Thanks for the video. I bought a Leica Q after 8 years selling it away for 1.8K USD, fairly new condition. Didn’t need the higher resolution and weather seal. Happy with having the Leica lens and the image quality
Hi Paul, I really appreciate you putting out this video on the Q3. I currently have the Q1 and was wondering if I should upgrade to the Q3 or even the Q2 given the age of my Q1. Here in Canada, the cost of the Q3 is $8,100 plus tax quite a lot of money and that doesn't include any accessories other than what is provided in the box. Based on what you mentioned and my own experience with the Q1, I'm going to stick to using my Q1 for now as the changes are not enough to make me upgrade my camera at this time.
8100 CAD? That is expensive. I am supervised as here in Europe it goes for 5950 Euro (basic Q3 no accessories or limited editions/monochrome). Regardless it is a lot of money. Upside is that these cameras age very well
Couldn't agree more. Currently, I have Q and simply can't find a logical reason to upgrade even to Q2. The lens is the only important - and it is the same! so I was so surprised by that hype around Q3 release... in simple words - if you badly wanted some new gear to buy - better for for smth new like Fuji (what I've personally done by taking x100v and sold it after one month because it can't beat Q). thanks for your thoughts and all the best
Thank you for your feedback. Much appreciated. When it comes to the Q series. You buy the lens really, which hasn't changed throughout the series, the camera/sensor specs and features have. I don't really need more mega pixels nor do I need 8k or a flip screen. I am considering buying the Q2 monochrome but still scrutinizing the need for it :)
Recently picked up the Q at a great price and can't imagine how big the files of the Q3 may be when this one at 24MP makes 45MB files as it is. This hunt for more megapixels is just marketing hype IMO. Granted the Q2 introduced weather sealing but how many of us are risking the damage to a 6k camera by shooting in the rain or bad weather!? There's a reason why the M9 with its 18MP sensor is still sought after and still commands such a hefty price, it's not about the pixels and it never has been.
Weird reason not to upgrade, sounds like leica is giving you more then expected for less money then expected so you won’t upgrade. I have the original Q, love it, didn’t upgrade with the Q2 because I was hoping Leica would switch to a 35mm lens. Now with the Q3 and the better processor, better autofocus, higher MP so cropping to 35mm makes sense I preordered the Q3. Plus I like the new app that allows for easy transfer to my phone and converting dng to a leica look jpeg right on the app for quick sharing. I’ll probably never use the video feature, guessing it’s just there since every modern camera offers at least 4K just like all your Fuji cameras.
Well I do agree with your reasoning, mine comes in from a different perspective, call it weird if you want to. My reasoning is that despite all new features on the Q3, I still feel that my Q does the job for me. I dont need a big mp sensor (despite cropping feature on the Q3). The Q3 specs include 8K video, I wont need it and wont be paying for it. That said it could prove a feature that in 3 to 5 yrs will become standard. By that time I might have a good reason to upgrade my Q. That doesn't mean the Q3 is a "bad" camera. Not at all the tech nerd in me loves it. The photographer in me can see the benefits, but at the moment I don't see those benefits as critical to my photography. Thank you for your response.
food for thought … i have the Q2 been thinking of adding the Q2 Mono but the 3 is interesting but agree in seeing how things shift out in a year or so… and yeh the big file sizes are a bit intimidating too…
Good video! Happy Q1 owner as well & exactly the same points you make went through my head when the Q3 came out. Rarely, if ever, do I bemoan the Q1 "only" having 24MP; it's the old 35mm film equivalent and more than enough imo. What would make for better pictures, e.g. image composition etc., mostly come down to the operator. Also, the Q1's AF is adequate for my needs. I haven't outgrown the Q1 by a long shot yet!
If the same especially when it comes to the quality of photos. Mostly down to the photographer and more megapixels don't make for better photos. For the Q3 I feel Leica has taken a few wrong decisions. 8k video? I love my Q for photography? Flip screen? I have learned to appreciate the point and shoot style cameras with a good view finder. I would consider buying a Q2 monochrome but that is more wishlist than goal.
