Q3 43 Continuous Auto Focus is disappointing

[quiet.seattle]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I read recently (on these forums, I think) that a Leica rep suggested that if one sets up the Q3 43 in iAF with Face/Body detection, the results should satisfy. I just took 30 pictures of my girlfriend working in the kitchen, walking around not at a particularly frantic pace, and only 2 or 3 images were sharp. I was in Aperture priority at f2 and auto iso (generated 100, 200 typically). Look, I usually use the camera for static subjects but this result is really disappointing. Anyone else experience this. Makes mne reconsider my $7000 purchase.

[Advertisement]

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

[Cogito]

What was your shutter speed? (check the EXIF data) just making sure the lack of sharpness wasn’t due to a long shutter speed (this has happened to me.)

Did you see boxes around your subjects face and smaller boxes around her eyes with the eye you prefer highlighted? just confirming the camera had recognized the face and was attempting to focus on her eyes.

I’m the one who posted what the Leica rep at Bild suggested but haven’t had a chance to really test it out yet. 

[quiet.seattle]

The shutter was consistently at 1/125. I did get boxes around her body and face and, when she faced me directly I would see the small boxes on the eyes. 

[SJH]

I'd suggest using AFC (iAF takes time to adjust to whether a subject is actually moving or not). Allow auto ISO to auto range up to 12k and then depending on the light come down from there to 6,400 max if the shots are working out fine from an in focus/sharp point of view but slight grain and see what happens. I'm told the issue with iAF in this generation of camera's (SL3, Q3 etc) is that it moves from AFS contrast detect only to AFC PDAF, so this causes the 'lag'. Start in AFC/Face detect and a walking subject should be absolutely fine in the situation you're describing as you'll be using PDAF from the off. With the Q2 and SL2 iAF is always in contrast detect mode if the subject is stationary or moving.

[LocalHero1953]

What were your crop settings? Remember that AF (and exposure metering) only operates within the crop frame. This can be a very handy tool, or irritating, depending on your shooting practice.

But in the end I don't know what your performance standard is for AF. The Q3 43 is not up to the SL2-S (I have both), and other brands are further ahead - so I'm told, but the SL2-S is good enough for most of my needs.

If you thought $7000 dollars would buy you class-leading AF, you were ill-advised or didn't do enough research - and there is no camera that is best at everything. You need a different camera for the best AF.

As for "the results should satisfy", it obviously depends on how easily one is satisfied. I use iAF and Face on the SL2-S without problems (again, for my needs), I do the same on the Q3 43, but it is simply not as good at it.

Edited June 24 by LocalHero1953

[Qwertynm]

1/125 might be ok for static portraits. I shoot my kids at 1/500 - 1/1000 indoors. 1/250 - 1/500 if they are „static“. But yes agreed. The AFc of the Q3 is a bit disappointing 

[Miltz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1/125 is too slow for moving subjects. That’s a different issue. 
 

Everyone knows the Q3 isn’t great at autofocus when compared to other cameras. But if you don’t compare it to others it’s good 😊 

[Jonas Larsson]

5 hours ago, Miltz said:

1/125 is too slow for moving subjects. That’s a different issue. 
 

Everyone knows the Q3 isn’t great at autofocus when compared to other cameras. But if you don’t compare it to others it’s good 😊 

Love this! Honesty is rare.

[bobtodrick]

No camera will do everything well.

At one time I covered motorsports for an automotive magazine…my M4 was left at home.

But when I wanted to shoot indoors availability light portraits my Nikon with 300 2.8 wasn’t my first choice.

The Q series is great for some things…not so great for others. 
In my opinion that is what a lot of new photographers don’t understand…there is no camera that does everything well.

Edited June 26 by bobtodrick

[thelivingyears]

So the AF of the SL2-S (also non-S?) ist better than that of the Q3 43?

I thought the Q3 has the same as the SL3(-s)? Just my guess. If yes, than the AF of the SL2(-S) is better than that of the newer SL3s as well?

[schipper]

Did sell my Q3 a few month ago because of the autofocus disapointment, and bought a sl3 and got happy.

 

And will rebuy a Q3 (the up coming Q3 monochrome) because i did understand meanwhile that for the use i will have, the autofocus is not a issue.

 

just don’t try the moving subject with it, for the rest, it is fantastique and take a sony or sl3 or anything else for sport, birds or people walking fast.

[LouK]

I rented the Q343 but found the autofocus not useful for the project I am doing, groups of 6 to 20 or more dancing. I had a hard time knowing what was in focus and when I used some the or other settings, I found it hard to concentrate on composition. In my situation and all the other photographic subjects I shoot, my M11 suits me perfectly. I do not understand the popularity of the Q3 series for M owners. We can walk around with the M11 and a 35mm or 50mm lens.  When my eyesight makes focusing more difficult, I will need to use, god forbid, an incomprehensible Sony and its menu.

[bobtodrick]

No one that I know (personally have seven friends with various Q’s)…none purchased for the A/F performance.  This is where one has to do research and hopefully doesn’t talk to a salesperson just wanting to make a sale.  The Q’s have a great sensor with a wonderful colour palette in a compact package with a great lens.  
No camera does everything well…if most of your shooting is action, large groups with movement…that’s not what the Q’s were designed for.

[LocalHero1953]

I have a Q3 43 and I photograph dance (and other stage performance). Frankly I wouldn’t dream of using a Q of any flavour for that purpose, and never did. I use the SL2-S and 24-90SL for that purpose. 

Who told you the Q was popular among M owners? 

[MikeWanderings]

I was told recently by a Leica rep to use zone focusing instead of face and maybe set the ISO manual ( I was asking about using AFC for children and street photography) to free up some computing power as it sometimes helps. 

 

[bdjackson]

In regards to autofocus on the Q it is sub par compared to most other system cameras. I would stick to centre point and non continuous mode as that for me has been pretty bullet proof. Up the shutter speed and deepen the depth of field, 28mm is pretty forgiving even at f2.8. The Q shines in its simplicity of use, its flexibility (macro, megapixels, flip screen etc) and the quality of its output in my opinion - there not much out there that compares. Stick with it and try and forget how much you spent on it! It will soon become indispensable to you. 

I have an M and a Q and as my eyes have aged I find myself enjoying the the Q more and more. I  still love my M11 but now armed with ever thickening glasses I can't really see anything other than the 50mm frame lines. I also prefer the straight out colour of the Q and how it auto white balances. 

 

 

Edited September 2 by bdjackson

[bdjackson]

Whoops, just realised you are shooting with the 43mm this might not be so forgiving... I'll get my coat on the way out