tl 35 Is Q3 43 the answer to M + Lux 35 and CL + TL35?

[Torpille]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been using the CL for many years, (2018 I think) and as much as this system is perfect in size and in the quality of the images produced, it suffers from a few imperfections linked to its autofocus which sometimes makes it frustrating compared to more current systems.

I was able to use the Q3 43 for a few days, and I'm won over by this camera, but I find that it still suffers from a few shortcomings in terms of autofocus, particularly in face recognition, and this is an important point for me.

In terms of pure image quality, it's beautiful, it's clean, but less impressive than the Summilux Q2/Q3 28 in my opinion...
It's true that I'm in love with the Summilux M 35, TL35 rendering.

Unfortunately, the Q3 28 is not an option for me, as it doesn't suit my eye.

The 43mm focal length is interesting, right between the 35mm I love on the M and the 52 equivalent I use on the CL with the TL35.

Does the Apo 43 really deliver what I'm looking for in terms of rendering?
hard to answer over a short period of use...

For the moment, I find the CL + TL35 rendering very close to the Q3 43, hence my questioning.

Another thought is an SL3 with or without S and an APO 35 or 50 lens, but the system loses a lot of compactness...

I'd love to hear your comments

[Advertisement]

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

[Kim Dahl]

I currently have both the Leica Q3 and Q343. I just sold my TL2 and several lenses. Also the TL35. I think the Cl is a better camera body than the TL2. If I compare my TL2 and TL35 with the Q343, I definitely like the Q3 43 (and Q3 28) better - rendering and APO for 43. Not because there was any CA problem with the TL35 with 43 mm, but Q3 43  is - hands down - the best lens I have used. AF is always a trade off for Leica ?? - I don't know why they can't do it better - but for general use it's ok. But the 43 APO is clearly a better lens than the Q3 28 - in my opinion. The next generation Q4 will probably have an APO 28 ... but the 28 mm that is in now is more than good ...

[JNK100]

I have the Q3 and an M.

For my usage, which is mainly static scenes, the AF is more than good enough (as is the MF if ever needed).

What I would say though is the only camera I have ever regretted selling has been an M (9) . I missed the experience so much I had to get an M11 so I suggest you think carefully about selling your M.

The lens on the 43 may be a little sharper than the Q3 but it is still outstanding and a little faster.

If it was me I would keep my M and get a Q2/3/43 

Good luck with your decision!

 

[F-train]

Yes.

One step forward equals 50mm, one step aft (careful!) equals 35mm.
 

Leica ingenuity. Frighteningly sharp.

Everything more is kitchen sink.

Edited June 16 by F-train

[Torpille]

3 hours ago, JNK100 said:

I have the Q3 and an M.

For my usage, which is mainly static scenes, the AF is more than good enough (as is the MF if ever needed).

What I would say though is the only camera I have ever regretted selling has been an M (9) . I missed the experience so much I had to get an M11 so I suggest you think carefully about selling your M.

The lens on the 43 may be a little sharper than the Q3 but it is still outstanding and a little faster.

If it was me I would keep my M and get a Q2/3/43 

Good luck with your decision!

 

I'm well aware that selling an M is a decision of the kind that can be quickly regretted.

To date, I haven't found anything more satisfying than the M10 and the 35 FLE SOOC.
I'd like to keep it because the image rendering is exceptional.

(even if I find it easy to match images from a slXXX or a QXXX in terms of colorimetry to the M10 without too much effort).

On the other hand, in terms of use for reportage, portraiture and everyday photography, I need (I think?!) an autofocus camera, and at the moment, the CL occupies this position.

the Q3 43, given its specificity, is an excellent candidate, but as mentioned above, its limited autofocus and outrageous price prevented me from taking the plunge.

I was also able to try out the SL3-S, which is a great camera, very fast, but far from compact and lacking in discretion as soon as you take it out.

[Tseg]

I started with the Q3 43 after 12 years with using only the Sony RX1 35mm Zeiss.   Clearly it was not good enough to be stand-alone...

 

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!

[garygraphy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I suggest you check again... the rendering off the 43APO is second to none of those lenses you're referencing. Q3 with its 28mm is starting to show its age, now when compared with the 43APO and due for a serious upgrade, and the TL23mm is an inferior lens, barely registering as a modern Leica product.

I suspect you are not after lens performance but instead looking for imperfection as a lens character - with which, you're on your own as its really your personal preference vs any regard of performance.

The only lens that perhaps overwhelms the 43APO is the SL-50APO. Even the M-35APO (which is the best performing M lens) is hard to conclusively say is better than 43APO, tho it could be due to the OIS on the 43APO that eliminates all vagaries of slight movement contributing to 'poorer' output.

[ravinj]

On 6/16/2025 at 6:29 AM, Torpille said:

I've been using the CL for many years, (2018 I think) and as much as this system is perfect in size and in the quality of the images produced, it suffers from a few imperfections linked to its autofocus which sometimes makes it frustrating compared to more current systems.

I was able to use the Q3 43 for a few days, and I'm won over by this camera, but I find that it still suffers from a few shortcomings in terms of autofocus, particularly in face recognition, and this is an important point for me.

