Cant decide: Q3 43 or SL3

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, CptSlevin said:

Any proofs?

not subjective experience please?

I’ve never seen published tests of EVFs. Looking through them is the only option IMO. 

Often the specs don’t tell the story because of lag, optics in front of the screen, blackout time, brightness, etc. 

[Smogg]

3 hours ago, CptSlevin said:

Any proofs?

not subjective experience please?

I have nothing to back up my opinion other than my personal experience. The scene is visually very different when viewed through these EVFs. Shadows are much more visible on the SL3, while on the Q3 28/43 the image is much more contrasty and the shadows simply fall into blackness. 

[CptSlevin]

5 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I have nothing to back up my opinion other than my personal experience. The scene is visually very different when viewed through these EVFs. Shadows are much more visible on the SL3, while on the Q3 28/43 the image is much more contrasty and the shadows simply fall into blackness. 

SL2S has the same EVF as SL3, specwise

Have both Q3 and SL2S, looks identical to me in terms of resolution

 

[Smogg]

2 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

SL2S has the same EVF as SL3, specwise

Have both Q3 and SL2S, looks identical to me in terms of resolution

 

Their resolution is indeed the same, I don't argue with that. But the capabilities for depicting a contrasting scene are very different.

[CptSlevin]

Just now, Smogg said:

Their resolution is indeed the same, I don't argue with that. But the capabilities for depicting a contrasting scene are very different.

You do realize that it’s highly subjective issues which might be connected with the viewing abilities and eyes peculiarities of different people?

 

[Smogg]

6 minutes ago, CptSlevin said:

You do realize that it’s highly subjective issues which might be connected with the viewing abilities and eyes peculiarities of different people?

 

I do not exclude this, I just shared my own experience of using SL3 and Q3 43. The image on SL3 is much closer to natural for me in contrasting lighting (any sunny day).

[Ralf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 23 Stunden schrieb Elliot Harper:

That’s why I love the is forum.

When you ask to choose one from two camera bodies, you end up with 3 cameras and 4 lenses

🤑

😆

[hdmesa]

11 hours ago, Smogg said:

I do not exclude this, I just shared my own experience of using SL3 and Q3 43. The image on SL3 is much closer to natural for me in contrasting lighting (any sunny day).

Might not be the case for you, but I've noticed that having iDR set to high will make the image in the EVF look much more natural. Film simulation in use makes a difference, too.

[Smogg]

17 minutes ago, hdmesa said:

Might not be the case for you, but I've noticed that having iDR set to high will make the image in the EVF look much more natural. Film simulation in use makes a difference, too.

I use Natutal film simulation, and additionally change the iDR strength depending on the lighting. iDR helps to see shadows, but unfortunately makes the image more like HDR than natural. At the same time, on SL3 auto iDR works much better

[SrMi]

20 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I use Natutal film simulation, and additionally change the iDR strength depending on the lighting. iDR helps to see shadows, but unfortunately makes the image more like HDR than natural. At the same time, on SL3 auto iDR works much better

Yes, iDR lifts the shadows and reduces the issue of an EVF's limited contrast. It does not affect the raw file.

[Smogg]

10 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Yes, iDR lifts the shadows and reduces the issue of an EVF's limited contrast. It does not affect the raw file.

iDR helps a lot. I just wanted to say that on SL3 with or without iDR the picture looks much more natural than on Q3. Hence my conclusion that the EVF quality (dynamic range) of the SL3 is initially significantly higher than that of the Q3, despite the same resolution.

[SrMi]

36 minutes ago, Smogg said:

iDR helps a lot. I just wanted to say that on SL3 with or without iDR the picture looks much more natural than on Q3. Hence my conclusion that the EVF quality (dynamic range) of the SL3 is initially significantly higher than that of the Q3, despite the same resolution.

Yes, it helps a lot. I was encouraged to use iDR after reading one of Sean Reid's articles. Now I use it on all my Leica cameras. It affects the histogram's shadow part, but I do not care. Most importantly, it does not affect the clipping information.

