For those who don't want to shell out over £6000 for the Leica Q3, this lens is available on the M mount for £4400 so you can mount it on your affordable £7000+ Leica M11 body for the same experience, although manual focus only...

@niceyesplease

7 ай бұрын

😂😂

@GioJonnhyK

7 ай бұрын

😂😂😂❤

@noenken

7 ай бұрын

Typical "look, expensive! lol" comment. If you want the lens for less, get the original Q for about a third of the price, that is actually a bargain. And no, the M lens is not the same, not even close.

@spaqin

7 ай бұрын

@@noenken Yes, no way they would sell that lens in M mount - imagine it with film, where there are no software corrections... Even Leica has a bit more self respect than that.

@fnm04

7 ай бұрын

@@noenken the original Q is very nice and good value compared to the newer stuff and it's only going to go down in price with the q3

Never blame Canon for massive in-camera corrections on their budget lenses anymore... ;)

@dangir1783

7 ай бұрын

❤😂 I confirm the Leica lens is nothing special and you can't even change it, it's very likely that it will be produced by Sigma And to think that there were people who complained about the Fuji x100v Fuji's 23mm F2 is truly a beautiful lens that protrudes very little because it is inserted completely inside the body of the camera

@peterebel7899

7 ай бұрын

Then why to blame Leica for their budget lenses?

@noenken

7 ай бұрын

The 28mm on the Q is older than the L-mount alliance, if that is how you came to the assumption it could be a rebrand. I don't blame you for thinking that but it just isn't accurate. It is also worth mentioning that the Q lens is half a stop faster AND a full frame lens with two actual focus scales on it's manual focus clutch. Don't wanna take anything away from the Fuji, I have owned multiple X100 models over the years and they are great, just want to give some context. What it is really missing on the Q lens is the built-in ND, with that it would be perfect, I think. @@dangir1783

@MacPhantom

7 ай бұрын

@@peterebel7899 Fixed lens with such abhorrent characteristics for a price tag of 6000 USD? Budget? True, we should not make fun of that. It's downright insulting.

@EverythingCameFromNothing

7 ай бұрын

@@MacPhantom😂

This makes me appreciate the canon RF 28mm and Nikon Z 28mm even more.

Great review. Note that on macro mode the minimum aperture is forced to 2.8. Thats why theres no difference in your samples at 2.8 and 1.7.

Wow, you just need one of those magic Frost reviews to take away the Leica "magic". The best review of this lens so far.

Im a Sony A7R4 user, with 61 Mpix on board. I had my eye on the Q3 for streetphotograohy only. But now i think a Sony A7CR with a 24 1.4 GM or 35 1.4 GM would be the sharper option. These lenses have far superior corner IQ with my 61 Mpix sensor.

@johnadams3038

7 ай бұрын

Bro even Samyang looks like it is going to be sharper than a Leica

@nicnic4166

7 ай бұрын

I rented the Q2 and compared the images with my Sony A7R5 and 35GM, the Q2 (and lens) blew me away in landscape type photography. I would rent one before you make any final decision. Furthermore, I'm not sure that the flat chart does the Q2 justice.

@professionalpotato4764

7 ай бұрын

@@nicnic4166 The only way to test lenses is with flat charts.

@Kevon420

7 ай бұрын

@@professionalpotato4764maybe if that’s what you take photos of all day.

@professionalpotato4764

7 ай бұрын

@@Kevon420 Even ARRI that makes devices for people who shoot real world stuff all day uses walls with projected test charts. Are you just trying to show your (lack of) intelligence?

After all the crazed hype about the magic of these Leicas its good to finally see an objective assessment of the lens, being able to be compared on your consistent measures. (Not that i’ll ever be able to afford any of the Leicas. ;-)) Thank you Chris!

Now I have a whole new appreciation for my Canon RF 28mm pancake.