In terms of pure image quality, it's beautiful, it's clean, but less impressive than the Summilux Q2/Q3 28 in my opinion...
It's true that I'm in love with the Summilux M 35, TL35 rendering.

Unfortunately, the Q3 28 is not an option for me, as it doesn't suit my eye.

The 43mm focal length is interesting, right between the 35mm I love on the M and the 52 equivalent I use on the CL with the TL35.

Does the Apo 43 really deliver what I'm looking for in terms of rendering?
hard to answer over a short period of use...

For the moment, I find the CL + TL35 rendering very close to the Q3 43, hence my questioning.

Another thought is an SL3 with or without S and an APO 35 or 50 lens, but the system loses a lot of compactness...

I'd love to hear your comments

By "less impressive" do you mean you find the images from Q3 28 more "beautiful"? If so, yes, I can see why you would say that. I have both Q3's and at times, feel that the 28 is producing images that better appeal to me visually. It is a matter of taste. 

On technical terms, the lens in the Q3 43 wins, though that may not lead to more likeable images. 

SL3 with APO is a different thing altogether - are you willing to carry the size / weight? 

Bottom line, hard to beat any of the Q variants for for the image quality in a smallish size / weight. I don't photograph sports or fast moving objects so can't comment on the AF, except that I find it adequate.

If you are really after fast and accurate AF esp for face detect, it is hard to beat the offerings from the major Japanese brands. 

M + Lux 35: how does this fit in your kit since you mention AF as a priority for you? 

 

Edited June 22 by ravinj

[Le Chef]

Sometimes the shots from the Q3 43 feel too clinical, and the Q3 images more “painterly”. The way I address that is to reduce sharpness and saturation.

[Torpille]

On 6/22/2025 at 7:54 AM, garygraphy said:

I suggest you check again... the rendering off the 43APO is second to none of those lenses you're referencing. Q3 with its 28mm is starting to show its age, now when compared with the 43APO and due for a serious upgrade, and the TL23mm is an inferior lens, barely registering as a modern Leica product.

I suspect you are not after lens performance but instead looking for imperfection as a lens character - with which, you're on your own as its really your personal preference vs any regard of performance.

The only lens that perhaps overwhelms the 43APO is the SL-50APO. Even the M-35APO (which is the best performing M lens) is hard to conclusively say is better than 43APO, tho it could be due to the OIS on the 43APO that eliminates all vagaries of slight movement contributing to 'poorer' output.

Thanks, your feedback is interesting and you're probably pointing out that I prefer the character of the summilux among Leica lenses.

concerning the CL, I'm not talking about the TL 23 but the TL35mm and the result obtained is for me very close to that of the APO 43.

Surely, in terms of optical perfection, the APO 43 is a cut above the rest, but that's only one parameter in the overall appreciation of an image.

I think a second week with the Q3 43 would be necessary to better evaluate it.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

[keithlaban.co.uk]

The Q3 43 lens never ceases to amaze me. Stopped down it's one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used and yet wide open it is still remarkably sharp and capable of wonderful 3D pop.

I'm now in the position where I find myself being disappointed when I have to switch to shooting with another camera, but needs must.

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!

  

[Torpille]

14 hours ago, ravinj said:

By "less impressive" do you mean you find the images from Q3 28 more "beautiful"? If so, yes, I can see why you would say that. I have both Q3's and at times, feel that the 28 is producing images that better appeal to me visually. It is a matter of taste. 

On technical terms, the lens in the Q3 43 wins, though that may not lead to more likeable images. 

SL3 with APO is a different thing altogether - are you willing to carry the size / weight? 

Bottom line, hard to beat any of the Q variants for for the image quality in a smallish size / weight. I don't photograph sports or fast moving objects so can't comment on the AF, except that I find it adequate.

If you are really after fast and accurate AF esp for face detect, it is hard to beat the offerings from the major Japanese brands. 

M + Lux 35: how does this fit in your kit since you mention AF as a priority for you? 

 

Thanks  you

I'll try to answer point by point:

I do find Q3 images more "bewitching" than those of the Q3 43, even if everyone agrees that APOs are technically the best lenses.
the Q28 isn't for me, I'm not a wide-angle user, which is too restrictive for what I do.

I'm not sure I want a big SL3 (S) kit with an APO, size and weight are the reasons why I didn't keep my SL2-s (even though I only had the 24_90). 
The SL3-s with the new 28-70 may partially solve this dilemma.

Moving away from Leica for autofocus isn't what I want most, because I like the L-mount alliance. 
The SL3-S seems to be catching up with the Japanese brands?

The M10 + 35 lux kit works well for me, it's simple, very effective and SOOC rendering is exceptional.

But as a second camera, I like to have an autofocus camera that allows me to shoot a variety of scenes and ensure sharp focus at wide apertures. 
Hence the CL, SL, Q....

[ravinj]

5 hours ago, Torpille said:

Thanks  you

I'll try to answer point by point:

I do find Q3 images more "bewitching" than those of the Q3 43, even if everyone agrees that APOs are technically the best lenses.
the Q28 isn't for me, I'm not a wide-angle user, which is too restrictive for what I do.

