Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Before I got into Leica I had a Sony RX1 (followed by an RX1R) for several years in the mid 2010s and got some wonderful shots with it. I used it when travelling together with an SLR camera, either the RX1 plus an 85mm prime when using them both, or using the SLR + zoom during the day and RX1 for evenings out or when I wanted to be more discreet. 

I got some really nice environmental portraits, landscapes and music shots with the camera, so it is nice to see it has now been updated. As noted above, the lens and rendering was quite delicious.

On the plus side, it is IMO significantly lighter and more compact than a Q. I suppose the autofocus will be much better e.g. when there are several faces in the scene - although I am already happy with the Q3 43 AF and, as others have posted, some of the downsides rule this camera out for me:

  • Buttons and dials that I would never use (I always shoot in manual mode so exp compensation and mode dial are not needed)
  • Lack of tilt screen
  • Lack of IBIS/IOS (altough this did not bother me 10 years ago with the 36mp sensor of the RX1R)
  • Sony menu system (although its not so bad when shooting in manual mode, you can ignore a lot of the menu
  • The quality of the EVF was 'ok' for me 10 years ago, because the output is so nice. Nowadays I am ruined by the quality of the SL viewfinders and find the Q3 43 EVF to be pretty good (but not as great as the SL)

Looks very nice IMO but not for me.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

x
On 7/16/2025 at 6:03 AM, Smogg said:

Moreover, the differences in size and weight of the new camera from the A7CR paired with the Sony 35 2.8 or Samsung 35 2.8 are not that great. At the same time, stabilization is lost, the battery is worse and the price is radically increased. What's the point?

To be fair, the lens/sensor pairing and engineering of the III will be extremely precise, and along with the Zeiss 35mm f2, should provide a better quality image than the Sony or Samsung f2.8 lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, hoolyproductions said:

I am ruined by the quality of the SL viewfinders and find the Q3 43 EVF to be pretty good (but not as great as the SL)

Blimey, if the SL EVF is great, I'd hate to depend upon a lesser EVF. I acquired a SL2-s earlier this year (coming from M and other non-EVF cameras) and, whilst I enjoy using it and think very highly of it as a camera, the EVF experience is what I like least about it. I had no idea that the SL2 era EVF is still considered one of the better ones.

Edited by wattsy
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, wattsy said:

Blimey, if the SL EVF is great, I'd hate to depend upon a lesser EVF. I acquired a SL2-s earlier this year (coming from M and other non-EVF cameras) and, whilst I enjoy using it and think very highly of it as a camera, the EVF experience is what I like least about it. I had no idea that the SL2 era EVF is still considered one of the better ones.

Yes. It gets worse...way worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
59 minutes ago, wattsy said:

 I had no idea that the SL2 era EVF is still considered one of the better ones.

It's by far the best one I have ever used, but I shot only with M cameras from 2014-2021 so my prior experience was a Sony A7R (first version) and the RX1's I mentioned above. I noticed that the latest Sony A7R cameras have bigger magnification and higher resolution but I've never tried one in practice to see if it is actually better.

Edited by hoolyproductions
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

Same OLED EVF as the D-Lux 8 and G100D ? it is surprisingly good for a $600 camera, and way better than the M10's Visoflex.

What is the same ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The OLED EVF : specification looks to be common across the OM-3, D-Lux8, G100D and RX1RIII 

The relevant specifications are: resolution, size, eyepoint, and normalized magnification. I was unable to find all the specifications for the mentioned cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The OLED EVF : specification looks to be common across

I wouldn't put too much weight on the specs. My Canon R5 and Leica Q3 have the same spec EVF. Same resolution, same magnification, same distance from the prism and yet they look distinctly different - the Q3 EVF is much better imho. Just wait and see, I doubt it will be aweful in a 5k$ camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Qwertynm said:

I wouldn't put too much weight on the specs. My Canon R5 and Leica Q3 have the same spec EVF. Same resolution, same magnification, same distance from the prism and yet they look distinctly different - the Q3 EVF is much better imho. Just wait and see, I doubt it will be aweful in a 5k$ camera.

Yes, that is my experience too. The way the contrast and colors are displayed differs considerably between the same or similar-spec EVFs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SrMi said:

The relevant specifications are: resolution, size, eyepoint, and normalized magnification. I was unable to find all the specifications for the mentioned cameras.

All compact eyepieces, with magnifications in the x0.69 to x0.74 range . The G100D is cheapest camera, but also has highest magnification;  the display is very sharp, contrasty and clear. I would not be surprised if the OLED panel is the from the same manufacturer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

The OLED EVF : specification looks to be common across the OM-3, D-Lux8, G100D and RX1RIII 

Thanks - this EVF is fine for a £600 camera but not for a £4000 one in my view.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, JNK100 said:

Thanks - this EVF is fine for a £600 camera but not for a £4000 one in my view.

It is likely the same as in the $3,000.- a7cr. Both cameras had serious size constraints, hence the lower-spec EVF.

Lack of stabilization is a serious concern for me. If I do not need the stabilization, I would rather shoot with the slightly less expensive GFX100RF.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Qwertynm said:

I wouldn't put too much weight on the specs. My Canon R5 and Leica Q3 have the same spec EVF. Same resolution, same magnification, same distance from the prism and yet they look distinctly different - the Q3 EVF is much better imho. Just wait and see, I doubt it will be aweful in a 5k$ camera.

A lot of the EVF experience is about the quality of the video feed coming off the sensor, how much of that resolution they're pushing up to the EVF, and the factory design decisions about how to display the feed (default contrast, color, etc.). For example, the SL2-S EVF experience is better than the SL2, particularly in low light. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, frame-it said:

stabilization at ~ 5min30

 

Active Steady Shot (electronic stabilization) is per Sony only effective when shooting video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, SrMi said:

Active Steady Shot (electronic stabilization) is per Sony only effective when shooting video.

Oh, OK.

 

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!

 

Edited by frame-it
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...