Leica Q3 or Fujifilm GFX 100RF

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 hours ago, Smogg said:

It's funny, I have the opposite. Even though I don't like the Fuji colors (I have to mess around with it longer in post-processing), I really like the new camera based on the reviews. First of all, because of the compact lens and ergonomics. It all depends on the application. I rarely shoot with an aperture wider than f8 and slower than 1/125.

If you get it you might want to try Iridient Software in order to give you a DNG file of your RAF files especially if you ever use C1.

[Smogg]

2 hours ago, algrove said:

If you get it you might want to try Iridient Software in order to give you a DNG file of your RAF files especially if you ever use C1.

I used the C1 a long time ago and tried Iridient, but I ended up switching to Lightroom entirely for its cataloging capabilities and versatility. Also, the C1 doesn't support Hasselblad cameras, and I don't find it convenient to use multiple apps.

[Phatcat]

I don’t know, it might sound like a small thing but the ability to change different aspect ratios and focal length on the fly for framing sounds very intriguing and could be the reason that people want to try this camera, for me at least. 

[Smogg]

5 minutes ago, Phatcat said:

I don’t know, it might sound like a small thing but the ability to change different aspect ratios and focal length on the fly for framing sounds very intriguing and could be the reason that people want to try this camera, for me at least. 

As a prime lens shooter I really like the ability to crop on the fly. I think all cameras should have the ability to crop to smaller formats. MF->FF->APS-C->M4/3. This somewhat replaces a bulky zoom lens. 
Leica offers a similar solution in some of its cameras, but it is only a partial solution (there is no darkening of the outer frames or full-screen zoom).

[Besprosvet]

17 hours ago, Dazzajl said:

They might be regarded as such in marketing material and via web content but that’s not my experience in the real world. I don’t know any commercial snappers that use Hasselblad and that’s for a variety of reasons. It’s not a fully rounded and mature system, like you get from Canon, Nikon, Sony or Fuji. It’s a bespoke, niche, designer and boutique system. Which is very wonderful and offers something different to the main crowd. In much the way that Leica does too. 
 

I should be very clear that because the GFX kit is much better for my needs, that does not mean I consider it the best system there is. It’s a truly fabulous work tool and I appreciate it hugely. I never reach for it when I’m not at work though. My current love is a M246 which couldn’t be further from a fully rounded and capable camera. 

M246 is the most underrated digital M ever

[Phatcat]

56 minutes ago, Smogg said:

As a prime lens shooter I really like the ability to crop on the fly. I think all cameras should have the ability to crop to smaller formats. MF->FF->APS-C->M4/3. This somewhat replaces a bulky zoom lens. 
Leica offers a similar solution in some of its cameras, but it is only a partial solution (there is no darkening of the outer frames or full-screen zoom).

Not just crop, but aspect ratios, this will enable some creativity when framing. The biggest difference is having dedicated dials and knobs on the camera.

On current GFX cameras you can change but it’s in the menu, so I think people don’t go through the hassle. But having physical buttons you can adjust on the fly couple with software assistance, will encourage people to experiment. 

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 minutes ago, Besprosvet said:

M246 is the most underrated digital M ever

Leica M is a completely different level in terms of price, quality and ease of use. It is not worth comparing it with the GFX100RF. Humanity has not invented anything better than Leica M and probably will not.

[Smogg]

3 minutes ago, Phatcat said:

Not just crop, but aspect ratios, this will enable some creativity when framing. The biggest difference is having dedicated dials and knobs on the camera.

On current GFX cameras you can change but it’s in the menu, so I think people don’t go through the hassle. But having physical buttons you can adjust on the fly couple with software assistance, will encourage people to experiment. 

I am not a fan of multiple aspect ratios. 3:2, 4:3 are enough for me. Either you need to do the whole project in a single aspect ratio, or you will be tormented by choosing pairs for the book.

[Besprosvet]

17 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Leica M is a completely different level in terms of price, quality and ease of use. It is not worth comparing it with the GFX100RF. Humanity has not invented anything better than Leica M and probably will not.

Let's say that -hypothetically- the lens on this Fuji has a better tonal richness/color separation than the lens on the Q (which is what matters the most to me), the only thing that would throw me off from buying that is the way it's tailored to work with the AF.

The M is amazing because it's the only camera that makes me nail shots at f2 in dim light of my kid playing around and running. The M is ergonomically studied to be manual focus, and so, lets me "predict" the future: where and when the photo is going to happen.

This Fuji, like all the AF based cameras, has an horrible manual focus experience, so I know I'll nail less shots compared to the ones I do nail now. Little exception for Leica Q, which tries well enough in implementing MF as a decent emergency shooting style when you want to think "M" but you have the Q with you.

Also, my vintage 'crons have plenty of the so called "micro contrast" (more than most modern lenses), not easy to convince me to give away that experience in favor of something else.

About color science, Leica is very "opinionated" about it. I like them, I learned how to squeeze the juice out of their interpretation, enough for me. All in all it's my favorite color science for my personal stuff.

Edited March 23 by Besprosvet

[Smogg]

29 minutes ago, Besprosvet said:

Let's say that -hypothetically- the lens on this Fuji has a better tonal richness/color separation than the lens on the Q (which is what matters the most to me), the only thing that would throw me off from buying that is the way it's tailored to work with the AF.

The M is amazing because it's the only camera that makes me nail shots at f2 in dim light of my kid playing around and running. The M is ergonomically studied to be manual focus, and so, lets me "predict" the future: where and when the photo is going to happen.

