I went back and watched Christopher’s Leica SL APO 28mm review. That lens out significantly outperformed this lens with regard to chromatic aberration. I have the 43 and can testify to its sharpness and color rendition. But this video shows that not all APOs were created equal. Given the size and weight, I’m still happy with the 43.
I had the same question when I tested it out against the 28 (which has less fringing but is not as sharp). Still kept the 43 though it’s otherwise a great lens.
If you want 100% APO performance, really only the SL APO lenses provide that. However this APO Q lens and the APO M lenses are still great performers, they are not optical perfection.
We need more options for this range on full-frame cameras. I love the 43mm focal length, and I don't mind not having f1.4 or less if it means I can have a very small street photography lens.
@@awake780It’s a no brainer for the price. But I’d be very willing to pay a lot more money for a better performing version. It’s not performing as great as some people pretend. At least not when you compare it to other options from Sony, Voigtländer, Leica, Sigma. A 200€ lens on my 4000€ Z8 seem wrong.
@@RegrinderAlert that’s the thing, most people spending $4k on a high resolution FF camera would and probably should be ponying up for the 35 or 50 1.8/1.2 variants to make the most out of their sensor. Expecting a cheap lens to do miracles is wishful thinking. Does the Voigtlander have better IQ? Obviously. It costs 5x more. Sigma - I hope you like heavy lenses or adapting F mount. Leica - prepare to get a second mortgage. You’re kind of comparing apples to pineapples.
Thank you for your review. Given that you like the macro function, you should mention that the supplied lens hood cannot be used with a filter in place in macro mode-a strange oversight for Leica. I use a third-party rectangular hood that screws into the filter. A small knurled screw keeps it from rotating out of position. It works, but I wish Leica would have designed a bayonet lens hood that works in all circumstances.
I'd buy this for a reasonable $4000-4500 with Sony's latest AF. Main selling point is the 43mm lens, large EVF, less intimidating RF style body, the tilting LCD (I'm a waist level photographer), and the most important: Leaf shutter. I prefer the quite shutter sound, much less vibration, and fast flash sync speed. I have to use mechanical shutter with my A7RIV, that 60MP sensor readout too slow for reilable electronic shutter. However I miss the built in ND filter.
Hard disagree from me. Similar to Rolex, maybe, because both built their reputations on quality, not just style, and both still make products that function as well as anything else out there.
At that price, it's as sharp as a Viltrox (or just about any other modern 40mm/50mm lens), has monstrous distortion and LoCA. Leica's optics these days really is something.
I was taken aback by how much distortion there was. I understand that we've had lens corrections for a while, but it feels like some companies are getting lazy in just how much there is.
So many aberrations in an apochromatic lens? Much cheaper apo lanthar from voigtlander present a much higher level of optics. I expected better results from leica apo summicron.
I own the Q2, but purchased the Ricoh GRIIIx for 1/10th of the price. Same FOV, has in body stabilisation, macro mode and produces lovely images. Just doesn't have the OVF.
I'm curious to see if lenses and cameras from the Leica M system will be tested on this channel. Perhaps Leica will lend them out for a week or two for testing purposes 🙂
The Leica haters are out in these comments. Build quality, UI, and superb optics are motivators for some. Of course you have more cost effective optical equivalents; but some of us actually enjoy the Leica history, build, feel and optics. Horses and courses.
hmm some of your photos at bokeh tests are really overexposed. But nice review, as always. Hmmm but I get the feeling, the lens is not that promising as I first thought
A far better alternative would be either the Sony A7Cii or A7CR and the older 35mm Sony Zeiss Sonnar lens. Package total will be about $3500. The benefit of a less expensive camera is that you can interchange lenses with the A7C series with hundreds of first/third party lenses and a host of vintage lenses. It's like a buffet vs a simple hamburger station.
I used to own a Sony a7Cii with 40mm f/2.5. Great camera, but the resolution of the Leica gives the Leica images something better. (I'm assuming it's the resolution.) You can crank up the contrast and saturation to get the Sony images near to the "Leica look" in post. But there's still something different that the Sony cannot produce. Well . . . the Sony's mechanical shutter is super loud. Maybe it's shutter shock that keeps the Sony images from being quite as good.
@@billmartin1663 a7CR has the exact same sensor as M11 or Q3. "Color Science" might be the last argument but we know it really doesn't matter if someone knows how to do the most basic lightroom postprocessing.
