Those of you who own both an M and a Q and you’re only taking one out, what drives your choice?

[Derbyshire Man]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How do you decide which to pick up and when? How do you set up when you do? 

[Advertisement]

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

[JNK100]

On family day outs etc. and for when I think a WA lens is needed,I take my Q. 

I use my M with a 50mm 'Lux so lens so use this when on solo trips depending on the location. I only have the one M lens by choice.

I also take the M combo to places I have photographed with my Q to get a different shots due to the differing FOV. 

I never take both cameras anywhere.

[Mikep996]

I only use the Q3 nowadays.  I pretty much quit using my M digitals two years ago when I took my M10R BP and my Q2 to the Amalfi coast for 10 days, trading off shots equally between the cameras.  I ended up preferring the Q2 pics in general to the 10R pics, regardless of which lens was on the 10R with the Q2 pic cropped to equivalent size.  So a digital M is no longer part of my normal photog use.   Only M I use at all now is my 1984 M6 with Ilford FP4/HP5.

 

[wlaidlaw]

Unfortunately for me it is ever increasing arthritic tremor favours my use of the Q3 with its OIS against my M10-R. I borrowed an M11 from a friend to see if I wanted to upgrade (he is looking to swap for an M10-R and cash adjustment) but due to my tremor I was getting no benefit from the extra pixels. I had a deep think about this and was torn between pre-ordering the soon to be released Sony A7 update with effective IBIS but in the end I have gone for a Hasselblad X2D-100C, whose 5 axis IBIS is reputed to have been improved by the parent DJI's drone technology expertise, to be the best in the business. In my M10-R, if I want really sharp photos, now 1/125th is the slowest speed I can use, if I want to print to A2 at 360 dpi. On the Hasselblad, 1/30th is no problem at all and at a pinch if I brace on something, 1/15th is just fine as well. The Hasselblad gives me back the interchangeable lens facility that I don't have on the Q3 and I have been using my Leica MR-500mm Telyt-R lens with 2X APO extender and Novoflex HAX-LER adapter on the X2D, with only a very modest amount of cropping required (and obviously a very robust tripod, in my case a huge Manfrotto 76B made for large format). 

Like Mike above I still use my M4-P and M7 with film. 

Wilson

Edited May 17 by wlaidlaw

[Mikep996]

Interesting - I was eyeballing that Hassie recently...looked like a good "trade in my 10RBP/Leica lenses" for it option but couldn't bring myself to do it.  You've given me something to (re)think about!  Thanks!!! 

[Le Chef]

I don’t have an M yet…but I’ve used Ms a few times and have buying one on my list. I have a Q3 28 and a Q3 43, and a CL with various lenses. So why would I be interested in an M??? Surely I have all my bases covered in terms of focal lengths, weight and size etc. But the appeal of the M is not output per se, but the experience of shooting.

Back in the 80s and 90s I shot with an Olympus OM2 then Canon F1s. You had to think ahead and anticipate more. (The Wayne Gretzky quote comes to mind.) There was more satisfaction when you looked at the shot later on if you had got a good one, but equally “failure” taught you something about how to improve.

With an M I have to do more work. I have to think ahead to where I think the shot is going to unfold. That’s composing/framing, focusing, and also exposure setting. With the CL and Qs most of the attention is on composing/framing.

I think giving up that M experience would be hard to do. If it were me I would keep an M for those occasions when you want to challenge yourself in a different way.

[thierry40]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just got a m11 … I had planned selling my Q2 but kept it … I have a doubt I’ll use both on the future. Of course I’ll now put some time with the M but maybe when the weather is threatening the the Q2 will come out again who knows ?
tough one but good one !  

[Markey]

1 hour ago, Mikep996 said:

I only use the Q3 nowadays.  I pretty much quit using my M digitals two years ago when I took my M10R BP and my Q2 to the Amalfi coast for 10 days, trading off shots equally between the cameras.  I ended up preferring the Q2 pics in general to the 10R pics, regardless of which lens was on the 10R with the Q2 pic cropped to equivalent size.  So a digital M is no longer part of my normal photog use.   Only M I use at all now is my 1984 M6 with Ilford FP4/HP5.