@arrangearrange

6 ай бұрын

2.8 a lot different from 1.7 but maybe you’re ok with that

@DriveCancelDC

4 ай бұрын

@@arrangearrange This lens performs worse than the RF 28 pancake even stopped down to f/2.8 lol

@arrangearrange

4 ай бұрын

@@DriveCancelDC I was making the comment that you can’t compare a 2.8 lens to a 1.7 in terms of aperture. And I’ve never seen a test comparing the two but I’d be shocked if the Leica lens performs worse than a cheap canon lens. lol

What a beautiful lens and camera! Thank you for sharing and God bless you and your family!

Unless you really really want a Leica for 6k, I think getting the Sony A7CR would be way better if you want a small and lightweight camera. You won't be limited to 1 lens, get better AF, faster processors and saves you quite a lot of money.

@MrPedalpaddle

7 ай бұрын

My “Poor Man’s Leica” is a Sony a7C2 with a Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f/1.2. I think 33 MP is plenty unless, like Leica, you are relying on the big sensor to let you zoom by cropping

@jeroenvdw

7 ай бұрын

@@MrPedalpaddle yeah 33MP is more than enough unless you really need to crop a lot

Now I understand why this camera is so expensive - it's the first ever 28mm "fisheye" lens. This amount of distortion and softness in the corners is not normal for the 6k price.

Thank you for this review. I own a Q3 since june and it replaced my R5 as my main camera. I love the look and colors I get out of it. I was really curious about how it would fare in your tests.

@leealessi2806

6 ай бұрын

Im looking at downsizing from an r and RF70-200 2.8 Any regrets?

Well , it is a lot to expect . Small , useful , and performance from a simple system . Dedicated to use for street , travel and backup . You pay for the name and certain quality . With Leica you always want and expect more . Great video review , thank you !

After watching your review about this expensive lens. I love my budget Sony 35mm f/1.8 even more 😅

I have always wondered about this lens/camera great video!

This camera and the Q2 are very popular as these things go. It’s such a satisfying camera to use, and it produces rather nice images which are very slightly different to most other cameras in a way I find impossible to explain. One thing about the lens is that if you compare the field of view with other camera lenses you will probably find that this is more like their 24mm than 28mm images. Personally I would prefer it to be the other way, more tight like a 30mm lens or even a 35mm for street use and optimum out of focus area. We’re all different of course. The body has a very simple almost minimalist appearance with few external controls but all most people need is there and the menu system, although very comprehensive, is probably up there with the very best for being logical and easy to use.

I just placed your Canon RF 28-70mm F2 lens video review next to this video and the Canon lens blows the Leica 28mm F1.7 out of the water. Thanks Chris, you just saved me $6000.00.

Always enjoy your reviews, even when I watch them a second time! 8:25

Thank you very much for this lens test. Is there another test coming for the three different resolutions of the Q3?

Amazing review 😊

Just a tiny hint of blue+gold chromatic aberration (especially in the corner test chart and the clock macro shot), which I find very pleasing compared to the common green+magenta aberrations. My eyes see naturally blue+gold aberration on contrasting edges, and any lens that produces that instead of magenta will look far better to me.

I own the A7RV and the Q3 and while I agree that with some GM glass, even the GM II zooms, the A7RV makes the best use of of the 61mp sensor, the Q3 is much more portable and ‘fun’ to use. An interesting comparison would be the Q3 with the Q2 and/or Q with their lesser sensors but the same lens.

@DonVetto-vx9dd

7 ай бұрын

A7RC would be Sony answer to this then.

@kenn6592

Ай бұрын

I own a A7rv with 35, 50 and 70~200 G Master lenses. Plus a 2o G. I love the system but I still lust after a Q3. Tough question I know but do you still love the Leica? They are a serious investment for a retired chap!

@michaelwilson6584

Ай бұрын

The Leica Q3 is the pick up and go camera, wins over the iPhone. The Sony is for that dedicated photo trip or assignment. Both great cameras. But the Leica is serious money. I often look at the A7CR but at the end of the day, the Leica is better.

@kenn6592

Ай бұрын

Thank you for responding . I too looked at a 7cr. Nah. It's just a shame the Q is so much money.

I'm happy with the first Leica Q model

I only have the Leica Q, not the Q3, but the best images are portraits. Simon from Simon's Utak and Zenography indicate that there is more to lenses than technical specs. Now that I have seen this, I am content that I did not spend more than I did for my used Leica Q. Thank you for this review. Your channel is excellent.