Video makes sense on the Q3 as you can shoot something like 75mm native 4K, no upscaling. And same for photos, you have 39Mp at 35mm crop, and still 19Mp at 50mm crop, that's like a M9, with a "Summilux" at f/4.0 as it's basically a M4/3 crop on the sensor.
When i look from your perspective, higher res evf and weather sealed body would be the main reasons for an upgrade. And if i decided to upgrade my Q after using it for a long period, i would probably wait for a special edition version of the Q3.
Paul, another great video, thank you! I completely agree! I have an 'ancient' TL2 which is often slow to focus in low light, but ok with the 23mm f/2.0. And 24 megapixels suits me fine. Plus, I have forgotten my memory card a few times, so the inbuilt memory is a Godsend. And I honestly can't see any improvement could be made to the pictures I've taken with my TL2. I'll be sticking with it until it conks out!
So true and indeed i will be emptying my Leicas in the coming years, but will rent a Leica SL2 and Leica Q3 in the future to see what the experience is. The TL ans CL cameras of Leica are excellent cameras to bad Leica discontinued them to be able to add a flip screen on the Q3 and 8k video...
@@PaulTakesPhotos I'll look forward to hearing what you make of the Q3! I wouldn't know what do with all those pixels either! And like you - I completely fell in love with my first generation Q, and really regretted having to sell it; but I had to put food on the table!
I love my q but found focus a bit slow, visor little outdated, menus too, battery not so durable. I think the q3 is not really an improvement over the final image but for the useabilitymostly can be a good improvement if money is not a real problem.
I agree that the Q is showing its age a bit, that said I love using it and love image quality. Maybe one day I will upgrade, for now keeping my pennies :)
As a deliberate Leica Q (vs. Q2 or Q3) owner I agree with everything you say, Paul. Low light capabilities, which tend to be better with lower resolution sensors, were an additional argument for me.
To me, as a first time buyer, the Q3 gives you more for the money. Q3 is just $200 more than a brand new Q2 and you get way better auto focus system, screen and evf resolution and the usb in camera charging (very useful when traveling). Also video capability is now useful.
Hi Rico, thanks for sharing. I agree that the Q3 is offering a much better value proposition than the Q2 and Q. I don't need the Q3 or Q2 as the lens is still the same as on the Q. That said the price of the Q3 really surprised me positively. Did you order the Q3?
The EVF and the screen resolutions are also much better. Also the triple resolutions mean you can use the 60mpixels when you need them, and also smaller when you don't. Best of both worlds.
Maybe I'm wrong but I've owned a Q1 for 2 years and I am more than happy with it. I don't consider it the best camera for street or any specific genre of photography. its strength lies in the image quality. What you manage to compose correctly within its lens - even with some crops - is, yes, peerless compared to many other brands. I would say that this is already a lot.
Why are you selling you x100v? I personally love the way the q fits in my hands (with cage) and love the image quality. The x100v never agreed with me. I'd say that if you want to get rid of your x100v I'd suggest looking at the XT30II (same processor and sensor as x100v) and pair it with the 27mm or the Ricoh GRiii-x (27mm fixed lens). Keep in mind that form factor of the Q doesn't allow it to just fit in your pocket except for 90's mc hammer pants :)
There is a better viewfinder. I have the Q2 Monochrom and live it a lot. I miss color and wanted the Q2 too. We are a Leica boutique and so I tested the Q3 prior to its release and I love it very much. It’s a joy to use and personally I don’t care about the file size etc. I agree with you that 7k video is silly without two card slots. So if I had a Q2 I don’t think I’d upgrade to Q3, mainly because of the money, but after using the Q3 I’m in love with it 😊
Thanks for sharing Michal. The price actualy surprised me positively (accessoires aside). I think if you sell a Q2 a buy the Q3 it is probably more affordable. That said, the gear enthousiast in me, screams buy, the realist is pretty much Leica Q all-the-way. I think one thing set Leica apart which is the shooting experience itself. Basic, easy and great image quality. I also shoot on an X2 which is still producing very nice quality images.
