine applying this line of thought to everything in life: 
“I went to the dentist, but asked them not to use anesthesia, because that’s how we did it in the past.”

”I got my cataract done, but instead of the 2 minutes modern laser treatment, I went for a painful long needle in my eye, because that’s how we always done it in the ‘80s”

“I no longer have an electronic alarm. Instead, I hired a knocker-upper”

etc.

TL;DR sure, I also have fun with fully manual film cameras from time to time, but others - me included - prefer more modern tech. Both are fine as long as you’re happy with your choice. Clearly the OP is not happy with a digital M, and I can totally relate to that, I wouldn’t use one myself. 

[PeterHatt]

6 minutes ago, Simone_DF said:

TL;DR sure, I also have fun with fully manual film cameras from time to time, but others - me included - prefer more modern tech. Both are fine as long as you’re happy with your choice. Clearly the OP is not happy with a digital M, and I can totally relate to that, I wouldn’t use one myself. 

Yes, and use generative fill to make a Q3 43 take 28mm photos 😜

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, Simone_DF said:

 

Imagine applying this line of thought to everything in life: 
“I went to the dentist, but asked them not to use anesthesia, because that’s how we did it in the past.”

”I got my cataract done, but instead of the 2 minutes modern laser treatment, I went for a painful long needle in my eye, because that’s how we always done it in the ‘80s”

“I no longer have an electronic alarm. Instead, I hired a knocker-upper”

etc.

TL;DR sure, I also have fun with fully manual film cameras from time to time, but others - me included - prefer more modern tech. Both are fine as long as you’re happy with your choice. Clearly the OP is not happy with a digital M, and I can totally relate to that, I wouldn’t use one myself. 

You missed my point entirely!!

Did I anywhere say the ‘old’ ways were better?  Please highlight that if I did.

What I was addressing was the fact that many in the digital age seem ignorant of the fact that wonderful images have been made since the 1850’s, or at least don’t know how it was done without all the modern tech.

And too often these are the people who are guilty of placing tech ahead of talent.   As I’ve mentioned before I had a poster of Capa’s ‘Falling Loyalist Soldier’ in my office.  Many people commented on how wonderful an image it is (staged or not).  But it was sad how many newer photographers commmented how it could of been sharper…or that if run through Photoshop they could get rid of the grain.

Sorry, but IMO talent trumps tech any day.

Edited November 17, 2024 by bobtodrick

[JTLeica]

28 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

Sorry, but IMO talent trumps tech any day.

And, it always will.

Technology cannot think for you nor compose for you

[David Wien]

3 hours ago, Simone_DF said:

“I went to the dentist, but asked them not to use anesthesia, because that’s how we did it in the past.”

“I no longer have an electronic alarm. Instead, I hired a knocker-upper”

 

I agree with the first of these statements, and I have never used either an electronic alarm OR a knocker-upper. 😀

David

[Tseg]

The point I made about a longer FL on the M11, with 60 MP sensor, is it that a 50mm lens is physically more restrictive from a shake and FOV perspective than a 28mm lens.  It is just a fact.  As a result, it is easier to take a photo with 28mm FL that is more apt to be in focus with a rangefinder when street shooting.  I never said a good photo cannot be taken the a 50mm lens.   Like the OP asked which Q lens is better, I made the point a longer FL lens on the M has more technical limitations, so I was going to start with a wider lens as I acclimate to an OV camera with no stabilization and a 60MP sensor. It is also a reason why I was glad to get a Q3 43 over the Q3, as it is all paying out for me.  Not sure why my comment came across like I’m stupid?

Edited November 18, 2024 by Tseg

[ramarren]

On 11/17/2024 at 7:43 AM, Simone_DF said:

 

Imagine applying this line of thought to everything in life: 
“I went to the dentist, but asked them not to use anesthesia, because that’s how we did it in the past.”

”I got my cataract done, but instead of the 2 minutes modern laser treatment, I went for a painful long needle in my eye, because that’s how we always done it in the ‘80s”

“I no longer have an electronic alarm. Instead, I hired a knocker-upper”

etc.

TL;DR sure, I also have fun with fully manual film cameras from time to time, but others - me included - prefer more modern tech. Both are fine as long as you’re happy with your choice. Clearly the OP is not happy with a digital M, and I can totally relate to that, I wouldn’t use one myself. 

Amusing, but dumb and inappropriate. It's not sensible to apply such a ridiculous "line of thought" to everything in life.

The simple thrust of my thought that you quoted is that the Leica M has never had image stabilization and yet thousands of M users have used longer focal length lenses very successfully, and have for 70 years or so. It simply takes a little understanding, thought, and skill to do so. If you have no understanding and resist acquiring any skills or ability to think, well, it's likely the wrong camera for you. Or you constrain yourself to using only that which you are most comfortable with and leave the rest of the cameras' capabilities on the floor.

Digital Leica M models have no more image stabilization than film M models, so I don't know where you are coming from with that silliness. 

G

[Kozonoh]

On 11/17/2024 at 4:43 PM, Simone_DF said:

 

Imagine applying this line of thought to everything in life: 
“I went to the dentist, but asked them not to use anesthesia, because that’s how we did it in the past.”

”I got my cataract done, but instead of the 2 minutes modern laser treatment, I went for a painful long needle in my eye, because that’s how we always done it in the ‘80s”

“I no longer have an electronic alarm. Instead, I hired a knocker-upper”

etc.

TL;DR sure, I also have fun with fully manual film cameras from time to time, but others - me included - prefer more modern tech. Both are fine as long as you’re happy with your choice. Clearly the OP is not happy with a digital M, and I can totally relate to that, I wouldn’t use one myself. 

It is abolutely fallacious to apply the same line of thought to everything in life. Such an old and tired argument.

[costa43]

The 43 is technically the better lens on what is measurable at least. The MTF is clear. The better focal length is of course subjective. For me, 60mp with an APO lens in a standard focal length is appealing/exciting and if I was to choose one, it would be the 43mm. I do not tend to enjoy shooting with the intention to crop so it would suit me a little better as an every day option. Although I much prefer the OVF/rangefinder experience of the M for everyday, I'm tempted by this as a weatherproof, autofocus, supreme performance option. 

[My1stLeicaCam]

I feel that if one always shoots portraits and his pictures always focus on 1 main object, 43 is the choice.

If someone like to shoot pictures that focus on some key objects, then 28 is the choice. 

But ultimately it’s the photographer that makes great pictures. 

Edited November 28, 2024 by My1stLeicaCam

[Serg557]

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!

[JNK100]

It is just the same decision about whether to.buy a 28 or 43/50mm lens for your camera.

Only you can decide.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Matt Stevens]

For pixle peepers, I guess the 43 is the "better lens." But for me, I try to tell a story with my photographs and the Q3 28 does a better job of allowing me to tell a better story. If I need a longer focal length, I switch to an interchangeable lens camera.

Edited December 2, 2024 by Matt Stevens