Thinkimg of selling all of my Sony gear for the Q3 43. Thoughts.

[Cogito]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

The great thing of a one lens camera/setup is, that that’s it. It’s just you and the camera. I had the Q43, it’s a great camera. This is one of my last images. The lightning struck just when I clicked…

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!

Olaf, what happened to your Q3 43?

[Olaf_ZG]

Because of the Q, I didn’t use my M’s, which is a shame. As I partially moved to another system, I had to sell some of my equipment, so lesser used SL lenses went as well as the Q.

The Q is a great everyday camera, but, so is a M. 

[LocalHero1953]

4 hours ago, liggy said:

I love my Q2 and the Q3 43 might be perfect for your needs.  I could not live without the amazing AF, tracking, tele options and 1.2 1.4 fast lenses.

For a more engaging experience I’d suggest picking up a CV 40 1.2.  You’d get a feel for being stuck at one focal length and get rendering with a bit more character than some of your lenses.  

You must be writing about a different camera. The Q cameras have fixed, not interchangeable lenses: Q, Q2 and Q3 have 28/1.7, and the Q3 43 has 43/2. 

[liggy]

10 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

You must be writing about a different camera. The Q cameras have fixed, not interchangeable lenses: Q, Q2 and Q3 have 28/1.7, and the Q3 43 has 43/2. 

I was thinking the OP should try his A1 with the Voigtlander 40 1.2 first before flipping everything.  Sorry - that wasn’t very clear.  

[viramati]

I certainly wouldn't give up the versatility of my Sony system for a Q43  but then each to his own. I have a Q2 monchrom and it is fantastic and with me most of the time. 28mm is my favourite lens for story telling and street photography but I would find a fixed 43mm lens camera very limiting

Edited July 20 by viramati

[PeterCL]

I did. Sold my Sony CR and three Sony primes and bought the Q43. Absolutely no regrets. 

Big bonus: the end of GAS for me; what a time saver !

[plantagoo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The two posts before this one shows the "problem" with these kind of question. Everyone has a different need and approach to photography. The only person to answer the starting question of this thread is the one who asked it...

I for myself had to buy the Q3 43 first to find out that it was too limiting for me. Went back to the Q3 28. I knew it before - a little bit. But until I tried it for myself, I lusted for the Q3 43 again again. Now I can appreciate my Q3 28 even more.

But: I need another camera for occasional event or sport shootings - where even the 28mm are too narrow or way too short...

And: I would have never thought this > After 10 years of 28mm Qs I built something like a "muscle memory". If I have a Q in my hand my brain switches to some kind of special shooting mode which utilises the all good sides of the Q 28mm. And this "Q 28mm shooting mode" did absolutely not work with the Q3 43...

Edited July 20 by plantagoo

[Stephen_C]

Getting rid of DSLR gear (i.e., significantly, interchangeable lenses) in favour of a Q model (Q3 in my case) goes hand in hand with a decision to model your future photography around the new camera's capabilities. In my case, that meant an end to wildlife photography and a decision to concentrate on landscape and street photography. I regarded the pay-offs (a camera with which I could walk around and no more sensor cleaning) as worthwhile. Of course, as this thread shows, everyone has their own views on the conundrum.

Stephen

[Einst_Stein]

You are likely to find your move is too large a step than you assumed. 

I think your will find get rid of Sony is a right move. I have been there, but I moved into Leica M and later S.  I am at home now.  However, sometimes I want to carry minimum and I should and I must, then a high end fix lens P&S is so much better than M or S with multiple lenses. For that, I have Leica X-U (35mm equivalent) and X-V (28-70mm equivalent), and I used X-V much more than X-U. If I want 28mm instead or 35mm, I have 28mm on M, so far so good. I see you have two zooms. I guess you might be more comfortable with a zoom P&S than Q. 

However, force yourself into a prime P&S might be actually a better decision.  I always feel my photos not impressive, and I suspect I should  boldly move out of my comfortable zone.  There is a psychological barrier.

Edited July 20 by Einst_Stein

[anonymoose]

On 7/19/2025 at 11:32 AM, richard371 said:

As far as AF I often shoot flowers that are moving in the breeze.  I keep the A1 on continuous AF because there is always some movement by the time the focus locks and I fully press the shutter.  Will the Q3 struggle here?