 

Interesting .

I always wondered whether that may be the case but haven`t seen any comparisons .

[SrMi]

I prefer the OVF to EVF, so the M11 is the preferred camera most of the time. However, Q cameras are a lot of fun and can handle low light better than the M11 because of their stabilization. The shooting experience is quite different. I pick one or the other often on a whim. M11 requires more skills, and I like to hone my rangefinder skills. 

[Kim Dahl]

I have Q3 28 - Q3 43 and M9 -Leica  MD. After I got the Q (43) I have used the M very little. Honestly, the M9 has not been used for 100 pictures in the last many years. I am very happy with my Leica MD. I am glad that I kept it. (Maybe I'll never sell it. I'll keep it like I kept my M6 without using it either. It's just something special). It does not eat bread as we say here. So it will stay. I do not need 60 MP in an M - I need that glow - that feeling - and the special thing about the different M lenses. But often it is my Q3's that are taken.

Now I am considering buying one of Sony's small camera bodies that are video-oriented. Call it a day. The MD will stay and I have a hard time seeing it get better with newer M’s. I am excited about the M evf though - but it has to work from day one and have a viewfinder that is truly top-notch. Otherwise I am out. The answer is my Q's - I mostly use 28 mm.

 

[NigelG]

17 hours ago, JNK100 said:

On family day outs etc. and for when I think a WA lens is needed,I take my Q. 

I use my M with a 50mm 'Lux so lens so use this when on solo trips depending on the location. I only have the one M lens by choice.

I also take the M combo to places I have photographed with my Q to get a different shots due to the differing FOV. 

I never take both cameras anywhere.

FWIW I use the Q1 and M+50Lux as a standard outfit…might be different w a Q2/3 maybe

Edited May 18 by NigelG

[Kim Dahl]

That's the "problem" (jokingly) 🤣. with the Q3. The Leica Q3 is really - really good in the 28-50 mm range and having only one camera with you when you're traveling is very good. Very liberating.

[flappo]

Yes , I am definitely eyeing up a Q3 28 to upgrade from my d lux 8 , i shoot everything wide so really don't see the point of zoom at all

[Smogg]

I sold the Q3 and Q3 43 because I didn't see any advantages over the M11, but I did see a lot of disadvantages.

[Derbyshire Man]

1 minute ago, Smogg said:

I sold the Q3 and Q3 43 because I didn't see any advantages over the M11, but I did see a lot of disadvantages.

Have you got anything you use for AF instead or 100% MF? Do you have anything you use which you regard as small and unobtrusive other than M11? I find the screen in the Q3 helps somewhat to reduce barrier between subject and myself, I tried to use the X100VI as smaller but I don’t like the images so much and what is effectively a 23mm f2 cropped. For compactness and low impact it’s hard to beat something along the lines of an M11 with a Summicron C/Rokkor 40mm F2. 
 

I can see that as a single flexible do everything camera the Q3 has a lot going for it. The AF is useful for slightly reticent/uncooperative portrait subjects who can’t/won’t keep still, but if I take a few shots while ‘focus tracking with my body’ using an M I nearly always get a good image anyway. I just love my M bodies and lenses so much that when they are available quite hard not to reach for them. 

[Smogg]

38 minutes ago, Derbyshire Man said:

Have you got anything you use for AF instead or 100% MF? Do you have anything you use which you regard as small and unobtrusive other than M11? I find the screen in the Q3 helps somewhat to reduce barrier between subject and myself, I tried to use the X100VI as smaller but I don’t like the images so much and what is effectively a 23mm f2 cropped. For compactness and low impact it’s hard to beat something along the lines of an M11 with a Summicron C/Rokkor 40mm F2. 
 

