Q3 43 rattles when off

[Rich1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, I have discovered my Q3 43 has a light rattle noise if shaken ( not too hard) but when I switch it on there is no rattle noise. Anyone else realised this or know the cause?

[LocalHero1953]

It's the image stabilisation elements in the lens. It's normal.

[Le Chef]

5 hours ago, Rich1 said:

Hi, I have discovered my Q3 43 has a light rattle noise if shaken ( not too hard) but when I switch it on there is no rattle noise. Anyone else realised this or know the cause?

If you do a search for “rattle” on this forum you will discover pages and pages of posts that have raised this “issue”, and as you might learn from them, this is due to OIS and is absolutely normal.

[aficionados]

when it's off it rattles. when it's on it hums.

That's how OIS works

[keithlaban.co.uk]

LocalHero1953, the first respondent here, nailed it.

How many other versions do we need?

[LocalHero1953]

2 hours ago, keithlaban.co.uk said:

LocalHero1953, the first respondent here, nailed it.

How many other versions do we need?

I can think of two reasons why we need multiple replies. 

The first is to achieve statistical confidence at the 95% or 99% level. Given the known fact that 1 in 20 camera owners are simple contrarians (1 in 13 Leica owners) and will post an incorrect reply just to be awkward, then the OP needs a certain number of correct replies to be confident they are correct. If I could find my undergrad stats textbook, and if it wasn’t bedtime, I would tell you how many responses are needed.

The second possible reason is hypothesis testing. Supposing I wasn’t sure about my first response, I might have proposed my answer as a hypothesis that “all Q cameras rattle when switched off”. We thus need a stream of responses (‘white swans’) from Q users who have the same experience. If we get just one black swan (a Q owner whose camera doesn’t rattle) then my hypothesis is disproved.

OK?

 

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

30 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

OK?

No! Not OK!

Now we need multiple posts agreeing with your post to make sure what you've written is correct.

And now my post needs multiple posts to agree with it. Where will it all end?

(btw you missed the third reason for multiple identical replies... some people just like the sound of their own voice)

[anonymoose]

I've had two Q2's and a Q3 and they've all rattled when off--perfectly normal.

[Sharpshooter]

35 minutes ago, Corius said:

No! Not OK!

Now we need multiple posts agreeing with your post to make sure what you've written is correct.

And now my post needs multiple posts to agree with it. Where will it all end?

(btw you missed the third reason for multiple identical replies... some people just like the sound of their own voice)

That would be the sound of their own fingers.

[setuporg]

This thread has rattled me.

[Aram Langhans]

6 minutes ago, setuporg said:

This thread has rattled me.

Don't worry.  That is normal.........

Anybody want to concur???

[aficionados]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I can think of two reasons why we need multiple replies. 

The first is to achieve statistical confidence at the 95% or 99% level. Given the known fact that 1 in 20 camera owners are simple contrarians (1 in 13 Leica owners) and will post an incorrect reply just to be awkward, then the OP needs a certain number of correct replies to be confident they are correct. If I could find my undergrad stats textbook, and if it wasn’t bedtime, I would tell you how many responses are needed.

The second possible reason is hypothesis testing. Supposing I wasn’t sure about my first response, I might have proposed my answer as a hypothesis that “all Q cameras rattle when switched off”. We thus need a stream of responses (‘white swans’) from Q users who have the same experience. If we get just one black swan (a Q owner whose camera doesn’t rattle) then my hypothesis is disproved.

OK?

 

degree of freedom needed is 15.

So you need 16 answers to reach any statistically meaningful conclusion.

hypothesis test needs a t-value, you can't just have one answer to reject.

Edited December 31, 2024 by aficionados

[adan]

All those explanations of explanations of the expanation can be boiled down to:

"How many Leica owners does it take to answer a simple question?"

"How many have you got?!"

[anonymoose]

2 hours ago, setuporg said:

This thread has rattled me.

I read this thread twice yesterday and once today and was rattled every time--perfectly normal.

[Rich1]

Just to confirm, I am happy with the first reply and the barrage of humour which followed was unexpected.

[albert]

I'm too old a deaf to hear rattles.  

[Olaf_ZG]

On 12/31/2024 at 12:13 AM, Corius said:

No! Not OK!

Now we need multiple posts agreeing with your post to make sure what you've written is correct.

And now my post needs multiple posts to agree with it. Where will it all end?

(btw you missed the third reason for multiple identical replies... some people just like the sound of their own voice)

Just mention “freezing” and the posts will be countless…

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Just mention “freezing” and the posts will be countless…

THat's nothing! I just saw a post from a Grinch at 12:15 this morning saying that the Q3 also has a magenta cast!!!!

It doesn't look like it's going to be a happy and peaceful New Year in Leica Land 

[Rich1]

Having now had a couple of days to think about a solution I believe a work around is possible to prevent the camera lens rattling. I can buy a usb-c power bank and keep it connected to the camera at all times to allow the camera to remain switched on at all times thus no rattling. However not sure yet how to attach to camera, perhaps superglue to the side without the connector flap. Once sorted may patent it so Leica don’t copy the idea.

Edited January 2 by Rich1

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jaapv]

On 12/31/2024 at 2:40 AM, setuporg said:

This thread has rattled me.

Did somebody shake you?