Context: I own an A7S III, A1, and Q2 currently. I previously owned a Q3.

The Q3's AF is good, but nowhere near as good as the A1. If you rely heavily on the A1's AF, you will be occasionally frustrated with and miss shots with the Q3. Is it a dealbreaker? For me no--I went from a Q3 to a Q2 (and took a hit on AF) and it mis-focuses on about 15-20% of my shots vs. the A1, but I'm ok with it. Why? Because the Q serves a certain purpose for me (easy to carry, easy to travel with, simple operation, clean design, lovely pictures at f1.7).

I personally wouldn't recommend going all-in on the Q3. Rent it first and use it as your only camera for a week or two and see how you feel. 61MP and cropping will help offset the 28 or 43mm focal lengths, but you're not going to get the shots you'd get with a 70-200 lens. I went through this thought exercise you're going through before and ended up owning both the A1 and Q2 and I'm very happy with that decision.

A1 strengths: quick+sticky AF, interchangeable lenses, 8K30 and 4K120 video (if you care), cheaper

Q3 strengths: 61MP of crisp/sharp/beautiful photos, simple design, slightly smaller, great lens that looks amazing wide open, 4K60 video is serviceable

Edited July 20 by anonymoose

[bobtodrick]

5 hours ago, PeterCL said:

I did. Sold my Sony CR and three Sony primes and bought the Q43. Absolutely no regrets. 

Big bonus: the end of GAS for me; what a time saver !

😂…I to appreciate that about my Q, I never have to worry whether I need that newly introduced lens.

[Le Chef]

Buying a Q3 is like living on a Scottish island. You have to be self sufficient and adaptable. You need to be able to figure out workarounds that don’t include a bagful of lenses and enjoy it.

If the challenge of that doesn’t appeal, then you would be better off sticking with the Sony.

[BWColor]

The Leica Qs appear to be fine cameras.  I cancelled my Q3 43 order and picked up the A7CR with a series of small lenses and the 24mm GM.  I also use the wonderful Loxia lenses with the CR.  I rarely change lenses and travel for weeks with only two lenses.  Currently, I’m planning a trip while only carrying two 645 fixed lens film rangefinders.. so no issue with fixed lens cameras.  I do appreciate a better viewfinder than the CR, I previously owned the A7Rv and own the X2D.  I believe that the CR’s EVF and Sony’s horrible menu system combined with their new take on a small full frame fixed lens camera should help to sell many Qs.  I love my CR and some of the lenses, so I don’t regret my choice.  For me, the less capable autofocus of the Q would not register as a negative, but then again, my favorite camera is the M11 Monochrom.  Buy the A7CR for practical reasons, but buy the Q to have fun with a great camera.  This sound like what you want to do..so go for it.  All the best…

Edited July 21 by BWColor
Corrected camera typo

[Qwertynm]

I agree that handling the Q cameras is a much more enjoyable experience than any of the more advanced ILC‘s from CaNiSo. The Eye-AF is still jerky and unreliable after two years of the cameras introduction - Leica should improve its AF algos via firmware imho. I miss a lot of shots of my kids because they are moving too fast for the Q3 but the process of getting there is much more enjoyable than with my Canon R5. The buttons and wheels just feel so satisfying, the camera is a joy to handle. I find the files amazing out of this camera, better than the Canon. That’s why I‘m keeping it despite its flaws. 
 

I‘d suggest you go to a store and handle the camera yourself. If it clicks and you’re in love then you know what to do.

[anonymoose]

22 hours ago, plantagoo said:

The two posts before this one shows the "problem" with these kind of question. Everyone has a different need and approach to photography. The only person to answer the starting question of this thread is the one who asked it...

I for myself had to buy the Q3 43 first to find out that it was too limiting for me. Went back to the Q3 28. I knew it before - a little bit. But until I tried it for myself, I lusted for the Q3 43 again again. Now I can appreciate my Q3 28 even more.

But: I need another camera for occasional event or sport shootings - where even the 28mm are too narrow or way too short...

And: I would have never thought this > After 10 years of 28mm Qs I built something like a "muscle memory". If I have a Q in my hand my brain switches to some kind of special shooting mode which utilises the all good sides of the Q 28mm. And this "Q 28mm shooting mode" did absolutely not work with the Q3 43...

