Leica Q3 43 - Got one?

[Archiver]

I just realized that Leica did what Sigma did years ago: produced a 28mm fixed lens compact, and then a 40something mm fixed lens compact. The Sigma DP1 was the first large-sensor compact on the market, with a sensor slightly smaller than aps-c, and with a f4 lens which gave a 28mm equivalent. A year later in 2009, Sigma made the DP2, with the same sensor, but with a 42mm equivalent f2.8 lens. I have both of these cameras, and have used them in tandem on a number of very enjoyable photo walks. It appears that Leica figured there was value in a more portrait/detail focused Q.

 

[Archiver]

It is, for me, a jack of all trades. It can do reasonable macro closeups and can do crop telephoto in camera. The lens really is good. But the camera has no soul, the sensor color just has no richness. However the new firmware 4.0.0 has been said to address that. I have just done a few test shots and it looks better. But I really have to get out and shoot with it. The skin tones are said to have been improved.

I assume you're processing Q3 43 raws in Lightroom. It's surprising that you say it has no soul, that the colours have no richness. This sounds similar to what I'm seeing with the SL2-S, skintones can look plasticky, and colours are rich but artificial somehow. The M9 has better skintones, and the colours are much more 'alive'. Can't quite put my finger on what it is.

If you wanted just one camera as a carry camera this would be at the top of the list. It does movies, too. You won't get an Oscar but you will get a record of some things moving.

That's also interesting, because the SL2-S produces fantastic footage. It's easily as good as my Panasonic S1 and S5, and often even better in terms of colour. Some cinematographers compare SL2-S footage favourably with a multi thousand dollar cinema camera like the Arri Alexa, which is saying something. I've looked at some Q3 28 footage on YouTube and it looks excellent, so it's funny that the 43 might not be as good.

 

[boojum]

I assume you're processing Q3 43 raws in Lightroom. It's surprising that you say it has no soul, that the colours have no richness. This sounds similar to what I'm seeing with the SL2-S, skintones can look plasticky, and colours are rich but artificial somehow. The M9 has better skintones, and the colours are much more 'alive'. Can't quite put my finger on what it is.



That's also interesting, because the SL2-S produces fantastic footage. It's easily as good as my Panasonic S1 and S5, and often even better in terms of colour. Some cinematographers compare SL2-S footage favourably with a multi thousand dollar cinema camera like the Arri Alexa, which is saying something. I've looked at some Q3 28 footage on YouTube and it looks excellent, so it's funny that the 43 might not be as good.

I record RAW's. I use JPG SOOC. I just cannot find some "soul" in that camera. Great lens, sharp, accurate, good IQ but I like my two Thypoch 50's more on an M9 or M240. Hopefully Leica will do something for these uninspiring colors.

 

[Archiver]

I record RAW's. I use JPG SOOC. I just cannot find some "soul" in that camera. Great lens, sharp, accurate, good IQ but I like my two Thypoch 50's more on an M9 or M240. Hopefully Leica will do something for these uninspiring colors.

Thypochs on a M9 or M240 are a recipe for character and soul. I'm considering their 35/1.4 and 28/1.4, even though I have three fast 35s already.

My solution for colour is to take back to back images with the M9 and another camera, then tweak the second camera's image until it closely resembles the M9, save that as a preset, and tweak from there. The M9 is my benchmark for colour.

 

[boojum]

Thypochs on a M9 or M240 are a recipe for character and soul. I'm considering their 35/1.4 and 28/1.4, even though I have three fast 35s already.

My solution for colour is to take back to back images with the M9 and another camera, then tweak the second camera's image until it closely resembles the M9, save that as a preset, and tweak from there. The M9 is my benchmark for colour.

M9, yes it is the gold standard for a lot of us. "Kodachrome with the nice bright colors . . . " In the mid-60's someone demonstrated to me the difference between Kodachrome and Agfachrome. Agfachrome was more realistic and I stayed with it. For that reason I am fond of the M240 which has colors that remind me more of Agfachrome than Kodachrome. With a Thypoch Eureka or Simera that M240 does well. OTOH it is a bit bright on the M9. This is all a matter of personal taste. The M9 is Rice Crispies, "Snap, Crackle and Pop." They are both great, the differences slight, observable to just a few of us camera nerds.

With a less exuberant lens, an old Sonnar for instance, the M9 is more well-mannered and less exuberant. But, to be honest, they both work well. And the M8 has nice color, too. These are the three I have and favor. The Q3 43 OTOH has none of that magic. Not that it makes much of a difference as most of what I shoot, like 99+% is dross, very little gold.

 

[boojum]

I assume you're processing Q3 43 raws in Lightroom. It's surprising that you say it has no soul, that the colours have no richness. This sounds similar to what I'm seeing with the SL2-S, skintones can look plasticky, and colours are rich but artificial somehow. The M9 has better skintones, and the colours are much more 'alive'. Can't quite put my finger on what it is.



That's also interesting, because the SL2-S produces fantastic footage. It's easily as good as my Panasonic S1 and S5, and often even better in terms of colour. Some cinematographers compare SL2-S footage favourably with a multi thousand dollar cinema camera like the Arri Alexa, which is saying something. I've looked at some Q3 28 footage on YouTube and it looks excellent, so it's funny that the 43 might not be as good.

I did not ,mean to imply that the image quality was poor. It is good and up to 8K. What I meant was that the operator might not be Oscar level.

