Leica SL3-S vs Leica Q3 (Comparison Stabilisation)

[D-Leica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello and good Morning out there ☕️

First I didn't know exactly where I can place this post. I hope it fits here...whereby it would also fit in the Q3 forum 🤔

I would very much like to know your opinions on my little dilemma and look forward to your advice.

After switching from a Sony A7RV to the Leica Q3 43 and having a lot of fun, I decided to sell the 343. The reasons why to sale the 343 were the following:

My photographic style is rather wide-angled than that of the 343 and when I thought, although I looked at many pictures that I had taken with the Sony A7RV before buying the 343, but after I used the 343 on various trips and photo walks, I realised that I often was far too close to the subject and mostly I can't go back.

Now I would like to stay with Leica and looked at and tested an SL3-S yesterday in Frankfurt. I liked this one very much, but the weight is not to be underestimated for me. After a good conversation and the question what would be important to me about a camera, I tested the Q3 28. And what can I say, now I am between the two cameras and each has something for itself and certainly something that would speak against them.

That's why my question to you here, because this point is very important to me. How good is the stabilisation in comparison of the two cameras? How are your experiences with photography straight out of hand? I don't really use a tripod and I'm not an action, sports or wildlife photographer. 

Thank you in advance for your ideas and advice and of course thank you for sharing the many beautiful pictures in the individual forums…I love them 🙏

Best regards 🙋‍♂️

[Advertisement]

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

[vkdev]

I use the M11 and the SL2-S with the APO-Summicron 28. I think the main difference is the size. The SL series is very large and heavy. And if you're only going to use one lens, there's no need to carry around a heavy weight. Of course, I've tried the Q series. The SL camera has better stabilization, but in real life, stabilization isn’t that necessary if you're using a 28mm lens. Choose the SL only if you need zoom lenses or want to use M-mount lenses.

[D-Leica]

vor 37 Minuten schrieb vkdev:

I use the M11 and the SL2-S with the APO-Summicron 28. I think the main difference is the size. The SL series is very large and heavy. And if you're only going to use one lens, there's no need to carry around a heavy weight. Of course, I've tried the Q series. The SL camera has better stabilization, but in real life, stabilization isn’t that necessary if you're using a 28mm lens. Choose the SL only if you need zoom lenses or want to use M-mount lenses.

Thank you 🙏 Indeed I am not planning to use Zooms, but I have respect of the manual focus … 🤔 But the M11 is great 👌 Otherwise I will have to check this piece out soon 🤤

[Stuart Richardson]

I think if you were having fun with the Q3 43, but found it too narrow of view, the Q3 28 makes sense, particularly if you are not going to use a zoom. It sounds from the way you are talking about your experience that you are photographing more as a hobby than as a profession, so I think the wider Q is probably a good fit for you. 

Not quite sure why you landed on the SL3-S and not the SL3 though...the SL3 is the one that shares a sensor with the Q3, and if you don't plan to use multiple lenses or a zoom, that extra resolution will help you maintain your quality, vs the 24mp SL3-S. 

[D-Leica]

vor 40 Minuten schrieb Stuart Richardson:

photographing more as a hobby than as a profession

Thank you. Indeed I am not a pro and it’s not my Job as well, but it’s my passion.

vor 40 Minuten schrieb Stuart Richardson:

why you landed on the SL3-S and not the SL3

One reason for me is that the sensor with 24MP of the SL3-S is a bit more forgiving with slightly trembling hands, it can probably do more higher iso and thus possibly have a better noise behaviour than the 60MP sensor of the SL3, although I appreciate the detail reproduction of the Q343 very much...and most Pics was very good. Higher iso wasn't so good in my experience.

Will visit the Leica Store tomorrow or next week again 🙂

[LD_50]

1 hour ago, D-Leica said:

Thank you. Indeed I am not a pro and it’s not my Job as well, but it’s my passion.

One reason for me is that the sensor with 24MP of the SL3-S is a bit more forgiving with slightly trembling hands, it can probably do more higher iso and thus possibly have a better noise behaviour than the 60MP sensor of the SL3, although I appreciate the detail reproduction of the Q343 very much...and most Pics was very good. Higher iso wasn't so good in my experience.

Will visit the Leica Store tomorrow or next week again 🙂

The lower resolution sensor is not going to be more forgiving of motion blur. You’re just starting with less so there is less to lose 

[Photoworks]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

7 hours ago, D-Leica said:

That's why my question to you here, because this point is very important to me. How good is the stabilisation in comparison of the two cameras? How are your experiences with photography straight out of hand? I don't really use a tripod and I'm not an action, sports or wildlife photographer. 

The SL3s have the best-in-class sensor stabilization IBIS. They share the tech with Panasonic. The only other camera better is probably the Hasselblad.

The Q camera has in-lens IS, which does some, but not as great as IBIS.

I think the challenge is really shooting in low light is to keep he subject in focus. IBIS only works if the subject is static. If you are shooting a person in motion, you may need to shoot it at 1/250 to 1/1000, any IBIS becomes less important in image quality.

You should just try them both and make your own impressions based on your style of shooting. to me, the SL camera with a big lens is great quality, but it involves carrying some weight. I would pick the q3.

[jaapv]

Another thing to consider: the more bulky/heavy a lens-camera is ( within limits of course) , the better to hold stable

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, D-Leica said:

One reason for me is that the sensor with 24MP of the SL3-S is a bit more forgiving with slightly trembling hands,

Same amount of blur at equal magnification.  The issue is how much one magnifies viewing, either via screen (pixel peeping) or print (size and viewing distance), not directly as a result of MP count.