This Fuji, like all the AF based cameras, has an horrible manual focus experience, so I know I'll nail less shots compared to the ones I do nail now. Little exception for Leica Q, which tries well enough in implementing MF as a decent emergency shooting style when you want to think "M" but you have the Q with you.

Also, my vintage 'crons have plenty of the so called "micro contrast" (more than most modern lenses), not easy to convince me to give away that experience in favor of something else.

About color science, Leica is very "opinionated" about it. I like them, I learned how to squeeze the juice out of their interpretation, enough for me. All in all it's my favorite color science for my personal stuff.

M is a versatile camera and a very compact camera, with which I can shoot everything I need and with excellent quality. It will always be in first place for me.
I have a Q3/43 and had a Q3 28. I have no complaints about the Q28/43 in terms of picture quality, the lenses are excellent, the pictures are excellent. However, I categorically do not like the quality of the EVF and LCD in the Q series and the recognition of people. I also do not like the manual focusing in the Q, I prefer the sliding ring like the X2D. The zone focus in the Q is also inconvenient because the distance scale is too narrow.

The GFX100RF, judging by the reviews, has high-quality EVF and LCD and controls that are convenient for me (S / C / M switch, digital zoom switch). F4 does not bother me, since any f5.6+ lens suits me. I consider it exclusively as a documentary and travel camera for situations when taking the M11 with me is undesirable for safety reasons.

Edited March 23 by Smogg

[Chris W]

10 hours ago, Dazzajl said:

Poor might not be the most accurate choice of words, in the wider sense. The way Leica colours are engineered into the camera makes processing files to represent true to life colour more difficult. Because you can’t make global adjustments to colour temp, tint and hues. 
 

But on the flip side, if you’re not working commercially in colour critical environments, you get a camera that offers a gorgeous, artistic interpretation of the world that hopefully inspires great images. 

Again, I find this bizarre. Of course you can adjust the colour temperature and hue.

Again, there is a very respected photojournalist who shoots Leica, mostly M11P and some SL3 and his images are stunning, beautiful colours. He would definitely use a different system if it was a hassle, or he couldn't achieve his own style with a Leica.

[Chris W]

1 hour ago, Smogg said:

I consider it exclusively as a documentary and travel camera for situations when taking the M11 with me is undesirable for safety reasons.

I've never met a mugger who'd ever heard of Leica. You think a blingy, medium format camera is less desirable to robbers?

[Smogg]

3 minutes ago, Chris W said:

I've never met a mugger who'd ever heard of Leica. You think a blingy, medium format camera is less desirable to robbers?

I think they know as much about cameras as we do. Also, whole bags are often stolen. Losing a 5k camera is not as bad as losing an M11-P with an APO lens.

[Chris W]

I travel a lot. Robbers want mainstream items they can sell on very quickly - Rolex, iPhone, Laptop etc.

You can sell a Nikon, Canon, Sony in a bar very quickly. You don't want buyers to ask "what is a leica?"

[Smogg]

5 minutes ago, Chris W said:

I travel a lot. Robbers want mainstream items they can sell on very quickly - Rolex, iPhone, Laptop etc.

You can sell a Nikon, Canon, Sony in a bar very quickly. You don't want buyers to ask "what is a leica?"

It seems to me that robbers want everything you have with you and I doubt that they will disdain a Leica camera, just because it may be unfamiliar to them.😅

[Smogg]

Once, when I was taking pictures at one of the eastern markets, I was surrounded by security and taken to their boss. So then I was lucky that I had an M10 in my hands, and when he saw it, he exclaimed: Oh, Leica! He quickly looked through the shots I had taken and told the security guards not to touch me anymore. So sometimes even people who are far from photography know our cameras😀

[Chris W]

7 minutes ago, Smogg said:

It seems to me that robbers want everything you have with you 

Right, so a medium format Fuji camera is no less dangerous to carry around than a Leica.

Ugh, this is exhausting.

[Besprosvet]

13 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I think they know as much about cameras as we do. Also, whole bags are often stolen. Losing a 5k camera is not as bad as losing an M11-P with an APO lens.

But, I don't know if the lens on this Fuji is going to be on par with Leica APO ones, and it's still over 5k anyway, not cheap at all. If that's the case, to me it'd feel awkward roaming around with a 100mpx medium format that gives me worse result when compared to my full frame gear...

I don't mind f4 and lack of IBIS, I want to see a side by side comparison with a Q 28: mid and close distance portraits in different lighting conditions, with the Fuji at f4 and the Q at f3.something. And then I may decide if this Fuji can go in some future wish list for the next years.

[Smogg]

1 minute ago, Chris W said:

Right, so a medium format Fuji camera is no less dangerous to carry around than a Leica.

Ugh, this is exhausting.

It won't be such a pity to give it away😃

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Smogg]

5 minutes ago, Besprosvet said:

But, I don't know if the lens on this Fuji is going to be on par with Leica APO ones, and it's still over 5k anyway, not cheap at all. If that's the case, to me it'd feel awkward roaming around with a 100mpx medium format that gives me worse result when compared to my full frame gear...

I don't mind f4 and lack of IBIS, I want to see a side by side comparison with a Q 28: mid and close distance portraits in different lighting conditions, with the Fuji at f4 and the Q at f3.something. And then I may decide if this Fuji can go in some future wish list for the next years.

I hope that Fuji will have "enough" quality for my purposes. I am not chasing medium format. I see it as a FF camera with a focal length of 35mm, with which I will occasionally shoot frames a little wider (28mm) or a little narrower (50mm) with acceptable quality at f8-f16. I clearly understand that this is a narrow application, but this is exactly what I need.