Lecia Q3 Monochrome

[bobfriedman]

the question is should I buy it??

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

No.

The Mercury is NOT in retrograde, so no; delay your purchase until February 26th to March 20, when it will be.

[bobfriedman]

No.

The Mercury is NOT in retrograde, so no; delay your purchase until February 26th to March 20, when it will be.

excellent... thank you so much for the technical answer.... I will keep it under advisement.

any technical issues with this camera?

[PeterAit]

Only if you have an iron-clad return privilege.

I am a big fan of monochrome images so I bit the bullet some years ago and bought one with IIRC the Summicron 75mm. I was underwhelmed

It takes marvelous pix to be sure but I could not see an advantage in IQ. They say it is sharper because of having no Bayer but durned if I could see it compared with my Sony gear. And a major negative is not having the colors to work with. Starting with an RGB image, the B&W conversion process gives you a lot of control over how the various colors are translated into grays. With the Monochrome that is gone completely. The camera decides.

I also found the rangefinder very hard to work with after years with SLR viewfinders.

That's my take.

[Manoli]

the question is should I buy it??

Short answer : depends on how dedicated & competent a b&w photographer you are.
Long answer :  read the latest ReidReviews article …

Today I published an article based on studio tests that compare the Leica Q3 Monochrom to the Leica M11 Monochrom, Leica Q3 and Fujifilm GFX100RF. These tests look at spectral sensitivity (B&W tonal translation of color), overall rendering, noise at various ISO levels and, for the Q3M, highlight headroom (estimated native ISO). This is the third article, in a series of at least five, about the Q3M.

In the article following that, we will compare the three fixed lens cameras (Q3M, Q3 and GFX100RF) in terms of their resolution and vignetting. Stay tuned. It should be particularly interesting to see how a 60 MP small format monochrome camera, with its F/1.7 lens, resolves and renders compared to a 102 MP medium format color camera (producing B&W final output) with its F/4 lens.

https://www.reidreviews.com/

[bobfriedman]

so I have been using converted D800's to monochrome for some time (excised bayer array and microlenses).. however, I always had to use live view and the usage was awkward.. this is first time I have seen a industry standard monochrome (60 Mpx, probably Sony sensor) camera from Leica and if you include the lens, with a tolerable price albeit still pricey. my main intent is landscape/cityscape so the fixed 28/1.7 will probably suffice.

anyway... I bought it.. perhaps I couldn't help myself.. but I just couldn't wait until Mercury was in retrograde 

[bobfriedman]

Long answer :  read the latest ReidReviews article …

https://www.reidreviews.com/

thank you for this article!  too bad it is behind a paywall.

[bobfriedman]

That's my take.

thank you!

[Rob C]

Only if you have an iron-clad return privilege.

I am a big fan of monochrome images so I bit the bullet some years ago and bought one with IIRC the Summicron 75mm. I was underwhelmed

It takes marvelous pix to be sure but I could not see an advantage in IQ. They say it is sharper because of having no Bayer but durned if I could see it compared with my Sony gear. And a major negative is not having the colors to work with. Starting with an RGB image, the B&W conversion process gives you a lot of control over how the various colors are translated into grays. With the Monochrome that is gone completely. The camera decides.

I also found the rangefinder very hard to work with after years with SLR viewfinders.

That's my take.

I was originally taken with the idea of a mono sensor, but eventually came to the same conclusion as you have. Pentax makes one such camera, and now, so does Ricoh’s GR come as a new mono. So yeah, affordable options are out there, but they all inevitably deny you the use of the missing colours as after-the-fact filtration opportunities. Carrying physical filters is no longer a sensible option, and just slows you down and gets in the way. You could also make the wrong call: there’s a big space between theory and fact.

I don’t know if you look at the Samuel Streetlife videos, but he clearły can show he knows what photography is, and though an ambassador for Ricoh, he uses a Nikon ZF to great effect, mostly in b/white. (He has just begun a second year of b/w photos only). He was in the Leica Q system for a while until dissatisfaction made him sell it. He made a video on that camera, explaining why he let it go. He recently posted a video on the new GR Mono, and unlike his stuff with the Nikon, the błacks mainly seem to be totally lost, compressed into ugliness, even where losing them doesn’t look intentional. If I remember correctly, the GR Mono has a built-in red filter you can apply if you want to so do. Perhaps overuse of that, just because it’s there, has been the problem?

I suppose that the mono camera idea came about because many post-film days photographers have a romantic idea of how photography used to be. From a pro point of view, much of that current belief system is nothing but a fantasy: when you had to make a shot in b/w, you just made it the best way you could; that was pretty much all there was to it. Okay, you had a working idea of which backgrounds to avoid - if you could - but messing about with filters wasn’t something I did, other than put a UV one on every lens I owned for protection. Perhaps landscape guys had the luxury of time, and subjects that didn't move about, so doing a series through different colours may have been fun.

[bobfriedman]

the Ricoh monochrome is also pricey for a a Ricoh and they have a poor reliability and repair history. 25Mpx with a point and shoot design... nonstarter for me.

[KLaban]

I'm a colour guy, through and through. Even as an illustrator I routinely turned down B&W commissions. That said I occasionally have a capture that doesn't work in colour and I'll typically convert to monochrome using ACR or Silver Efex. My Q3 43 files are malleable and obliging.