[Dazzajl]

Lots of interesting thoughts here, ultimately a choice between two fabulous options and whichever way you go, I’ll bet there will be days you’ll wonder if you should have gone the other. 
 

Both cameras have so much to offer you that I can’t imagine any photographer being unhappy either way. Maaaaaaybe the 43mm might feel a little cramped occasionally but that could inspire you create wonders. 

[Dr. G]

FWIW I just photographed a culinary event run by Eric Ripert in Grand Cayman to help out my friends who were down there as sponsors.  I took my Q3 43, (2) SL3 bodies, 21 APO SL, 75 APO SL and Sigma 50 1.2.  I would have taken the 50 Lux, but I needed something with a better minimum focus distance and I wasn't sure how the Q3 would be, comparatively speaking. 

Using the SL3 was a very different (better) experience than the Q3 43 (which I love) and I only came home with a handful of images from the Q.  When weight and size is a concern the Q3 43 is fantastic, but when I had both by my side I consistently grabbed the SL3, even when the Sigma 50 1.2 was being shot stopped down.  

Edited January 27 by Dr. G

[hoppyman]

On 1/23/2025 at 7:45 AM, Clandrel said:

 

Hi,

I just can’t decide between a Q3 43 or go for the SL system.

I have no 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 lens gives you (Q3 43).

What would you do, and if you choose SL3, which lens would you start with?

Thoughts?

Claus

Hi Claus. I am fortunate to have both after I couldn't resist the opportunity at a visit to the Leica camera store in Australia. I traded in my SL2 and Q3 (28). I think your choice will be entirely dependent on your preferences and priorities. I use the SL system for studio and the Q3 for personal and travel.
I think that the APO 35 SL Summicron ASPH is unbeatable as a first choice. I use the 50 just as much. Whether or not you NEED the APO versions is again up to you (and your budget).
On system build quality and design, the SL system (I used SL, SL2, M's and the S system extensively too). The SL system is the only Leica system that has never had a single fault develop.

The SL3 and Q3 are priced identically here. Obviously 1-2-3 SL lenses add significant cost.

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 1/24/2025 at 3:29 AM, Smogg said:

Resolution is just one of the characteristics of the EVF. The SL3's EVF has a significantly better dynamic range than the Q3, which is very noticeable in high-contrast scenes. I would even say that the EVF of the SL3 is one of the best on the market

This is far more likely a difference between the optics in front of the EF rather than the unit itself. The SL cameras have always had excellent optics used for the eyepieces. The quality of the glass and coatings affects contrast.

I agree that the EVF experience is better on the SL3. There’s simply more room to work with.

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 1/23/2025 at 8:45 AM, 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

If this is the criteria then the SL3 with a SIgma DGDN prime is the obvious choice. Faster AF than the APO’s or Q and a joystick for subject selection. The SIgmas are better lenses than the non-APO’s for photography. Also aperture on the lens where it should be.

If there are issues with being noticed then the Q3-43.

Gordon

[georgecp]

A simple answer: Get Both! the serve very different purposes and are complementary!

Edited January 30 by georgecp

[Aldophoto]

On 1/22/2025 at 10:45 PM, Clandrel said:

...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…

Hi, I can give you my 2 cents of personal thoughts

I own an M10-P with a Summilux 35mm Aspherical (75% of my shoots) and a SL2-S with an APO-Summicron-SL 90mm ASPH (24%) and a Sigma 24mm DG DN f/1.4 (1%)

If I would have to make a choice now I will go for a SL3-S (no need for bigger files: I printed 70x100 cm the M10-P ones) and an APO-Summicron-SL 28mm ASPH
waiting to add the APO-Summicron-SL 90mm later on.

I also tried the Q3 (not the 43) but I still prefer my M10-P

Aldo

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[HPFM]

Am 22.1.2025 um 22:45 schrieb Clandrel:

 

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

family, street and architecture will need different focal lengths.... so I would go with the SL3 and a 24-90 or 24-70. The 24-90 for me is comparable to fixed focal lengths. For the SL-System I only use zoom lenses ( except for the 500/5.6 Sigma for wildlife...)