I will die on the hill that the Q3 is better than the Q3 43 overall! 😂

I owned a Q3 for about a year and rented a Q3 43 alongside it for a week (covering some personal family events and a trip to Yosemite). On a fixed camera lens, having more FOV and cropping in was way more useful for me (especially when it's not possible to back up because you might fall off a cliff!). The extra light gathering from f2-->f1.7 was meaningful in practice for keeping ISO noise down.

I also did a double blind test of the same picture from the Q3 and the Q3 43 with my wife and a group of friends (overall picture, pixel peeping, etc.) of a variety of pictures (portraits, lifestyle, landscape) and it was basically 50/50. Most times people said, "I can't tell a difference really" and just picked one.

To the threadstarter I will say: if you're downsizing from an entire Sony system to a single Q camera, make it the Q3.

Edited July 21 by anonymoose

[SrMi]

33 minutes ago, anonymoose said:

I will die on the hill that the Q3 is better than the Q3 43 overall! 😂

I owned a Q3 for about a year and rented a Q3 43 alongside it for a week (covering some personal family events and a trip to Yosemite). On a fixed camera lens, having more FOV and cropping in was way more useful for me (especially when it's not possible to back up because you might fall off a cliff!). The extra light gathering from f2-->f1.7 was meaningful in practice for keeping ISO noise down.

I also did a double blind test of the same picture from the Q3 and the Q3 43 with my wife and a group of friends (overall picture, pixel peeping, etc.) of a variety of pictures (portraits, lifestyle, landscape) and it was basically 50/50. Most times people said, "I can't tell a difference really" and just picked one.

To the threadstarter I will say: if you're downsizing from an entire Sony system to a single Q camera, make it the Q3.

I do not crop in-camera. I use my Q3 as a 28/26mm and Q3 43 as a 43mm system. On my recent trip, I took both the Q3 and the Q3 43, but 95% of the shots were taken with the Q3. However, that experience is very personal, and for others, the ratio may be reversed.

[LocalHero1953]

I don't crop in-camera with the Q3 43 (one cannot). But I crop its images a lot in post.

[Ivan M]

On 7/19/2025 at 12:41 PM, richard371 said:

I've been reading lots of reviews and forum post etc. in addition to going into a Leica store and checking it out.  Right now I have a 3 year old Sony A1, 24-70GM2, 55 1.8, 24-105F4, and the 40/2.5 which I enjoy the most.  I don't shoot any action, sports etc.  Mainly just general walk around/travel photography.  What's alluring me to the Q3 is the images I'm seeing online.  There is just something about them that pop.  I tried Leica profiles for the Sony and it's not the same. I'm also tired of lugging heavy gear around so sometimes it just stays at home. Also tired of deciding what lens to take/buy etc.  I'm going into this camera knowing its limitations and I know the AF is not in the same league as the Sony. Not only am I loving the IQ of the Q3 I also want a more enjoyable shooting experience. I feel like the Sony is like shooting with a computer.  Thoughts?  Any advice here?  It's a big trade/purchase that I hope I will not regret.  Thanks

You will have ZERO regrets if you decide to get a Q3, Just remember it is the GATEWAY to LEICA. I shoot with a Q3 and an M6, I would not have it any other way, and i have shot them ALL. Minolta, NIKON, CANON, HASSELBLAD, Large Format. LEICAS are absolutely MAGICAL, please remember also it is ONLY A TOOL, The rest is up to you. 

Edited July 21 by Ivan M

[SrMi]

3 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I don't crop in-camera with the Q3 43 (one cannot). But I crop its images a lot in post.

Sure, you can. Shoot JPG and use digital zoom.

I was referring to the @anonymoose's post and using digital zoom (aka cropping). My point is that I use 28/26mm because of its native focal length, not because of its potential for digital zoom (wide to long).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[anonymoose]

3 hours ago, SrMi said:

I do not crop in-camera. I use my Q3 as a 28/26mm and Q3 43 as a 43mm system. On my recent trip, I took both the Q3 and the Q3 43, but 95% of the shots were taken with the Q3. However, that experience is very personal, and for others, the ratio may be reversed.

I use it with the 35mm crop active for framing (gives it a very mild rangefinder-esque feel), but frequently re-crop images back to 28mm.