One thing : mp count does not mean size. 24 mp Q1 is the same size as 60mp of Q3. More than that: if you need a good colors, so there is a rule: less megapixels means better colours. More pixel density - worse colours, more complicated algorithms to achieve pleasant colours = more errors. Full frame 24x36 sensor is the same in all full frame cameras. Q, Q2, Q3.. m9-m11 etc etc. but oldest cameras have a greater colours soc than newer high mp count. Rule. Axiom. Take an oldest full frame canon 5d with 10mp. Make a photo in raw. And see that unbelievable pleasant film like colours. And this os not even ccd. It is just a big fat pixels. The lover mp count , the lower density - the bigger every pixel is. The smaller between pixel gaps. The more information sensor receive.
Very informative, thank you for taking the time to share. Always wondered about it. I prefer cameras (digital) that were produced between 2012-2018 in general mostly MFT & APC (Fuji & Lumix) although I do own the XT30ii & XT4. I do like the older cameras more fun less artificial in colour rendering.
4K is worth having just about but I’m happy enough using 1080P as I do not view my videos on more than a 32” monitor, usually a 27” iMac. 8K? No, not necessary, but it is there for those that wish to use it, as is the case for all features. Most people will use different features from their neighbour, so it is best to fit all the features into the same camera. It sounds to me as if you would be happier with a Sony A7IV with a 24mm lens. However since you are happy with your Q1, stick with that and shoot happy without any gadget acquisition syndrome. It is a nice place to be.
Great points for discussion. This high MP count of the latest generation of prosumer cameras is not due to necessity. It is just that the technology is there to produce these sensors cheaply and the marketing dept of these giant companies have a hell of a lot to say in how these cameras are engineered, what features are to be put in them etc etc. Just to keep things in perspective, the IQ3 50 MP digital back from Phase One was introduced in 2016 and cost about $44000 then, and what do you think it was used for? All the super glossy photos for fashion and product photography for billboarding. Who are we kidding here? Why does a point and shoot camera need a 60 MP sensor? What exactly do we photograph that needs that much data? I have seen 60X90cm brilliant colour landscape prints from a 12 MP D700 that lacked nothing when viewed at the proper distance. A 24 MP sensor would give an increase of about 40% in linear scale to the print, that is just under 1.5 meter long prints. Has anyone exhibited anywhere? Have you been asked to produce 1.5 meter long prints? I really don't know where we are going with all this? Not so long ago, we used to produce 12X16 photographs for gallery exhibitions, now kids carrying these 45MP or 60MP cameras use them to post on Instagram!!! The Mind Boggles.
Some very good points you made and you are right that the video was intended to spark discussion and I do think, like you, that bigger sensors (26mp plus) only make sense to a certain degree. The cropping factor.... Yeah your crop to the format of a 90mm but the compression will still be of a 28mm f/1.7... I have never seen big prints of 2 meters in a gallery. I have seen them at the movies though.. Danny Trejo :) One more thing: cam manufacturers seem to be under the impression they have to keep up with mobile phone producers and offer new cameras every 16 months (Sony hello!) instead of focussing on one camera and build it to last, support it with 10yrs of firmware upgrades... I think that Leica does that part well. Cameras build to last and stand test of time.
@@PaulTakesPhotos Nikon used to be pretty good at making sure their stuff last and was backward compatible, but not anymore. Leica is probably the only one left, I agree with you, but their recent SL3 is a cause for concern. It looks like it was designed by a committee of accountants and marketing people!!!
@lensman5762 Leica too has to deal with pushes for increased revenue. I do feel that SL series is more of a niche camera, for a very specific (pro) user. There are rumours Leica will release an entry level Q, but I don't see that happening. I think Leica made a big mistake/error discontinuing their X-line aps-c cameras.
The exact my own reason is i only need my photos just for social media, edit mobile, and the largest possible probably only for photo book/zine but its something i dont do for a long time. As long as the lens still the same, im not insecure lol
Yes,I too still shoot my original Q frequently even though I have the Q2 as well. The tilt screen is nice but, like you, I have it on one of my Fuji cameras. The back lit sensor is a good feature but I've got that on my SL2-S so I have no incentive either to get the Q3. I rarely need the 47 megs on the Q2 so 60 is just way too much for my needs.
@@PaulTakesPhotos It's the SL2-S that I shoot and yes, it's a beast weight wise but I only shoot it on the street for very short periods. I normally use the SL 24-90mm or the APO SL 35mm...both stellar performers !