Of course if you choose an SL variant, the focal length issue remains, along with additional considerations and choices regarding specific lens characteristics and form factors.  35mm vs 28mm, for one.

[D-Leica]

Am 18.7.2025 um 15:35 schrieb jaapv:

Another thing to consider: the more bulky/heavy a lens-camera is ( within limits of course) , the better to hold stable

Ok…sounds obvious 🤔

[Elliot Harper]

I had Q2 and sold it for Q3/43, I had SL2-S and sold it for SL3-S, I also have various M’s

I can tell you, IBiS doesn’t matter. Most of the time I don’t even take my SL3-S out due to its side and weight. Get an Q3 if you can live with the 28mm focal length and forget about SL

[LocalHero1953]

The Q series also have a leaf shutter, which is far less likely to induce shake than the SL2-S focal plane shutter. I have the SL2-S and Q3 43, and before that the Q2, and notice no major difference in stabilisation at normal shooting speeds - if I was shooting 1/4 sec I might pick the SL2-S, but there's not much in it. However, in your shoes I would take the Q3 every time: IMO the SL series are too heavy and large to be 'taken out' for casual, walk-around photography. I know others disagree!

[jaapv]

Weight… An SL3 weighs 770 grams, a M11 silver 640. 130 grams is an unbearable weight to carry? Seriously? 

[LocalHero1953]

21 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Weight… An SL3 weighs 770 grams, a M11 silver 640. 130 grams is an unbearable weight to carry? Seriously? 

I have trouble getting decent photos with just a body. YMMV.

Meanwhile in the real world, if I wanted to carry a M around for street, I would pick a classic small light M lens. I don’t enjoy manually focussing M lenses on the SL - and why bother with a SL if you’re not going to use its own lenses. As I wrote, I have Q and SL, and have had digital M. I have a very clear idea, based on experience*, of what each is good for. I also wrote that others may disagree. 
 

*Edit. This includes using the SL for street photography. ‘Unbearable’ wasn’t the reason I decided against it. Discomfort and recognition that it was the wrong tool for the job - as I saw it.

Edited July 22 by LocalHero1953

[D-Leica]

Thanks all for sharing your experiences 🙏 

Weight is not everything, but as light as possible for the day around would be nice. Weight is a point where I can compromise up to a certain point.

I tested the sl3s again today in Frankfurt and just like the first time I spent a longer time with it than with the Q3. The Q3 is pleasant, but after I had a 21 and 24 lens on the sl3s and was close to the store, the focal lengths were more pleasant for me. Whether a zoom would be added, I can not estimate at the moment. Maybe a 75, 85 or 90?

I find 24mp for me well sufficient in consideration of a 60MP sensor of a Q3 or sl3.

Thank you in advance again 🙏

[jaapv]

55 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I have trouble getting decent photos with just a body. YMMV.

Meanwhile in the real world, if I wanted to carry a M around for street, I would pick a classic small light M lens. I don’t enjoy manually focussing M lenses on the SL - and why bother with a SL if you’re not going to use its own lenses. As I wrote, I have Q and SL, and have had digital M. I have a very clear idea, based on experience*, of what each is good for. I also wrote that others may disagree. 
 

*Edit. This includes using the SL for street photography. ‘Unbearable’ wasn’t the reason I decided against it. Discomfort and recognition that it was the wrong tool for the job - as I saw it.

Nobody is stopping you using the same M lenses on the bodies…  It is just that for me, the weight and bulk argument cuts no ice between M and SL series. Just slap  a heavy Tele on an M/Visoflex or a light L lens on an SL depending on the whim of the day. 

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Nobody is stopping you using the same M lenses on the bodies…  It is just that for me, the weight and bulk argument cuts no ice between M and SL series. Just slap  a heavy Tele on an M/Visoflex or a light L lens on an SL depending on the whim of the day. 

I repeat, since you missed it: I don't enjoy focussing M lenses on the SL series.

I repeat, again, since you missed it: YMMV i.e. what you do with the SL in the privacy of your own home is entirely up to you.

The OP will, I am sure read all this advice and make their own choice. I try not to tell others what their preferences should be or why their experience is wrong.

Edited July 22 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

You missed the words “for me”…. 🙄

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[costa43]

I would go with the Q. For an everyday walk around the Q3 in either focal length is hard to beat imo. It’s the very best camera I’ve owned but sold (28). It was a curiosity purchase for me and the only reason for the sale is because I really like the M experience and prefer it to an EVF based camera. I stopped using the Q and couldn’t justify 6 grand sitting on the shelf. After some reflection, I may pick one up again later this year for a winter weather resistant option. It was so refreshing to take it out in rain and snow and not worry so much about it. My SL2-S has a fantastic sensor but it’s now relegated to scanning film negatives as the manual focus experience does not match the M and I do not enjoy using SL lenses much unless I have a really specific need. 

[Elliot Harper]

18 hours ago, jaapv said:

Weight… An SL3 weighs 770 grams, a M11 silver 640. 130 grams is an unbearable weight to carry? Seriously? 

Yes seriously 130 is 20% of 640.

Let’s say you are 180 lbs and all of sudden you become 215 lbs when you wake up tomorrow morning. Would you not complain? 

130 gram and 20% is a LOT in camera world.

Edited July 23 by Elliot Harper