@@summit8796many photographers (me included tbh) like taking photos but don’t like editing them. We like nice cameras to hold and take photos with, and like nice photos coming straight out of the camera, and maybe share them or just look at them once in a while
The sample shots are nice, but I don't see how it justifies a $6k price tag 🤷... I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I paid less than one third of that for a 90D and a Zeiss 35mm f2, and get much better results 🤷 Seems like most of that 6k is for the red Leica logo...
@@murbal7679It reminds me when I was young and yo-yo's were a craze. All the rich kids had a $100 "silver bullet" that performed the same or less than a $20 one 🤣 Seems like just a status type of thing...
It's all relative, isn't it? I can purchase a €2000 camera easily, it's an ok price for my reality. But if my income were 3x times higher, I'd surely buy it. Maybe it will be a gift to myself when I retire - I guess the target audience is older people anyway 😁
No idea why anyone would buy this. The price is awful and there are many options these days for retro styled bodies. At the very least it should have much better distortion and loca characteristics for the price.
Feel free to point out an overall better performing lens in the focal length. Distortion doesn’t show in your finished shot, so why care? Software correction is not a band aid on bad engineering. It was calculated into the lens design from the beginning. The end result beats out pretty much any other option in quality and that’s what matters for a tool. You can buy an "honest" lens, surely the viewers of your art will appreciate it 😂
The worst aspect of the (US$7,000) Leica Q3 43 is trying to obtain one. Yes, the price is high. But that has never motivated Leica to churn out an adequate supply.
street 28... You can always crop in...43 ... I have shot 43 a lot with my GFX camera, which is my 55 which is 44 and it's actually too tight for a lot of situations. It's a portrait lens.
Comments on Leica/Hassy/RED gear never disappoint. Yes, the Leica tax is a real thing, but if you think for a second this isn't a VERY high-quality platform, you're crazy. If you can't afford it that's fine, but don't pretend whichever Nikon with whichever plastic lens produces anything nearly as good.
Lens: shows maybe the craziest barrel distortion that's been on this channel all year Chris: "Some barrel distortion is having to be corrected here uwu :))" If you're going to go so blatantly easy on companies out of fear they'll stop sending you stuff to test, you might as well shut this channel down.
If you look carefully at the chart, you'll see that my statements are correct. There is obviously barrel distortion, but it's confined to the edges, so throughout most of the image it's actually not too bad. It's also worth remembering that distortion isn't generally a big deal if it's corrected properly, which is very easy to do.
No thank. 50 apo lanthar is less than 1k. So its the 35. I love 40 but versatility is waaaaay less than 28. It should be 39 not 43. Such usless expensive thing. Bring the 40 1.2 an put it at f/2.
I've been saying for years that 43 mm is the most accurate to human perspective in my opinion. I'm so glad Panasonic made this, and f2 is just perfect for what I'm looking for. The $6,000 price tag however is not. Looking forward to picking one up used in 15 years. 😄
Too expensive to be honest. For some this works fine but personally I can find plenty substitutes and get the same result. But for those who know what they want and like the 43mm lens, then I guess it's justified. If it was half the price it would make sense for the gear you get, the rest of the money is just for the branding.
Had several Leicas over the last 15 years, and I won't buy any more soon. Their cameras are great, but I won't be surprised to hear that Leica is one of the least reliable brand of all the big names. That's probably why you always have to wait several months, sometimes nearly a year, to get your camera back.
to me it's paying double for a less fat camera compared to the sony a7C series. I wish sony would handycap cooling for video a bid and just make those bodies a tad slimmer... well, we an only dream of a new RX1R generation
Let's see: Canon R5 - $2800, Canon RF 50MM f/1.2 - $2100, total = $4900. OR! Hear me out now...a Leica with a 43MM f/2 permanently attached lens that has barrel distortion and CA for days for $1100 more. Now sure, you'll get a much more capable camera with a near-perfect lens that's faster with the Canon, but on the other hand you'll have something in your hand that says "Leica" on it! Look, it's a tough choice, there's a lot to think about here. Go home and think it over. No no! Don't be rash! Now you jump in your Bentley and go back to your mansion and take a good nap. You shouldn't make big decisions like this when you're tired.
Always nice to get a free camera with every lens purchase.
...for only 6.750 EUR, a true bargain! And Panasonic lens design (Patent) Leica approved!
