Why did you buy the Q3 43?

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Another reason I chose the Q3 43 was to use it as a lightweight alternative to the SL2-S for drama and other stage rehearsals. It works well in this context as an alternative to the SL2-S + 24-90. Not quite as good in the lowest light (much better than the Q2), not as good AF (but manageable), and obviously missing the 24-43 range. Nevertheless its advantages over the larger combo are real: much lighter & more discreet, and wider aperture to counter the low light limitations. While the resolution advantage of the Q3 43 is lost as you crop beyond 75mm FL equivalent, there is also the advantage that, when working at speed, one is not side-tracked by using the zoom ring for framing - one can concentrate on other functions. Making the framing perfect is for post processing.

[Advertisement]

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

[Tseg]

Replace/supplement my 12 year old Sony RX1, although it is a fatty by comparison.  Not as big of a step up as expecting.

Edited January 5 by Tseg

[Olaf_ZG]

My more serious reply…

I have a SL setup, which is great, but even with a smaller prime just a tad too big for a daily carry (imho): the camera feels more bulky, I have a bigger strap (as I need to carry the zoom with it as well), and all adding up, it’s just doesn’t feel it aint there. It is there.

A daily carry should be non cumbersome. You shouldn’t be bothered with it. It could be a GR, tried them, but didn’t like its files. Had the x100 series, but loving to hold the camera with two hands, it’s just too small. The xpro series would be great though.

But, I wanted FF, so to me the choice was either M or Q. Both are great. The M might be better, but for better I have the SL. I had the m10m, but traded it for the Q. Main reasons:

1. Weatherproof: I don’t want my daily cam in a bag. So it should be able to stand some rain, snow, whatever dust or liquid is around. As I carry always a spare battery, with it I carry a tiny plastic bag for extreme situations.

2. one-hand operation: though mostly I use both hands, sometimes I have only one available.

3. 43mm suits me much better for a daily carry. I do like 28mm, but often I want to be much tighter. 

Very nice to haves: good AF (imho) and great manual focus experience, the tilt screen, ability to choose MP and the button layout of the q3 (both 28 and 43) is just perfect.

And, last but not least, it is so much cheaper than a M. With the Q, I bought a grip, another hood, had still some filters and a strap, and bought myself another off-camera flash plus trigger (lies around in the car, in case I need it).

With the M, there is always this longing for another lens. I can’t help it. Bought and sold a bunch of lenses during the last 4 years. It’s fun, but it aint photography. 
 

So to me, the Q43 is a great fit. Almost perfect, but as I am not perfect, I don’t need a perfect camera. 

[Simone_DF]

I shot >50% of my shots with a 50mm, so the Q3 43 offers a great alternative to my previous setup, SL2-S with the SL50mm APO, in a much lighter and more compact package, plus some other benefits, like a quieter leaf shutter, better flash sync speed, a more discreet body, and better ergonomics for my hands. For me the switch was a no brainer, but I really miss the SL90mm lens. 

[Herr Barnack]

On 1/2/2025 at 9:25 AM, Rich1 said:

For me, I want to try sadomasochism, to be tied to and forced to use one focal length at full frame only for at least a year, perhaps forever. I don’t like choice and don’t like baggage and sold my 501CM plus 5 lens for the Q3 43.

That's as good a reason as any. 

Isn't that why we are all drawn to the red dot like a moth to a candle's flame??  😅

Edited January 5 by Herr Barnack

[Cogito]

3 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

And, last but not least, it is so much cheaper than a M. With the Q, I bought a grip, another hood, had still some filters and a strap, and bought myself another off-camera flash plus trigger (lies around in the car, in case I need it).

With the M, there is always this longing for another lens. I can’t help it. Bought and sold a bunch of lenses during the last 4 years. It’s fun, but it aint photography. 

it’s amazing how much cheaper a $7,000 camera can be if there’s no possibility of purchasing another lens for it. 

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, Cogito said:

it’s amazing how much cheaper a $7,000 camera can be if there’s no possibility of purchasing another lens for it. 

Considering that a M would cost the same without lens, yes it is.

[Bewithabob]

I have the Q2: and wanted the Q 43 for portraits without lens distortion. 

 

[Jeff S]

On 1/6/2025 at 2:38 PM, Bewithabob said:

I have the Q2: and wanted the Q 43 for portraits without lens distortion. 

 

So much for those choosing a Q rather than a M for eliminating lens purchases. Now one can just buy an additional Q model…. and instead carry two bodies with fixed lens.

Maybe a Q-Monochrom is next. 🤪

[jdlaing]

7 hours ago, Jeff S said:

So much for those choosing a Q rather than a M for eliminating lens purchases. Now one can just buy an additional Q model…. and instead carry two bodies with fixed lens.

Maybe a Q-Monochrom is next. 🤪

https://leica-camera.com/en-US/photography/cameras/q/q2-monochrom

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, jdlaing said:

https://leica-camera.com/en-US/photography/cameras/q/q2-monochrom

The point was next for him, not next for Leica… obviously.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

5 hours ago, Jeff S said:

The point was next for him, not next for Leica… obviously.

I have a Q2M.

Gordon

[Jeff S]

20 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

I have a Q2M.

 

Reference to ‘Bewithabob’ … posts 28/29.

[Smogg]

For me it's more of an impulse buy, as I shoot 90 percent of my shots at 45-50 focal length. It's a great camera, but I don't feel as confident with it as I do with the M11-P, and I miss a fair amount of shots because of it.

[Herr Barnack]

23 hours ago, Al Brown said:

It's mostly masochism.

Masochist:  "Slap me - hard."

Sadist:  "No."

[scroy]

I had the Q3, and after reviewing my images, I noticed that I cropped in on nearly 100% of my shots.

The 43mm fits me better.

[discoman5]

I had someone walk into my office - and I was not even looking for a camera. 
I had 5D MK IV , 50 mm F1.2 L , 24-70 mm F2.8 IS , and 70 - 200 F2.8 IS II - sitting in closet for years and I did not use it. 

When I told him that - he pulled out a Leica q3 28. That reminded me of my love affair with pictures from this (at the time unknown to me) lens call "noctilux".  Whenever I was working overnight I would just flip through pictures and I promised myself that after my training I  WILL but this stupid thing call "noctilux".

Time went on and I had to pay student loans/ kids tuition / mortgage but always in the back of my mind I wanted that lens.  When I looked into it - I figured that setup would cost about 22k. 

When this guy pulled out the camera - I said to myself - let me get in with a more reasonable cost - although I will at one point get that setup.

 

[discoman5]

On 1/4/2025 at 7:56 PM, Tseg said:

Replace/supplement my 12 year old Sony RX1, although it is a fatty by comparison.  Not as big of a step up as expecting.

Are you saying the RX1 performed marginally less than the q3-43?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Tseg]

Yes, the RX1 is a high quality build and the Zeiss lens is excellent.  But AF is likely like the original Q and battery life is limited.  The newest RX1 r2 addresses AF.  My original is a 24MP sensor but the newer one is 48MP, I believe.  The RX1 does not have wireless sharing.   In summary, the feel and image quality of the RX1 is comparable to the Q3… but it does fall short in other areas… but is much older and much less expensive.

[Leica Filmmatic]

That APO lens got me and the look and feel of the Q series.