Olaf_ZG Posted November 22 Share #1 Posted November 22 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have had the Q, the Q2 and the Q43. I didn’t like the performance of the Q2 with lack of light. To me, the Q3 performed much better in that aspect. Low light performance of the Q2M is somewhere near the m10m. How much better will be the Q3M in low light? Will there be a noticeable difference when photographing in, for example, a dim light bar/cafe? Is the difference comparable with the difference between m10m and m11m? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 22 Posted November 22 Hi Olaf_ZG, Take a look here Q2M vs Q3M …. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Mr Perceptive Posted November 22 Share #2 Posted November 22 Dynamic Range v ISO Q2M is roughly one stop better than the Q2 Q3 is roughly the same as Q2M (advantages of a BSI sensor) I'd expect the Q3M to be in the order of 1 stop better than the Q3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olaf_ZG Posted November 22 Author Share #3 Posted November 22 One stop better, but does it need to be offset with a higher shutterspeed due to movement visible due to higher mp? will the image show nicer noise, feel more film like? What will be the significance difference image wise between the 2 and 3? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 22 Share #4 Posted November 22 1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said: One stop better, but does it need to be offset with a higher shutterspeed due to movement visible due to higher mp? will the image show nicer noise, feel more film like? What will be the significance difference image wise between the 2 and 3? The linear resolution difference is about 14%. In theory, one would need a 14% faster shutter speed. In practice, I have set 1/15 sec as the slowest shutter speed for both Q2 and Q3. I have yet to see a digital camera with film-grain-like noise. Some digital noise may be more pleasing, but to get the film grain, I use post-processors. Also, to emulate negative film grain, one needs to add grain to highlights, not to shadows. It is the opposite with digital. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derbyshire Man Posted November 22 Share #5 Posted November 22 (edited) With the M11M I find that unless one is happy to crush the dark and shadow areas of an image there is a significant risk of waffle at anything greater than ISO 50,000. So although the grain size is more impressive it really hits the buffers badly sometimes. I also find it impossible to predict when that is going to be. Often it's quite subtle but any hint of trying to increase structure and it can precipitate it. It is better if processed through C1 than LR but even still, I think that is because C1 treats the images differently with less inherent structure at the first pass. If willing to crush blacks and darker areas, increase overall contrast rather than structure then 100-200k is possible but definitely not to be relied on. Clearly it's pretty phenomenal anyway and I love using it but I wouldn't say the average image out of my M11M is any better or more useful than the Q2M used to be. I'd imagine that crosses over to the Q3M. I do much prefer being able to be flexible with the lens however. Just to be clear, I used to find the same on the Q2M before it somehow pupated and became an M11M. Edited November 22 by Derbyshire Man 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted November 23 Share #6 Posted November 23 15 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said: Is the difference comparable with the difference between m10m and m11m I use the Q2M & M11M images interchangeably, apart from the difference in resolution, the Q2M introduces a little “grain” at the higher ISOs. Shadow recovery on the M11M is a little cleaner on screen, but in print barely noticeable. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted November 23 Share #7 Posted November 23 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) In my usage I would say that the the Q2M has way more like 2 stops or more of high iso advantage. When I had the the Q2 for street work I set the auto iso limit at 6400 and with the Q2M I have it set at 25,000 and even go to 50.000 at times which gives a grain like old 400asa film. I have seen reviews on youtube showing files from the new Q3 at 200,000 which is insane, they were usable if correctly exposed (Q2M limit is 100,000 iso) The Q2M is still a remarkable camera and along with it f1.7 lens and high iso capabilities is excellent for any bar/cafe unlike it is near total darkness. As much as I would like some of the upgrades of the Q3 it is hard to justify the extra cost of around £3500-4000 after trading in my very well used Q2M No great shot but this is at iso 50,000 in a dark underpass and the 2nd is actually an OOC JPEG at iso 25,000 in a dimly lit bar 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 November 23 by viramati 9 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/425590-q2m-vs-q3m-%E2%80%A6/?do=findComment&comment=5897343'>More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted November 24 Share #8 Posted November 24 (edited) Any thoughts in terms of the functional difference between the view finder on the Q2M compared with the Q3M? It might be another reason for going for the 3… Edited November 24 by chris_tribble Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 24 Share #9 Posted November 24 Resolution difference; screenshot at 200% after resizing to 43MP. Not clear whether it would be visible in print. Q2M vs Q3M 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/425590-q2m-vs-q3m-%E2%80%A6/?do=findComment&comment=5898070'>More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted November 24 Share #10 Posted November 24 @SrMi I was thinking about the viewfinder clarity on the different bodies and if it makes an appreciable difference in use…. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 24 Share #11 Posted November 24 (edited) 2 hours ago, chris_tribble said: Any thoughts in terms of the functional difference between the view finder on the Q2M compared with the Q3M? It might be another reason for going for the 3… A quick comparison between the two cameras, both with iDR set to high, shows more detail in the deep shadows with Q3M. It may be possible to change it with some settings in Q2M. Otherwise, the EVFs look similar to my aging eyes. Edit: Magnified low-light view in Q3M shows smoother movement. Edited November 24 by SrMi 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted November 25 Share #12 Posted November 25 The Leica Q3 Monochrom has a higher resolution viewfinder at 5.76 million dots, a significant upgrade from the Leica Q2 Monochrom's 3.68 million dots. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 25 Share #13 Posted November 25 34 minutes ago, Le Chef said: The Leica Q3 Monochrom has a higher resolution viewfinder at 5.76 million dots, a significant upgrade from the Leica Q2 Monochrom's 3.68 million dots. Yes, indeed, but I don't notice much difference. People with better eyes may, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 25 Share #14 Posted November 25 I must confess that these discussions about EVF quality puzzle me somewhat. It is just a tool for viewing the image and other information. So what does a minor aesthetic improvement bring? 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 25 Share #15 Posted November 25 35 minutes ago, jaapv said: I must confess that these discussions about EVF quality puzzle me somewhat. It is just a tool for viewing the image and other information. So what does a minor aesthetic improvement bring? The quality of the EVF or OVF is key to my enjoyment of taking pictures. If it flickers or has little contrast, it's just a pain to use. Also, a good implementation helps a lot with quick, effortless manual focusing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 25 Share #16 Posted November 25 (edited) At ISO 100000, with the same exposure, Q3M has a 1-stop advantage. Also, reset sharpening and noise reduction before resizing both images to the same size (42.5MP). Q2M default noise reduction in LrC is higher than Q3M's default setting. Screenshots from excerpts at 100% in LrC, Q2M vs Q3M: 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! Q2M Q3M Edited November 25 by SrMi 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Q2M Q3M ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/425590-q2m-vs-q3m-%E2%80%A6/?do=findComment&comment=5898461'>More sharing options...
SrMi Posted November 25 Share #17 Posted November 25 (edited) Also, Q3M at ISO 100000, but AI denoised in LrC. There is some loss of detail, but it works pretty well. To get a filmic look, one can add grain simulation on top of that, which looks better to me than the digital noise. 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! With AI Denoise (LrC) With AI Denoise and added grain. Edited November 25 by SrMi Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! With AI Denoise (LrC) With AI Denoise and added grain. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/425590-q2m-vs-q3m-%E2%80%A6/?do=findComment&comment=5898463'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 25 Share #18 Posted November 25 Five or six familiar books there, including the Morgan one 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nameBrandon Posted November 26 Share #19 Posted November 26 9 hours ago, jaapv said: I must confess that these discussions about EVF quality puzzle me somewhat. It is just a tool for viewing the image and other information. So what does a minor aesthetic improvement bring? Manual focusing is my big one.. In a lot of scenarios I will manual focus the Q3 43 / M. As far as high ISO, I'm particularly bothered by too much noise, and for me the Q3M is usable without any need to correct for noise up to ISO 25,000 (which is what I've set my Auto ISO limit to as well). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted November 26 Share #20 Posted November 26 I currently own the Q2 Monochrom and love it. I got to play with the Q3 Monochrom last Saturday - along with the M11 Monochrom, and M EV1, at the Leica Store and Gallery in Porto, Portugal. They offered me a trade-in deal on my Q2 Monochrom I can’t resist. I decided to accept their offer and I’m going for the Q3 Monochrom. I’m definitely more of a Q photographer now than a M photographer - in most situations. These “Red Dot Forum Camera Talk” guys do an in depth review I think is worth a viewing. It’s very thorough and points to the differences between the Q2M and Q3M. Leica Q3 Monochrom" width="200" data-embed-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/vsZM8SXFuBU?feature=oembed"> 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! 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/425590-q2m-vs-q3m-%E2%80%A6/?do=findComment&comment=5898775'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now