Leica Q3 or Fujifilm GFX 100RF

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My camera arrived today. First impression: very light, but not very small. Something in between the Q3 and X2D in terms of feel. At the same time, the Fuji feels more compact than the A7RV with 40 2.5. The single-point focus is quite fast, but loses out to the Q3 in tenacity in low light significantly (which is not surprising due to the difference in maximum aperture). The build quality is very high, but it is not yet a Leica and certainly not a Hasselblad. It reminds me of the first Lexus cars, but there is still a lot of Toyota. You could say that the GFX100RF is modestly knocking on the lobby of the VIP box, where Leica and Hasselblad have long been comfortably located. The digital zoom is implemented fantastically conveniently!

[Advertisement]

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

[Dazzajl]

58 minutes ago, Smogg said:

My camera arrived today. First impression: very light, but not very small. Something in between the Q3 and X2D in terms of feel. At the same time, the Fuji feels more compact than the A7RV with 40 2.5. The single-point focus is quite fast, but loses out to the Q3 in tenacity in low light significantly (which is not surprising due to the difference in maximum aperture). The build quality is very high, but it is not yet a Leica and certainly not a Hasselblad. It reminds me of the first Lexus cars, but there is still a lot of Toyota. You could say that the GFX100RF is modestly knocking on the lobby of the VIP box, where Leica and Hasselblad have long been comfortably located. The digital zoom is implemented fantastically conveniently!

Will be very interesting to see what you think over the next few days/weeks. Many reviews out there but yours is the first opinion I’ve seen from someone who’s bought one with their own hard earned money. 

[Smogg]

1 hour ago, Dazzajl said:

Will be very interesting to see what you think over the next few days/weeks. Many reviews out there but yours is the first opinion I’ve seen from someone who’s bought one with their own hard earned money. 

One thing I can say with confidence already: X2D and M11 are head and shoulders above GFX100RF ergonomically. With Q3 28/43 the situation is not so clear for me yet.

[Dazzajl]

42 minutes ago, Smogg said:

One thing I can say with confidence already: X2D and M11 are head and shoulders above GFX100RF ergonomically. With Q3 28/43 the situation is not so clear for me yet.

This doesn’t surprise at all. Except the part about the Q cameras, which potentially speaks well for the RF. 

What I’ll be most interested to hear, is if you enjoy shooting with the Fuji? The GFX cameras have always been impressive in what they can achieve but, to me at least, never inspiring or much fun to shoot. 

[hexx]

On 4/12/2025 at 2:14 AM, setuporg said:

I’ve found Q343 to be a great focal length.  As much as I’ve enjoyed the original X100 and the Q2, there’s no going back to iPhonesque 28mm.

That’s something I’m pondering… should I try Q3 43? I have Q3 and before had M240 with 28 Summicron and 50 1.5 Nokton but also enjoyed shooting with good old Sigma DP2 Merrill (around 45mm) and really like photos from it - it’s the only Merrill I decided to keep. M240 and 28/2 were replaced by Q3.

[hexx]

15 hours ago, Smogg said:

My camera arrived today. First impression: very light, but not very small. Something in between the Q3 and X2D in terms of feel. At the same time, the Fuji feels more compact than the A7RV with 40 2.5. The single-point focus is quite fast, but loses out to the Q3 in tenacity in low light significantly (which is not surprising due to the difference in maximum aperture). The build quality is very high, but it is not yet a Leica and certainly not a Hasselblad. It reminds me of the first Lexus cars, but there is still a lot of Toyota. You could say that the GFX100RF is modestly knocking on the lobby of the VIP box, where Leica and Hasselblad have long been comfortably located. The digital zoom is implemented fantastically conveniently!

How is the manual focus implemented? Really hated the one on the original X100 - haven’t tried models that followed it.

[Smogg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

50 minutes ago, hexx said:

How is the manual focus implemented? Really hated the one on the original X100 - haven’t tried models that followed it.

I didn't have the first X100, but I did have the last three models. Same thing with this camera. What exactly didn't you like? The ring has pretty good resistance on this model.

[hexx]

6 minutes ago, Smogg said:

I didn't have the first X100, but I did have the last three models. Same thing with this camera. What exactly didn't you like? The ring has pretty good resistance on this model.

I think it just didn’t feel like a manual focus. No hard stops if memory serves me well and wasn’t as well implemented as on Q

[Smogg]

8 minutes ago, hexx said:

I think it just didn’t feel like a manual focus. No hard stops if memory serves me well and wasn’t as well implemented as on Q

There is no hardstop, indeed. However, I dislike the version implemented in the Q3 even more, since it is almost impossible to press the small button before turning the ring when wearing gloves. The best option, in my opinion, is what Hasselblad did in the lenses of the new series.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

1 hour ago, hexx said:

That’s something I’m pondering… should I try Q3 43? I have Q3 and before had M240 with 28 Summicron and 50 1.5 Nokton but also enjoyed shooting with good old Sigma DP2 Merrill (around 45mm) and really like photos from it - it’s the only Merrill I decided to keep. M240 and 28/2 were replaced by Q3.

I own and use five lenses with focal lengths between 40mm and 50mm. The most used is the Q3 43 which given my obvious preferences made the Q3 43 a no brain-er for this tog.

[hexx]

15 minutes ago, keithlaban.co.uk said:

I own and use five lenses with focal lengths between 40mm and 50mm. The most used is the Q3 43 which given my obvious preferences made the Q3 43 a no brain-er for this tog.

Thank you for response. I should really spend more time checking galleries shared here for both 28 a 43 Q3 and then visit Leica Mayfair. Bought my Q3 before Q3 43 was announced so there was no way to compare them.