I can see that as a single flexible do everything camera the Q3 has a lot going for it. The AF is useful for slightly reticent/uncooperative portrait subjects who can’t/won’t keep still, but if I take a few shots while ‘focus tracking with my body’ using an M I nearly always get a good image anyway. I just love my M bodies and lenses so much that when they are available quite hard not to reach for them. 

As a general-purpose compact autofocus camera, I use the GFX100RF (it's about the same size and weight as the Q3). Its tracking and face recognition capabilities are much better than the Q3's, and the EVF quality is noticeably better. And in crowded outdoor situations, I can always pick out the right person and track them. This is not possible with the Q3, which only has reliable spot focus. However, despite all the conveniences of autofocus, I prefer the M11 because of the OVF and the convenient ability to use zone focus.

[wlaidlaw]

2 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said:

Have you got anything you use for AF instead or 100% MF? Do you have anything you use which you regard as small and unobtrusive other than M11? I find the screen in the Q3 helps somewhat to reduce barrier between subject and myself, I tried to use the X100VI as smaller but I don’t like the images so much and what is effectively a 23mm f2 cropped. For compactness and low impact it’s hard to beat something along the lines of an M11 with a Summicron C/Rokkor 40mm F2. 
 

I can see that as a single flexible do everything camera the Q3 has a lot going for it. The AF is useful for slightly reticent/uncooperative portrait subjects who can’t/won’t keep still, but if I take a few shots while ‘focus tracking with my body’ using an M I nearly always get a good image anyway. I just love my M bodies and lenses so much that when they are available quite hard not to reach for them. 

For small and unobtrusive, I have a Minox 35ML for film and in digital a Panasonic TZ200 (the Panasonic badged equivalent to the Leica C-Lux), that are so small that I can easily fit both of them simultaneously into my Billingham Pola Stowaway man bag. 

Wilson

[Smogg]

@Derbyshire Man

I would also like to point out the difference between OVF and EVF. In the same location, the shots will be completely different. Our perception of light, color will be different through different viewfinders, the stimuli, the mental images in our heads will be different, this in turn will affect the framing and the choice of scene in general. Sometimes, switching to EVF, I shoot things that I would never shoot on OVF and vice versa. Unfortunately, this is not easy to explain. Perhaps it will be a little easier to understand if you look through Eggleston's work and immerse yourself in his reality. I am sure that if he used EVF, everything would be different.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Derbyshire Man]

1 minute ago, Smogg said:

@Derbyshire Man

I would also like to point out the difference between OVF and EVF. In the same location, the shots will be completely different. Our perception of light, color will be different through different viewfinders, the stimuli, the mental images in our heads will be different, this in turn will affect the framing and the choice of scene in general. Sometimes, switching to EVF, I shoot things that I would never shoot on OVF and vice versa. Unfortunately, this is not easy to explain. Perhaps it will be a little easier to understand if you look through Eggleston's work and immerse yourself in his reality. I am sure that if he used EVF, everything would be different.

I agree with the sentiment and the difficulty of explanation! Part of it is the lack of cues around the change of size vs distance with lenses significantly shorter and longer than 50mm, some is presence in the scene, some of it is worry around parallax errors (which catch me out from time to time), some is an imponderable different window on the world. I drive differently in my 1970’s VW camper van from my 2020’s 2 seater convertible, despite them both being cars with four wheels, steering wheel etc. 

[Smogg]

7 minutes ago, Derbyshire Man said:

I agree with the sentiment and the difficulty of explanation! Part of it is the lack of cues around the change of size vs distance with lenses significantly shorter and longer than 50mm, some is presence in the scene, some of it is worry around parallax errors (which catch me out from time to time), some is an imponderable different window on the world. I drive differently in my 1970’s VW camper van from my 2020’s 2 seater convertible, despite them both being cars with four wheels, steering wheel etc. 

EVF gives a picture in already edited JPEG format with the selected profile. This significantly affects the choice. OFV gives a raw picture, which at the time of shooting is interpreted only by our brain and this interpretation exists only in the head, we do not see it when shooting.