I'm not sure I want a big SL3 (S) kit with an APO, size and weight are the reasons why I didn't keep my SL2-s (even though I only had the 24_90). 
The SL3-s with the new 28-70 may partially solve this dilemma.

Moving away from Leica for autofocus isn't what I want most, because I like the L-mount alliance. 
The SL3-S seems to be catching up with the Japanese brands?

The M10 + 35 lux kit works well for me, it's simple, very effective and SOOC rendering is exceptional.

But as a second camera, I like to have an autofocus camera that allows me to shoot a variety of scenes and ensure sharp focus at wide apertures. 
Hence the CL, SL, Q....

Great points!

Yes, M10 + 35 Lux is hard to beat. 

I understand what you are saying about Q3 43 APO "perfection" vs Q3 28 images that you like better. 

Deduction by elimination:

You are not a fan of 28mm so that rules out Q2/Q3. Q3 43 is out since those images don't really speak to you. SL series is not a lightweight solution. Its AF is satisfactory, not class leading and you seem to imply you need AF that works in all situations.

The solution you need may not exist in Leica land. My "solution" for fast and accurate AF for that rare use case (rare for me, as I rarely need stellar AF for my type of photography) is the Panasonic G9. With the right lenses like Pana-Leica 42.5 F1.2 and Olympus 75 F1.8 its output is way above what one would expect from a MFT sensor and its AF rarely misses. 

[Torpille]

On 6/23/2025 at 6:46 PM, ravinj said:

Great points!

Yes, M10 + 35 Lux is hard to beat. 

I understand what you are saying about Q3 43 APO "perfection" vs Q3 28 images that you like better. 

Deduction by elimination:

You are not a fan of 28mm so that rules out Q2/Q3. Q3 43 is out since those images don't really speak to you. SL series is not a lightweight solution. Its AF is satisfactory, not class leading and you seem to imply you need AF that works in all situations.

The solution you need may not exist in Leica land. My "solution" for fast and accurate AF for that rare use case (rare for me, as I rarely need stellar AF for my type of photography) is the Panasonic G9. With the right lenses like Pana-Leica 42.5 F1.2 and Olympus 75 F1.8 its output is way above what one would expect from a MFT sensor and its AF rarely misses. 

thanks for the feedback

the MFT bodies are currently too big to be appealing

I think the CL with the TL 35 and the vario TL 18-56 is still hard to beat in reality and is an excellent complement to the M10.

A Q3 43 could replace these 2 cameras but you'll need something like an SL as a complement...
 

[Qwertynm]

Sony A7C (r or ii) with the 40 f/2.5 or Nikon with 40/2 lens exists if you want to stay in that focal range, have AF that's better or on par with the SL or Q343. Sigma also makes a 45/2.8 for L-mount. There are a lot of options - every option has some tradeoffs, like with everything in life.

[Rick in CO]

I kept my TL2 and 18mm Elmarit for a wide angle option for my Q343.  Initially didn't savor the idea of carrying around two cameras, but the TL2/18mm is almost pocketable.  

The 43mm APO is a great lens, I've been astonished by its acuity, but some images posted on this forum show a wonderful rendering.  Sold my M10R and 50mm APO-M.

[Torpille]

On 7/15/2025 at 3:06 AM, Rick in CO said:

I kept my TL2 and 18mm Elmarit for a wide angle option for my Q343.  Initially didn't savor the idea of carrying around two cameras, but the TL2/18mm is almost pocketable.  

The 43mm APO is a great lens, I've been astonished by its acuity, but some images posted on this forum show a wonderful rendering.  Sold my M10R and 50mm APO-M.

I think the Q3 43 is the M killer for anyone who is either 35mm or 50mm 90% of the time.

I like the idea of having a single camera that does almost everything very well, it's almost the CL, but it has a few ergonomic imperfections that bother me. 
I have to agree that the pleasure with the Q3 is superior and the more modern state of the art camera is more responsive.

[Torpille]

I decided to take the plunge and ordered the Q3 43 a few days ago.
I have to admit, it ticks all the boxes that are important to me. 

First and foremost, the 43mm focal length is great and matches my sensitivity to 35mm on the M and 50mm on autofocus cameras.
As for the rest, it's a modern camera that's very pleasant to use thanks to the Leica interface.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[35mm_shooter]

On 6/16/2025 at 5:09 PM, Tseg said:

I started with the Q3 43 after 12 years with using only the Sony RX1 35mm Zeiss.   Clearly it was not good enough to be stand-alone...

How are you liking the q3 43 after coming from that dreamy 35mm zeiss?

[Tseg]

11 hours ago, 35mm_shooter said:

How are you liking the q3 43 after coming from that dreamy 35mm zeiss?

I like the Q3 43.   The 13 year old Zeiss lens design is very good, but A Lot of purple fringing.  IBIS, weather sealing, enhanced EVF, intuitive menu system and a pretty good Leica app, make the Q better fixed lens camera in just about every way.