@@NotAnotherChannel_Channel Yeah, thats one way to advertise it 🤣 "Free camera and lens! Oh, the batteries? $6,000"
Its like ordering 2.000 big macs and getting a free coke light with it :D
How can they put APO on a lens that has that much aberation?
Because it's a Leica, you can't expect Cosina quality.
I went back and watched Christopher’s Leica SL APO 28mm review. That lens out significantly outperformed this lens with regard to chromatic aberration. I have the 43 and can testify to its sharpness and color rendition. But this video shows that not all APOs were created equal. Given the size and weight, I’m still happy with the 43.
As tested, the lens on this camera can not be a true APO. Given the price of this camera, it should be.
I had the same question when I tested it out against the 28 (which has less fringing but is not as sharp). Still kept the 43 though it’s otherwise a great lens.
If you want 100% APO performance, really only the SL APO lenses provide that. However this APO Q lens and the APO M lenses are still great performers, they are not optical perfection.
Thank you for this. I appreciate very much your thorough and thoughtful analyses of camera/lenses.
Love this camera, yet after having Q2 monochrome and Q3 28mm (both sold) fixed lens is just not for me.
We need more options for this range on full-frame cameras. I love the 43mm focal length, and I don't mind not having f1.4 or less if it means I can have a very small street photography lens.
Nikon 40mm is looking better every day. For the price, it’s a no brainer if you’re in the Nikon Z system.
@@awake780It’s a no brainer for the price. But I’d be very willing to pay a lot more money for a better performing version. It’s not performing as great as some people pretend. At least not when you compare it to other options from Sony, Voigtländer, Leica, Sigma. A 200€ lens on my 4000€ Z8 seem wrong.
@@RegrinderAlert its not that bad
@@eyeamstrongest and not that great either once you ignore the price. At least not on the 47MP bodies, the Zf is just fine.
@@RegrinderAlert that’s the thing, most people spending $4k on a high resolution FF camera would and probably should be ponying up for the 35 or 50 1.8/1.2 variants to make the most out of their sensor. Expecting a cheap lens to do miracles is wishful thinking. Does the Voigtlander have better IQ? Obviously. It costs 5x more. Sigma - I hope you like heavy lenses or adapting F mount. Leica - prepare to get a second mortgage.
You’re kind of comparing apples to pineapples.
A good, honest review with a great fun element.
Thank you for your review. Given that you like the macro function, you should mention that the supplied lens hood cannot be used with a filter in place in macro mode-a strange oversight for Leica. I use a third-party rectangular hood that screws into the filter. A small knurled screw keeps it from rotating out of position. It works, but I wish Leica would have designed a bayonet lens hood that works in all circumstances.
I'd buy this for a reasonable $4000-4500 with Sony's latest AF. Main selling point is the 43mm lens, large EVF, less intimidating RF style body, the tilting LCD (I'm a waist level photographer), and the most important: Leaf shutter. I prefer the quite shutter sound, much less vibration, and fast flash sync speed. I have to use mechanical shutter with my A7RIV, that 60MP sensor readout too slow for reilable electronic shutter. However I miss the built in ND filter.
If a mummy 28 and and daddy 43 had a baby 35mm i would consider buying one
Leica is basically the Prada, Dior, and Gucci of cameras. 😅
Hard disagree from me. Similar to Rolex, maybe, because both built their reputations on quality, not just style, and both still make products that function as well as anything else out there.
Agree. Overly expensive just to show status. Very nice, but not necessary
Nice to see expensive stuff being actually awesome, not always the case sadly...
This is one on my dream list. Thanks for the content.
At that price, it's as sharp as a Viltrox (or just about any other modern 40mm/50mm lens), has monstrous distortion and LoCA. Leica's optics these days really is something.
I was taken aback by how much distortion there was. I understand that we've had lens corrections for a while, but it feels like some companies are getting lazy in just how much there is.
So many aberrations in an apochromatic lens? Much cheaper apo lanthar from voigtlander present a much higher level of optics. I expected better results from leica apo summicron.
No kidding, man. For 6k, can buy a decent camera and three Milvus lenses, or an Otus lens or two, that can blow this out of the water
@@bri_v😂😂😂 yeah, in autofocus especially 😂
@@cooperativ For 7k, that autofocus better mow my lawn and rub my feet too 😆
It would be nice to compare this camera with a Nikon zf with a 40mm lens.
I played his review of the Z 40mm and this one side-by-side and looks like I won't be buying a Leica anytime soon hahah.