Your reviews are a bit Leica like. There are 100’s as (technically?) good and even better than yours. But yours have a real sense of class. Thanks, very enjoyable. I still can’t make up my mind about buying a Q3. I have lusted after a Q since I first saw a Q2. But they are a LOT of money and I have Sony RV with 20, 35, 55 and 85 lenses. But I do want one! Thanks again for the classy reviews.

I did totally want to know how well that lens would do. Thanks chief.

Thanks for the nice review! I found similar performance with my Q3 except for the slipping "A" position on the lens. I wonder if it's just your sample? My aperture ring is not easy to put in A mode. I shoot at, or near 1.7 often and using it every day since June- no accidental mode switches yet. I suppose MINE could be the odd sample too 🤷🏼‍♂ Any other Q users having this issue? ...just curious. I've mentioned elsewhere in comment replies, but shooting for my full time living for many years and with many systems, it's hard to put a price on the pure enjoyment of shooting with my Q3. I was always intrigued by previous Qs but didn't part with the money until the Q3. In large part because the 60MP sensor and digital zoom offer very useable 35mm and 50mm equivalent focals lengths (about 40MP and 20MP resepectively). And for smaller enlargements or online uses, the 75 and 90mm equivalents are useful as well.

Hi Chris thank you so much for this review. I wonder if 60mp sensor is too taxing for this lens that has not changed since that much since the original Q. I wonder if you can get your hands on the older Q2 or the original Q to see if that lens works better with these less taxing sensors.

@michaelcibula9552

6 ай бұрын

I was thinking the same thing. Would be a very interesting comparison

Would live to see tests on the SL2 and the APO len’s

For this price I'd rather say bye-bye. But thanks a lot for testing this. I had always wanted to know if paying such amount of money would get an image quality that was up to it.

Very telling and revealing review. The lens is slightly better than average, and in no way justifies a 6000 price tag.

@JoelWolfsonPhoto

7 ай бұрын

As mentioned in the review, you also get a very nice 60MP camera thrown in with that $6K price tag. And using it is pure enjoyment. I've also been using Sony A7 systems and Fujifilm X-T series for years. It's apples and oranges. Leica certainly isn't for everyone but I have to say my Q3 is way more fun to use than Sony. You can't beat Sony for AF and versatility but it's just a vaguely ergonomic computerized box with lenses (superb ones though) Fujifilm X not FF but nicer user experience so kinda in the middle among the 3 systems, enjoyment-wise. All this is of course, just my personal preference and experiences.

Would be great if you do a review on the new Kamlan 70mm f1.1

I shoot it in Raw and have to crop slightly to remove the corner vignette and correct for the distortion, which probably makes the field of view equivalent to a 30-32mm

Love your review, I have heard others say it is actually a 24 mm that is cropped to a 28 equivalent. Apparently the images don’t match a typical 28?

@professionalpotato4764

7 ай бұрын

I've tested it side by side with a Fuji 18mm f/1.4 and Ricoh GR3. Indeed the Q is not a 28mm. It's more like a 26? Slightly tighter than 24, but definitely wider than 28. The Fuji performed far better than the Q2. I think the only Leicas worth owning are the M series. Those are really pleasant to use.

I currently own and use a Q3, which is a gift from a family member (definitely too much money for me to spend). My personal favorite compact camera line is still the Sony RX1, which I think is technically better than the Q. But the Q3 when viewed as a whole package really is a quality, fun camera that is hard to beat. I’ve also used the A7C+35GM combo, which is amazing but just feels a lot more clunky and less fun than the Q. If Sony would just give us a 3rd gen RX1 my Q3 might end up on the shelf a lot more though 😊

Not that I know what I'm talking about, but I wonder how the edge sharpness is in macro..How big is your chart?

I had a leica Q but it felt more like a 24mm than a 28mm i dunno it was just too wide for me .