I hear you can decrease raw files by pixel binning, if you don't need the size. Fore sure for someone who buys now, no brainer. I don't have any of it yet, expensive :-) Ricoh GR IIIx is what I have too.
Those feature indeed exist and it is helpful for those who either use the crop functionality or want smaller file sizes. Great features indeed useful for those who shoot commercial work (print vs. social media) :) review on the GRIII-x coming up. Great camera have to admit and easier to get than the X100V :)
@@PaulTakesPhotos . I had x100v but didn't like it that much. Sold it when it was running on normal price 🙂 Great camera, just not for me. ' out of the box' I was certainly more astonished by Ricoh, by it's performance and picture quality. Thank you for all you do!
@@f__e__e__l__e__e__p we are kindred spirits when it comes to the x100v i didn't enjoy it either shooting experience wise and the lens hunting. Sold it off too. Image quality was good though. Ricoh GRIiix has truly magnificent colours and sharpness. Especially.when you add your own film sims
For me it's the black coating that frustrate me - which is prone to scratches. One of the reason I prefer the explorer over the regular q2. I would have hoped they would release an explorer version with the Q3. The paint is just much more durable.
You know i never considered the coating. I accept it kind fades or damages over time. The explorer is very pleasing to the eye. Never realised the coating was different. Learned something! Thanks
@@PaulTakesPhotos i had the q3 black and got a lot of scratches on the edge within 3 weeks while in china Leica fanboys did told me « it’s expected » claiming « it gives character »Personally switching to the explorer was a much better options, and remains really good after a year of travelling The q3 is interesting, but I wouldn’t call it grown breaking compared to the q2.
Hi Paul, Great Video ! Yes, I was very excited with the arrival of the new Q3, but you put me back with my 2 feets on the ground. I appreciate your practical and well balanced thinking. Certainly, I will follow the reviews of the Q3 users. So, thanks alot for sharing your ideas with us all ! Greatings, take care, Roger. I love my Q1 !
Hi Roger, I am glad you found it useful, as I was equally excited like you, but had to tame that Gear Acquisition Syndrome. Let's see what the users say in a years time. Take good care and keep in touch
How often do we hear in the photography community that it’s the lenses that count, not the bodies? I love shooting with my Q and it has essentially the same lens as the Q3, so I see no reason for me to upgrade personally. The Q2 is more compelling to me 😊
Very compelling arguments. Professionals will only use thei Q model (whichever they have) for their own amusement and pleasure. Amateurs (even educated amateurs like me) will not need all the extra stuff. From the Leica stable, I like the Q, and the SL2S (if I could put up with the bulk, weight). 24MP is a sweet spot for shooting in low light, processing speed, etc etc etc. As a reference to... nothing... I had the M Monocrom CCD sensor camera. It was AWESOME in terms of image quality, rendering etc. And the Sumichron was actually rendering better with it, than the far more expensive Summilux. I am so sory I sold it... Love the concept of the Q line-up, though...
That is my point too, all Leica Q's are great, but the huge sensors not my thing. Had a Sony A7R2 (45mb) and realy wasnt my thing. I love the 24mb full frame sensors, perfect for me. I'd love to have a monochrome camera, wouldn't surprise me if the Q3 Monochrome will be released at some point. That said it would still be too much for me :)
@@PaulTakesPhotos Agree. The B&W was too much of a luxury for me. But having experienced it for 18 months, followed by another 18 months of the Typ 246 B&W - (and this is very subjective) - the 18mb CCD sensor rendered so much nicer than the following suit of CMOS sensors, including the current 60MB.
I own and love my Q and think Leica is going the wrong path with the Q3: flip screen and all the connectors ruin the great clean industrial design and pure experience. I would like to have a Q with better battery, weather protection and two memory card slots. So the Q2 had something to offer for me, the Q3 not.
I agree the battery life on the Q is uh outdated 😃 and i agree that Leica seems to have abandoned their simple design. Would love them the release the Leica QmII with better battery life, internal memory, weather sealing for a retail price of 3500 usd (wishfull thinking i am afraid)
It is not cheap, but fairly priced if you look at the price of the Q2 it is 5650 euro here, Q3 for a few hundred extra would make sense (except there will accessories that will cost a bit)