Beautiful. Great review too. As always 🍻
I own the Q2, but purchased the Ricoh GRIIIx for 1/10th of the price. Same FOV, has in body stabilisation, macro mode and produces lovely images. Just doesn't have the OVF.
I'm curious to see if lenses and cameras from the Leica M system will be tested on this channel. Perhaps Leica will lend them out for a week or two for testing purposes 🙂
I'm curious to see whether the Q 43 will be as big a success as the Q 28 🙂
well, chromatic aberration doesn't really seem to fit the definition of "APO" lens....
The Leica haters are out in these comments. Build quality, UI, and superb optics are motivators for some. Of course you have more cost effective optical equivalents; but some of us actually enjoy the Leica history, build, feel and optics. Horses and courses.
😂😂😂😂😂😂🙄🙄🙄
Please review the Sony 300mm f/2.8 GM
43mm is still fun to shoot on street. Now do top 10 most fun lens+body for street photography 😂😂😂
glad they're looking out for their customers with that BOGO sale
I was hoping for this review! I'm surprised at the amount of longitudinal chromatic aberration considering the apochromatic design of the lens.
hmm some of your photos at bokeh tests are really overexposed. But nice review, as always. Hmmm but I get the feeling, the lens is not that promising as I first thought
A far better alternative would be either the Sony A7Cii or A7CR and the older 35mm Sony Zeiss Sonnar lens. Package total will be about $3500. The benefit of a less expensive camera is that you can interchange lenses with the A7C series with hundreds of first/third party lenses and a host of vintage lenses. It's like a buffet vs a simple hamburger station.
A very, very tasty hamburger though.
I used to own a Sony a7Cii with 40mm f/2.5. Great camera, but the resolution of the Leica gives the Leica images something better. (I'm assuming it's the resolution.) You can crank up the contrast and saturation to get the Sony images near to the "Leica look" in post. But there's still something different that the Sony cannot produce. Well . . . the Sony's mechanical shutter is super loud. Maybe it's shutter shock that keeps the Sony images from being quite as good.
@@billmartin1663 a7CR has the exact same sensor as M11 or Q3. "Color Science" might be the last argument but we know it really doesn't matter if someone knows how to do the most basic lightroom postprocessing.
@@summit8796many photographers (me included tbh) like taking photos but don’t like editing them.
We like nice cameras to hold and take photos with, and like nice photos coming straight out of the camera, and maybe share them or just look at them once in a while
@@quangpham4372 same here. I always thought, there is something special about that 28mm 1.7 lens, that I never got with my Sony equipment
I just saved over $12,000!
By not buying either Q3.
Is the operation as slow as the original Q3?
Yes
I’m wondering if you plan to review the vogtlander 40mm f1.2 lens?
The sims music at the end , nice lol
The sample shots are nice, but I don't see how it justifies a $6k price tag 🤷... I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I paid less than one third of that for a 90D and a Zeiss 35mm f2, and get much better results 🤷 Seems like most of that 6k is for the red Leica logo...
Everyone knows that you pay for the leica name. Shouldn’t shock anyone
@@murbal7679 I guess? Sorry, I just don't understand the thought process behind it
@@bri_v Yeah doesn’t make sense to me either. I just treat it as a luxury item
@@murbal7679It reminds me when I was young and yo-yo's were a craze. All the rich kids had a $100 "silver bullet" that performed the same or less than a $20 one 🤣 Seems like just a status type of thing...
It's all relative, isn't it? I can purchase a €2000 camera easily, it's an ok price for my reality. But if my income were 3x times higher, I'd surely buy it. Maybe it will be a gift to myself when I retire - I guess the target audience is older people anyway 😁
No idea why anyone would buy this. The price is awful and there are many options these days for retro styled bodies. At the very least it should have much better distortion and loca characteristics for the price.
Feel free to point out an overall better performing lens in the focal length.
Distortion doesn’t show in your finished shot, so why care? Software correction is not a band aid on bad engineering. It was calculated into the lens design from the beginning.
The end result beats out pretty much any other option in quality and that’s what matters for a tool.
You can buy an "honest" lens, surely the viewers of your art will appreciate it 😂
Someone sounds salty they cannot afford 😅
The worst aspect of the (US$7,000) Leica Q3 43 is trying to obtain one. Yes, the price is high. But that has never motivated Leica to churn out an adequate supply.
I'd consider more the Fujifilm X100VI and travel plenty instead using that money for the Q3-43.