Chris… there’s something to know about the Leica Lens. You only focused in the center to test corner sharpness. Correct? Well I had similar results as you until I focus on each corner to test the lens corner sharpness and I can confirm corner sharpness is excellent and equal to center sharpness when you actually focus in the corner even at F1.7 I believe it’s part of this lenses design and I’m good with it. I want what I focused on to be sharp, not areas I did not. It doesn’t behave like my Nikon Z glass which doesn’t get sharper in the corner when you focus on the corner wide open.

@kenmonahan9924

6 ай бұрын

A very good and important point. This lens (like any Summilux) is designed to fall off away from the main point of focus wide open. Using a 28mm lens successfully is quite a skill and this lens lends itself to layering the image from front to back, and the focus point will always be razor sharp at f1.7 wherever you have placed it within the frame. This is one of the features that makes it such an awesome street camera for great contextual story telling. Christopher has done a great job here (as usual) testing the lens, but in a way that compares it to lenses where clinical corner to corner sharpness is deemed to be one of the most important features. For artistic image making this is not such a big deal. Thanks for the review Chris!

@LeicaGeek

6 ай бұрын

@@kenmonahan9924 Correct, while it wasn’t intentional his testing of the lens isn’t representative of how the Leica lens performs in real life. It’s misleading to people who don’t know how these lenses work.

I'd really like you to do a review of the Ricoh GRIII, to see how it compares to the Leica here.

@kenmonahan9924

3 ай бұрын

Have both, love both, different beasts!

Maybe you should review more compact cameras (like Fujifilm X100V, or Ricoh GRIIIX, or...)

Can you test a Phase One 150mp camera?

Question: when you did the clock close-up testing, was the camera in Macro mode? becase as far as I know, once you enter macro mode the camera automatically jumps to f2.8 even though the ring has 1.7 selected; At least it works that way on the original Q (maybe something changed with Q3?). Also worth mentioning is the camera uses a leaf shutter, for high-speed sync if someone is into that sort of thing.

@pierrevilley6675

7 ай бұрын

Why would you need high speed sync with a 28mm lens ?

@christopherfrost

7 ай бұрын

The lens was in macro mode for those test shots. Between f/1.7 and f/2.8 the EXIF information (and the screen information) will report as being f/2.8 for light gathering information, in a similar way to the Nikon system, due to close-up light gathering issues, but technically it's still f/1.7, which is why I classify it as being f/1.7. Hope that helps!

@smith507

7 ай бұрын

@@pierrevilley6675 🤷🏻‍♂️ some people use flashes for streets or maybe a fashion shoot? Who knows but it’s nice to have.

@Kevon420

7 ай бұрын

@@pierrevilley6675why wouldn’t you? Thats one of the fun parts of using a leaf shutter lens is flash usage, this camera/lens is perfect for that.

@Kevon420

7 ай бұрын

All lenses effective F-stop changes at macro distances, that’s why it’s F2.8 in macro mode.

Hi Christopher, I was intrigued by your review, for which many thanks. Owning a Q3 myself and in view of comments below I made a test chart (in Illustrator) and did a test myself at F1.7. Now I may not have been exactly square on but was certainly very close. I set the focus point on the centre and then each corner. Indeed there is a very small fall off in sharpness away from the point of focus. so when I focussed on the centre the corners were slightly less sharp than the centre and vice versa. The focus area was always tack sharp regardless of where in was positioned in the frame. I don't see this as a fault in the lens more a stylistic approach to the focus point and the fall off to the out of focus areas. I then did the same shot (filling the frame with the A4 card as I did with the 28mm) with the SL 75mm APO on the SL2-S It was razor sharp across the whole test card regardless of the focus point, as it is designed with corner to corner sharpness in mind. If Leica wants to make a lens that is sharp across the whole focal plane then they clearly can do it. I really do believe it is a stylistic "Leica Summilux M" look they are striving for in the Q series cameras. With a 28mm lens I am certainly looking to guide the viewers eye to the subject and fall off from focus area to the out of focus elements in the shot is tool I love to use to achieve that look. Thanks again for the non-biased review.