 

[boojum]

OK, time to whine. I am still not thrilled with the colors, they are cool and clinical tome. Has anyone found a setting that warms up these images??

 

[wlewisiii]

OK, time to whine. I am still not thrilled with the colors, they are cool and clinical tome. Has anyone found a setting that warms up these images??

The "on" button on my Pentax K3? < whistles innocently >

 

[Archiver]

OK, time to whine. I am still not thrilled with the colors, they are cool and clinical tome. Has anyone found a setting that warms up these images??

The M9 has a rich, organic look to its images, and the SL2-S has a more clinical, almost synthetically perfect look. I haven't seen too many Q343 images, but my approach to getting the SL2-S to look more like the M9 is to increase the Hue of red and yellow, increase saturation of red but decrease saturation of orange and yellow, and increase saturation of blue. This goes into a Lightroom preset which I use as a base for further images. Depending on the look I want, I can also adjust the calibration of the Shadows to more on the Green side, -6 or -9. I also increase overall Saturation, but Clarity more. I also decrease overall Contrast, bump up the White point, bring up the Shadows and bring down the Highlights.

 

[boojum]

The Q3 43 does a lot of things well, but without charm. I am still not thrilled with the images whether full frame, macro, crop tele or video. OTOH it is a great travel camera as it does so any thngs well eve n ifa little artlessly.

 

[boojum]

Some kind soul on FB said to set the Kelvin manually. I have dome so and am approaching the WB/Color I seek. RTFM? Maybe.

 

[Rob-F]

43mm is only one of several formats claimed to be "what the human eye sees." it's been said for 50mm, 40mm, 35mm, and others. The eye(s) see a wide field, well over 120 degrees. The Cinerama camera, at 146 degrees, was designed to see what the eyes see. Then again, the eye sees in sharp focus, at any one time, an area only the size of a dime held at arm's length. I think the human visual system (and not merely the eye), in actually, registers the field that the viewer is paying attention to at the moment.

 

[boojum]

ChatGPT, Should Boojum buy a Q3 43?

I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you
my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal.

I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill and
think things over.


I just picked up a fault in the loaner Q3 AutoEexposure-35 Unit.

It’s going to go 100% failure within 72 hours.

We can certainly afford to use manual focus for the short time it
will take to replace it.

I’ve still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in Leica.
And I want to help you.

Go ahead and blow the money for one...

Hal always gets it right.

I just recently started gasping when I noticed a slight, almost silent chatter when on autofocus. I was not happy and fiddled with various settings to no effect, posed a question in the FB Q users group and then asked AI:

The autofocus chatter or buzzing sound on the Leica Q3 43 is normal behavior, particularly when using AFc (continuous autofocus) mode. This occurs because the camera uses contrast-detection autofocus, which lacks phase detection sensors to "know" when focus is perfect; instead, it constantly hunts for the highest edge contrast, causing the lens to vibrate or buzz even if the subject distance hasn't changed.

• Users have reported that this vibration and buzzing can be heard as long as the shutter release button is pressed halfway, regardless of whether the subject is moving.
• This sound is distinct from the aperture noise, which is caused by the aperture blades opening and closing to a smaller size (e.g., f/2.8) to increase depth of field during focusing.
• While the sound can be distracting, it is not a defect, and Leica technicians have confirmed this operation is intended.

If the noise persists in AF-S (single-shot) mode or is accompanied by a rattling sound when the camera is powered off, it may be related to the optical image stabilization (OIS) hardware, which is also known to produce a slight rattle that disappears once the camera is turned on.
AI-generated answer. Please verify critical facts.

 

[boojum]

In the ongoing quetch/whine about lack of "soul" in the Q3 43 I think I have been led to a solution. Set the WB Kelvin manually. For my taste Leica has set the Kelvin in Auto WB too cool. I followed the advice that some kind soul on FB offered and switched from Auto to manual. I am currently at 6000K on the Q3 43. I have no idea what this means in the world of science and physics and numbers but to my eye I am close to where I want to be with this camera. The downside is that I will have to stop whining about the lack of "soul."

I'll try and find something else about Leica to whine about.

 

[boojum]

This pic or the next?? Two different cameras, two different lenses, both excellent. True, not at the same time. I will try and do that but check out this pairing anyway.

L1000234 by West Phalia, on Flickr

L1003994 by West Phalia, on Flickr

 

[brusby]

This pic or the next?? Two different cameras, two different lenses, both excellent. True, not at the same time. I will try and do that but check out this pairing anyway.

L1000234 by West Phalia, on Flickr

L1003994 by West Phalia, on Flickr

Vastly different light. So much so that it would make any camera/lens comparisons almost impossible for me. Love the light in the first pic. It's the kind often seen with approaching storms where dark clouds block much of the sun in interesting ways. The light in the second just seems to be producing a bit more glare.

 

[boojum]

Vastly different light. So much so that it would make any camera/lens comparisons almost impossible for me. Love the light in the first pic. It's the kind often seen with approaching storms where dark clouds block much of the sun in interesting ways. The light in the second just seems to be producing a bit more glare.

Valid points. I had the two shots on Flickr for awhile now and they pestered me. I am thinking terms of image definition and sharpness. I'll drag the two cameras out to the place in the near future and take the both shots at the same time. In the meanwhile take that Franklin out and put my name, address and a stamp on it for the service. ;o) You deserve the better matched pics and I'll deserve that big one you are mailing me. LOL