Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I never really understood why people will pay many thousands of dollars to.......[insert photographic practice that you don't adopt here]

Rather than this sort of comment (which comes up too often on photographic forums) perhaps we should just recognise that everyone is different and has different ways of taking photos? And that some of our own practices wouldn't stand up to the same sort of challenge?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

x
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I never really understood why people will pay many thousands of dollars to avoid the single-click action of cropping to the framing they want. I can think of much better things to spend my photo budget on. 

I never really understood why people don’t see 43 and 28 are not only about focal length, it’s APO and non-APO

Edited by Elliot Harper
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I never really understood why people will pay many thousands of dollars to avoid the single-click action of cropping to the framing they want. I can think of much better things to spend my photo budget on. 

Perhaps I should sell my Q3 43 and all of my Nikon Z and Voigtlander lenses except for my 15mm Voigtlander Super Wide and use that for everything and just crop?

Really?  

  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, keithlaban.co.uk said:

Perhaps I should sell my Q3 43 and all of my Nikon Z and Voigtlander lenses except for my 15mm Voigtlander Super Wide and use that for everything and just crop?

Really?  

By the cropper's reasoning, all anyone needs is a 100mp sensor with a 15mm wide angle lens, so they can crop to any desired framing. Meanwhile, I'll happily carry an Elmarit 28 and Summicron 50.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, jaapv said:

I never really understood why people will pay many thousands of dollars to avoid the single-click action of cropping to the framing they want. I can think of much better things to spend my photo budget on. 

Dear Jaap...some ppl do have money and they buy what they want to have...not all of us are Dutch, Scottish or German...have I missed someone ?

🤔

Edited by Genoweffa
Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Genoweffa said:

Dear Jaap...some ppl do have money and they buy what they want to have...not all of us are Dutch, Scottish or German...have I missed someone ?

🤔

why? are you implying Dutch, Scottish and German are stingy?

😀

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Elliot Harper said:

I never really understood why people don’t see 43 and 28 are not only about focal length, it’s APO and non-APO

APO is just a optical technical term which in itself tells us nothing about the way a lens renders. And absolutely nothing about focal length. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, jaapv said:

APO is just a optical technical term which in itself tells us nothing about the way a lens renders. 

Then why do people pay 4-5 times more on a APO summicron 35 M lens over non-APO version if it's just a technical term which tells us nothing about the way a lens renders?

Link to post
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Elliot Harper said:

Then why do people pay 4-5 times more on a APO summicron 35 M lens over non-APO version if it's just a technical term which tells us nothing about the way a lens renders?

Because Leica marketing has adopted it as a designation of their top line. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

To add, an Apochromatic lens can have significant chromatic aberration, because full chromatic correction needs only to be effected on three points of the spectrum to be called "APO", in the red, the green and the blue. What happens in-between those points  is not defined. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jaapv said:

I never really understood why people will pay many thousands of dollars to avoid the single-click action of cropping to the framing they want. I can think of much better things to spend my photo budget on. 

To get the photos they want? Would you crop the 28 Q3 to a 135 equivalent? Do you have more than one lens for your M camera?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could probably get away with it on a 60 MP camera but yes, that is a valid argument. But how many buyers of a Q type camera would habitually do so? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

You could probably get away with it on a 60 MP camera but yes, that is a valid argument. But how many buyers of a Q type camera would habitually do so? 

Let's say with Q3/43 cropped to 75, I can get more pixels than Q3/28 cropped to 75.

Is it also a valid argument? :D

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How many pixels do you need?  Normally 8 MP suffices for a high-quality end product, print or screen..

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2025 at 7:41 AM, Capww8 said:

I have a fairly unbelievable update. Ultimately, I did not file a police report while I was in Milan - talking with my hotel concierge, and bartender (both impeccable sources of information in my experience) it was clear that the process to file a report would take several hours out of my already short visit, and the deductible on my insurance policy exceeded the value of the goods (I'm in the process of remedying this!), so I didn't see any real reason to go through the trouble.

This morning, I was contacted by a detective in Genoa that had recovered only the camera, looked through the photos and found a hotel I was staying at last summer - the hotel somehow identified me as the guest, and gave my contact information to the detective in Genoa, and he found me!

Capww8--Congratulations on your recovery.  A nice ending to a troubling experience.  Also, I think you will find the Q3 or Q3 43 to a nice upgrade whichever you choose to keep.  My '43 is my everyday go everywhere camera.  I appreciated all the discussions on protecting your camera and other valuables when traveling and will keep this in mind for a planned cross-country Amtrak trip next year. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ordered the device mention by Smogg - Thanks for the info - and thought I'd add a bit of feedback.

While the concept of the device is good, I feel the implementation is a bit lacking in two respects:

1 - The alarm in not loud enough; it could even be mistaken for a loud appointment alarm on a phone.

2 - The alarm sounder is part of the unit the traveler keeps on their person.  I think it would be more effective if it were on the unit attached to the luggage.  If a thief were walking off with the luggage he might be inclined to drop it if it was making a loud, screeching noise.  As it is, the thief can continue walking away, increasing the distance from the source of the not-so-loud beeping.

Bottom line - better than nothing.  Just my €0.02 worth

Edited by 1stLeica
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/3/2025 at 1:07 PM, jaapv said:

Here we go again. There is no xx mm “look”. Perspective is determined by the relative position of camera and subject and not by the lens….   There will be a difference in DOF which is mostly not relevant, unless you go for blurry nose and ears portraits. Does the Q43 really sell on basis of a myth?  

While I do agree about "perspective and relative position of camera and subject" part, I cannot agree on DOF being "mostly not relevant"...
And if DOF was irrelevant - why would anyone ever buy Noctilux / Summilux lenses?
 

Edited by FocusDot
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 6/7/2025 at 9:11 PM, 1stLeica said:

Ordered the device mention by Smogg - Thanks for the info - and thought I'd add a bit of feedback.

While the concept of the device is good, I feel the implementation is a bit lacking in two respects:

1 - The alarm in not loud enough; it could even be mistaken for a loud appointment alarm on a phone.

2 - The alarm sounder is part of the unit the traveler keeps on their person.  I think it would be more effective if it were on the unit attached to the luggage.  If a thief were walking off with the luggage he might be inclined to drop it if it was making a loud, screeching noise.  As it is, the thief can continue walking away, increasing the distance from the source of the not-so-loud beeping.

Bottom line - better than nothing.  Just my €0.02 worth

It's strange that few manufacturers do this. Such solutions would be in great demand.

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...