@Ryomichi

3 ай бұрын

Stylistic approach. If only all other manufacturer can use the same excuse with their $3000 lens, they will be rich. My $300 RF 28mm f/2.8 got more stylistic approach than your lens 🤣. Though this is like quarts watch vs Rolex watch argument, but don't make excuse for bad traits when you clearly can get more out of that price. If I like Leica, I will wear it like Rolex, not because it tells accurate time.

@kenmonahan9924

3 ай бұрын

@@Ryomichi not sure what you mean m8 also have a Canon R5 and all the lenses (but not the shitty 28mm) what exactly is wrong with a stylistic approach anyway? Some other things to take into account with the Q3 are the sensor (60mm with pixel binning) and the Maestro IV Processor, totally mashes the canon all day long especially in difficult lighting conditions. The files are so good minimal processing is required compared to anything canon can offer. I was a Canon fanboy until I discovered Leica and after owning a CL, an M9, an M10, an M11 an original Q and my favourite the SL2-S; the Q3 is a beast. Not without its faults but to match it I would need hack around a huge bag full of Canon gear to get close to something so neat and small in form factor. You are entitled to your opinion of course but please speak from experience not jealousy

@Ryomichi

3 ай бұрын

@@kenmonahan9924 you call my 28mm shitty when the same stylistic approach applies, that is wrong. Imagine if this Leica camera is using film instead of sensor, cant correct that barrel distortion. people like you will be Leica's downfall because you will defend their product to justify your burned cash.

@kenmonahan9924

3 ай бұрын

@@Ryomichi as I said the Q3 does come with some downsides and I agree there is some barrel distortion which has in camera correction, which I don’t like, I would prefer to correct myself if the shot requires it. Again, if I want a zero d lens I have plenty of them so not a problem. If I want to “burn my cash” again that’s my problem. Facts are if I sell my Leica gear I will get most of my money back but the Canon gear has dropped substantially in value. So at the end of the day who is the mug money wise? me for buying canon…..😄

@Ryomichi

3 ай бұрын

@@kenmonahan9924 Yeah you got plenty alright. One camera of each focal length for sure you have. But you are buying electronics. Who would want to buy iPhone 6 when there is latest and greatest? If you want good investment, keep your analog camera.

Best review. Substantial. I have the camera. I love it. I would like to shoot like I do with an iPhone pro max where everything is in focus all the time and I find it a challenge with the Q3. Please do a review if you know how to best overcome bokeh. Not saying bokeh isn't good but sometimes I like or prefer everything crisp. Thanks. No one else tested the lense like you so thanks.

@kenmonahan9924

6 ай бұрын

I would simply stop down a bit?

@kenmonahan9924

3 ай бұрын

Hilarious

MORE LEICA REVIEWS !

Leica could have updated and improved the lens for the Q3, however it’s difficult to argue with a camera in such short supply that it is nearly impossible to find in stock. The lens is good enough, it is rare to find the photographer that can discern differences in corner sharpness in real world photos. For those that pixel peep it’s the e in the r.

I'm glad this camera only comes with a wide angle. It makes it easy to resist.A 50mm version would have made it much more difficult.

It would be nice if you could get a Sigma fp-L camera to be able to test L-mount only lenses too...or maybe a Panasonic S1R...I think you can get either camera for a good price now

@y34r

7 ай бұрын

24mm f2 sigma contemporary lenses is much sharper than this Leica without even software correction.

The distortion totally let me down

@dangir1783

7 ай бұрын

All the new lenses are like that and it's no coincidence that they reduce the weight a lot and in my opinion it's not even good the software it uses has to use Raw Digger to see the real corrections because it's very likely that the camera already applies something to the raw file and leaves you a little margin to see that there is a minimum of correction

@mcchicken9342

7 ай бұрын

C'mon, this grid looks like an old TV screen. So warm, noisy, and nostalgic. Aren't guys with money paying to bring their memories back nowadays?!

@Kevon420

7 ай бұрын

That’s all mirrorless lenses, they’re all distorted and erroneous without software corrections.

@DriveCancelDC

4 ай бұрын

@@Kevon420 This isn't true at all, it's only some of the budget ones that rely heavily on them.