Please, could you make a review about the new world first zoom shift lens Laowa 12-24 Shift?
So curious about this camera. Especially since I’ll never own one. It’s fun to see what it can do passively! Awesome video
So the lens comes with the camera🤔😮😊
street 28... You can always crop in...43 ... I have shot 43 a lot with my GFX camera, which is my 55 which is 44 and it's actually too tight for a lot of situations. It's a portrait lens.
Were I to win a very large lottery, may well purchase the camera and lens and not worry about the price, prefer the 28mm.
Seems all the CA testing here was done in Macro mode. That might affect IQ. What about CA in the normal shooting mode?
Think I'll just stick with a fuji 27mm f2.8.
Comments on Leica/Hassy/RED gear never disappoint. Yes, the Leica tax is a real thing, but if you think for a second this isn't a VERY high-quality platform, you're crazy. If you can't afford it that's fine, but don't pretend whichever Nikon with whichever plastic lens produces anything nearly as good.
Way to expensive for me. I would rather watch a review of the two Ricoh cameras and their fixed lenses GRiii (28mm) and GRiiix (40mm)
I thought this camera would cost around 800-1000 eur. 6000? that can't be real
I just don't get it.
Lens: shows maybe the craziest barrel distortion that's been on this channel all year
Chris: "Some barrel distortion is having to be corrected here uwu :))"
If you're going to go so blatantly easy on companies out of fear they'll stop sending you stuff to test, you might as well shut this channel down.
If you look carefully at the chart, you'll see that my statements are correct. There is obviously barrel distortion, but it's confined to the edges, so throughout most of the image it's actually not too bad. It's also worth remembering that distortion isn't generally a big deal if it's corrected properly, which is very easy to do.
but is it as good as the Samyang 45mm 1.8?! 🤪
No thank.
50 apo lanthar is less than 1k. So its the 35.
I love 40 but versatility is waaaaay less than 28.
It should be 39 not 43.
Such usless expensive thing.
Bring the 40 1.2 an put it at f/2.
I've been saying for years that 43 mm is the most accurate to human perspective in my opinion. I'm so glad Panasonic made this, and f2 is just perfect for what I'm looking for. The $6,000 price tag however is not. Looking forward to picking one up used in 15 years. 😄
Panasonic didn't make it, they designed it.
Already know this lens will be near flawless.
With that ridiculous distortion, I don’t think so.
Too expensive to be honest. For some this works fine but personally I can find plenty substitutes and get the same result. But for those who know what they want and like the 43mm lens, then I guess it's justified. If it was half the price it would make sense for the gear you get, the rest of the money is just for the branding.
Had several Leicas over the last 15 years, and I won't buy any more soon.
Their cameras are great, but I won't be surprised to hear that Leica is one of the least reliable brand of all the big names.
That's probably why you always have to wait several months, sometimes nearly a year, to get your camera back.
I’ll take 28mm every single day
Am I the only one who can see distortion in an architectural photo even after it’s been corrected? Honest question. Anyone else?
this lens is garbage or at-least not worth $6000
I will never understand the hype around these types of cameras. Complete waste of money
I don't know. The 28mm lens makes much more sense, for a fixed lens system.
distortion so bad
As purchased by lawyers and doctors.
all the images look a bit overexposed !!!
I tend to shoot quite high key
to me it's paying double for a less fat camera compared to the sony a7C series.
I wish sony would handycap cooling for video a bid and just make those bodies a tad slimmer... well, we an only dream of a new RX1R generation
Let's see: Canon R5 - $2800, Canon RF 50MM f/1.2 - $2100, total = $4900. OR! Hear me out now...a Leica with a 43MM f/2 permanently attached lens that has barrel distortion and CA for days for $1100 more. Now sure, you'll get a much more capable camera with a near-perfect lens that's faster with the Canon, but on the other hand you'll have something in your hand that says "Leica" on it!
Look, it's a tough choice, there's a lot to think about here. Go home and think it over. No no! Don't be rash! Now you jump in your Bentley and go back to your mansion and take a good nap. You shouldn't make big decisions like this when you're tired.
Overpriced as always, no wonder Japanese state of the art cameras outsell it forever 😅
OMG... for the money the lens quality is shyte 😂😂😂 and people complain about Canon using lens corrections 🤣🤣🤣
I thought you were just talking smack, but then I got to the distortion part lol. Yikes.
So it's a kit camera with lens 😅