The camera is my main walk-around (when my health is obliging). That said, at the moment I'm pissed with Leica for introducing an all new firmware update, 4.0, which has introduced an entirely new bug ridden user interface. I believe Leica wanted to standardise the firmware across their offerings which is understandable and forgivable, but please not on an existing camera, or rather on my existing camera. My muscle memory is hard won and I've no desire to switch user interfaces. I haven't updated the firmware on my camera and have no plans to do so for the foreseeable future which would mean I can kiss goodbye to any further updates.

Rant over.
;-)
   

[Rob C]

It’s not just Leica. The interface between users of electronic equipment and the manufacturers has sucked for as long as I have been involved with digital photography, film scanning and even monitor calibration. Bit by bit, my scanner, my old monitor calibration device have been rendered junk, impossible to use due to Windows changing its systems every few years.

I understand about “progress” but it ain’t progress when it means enforced redundancy. Old gear should be considered as sacred, and its use protected in new systems. Were that the case, I believe more people would willingly update their systems in order to feel up to speed, as well as just feel good to have the latest toy. If it means you lose vital bits of equipment for no good reason, you will fight the bloody companies until you lose, at which point you can either spend money because you have been forced to, or just say the hell with it, and walk away. So far, restrictions due to compatibility between my old Photoshop version and non-Nikon file types means that if I buy a non-Nikon camera, I won’t be able to access its files unless I spend a lot more just to be able to see the goddam things up on the monitor.

I won’t even attempt to get into the topic of planned camera obsolescence, beyond mentioning that my D700, all the camera I ever needed, is just an ornament now because Nikon pulled the plug on parts. Or so the Spanish importers told me several years ago. Once, you could keep, use and repair film cameras for as long as you desired. The digital world mindset screwed that, all right!

[degrub]

Actually, the way i remember it, Nikon decided to not sell parts to 3rd party repair shops. One could only get a Nikon camera/lens repaired through Nikon. Business choice , but maybe the repair group wasn't able to be profitable otherwise. Only a guess. i recall Nikon was being beat to death by the combination of Sony and Canon at the time and were struggling.

[Rob C]

That’s right, they had lost a lot of customers. I tried to get the repair done via the Nikon specialist in London (where I’d sourced the D700), and they advised against repairing because it would have been relatively too expensive compared to the then value of the camera; my next stop was the official Nikon importer in Barcelona, who gave me the bad news about parts availability.

I suppose I could really put it down to bad luck, and insufficient use, because if I'd been more active, it may well have happened under the warrantee period, and I could have got the thing back to London. Spain wouldn’t have helped because Nikon abandoned international warranties and limited repairs to the country where the product was bought - a lousy way to treat customers.

[KLaban]

Sign of the times perhaps, but unrealistic to expect any digital camera to remain repairable 18 years after first being introduced. Customers report that their original Q cameras (introduced 2015) are now deemed beyond repair. Afraid this is the new norm, like it or lump dump it.

We recently replaced our imaging desktop largely because it didn't have the necessary grunt needed to process high MP files. Now both of our desktops and two laptops run the latest versions of Windows 11. Fact is photography ain't cheap, what with the cost of film and processing it probably never was.

Cars are even worse with reports that luxury 3 year old cars are failing MOTs in the UK due to the unavailability of parts, meaning that they can be off the road for many months.

It's life, but the alternative is not to be recommended!

[Rob C]

I’m surprised to hear that Leica won't continue to acknowledge its early, big-selling and highly promoted (on the Internet, at least) baby Q! Of all companies, it’s the one most wedded to the concept of heritage, and it would be difficult, if this report be true, to square such behaviour with promoted traditional values that stick to the brand like, well, glue. Indeed, if true, sign of the times and the dropping of the charade of customer support into infinity or even, for that matter mid-distance. Blame it on the love of bokeh, the new old and inevitable side-product, commercial offspring of large aperture optics and marketing, often resulting in nothing much more than smoke and mirrors. At least one could normally suss out the mirrors.

[KLaban]

Rob, just to be clear that this only applies to the first version of the Q introduced in 2015, all later versions including Q2 and Q3 and variants are still fully supported. Leica's guarantee of support (ten years) is above and beyond the norm. The Q cameras remain Leica's best selling products.

Consumer digital technology changed the world but in doing so I'm afraid longevity wasn't on the list of benefits.

Use it, love it, rinse and repeat.

[KLaban]

...Blame it on the love of bokeh, the new old and inevitable side-product, commercial offspring of large aperture optics and marketing, often resulting in nothing much more than smoke and mirrors. At least one could normally suss out the mirrors.

Sorry, Rob, but I lost you there, perhaps just my aphasia getting worse?

;-)

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... It's life, but the alternative is not to be recommended!

Wiser words have not been spoken! 

[Rob C]

So, would Leica refuse TLC to an M3 (camera) on grounds of age, or is ageism just something reserved for the exclusive pleasure of digital equipment consumers, you know, those poor guys often suffering from acute GAS? In other words, is it being seen as a possible cure for GAS or as incentive to deeper addiction? Dangerous path: you could be chased by a drone and shot out of the water for your habit. This sounds familiar, in some strange manner. Either way, it’ll cost you money you hadn’t expected - much like the other M3 (car) will unfailingly manage to do.