I don't like a fixed lens camera that cost over €6000 and have Monster software corrections. There is too much exaltation for the Leica brand just because of its glorious past in the analog world of film In the digital era there is no longer this difference because the sensor is a Sony, the same one you find on the Alpha 7 R4 and the all the electronics are from Panasonic. In the end, the only thing you really pay for is the red badge and the software

@blackcatooow

7 ай бұрын

and the funny part is that most reviews keep talking about how mediocre it is and then adding “but it’s got that leica something special” or better yet, saying it makes you wanna go out and shoot more. sounds like a personal issue no equipment is gonna fix , i feel bad for people buying into them

Was looking at this, but I’m going with the Sony a93 global shutter

@pierrevilley6675

7 ай бұрын

Actually the A9III is probably way worse for street photography, as it is made solely for speed, with bad dynamic range and color depth (250 base ISO). If i had to pick a street camera, i would probably go with a Nikon Zf or one of those compact Sony full frame.

We do need more relatively compact full frame cameras like this, I don't know why people buy the Q3 though. If I'm gonna pay an insane amount for a Leica, which offers no image quality benefits over cameras 3-5x cheaper, I would get an M series for the unique rangefinder aspect. The Q3 just feels like a completely normal digital camera but with a Leica price tag (which some think is entirely made by Panasonic) and a fixed mediocre lens. Buy a Fujifilm X100 with the updated lens instead.

Ordered my in June, still on back order...

They should have put the A after the F16 like Fuji does, as you're far less likely to use that aperture than f1.4...

Cool for Leica to lend you this super expensive lens that conveniently comes attached to a camera.

It would be interesting to know at which distance you make these test chart shots, and how it relates to the typical use case of the lens of street and landscape. This might explain why I haven’t heart of any sharpness complaints from owners, at least of the Q2.

@darylgov

7 ай бұрын

Your heart has not been listening to the right sources. Since the Q was released it’s been known the lens is a 25mm with great barrel distortion and the cropping in camera gives a 26mm angle of view. Yet, in the real world with Leica’s baked in corrections the images are beautiful and many photographers give them high marks. Other cameras and lenses can do this also.

For a modern 28mm prime lens, I am shocked how bad the barrel distortion is. The vignetting could be an artistic choice, but still, not good at all.

@kenmonahan9924

6 ай бұрын

There are couple of things to bear in mind here. 1) this lens is fixed to the camera. 2) The (leaf) shutter is in the lens. If I’m not mistaken the lens is somewhat shorter than the M “version”. In order to make everything work the compromise is some barrel distortion that is handled via in camera software corrections, even in the raw file. This could also account for the fact that in some tests the field of view is somewhat narrower than a standard 28mm. Happy to be corrected on this, if anyone knows better. For context I have owned several Leicas and currently own a Q3.

Any reason, why my comments are removed?

Well, it seems that the combo of X-T5 and 18mm f1.4 is a better setup. BUT, it is not a Leica.

Cheers. It’s actually as if not more important than the camera to me

I think like a Voightlander 28mm F2 Ultron II and a Sony or a Nikon with no AA filter; will do a better job; and cheaper.. Almost just as small.

@y34r

7 ай бұрын

That has been my setup, sigma fp + voigtlander 28mm ultron ii

@soissle

7 ай бұрын

Show me the “almost just”… I really wanted to not like the Leica setup, but I can’t get my Nikon to tick all the boxes. Size, weight, resolution, macro, wide, simplicity, …

You show only 1.7 in the middle. Why is that?

@christopherfrost

7 ай бұрын

As I said in the review, from f/2, the middle is perfectly sharp.

7 ай бұрын

@@christopherfrost I hope you can show us some more results of center sharpness images (such as F2.2, F4...) at next videos. I always expect that from long time ago. Thank you

@jan-martinulvag1953

7 ай бұрын

@@christopherfrost You might as well say all this on radio.

Leica, you can find better but can't pay more.

@peterbalazs3095

7 ай бұрын

Hasselblad: Hold my beer

@Kevon420

7 ай бұрын

Hasselblad and PhaseOne are definitely more expensive.

