Clandrel Posted January 22 Share #1 Posted January 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I just can’t decide between a Q3 43 or go for the SL system. I have noe problem with size/weight, so it is all about what is the most satisfying system. I thought a Q3 with its limitations would be perfect, but suddenly I thought that all the possibilities with a SL3 would be the better option. This will be my only camera. So, a SL3 with a SL 35mm Summicron to start with ( or do I have to go APO?) or a Q3 43? I shoot family, street and architecture (with people in them). I LOVE the build quality of the SL3 and will probably build a small collections of lenses (35/50/75 most likely). I LOVE the possibilities a system gives you, but afraid it will turn into a lens-wanting-bonanza, where you always look for the best lens. Also, I believe the SL3 may be more future proof than the Q3? But… I LOVE the restrictions a fixed lense gives you (Q3 43). What would you do, and if you choose SL3, which lens would you start with? Thoughts? Claus 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22 Posted January 22 Hi Clandrel, Take a look here Can’t decide: Q3 43 or SL3. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Deeetona Posted January 22 Share #2 Posted January 22 What do you mean by "future proof"? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olaf_ZG Posted January 22 Share #3 Posted January 22 Buy both. Problem solved. 2 1 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted January 22 Share #4 Posted January 22 You should start by reviewing what lenses you currently use and what your EXIF data is telling you. What type of photography do you do? Do you shoot RAW or JPG? 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted January 22 Author Share #5 Posted January 22 7 minutes ago, Le Chef said: You should start by reviewing what lenses you currently use and what your EXIF data is telling you. What type of photography do you do? Do you shoot RAW or JPG? Well, it has been 10 years since I gave up this hobby, and now starting again. Only used M-glass, and mostly in the 28-50 range. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted January 22 Share #6 Posted January 22 Have you handled both cameras? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted January 22 Author Share #7 Posted January 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, I have. As I mentioned I love them both, for different reasons. I would love to hear if any other has been in the same situation, and what made them chose one over the other. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BradS Posted January 22 Share #8 Posted January 22 (edited) If money, size, and weight are not considerations, then the choice seems totally obvious...get the SL3 or SL3-S. Edit to add: bonus, with the appropriate adapter, you can use your M-mount lenses on the SL3 / SL3-S! Edited January 22 by BradS Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quiet.seattle Posted January 23 Share #9 Posted January 23 (edited) I sold my Q2 and Sl2-s (not the SL3, as you allude to, of course) and two Panasonic lenses (35mm & 50mm) to finance the Q3 43. To be honest, I miss both cameras. The Q3 43 is great but there is something about handling the SL and changing lenses that feels more comforting to me. I know, it's just a feeling, but somehow the other two cameras gave me more pleasure than the Q3 43--a camera I have no real complaints about: it is as advertised. If I had to do it again, I think I would keep the Q2 and SL2-s. The 60 megapixels is nice on the Q3 43 but the images I achieved with the Q2's 47 and the SL2-s' 24 were absolutely satisfying. Edited January 23 by quiet.seattle Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted January 23 Share #10 Posted January 23 SL3 will be more versatile, couple it with a 23mm tl lens for a more compact street camera with af or a small 28 or 35 M lens for manual focus. The Q3, while great is not a system camera like the SL line. Alternatively, buy both, used SL2 and Q2 are selling for good prices, they're not far behind in image quality or features. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genoweffa Posted January 23 Share #11 Posted January 23 7 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said: Buy both. Problem solved. Like I did....(waiting for their arrival) signed: guy with rich grandma that passed away 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeetona Posted January 23 Share #12 Posted January 23 Qs are beauties. SLs are on par with all the Japanese tools. Buy both, and sell the one you dont click with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ning Ning Posted January 23 Share #13 Posted January 23 vor 8 Stunden schrieb Olaf_ZG: Buy both. Problem solved. That's how I did it too. I work with the SL3 and the SL 24-90 80% of the time. For light luggage I have the Q3 43 and my old Q2. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coleica Posted January 23 Share #14 Posted January 23 Not the M11? Little bit of best of both worlds. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoolyproductions Posted January 23 Share #15 Posted January 23 If you are really sure that size and weight are not an issue for you: in my personal view the SL3 (and 2) is the more 'satisfying' system. I have both. I really like the Q3 43, the size and weight is fantastic and the output is on par with the SL cameras in nearly all situations. I have not used it much though, reserving it for situations where I really have to travel light (or I don't expect any good photo opportunities). For everything else I prefer SL for: overall ergonomics and haptics significantly better (IMO) and properly shielded EVF. When I bring the camera to my eye my mind is fully absorbed in the scene. Less EVF lag in extremely low light Better IBIS Proper back button focus Better customisability of the EVF elements (histogram, level etc) More configurable buttons Option to use other focal lengths I could probably go on and on but those are the main ones. The SL cameras just 'sing' in my hands. I look forward to using my Q3 43 more at some pont, but for now I am only able to pick up the SL3. For casual stuff I usually just take my 50mm SL APO, but this is just because it is my favourite focal length. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTLeica Posted January 23 Share #16 Posted January 23 10 hours ago, Clandrel said: Well, it has been 10 years since I gave up this hobby, and now starting again. Only used M-glass, and mostly in the 28-50 range. Good to see you picking it up again. I do have both cameras, if it were my only camera I would pick the SL, purely as I couldnt do all I wanted to with a 43mm lens. But, I also wouldnt be only having the 35mm non APO summicron, the SL really shines with the APO lenses, when you have used them it's hard to use anything else. Possibly go for a 24-70 instead and feel yourself into the system, APO lenses can be found cheap used too if you are careful where you look. Or buy a Q3 43 and in time add the 28 or whatever the Q4 will become Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smogg Posted January 23 Share #17 Posted January 23 10 hours ago, Clandrel said: Well, it has been 10 years since I gave up this hobby, and now starting again. Only used M-glass, and mostly in the 28-50 range. The SL3 is only worth getting if you shoot mostly wide open, otherwise focusing will be very slow on M lenses. You will need to first open the aperture, check for sharpness, then close it to the desired value. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhotoCruiser Posted January 23 Share #18 Posted January 23 I come from a life long hobby photographer and my last setup was a Nikon D800 with 4 prime lenses, strobes, etc,etc and i shot awesome photos with it. However over the time travelling with a big photo trolley became more and more a PITA and i photographed less as i hated to haul around all this gear. 2019 i bought a Q and shortly after available here a Q2 and it changed my way of photographing in many ways, due its size making it possible to use the Q series as everyday and always with me camera due the fantastic sharp 28mm lens due the immensely lowered weight and size of my luggage when travelling However, there are some things some like like me but others, not used to shoot a fixed focal length lens for example and hating cropping the 28mm photos to "zoom" later. I have to admit that i consider to get a SL2 or SL3 as addition to my Q2 as i often did wildlife macro what is not possible with the Q and sometimes i wish 14mm WA for even wider landscape i do a lot. So if i pull the trigger to get the SL2/SL3 i will add the Sigma 105mm Macro ART and a +/- 14mm wide angle and keep the Q for everyday and 28-70mm camera. vor 11 Stunden schrieb Clandrel: but afraid it will turn into a lens-wanting-bonanza, where you always look for the best lens Yes it will, and it will become very expensive I suggest you to rent a Q2/Q3 for a weekend and go out to do a extensive field test to see if you like her, or not. You know the advantage of a system camera so i think you could skip renting the SL3, but you should do with the Q3 as the fixed lens will change the way you photograph. Chris Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted January 23 Share #19 Posted January 23 12 hours ago, Clandrel said: Hi, I just can’t decide between a Q3 43 or go for the SL system. I have noe problem with size/weight, so it is all about what is the most satisfying system. I thought a Q3 with its limitations would be perfect, but suddenly I thought that all the possibilities with a SL3 would be the better option. This will be my only camera. So, a SL3 with a SL 35mm Summicron to start with ( or do I have to go APO?) or a Q3 43? I shoot family, street and architecture (with people in them). I LOVE the build quality of the SL3 and will probably build a small collections of lenses (35/50/75 most likely). I LOVE the possibilities a system gives you, but afraid it will turn into a lens-wanting-bonanza, where you always look for the best lens. Also, I believe the SL3 may be more future proof than the Q3? But… I LOVE the restrictions a fixed lense gives you (Q3 43). What would you do, and if you choose SL3, which lens would you start with? Thoughts? Claus Why don't you just buy the Q343 and use it for a year or so. Leica's Q line is always in demand so you should also be able to resell it, in case it does not work out. You seem to look for some help to control going too deep into gearaholics. Any Q can do that, as long as you don't buy another camera, of course Renting a Q for a weekend will not work in your case, I think. You have to put skin in the game 😎. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgh Posted January 23 Share #20 Posted January 23 (edited) Neither is more future proof. If you want something closer to a future proof Leica you need to look further to the past, like the M6. If you can’t decide, get neither. No need to half heartedly spend thousands and thousands of dollars. If you’re just getting back into this after years but you’re sure you want to get back into it, do it with some sanity and try a used Fuji X pro for a fixed lens experience, or try a used ILC from Sony/nikon/canon for something pretty close to an SL experience with image quality that still exceeds probably 95% of users needs and significantly less cost. If it sticks, then maybe it’s worth looking at Leica’s offerings - but also maybe not, because really they are only better in just a few niche things that don’t matter to most photographers, and they are equal or even a bit worse in most other ways. Especially a photographer not so stressed about size/weight. For what it’s worth, I do not much find the SL system satisfying. It’s just more practical. The Q system isn’t much different. If you’re drawn in a sort of aesthetic way to the minimalist restrictions of one focal length, it’s a nice solution. But it’s still just a digital autofocus camera. It’s still so easy that satisfying isn’t really something I’d ever use to describe it. For satisfaction one needs to put some consistent effort in, really. The only Leica I would say is more satisfying to use than other well made digital cameras are the M cameras, and generally they are still less satisfying than film - but better image quality. I understand the appeal of the Q, and the SL if you find it necessary (for no good reason, really) to keep everything the same brand - but most everything Leica does with the exception of the M series, and to some extent the Q, is bested in value by a long shot by the Japanese makers, or in the other direction, even Hasselblad (though the value beating isn’t as significant, it still exists here). If you have money to just burn, do whatever you want. But maybe look at local non-profits first. Edited January 23 by pgh Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.