Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So the card door now wraps around the tripod screw slot.  It means that all the Q2 cases with a card door are obsolete, and any Arca plate you screw in will obstruct the card door.  All for that handgrip that 0.1% of Q owners will ever get.  WTF?!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

x
41 minutes ago, setuporg said:

So the card door now wraps around the tripod screw slot.  It means that all the Q2 cases with a card door are obsolete, and any Arca plate you screw in will obstruct the card door.  All for that handgrip that 0.1% of Q owners will ever get.  WTF?!

Q3 28/43 are point and shoot cameras, they are not intended to be mounted on a tripod.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Q3 28/43 are point and shoot cameras, they are not intended to be mounted on a tripod.

Agreed, but the design should not break functionality and the Qx/28 could be used for landscapes. I have a grip on it which has an arca plate but rarely take the SD card out ... I let the images fester in the camera for some time before viewing them and looking freshly at them. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Q3 43 is NOT a point and shoot camera  , no more so than any other. It can be used as a point and shot it is also a first rate fully manual camera , Sorry but I get irritated by such simple descriptions as “oh it’s just a point and shoot” (rant over)

  • Like 6
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No doubt compatibility with previous accessories is important for many owners of Q/Q2.

Thankfully I was starting from scratch with the Q3 43 and couldn't be more delighted with the LIM case I bought for it which gives full access to the card slot and battery, an excellent buit-in grip and  Arca Swiss plate when I need/want it.

As for whether the Q3/43 cameras are point and shoot, well thankfully that is up to me.

 

Edited by keithlaban.co.uk
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Leslie22 said:

The Q3 43 is NOT a point and shoot camera  , no more so than any other. It can be used as a point and shot it is also a first rate fully manual camera , Sorry but I get irritated by such simple descriptions as “oh it’s just a point and shoot” (rant over)

Is point and shoot a negative characteristic? I meant that it is a very simplified version of the professional SL with controls and interface closer to amateur level than professional. The lens and sensor in it are actually great.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You know when a thread is doomed when comparisons between amateur vs professional cameras are introduced.

Thankfully cameras are not professionals but photographers can be.

One of my all time favourite fashion photographers uses Micro Four Thirds cameras: happily he is a consummate professional.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Is point and shoot a negative characteristic?

Not in itself, no, but I can’t escape the view that it is often used (in this forum and elsewhere) as a rather pejorative label. The inference is that it’s not a camera for ‘serious’ photography (it seems that only applies when the camera in question is not capable of being a ‘point and shoot’ device. Indeed, some people make that very point quite explicitly). Like Leslie22, I find it irritating as it smacks of snobbery. It’s a fully functional camera that can be used in completely automatic or completely manual modes of operation. There’s no reason I can see for the need to refer to it as anything but a camera (i.e., the ‘p & s’ prefix is wholly unnecessary).

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Barralad said:

Not in itself, no, but I can’t escape the view that it is often used (in this forum and elsewhere) as a rather pejorative label. The inference is that it’s not a camera for ‘serious’ photography (it seems that only applies when the camera in question is not capable of being a ‘point and shoot’ device. Indeed, some people make that very point quite explicitly). Like Leslie22, I find it irritating as it smacks of snobbery. It’s a fully functional camera that can be used in completely automatic or completely manual modes of operation. There’s no reason I can see for the need to refer to it as anything but a camera (i.e., the ‘p & s’ prefix is wholly unnecessary).

Ok, if you don't like the term P&S, you can probably come up with another one. I meant "simplification" like Adobe Express. This does not mean that you can't take great photos with this camera. But you can't close your eyes to the fact that the menu in the Q3 is simpler than in the SL3, there are fewer settings, there is no joystick, no BBF, the screen is simpler, the EVF is simpler, and so on and so forth. This is exactly what is called a Lite version or P&S when it comes to cameras.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, keithlaban.co.uk said:

You know when a thread is doomed when comparisons between amateur vs professional cameras are introduced.

Thankfully cameras are not professionals but photographers can be.

One of my all time favourite fashion photographers uses Micro Four Thirds cameras: happily he is a consummate professional.

All of my cameras are very unprofessional.

One of them allows me to shoot with the lens cap on.

  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Barralad said:

Not in itself, no, but I can’t escape the view that it is often used (in this forum and elsewhere) as a rather pejorative label. The inference is that it’s not a camera for ‘serious’ photography (it seems that only applies when the camera in question is not capable of being a ‘point and shoot’ device. Indeed, some people make that very point quite explicitly). Like Leslie22, I find it irritating as it smacks of snobbery. It’s a fully functional camera that can be used in completely automatic or completely manual modes of operation. There’s no reason I can see for the need to refer to it as anything but a camera (i.e., the ‘p & s’ prefix is wholly unnecessary).

Well, it was the reason that I never bought one - far too expensive for a camera that only improved on other high-end point and shoot cameras by offering a digital zoom instead of a physical one. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Well, it was the reason that I never bought one - far too expensive for a camera that only improved on other high-end point and shoot cameras by offering a digital zoom instead of a physical one. 

Digital zoom of a couple of steps (28-35-50, 43-50-70) is a great thing, but the implementation in the Q3 is lame.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Smogg said:

Digital zoom of a couple of steps (28-35-50, 43-50-70) is a great thing, but the implementation in the Q3 is lame.

Maybe I should have said cropping zoom 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...