@StephaanBOSS56

7 ай бұрын

You can't find better???????????????

I am pretty sure any camera brand can make a full frame fixed lens camera that will blow Leica Q out of water in terms of performance and features with lot cheaper price tag, but some how, none of them are doing it. So if some one wants full frame fixed lens point and shoot, you are stuck with one of Lecia Q 1,2,3 or Sony RX1 series(which is discontinued (and not very cheaper at all))

@Amphibax

7 ай бұрын

The market for cameras like that is just to small. Camera in that category just aren't that usefull for most photographers

@seokinchung

7 ай бұрын

@@Amphibax yeah.. small market -> smaller units produced -> increasing price -> only Leica has brand recognition or something to still able to find audience who will accept the price tag -> only Leica still makes camera like it. Makes sense. And everybody seems to be accepting the logic but still complains about the price because deep inside their heart, maybe people want a camera like that...? (I know I want one haha)

@pierrevilley6675

7 ай бұрын

Maybe nobody does it because nobody (except Leica fanboys) want to pay for a full frame point and shoot, because interchangeable lenses are mandatory to get the most out of a full frame sensor ?

@seokinchung

7 ай бұрын

​@@pierrevilley6675 I don't know. Even before Leica Q was a thing, I remember RX1 series was selling pretty good with decent amount of praise (or maybe it was just popular among "sony fanboys"?)

@Tekrel

7 ай бұрын

Zeiss came out with an even more expensive option that crash and burned . Given how Fuji can't keep the crop x100v in stock it stands to reason there really is a market, a strong market but it kinda takes some special sauce few have cracked.

First

That Diffraction so terrible already at f/8??? On a fixed non-interchangeable lens developed specifically for the camera... in a Leica Camera???

@victorlim5077

7 ай бұрын

That's the drawback of using a 60MP sensor.

@el_fucko

7 ай бұрын

I don't think you know what diffraction is, Jacob.

@pierrevilley6675

7 ай бұрын

Diffraction is a physical phenomenon which isn't preventable or even reducable. With a 61mp sensor, diffraction will always soften your images at F8 no matter the lens.

If you shown me the images without telling me what these images are shot with, I would have guessed that it came from some budgeted modern lenses with crazy distortion and poor corner sharpness. I even went back to watch Chris' review on the Viltrox 28mm f/1.8, and now I think I would buy that even if the costs are the same.

I have always wondered who buys this type of cameras...so much money, you vould get an absolute high end camera system with lots of lenses for that amount!

@kenmonahan9924

3 ай бұрын

Rich people with more money that sense….count me in.

Even Samyang can produce lens with better distortion control holy shit.

for 6k this camera should have a lens on it that is pin sharp edge to edge let alone the horrid barel distortion.., can't justify the price in my book.

I don’t mean to be rude, but this was probably a good performance 20 years ago.

@quikee9195

7 ай бұрын

A lens with so much distortion would be unacceptable 20 years ago, which was around the end of film and start of digital.

@tbrown2892

7 ай бұрын

@@quikee9195 Yes. I should have said 10 years. With this sort of performance, Leica is likely to loose some of its loyal fans! It has to start focusing on image quality and not just build quality….no pun intended!

Not too bad for Leica's budget option ....

I’ve never seen Chris review a lens and the corners never sharpen. Not even at f/8. For 6k.

As I always say, Leica cameras just like jewelry and people buy them for collecting purposes mostly. If you show Leica owners this review, they will say that is not quality issues, that is Leica's characters and feeling :))

@JoelWolfsonPhoto

7 ай бұрын

Okay, I admit, being a full time professional for decades and also being a Leica user, I'm in the minority of Leica owners. Of course my main systems for work have been Sony and Fujifilm. However, my Q3 is just pure fun. Definitely not jewelry for me. And I do sometimes use it to make money.

You can easily find The OG Leica Q in good condition for around 2k. It has the same exact lens and 24MP on Full Frame is all you need. Some People say the Leica Look is not real and I also think some people overhype it a bit, but if you actually use this camera and look at the images you can get out of it, it just makes you smile. It is truly special and there isn’t another camera out there that packs a full frame sensor with a wide and bright lens in a compact high quality body.