[setuporg]

8 hours ago, hexx said:

How is the manual focus implemented? Really hated the one on the original X100 - haven’t tried models that followed it.

The original got a lot of flak and then everything was drastically improved and focus by wire became quite standard.  I had several X100_ successors as well as X-Pro1/2, but Leica obviated those.  Agree with @Smogg that XCD V lenses do it well, but Leica S takes the cake.

[JaeR]

On 4/13/2025 at 11:39 AM, Smogg said:

My camera arrived today. First impression: very light, but not very small. Something in between the Q3 and X2D in terms of feel. At the same time, the Fuji feels more compact than the A7RV with 40 2.5. The single-point focus is quite fast, but loses out to the Q3 in tenacity in low light significantly (which is not surprising due to the difference in maximum aperture). The build quality is very high, but it is not yet a Leica and certainly not a Hasselblad. It reminds me of the first Lexus cars, but there is still a lot of Toyota. You could say that the GFX100RF is modestly knocking on the lobby of the VIP box, where Leica and Hasselblad have long been comfortably located. The digital zoom is implemented fantastically conveniently!

How's the image quality on low light photos?

[Smogg]

7 minutes ago, JaeR said:

How's the image quality on low light photos?

The quality of the photos is no different from other GFX cameras. The lens is sharp, but there is nothing unique about it. But the ergonomics are significantly different due to the digital zoom. I don't like zoom lenses because of their size and have long been waiting for a relatively compact camera with a digital zoom in the medium format that covers the focal range of 28-50 with sufficient quality for me (I don't shoot at other focal lengths). 

[JaeR]

8 minutes ago, Smogg said:

The quality of the photos is no different from other GFX cameras. The lens is sharp, but there is nothing unique about it. But the ergonomics are significantly different due to the digital zoom. I don't like zoom lenses because of their size and have long been waiting for a relatively compact camera with a digital zoom in the medium format that covers the focal range of 28-50 with sufficient quality for me (I don't shoot at other focal lengths). 

I held off buying this camera because of the lack of Ibis and the aperture. I do appreciate the feedback, it puts things in perspective for me.

[Smogg]

1 hour ago, JaeR said:

I held off buying this camera because of the lack of Ibis and the aperture. I do appreciate the feedback, it puts things in perspective for me.

For what I shoot, it is very important to show the context without significant perspective distortions (close to how a person sees), while maintaining the effect of presence. That is why I almost never use open apertures. If I am forced to open the aperture to highlight the main subject, not finding a way to do it otherwise, I regard it as my creative failure. IBIS is also not very important to me, since I almost always use 1/125 or 1/250 speed. So for me, a slow lens and the lack of IBIS are not minuses.
Nevertheless, the GFX100RF certainly has its shortcomings. My, not yet complete, list of shortcomings looks like this:

1. Too soft to turn on, easy to turn on accidentally;

2. No highlights metering;

3. Unresponsive joystick with very sharp spikes (expect a callus on your finger and scratches or holes in your clothes);

4. When face detection is on, it is impossible to change the exposure metering mode (for some unknown reason, all Fuji have the same problem);

5. The camera does not remember the zoom after switching it on/off.

My list of shortcomings in the Q3 28/43 is much longer.

Edited April 15 by Smogg

[Phatcat]

45 minutes ago, Smogg said:

For what I shoot, it is very important to show the context without significant perspective distortions (close to how a person sees), while maintaining the effect of presence. That is why I almost never use open apertures. If I am forced to open the aperture to highlight the main subject, not finding a way to do it otherwise, I regard it as my creative failure. IBIS is also not very important to me, since I almost always use 1/125 or 1/250 speed. So for me, a slow lens and the lack of IBIS are not minuses.
Nevertheless, the GFX100RF certainly has its shortcomings. My, not yet complete, list of shortcomings looks like this:

1. Too soft to turn on, easy to turn on accidentally;

2. No highlights metering;

3. Unresponsive joystick with very sharp spikes (expect a callus on your finger and scratches or holes in your clothes);

4. When face detection is on, it is impossible to change the exposure metering mode (for some unknown reason, all Fuji have the same problem);

5. The camera does not remember the zoom after switching it on/off.

My list of shortcomings in the Q3 28/43 is much longer.

Thanks for the real world perspective, keep them coming.

[keithlaban.co.uk]

The main reasons I bought, use and love the Leica Q3 43 was the focal length, combined with stabilisation and the quality of the APO lens even at the maximum aperture of f/2.

I'd miss being able to create images such as these:-

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Edited April 15 by keithlaban.co.uk

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[setuporg]

The subject separation on Q343 at f/2 is amazing.  The videos come out truly cinematic.  That alone makes Q343 distinct from this comparison.  Q3 28 vs 100-faux-RF is more iffy.

Overall the Q line reinforces the idea that a camera is just a lens with some body attached.  Leica lenses are so much more important than the variation in the bodies.  The Q takes it to the extreme, literally being a big lens with a slim body hanging off of it.  All the other things matter much less.

[Smogg]

12 minutes ago, setuporg said:

The subject separation on Q343 at f/2 is amazing.  The videos come out truly cinematic.  That alone makes Q343 distinct from this comparison.  Q3 28 vs 100-faux-RF is more iffy.

Overall the Q line reinforces the idea that a camera is just a lens with some body attached.  Leica lenses are so much more important than the variation in the bodies.  The Q takes it to the extreme, literally being a big lens with a slim body hanging off of it.  All the other things matter much less.

It's really worth comparing with the Q3 28, not the Q3 43. The second cat didn't fit in the picture because of its too narrow focal length😜

Edited April 15 by Smogg