6k? Lol you're paying for status first, lens second, and camera body third.

@adrianp7475

7 ай бұрын

👍👍👍👍👍

Lol the barrel distortion is even going to make flat-earthers to raise an eyebrow... Even budget lenses like Samyang aren't this bad. Leica what gives?

Leica trying for the Fuji X-100 market

You could buy this camera lens combo, or you could buy the ground breaking Sony A9. For the exact same price.. sure you’d have to buy a lens, but you’re guaranteed one of the best cameras for the next decade.

@pierrevilley6675

7 ай бұрын

The A9III has a base ISO of 250, and probably the dynamic range and color depth that comes with it (the main issue with global shutter sensors), so while the A9III is the new king of sport and action photography, it is a poor choice for everything else, including street photography and landscapes. A Nikon Zf with a voigtlander lens, will do that for less than half the price.

Kinda disappointing. But I just saved $6000 by not buying one!

leica lens imperfections = characters = expensive same lens with other badges = not good enough = reasonably priced 😂

Always thought you should be not so smart to buy a Leica...but turns out someone needs to be even less smarted to buy one with a fix focal that is not sharp in the corners even at f8 ahahahah but kudos to Leica, stealing money from wealthy not so smart people is a great feat!

Buy a mint q and thank me later

Honestly this just solidifies for me that Leica is a bit of the "gucci" of camera brands, massively overpriced with little reasoning.

You mean the red badge doesn’t make your image magical? It doesn’t fix your bad compositions and make up for lack of skill? Hmm a $6000 bargain.

Top Review! Thanks! The middle is just fine, the corners are just as rubbish as if they were a 100 euro glass.

I expected some interesting character, not just optical flaws. I like philosophy of those cameras that focuses on photography, but it's insultingly overpriced given this kind of lacking performance.

Ah yes... that ominous silence at the end. NOT RECOMMENDED. I dont care what company made this but a camera is as good as its lens. $6000 is ridiculous and Leica fanboys can say whatever they want to try and justify this nonsense

Technically not deserving the price asked. Ok your name is "Leica", but for that price I PRETEND much better performance.

Get a Sony a7R5 with 24 GM and you het better IQ , better IBIS , better AF,….

@JeanV1986

7 ай бұрын

I wouldn't hesitate for a quarter of a second but honestly, they're completely different cameras for different uses.

So, the lens is crap.

@jonasschwarz8174

3 ай бұрын

Turns out it’s an amazing lens when you actually use it. There is a reason they didn’t change it over 3 Generations of Q Cameras. And the best thing is you can easily find it for around 2k in great condition and it even comes with a camera attached 😊

So, for the bargain price of 6k you get a 28 mm with horrible corners, so you have to crop it down to a 40mm F/2.5 equivalent to get a decent picture. And all that in a full frame bridge camera with bad AF and horrible ergonomics.

Camera for snobs.

Leica reminds me of Apple products. You overpay just for the name. The lens image quality, in my opinion, does not justify the price.

No global shutter, but anyway ok.

Leica is a fashion brand. People who get into this brand usually look for exclusivity. Some of them are probably snob enough to describe the truly special (aka subjetive) features they can see on Leica's lenses. I'm quie convinced that Leica doesn't invest anymore on lens technology.

@quikee9195

7 ай бұрын

True, most of the last lenses Leica released are re-branded Panasonic or Sigma lenses with a substantial price increase of course.

@phillipallaway7306

7 ай бұрын

All the M lenses are Leica built. Some L mount lenses are Sigma and Panasonic clones@@quikee9195

Who is spending $6k on a fixed length point and shoot!? Oh, Leica owners, that's who.

is this the "quality" Leica owners brag about

No thanks.

Finally proof that these Leica lenses are hugely overpriced, being just better than average for a crazy price. I also personnaly found the bokeh to be unattractive,though the colours seem really nice. Honestly though, a canon R8 with a 28mm f2.8 is an all around better combo, if it can handle 45mp full frame or 32mp crop sensors fine.