MrSMW

If it's another kit lens or another rehashed old camera, I'm going to shrivel up and die. I liked my S1R's when I had them, but did not love them. I loved my S1H, but it's AF and lack of ability to burn in a LUT to log footage did for it for me over the S5II. I strong like my S5II for video, but wish it had a better rear screen and full-frame 6k 60p without removing anything to have that. I dislike it for stills however. Last chance saloon for me if it's not an S2R, S2H or S5R, but even then, it's going to come down to spec and real world performance... I'm not holding my breath but can only hope this is not another lame announcement. Any big YouTubers in Japan at the moment en masse?

It's like they have some kind of gentleman's agreement to each be shit somewhere.

Unless you have zero shame. Or it's a dare. Anyway, I already knew Hollywood had gone bonkers when I made the mistake of going to see Gladiator II, the near identical remake of the OG. Connie Nelson didn't need to learn any lines (or bother with any acting) and Derek Jacobi had "please kill me" written into his script.

I don't know and maybe I am wrong and you can't? I was looking at a pair of A7CR's instead of my sole A7RV and I could forgive the single card slot, but the rear screen, nah. It's a ploy to make you buy more drinks. Or maybe that is Wetherspoons...

I hope so as it's one of the current blockers to me going back fully to Nikon. Lenses that I am or was interested in such as: Canon RF 28-105mm f2.8 vs Sigma 28-105mm f2.8 = 1330g vs 995g plus the Sigma costing approx 50% less. Canon RF 28-70mm f2 vs Sony 28-70mm f2 = 1430g vs 918g, though the Canon can be had for slightly less cost than the new Sony. Latest Sigma 24-70 f2.8 approx 150g lighter than the Canon RF equivalent and 50% of the price. R3 though is considerably less than the Z9 in weight, but that is because it only has half the megapixels and those things are heavy 😉 Sure is and is exactly why I went with them for stills. But Nikon are almost back for me and if they can get a couple more things right, I'm pretty sure I will be back with them for everything (at least bodies anyway with Z8, Z6III and Zf) some time soon...

If they are serving dry cakes, they deserve it!

I think the bottom line is we still do not have a single brand that can deliver in full and instead, pros and cons to every set up. Well for my needs anyway... For video, I can't see past the S5II. There isn't anything it does not do that I need or want. I would rather it had a better quality/higher res rear screen as I think they skimped there and as someone who does not use an external monitor or the EVF, rear LCD quality is important to me. Closest alternative = Nikon Z6III...except it only writes to one card slot for video, so no backup, which itself/on it's own, is not the deal-breaker, but the fact that you cannot burn a LUT into the footage is. If I could burn in the RED Film Bias LUT, job done and done deal, the Z6III would become my primary video unit. For stills, Sony A7RV. Medium format cameras, with their lenses, are just a leetle bit too big for my tastes. Z8 comes closest, but it does not have the lenses without adapting and with that, comes issues. If Nikon was open to Sigma lenses, it would be a done deal there also and I'd be at peak camera for my needs with that combo. Secondary stills plus hybrid = Zf. If I had the brass, it would be Leica Q3 43mm, despite their shit customer service, lack of chairs and dry cake. It ticks every box for me in that regard except one and that is purchase price. Even at €3k, I'd struggle, but it's twice that, so my Zf is my 'Poor Man's Leica Q3'. And I have looked at every bit of kit out there, at least on paper and in reviews and there just isn't a single brand that ticks every box and I just find that odd. Why can we only burn a LUT into Lumix (and I think Fuji)? Why are your rear LCD's so shit Sony, unless A7RV and above? Why can we only write video to a single card slot Nikon. Why Canon is everything so big, heavy and expensive...except your R3 which is very light for what it is? Why are your cakes so dry Leica you fucktards?

This is the straw that broke the camels back for me. Japan it is then.

Nah, that was from last years advent calendar.

🤣

On the fourth (not) day of Christmas, my dealer said to me, it’s not the SL2 you want but the 3. Or a Canon R5.

On the first day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Leica SL3. (OK, an SL2) On the second day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Canon R3. (OK, an R5) On the third day (not) of Christmas, my dealer sold to me, a Nikon Z6III. (OK, a Canon R5)

I'm guessing stock, probably not!

It's available for Nikon Zf, but dare I...

I find they don’t tend to give a fuck these days as their attention spans are limited to TikTok memes only. Birds just aren’t what they used to be…

Nor me, but I can't unseen it now 😝 Same, - it's just an internal back up drive for me also. Another rabbit hole for me to explore. Thanks for that 😜 Yep. Or prime lens wander about all day camera. Yep, Zf is the better low light camera. Sitting on the fence whether I should get the Voigt 40mm f1.2 in Z or E Mount... And that of the A7RV even more so. I'd pay any premium in weight and cost quite happily though the actual screen is not a dealbreaker for me and the size & res is good. I could make a case for that and if there is ever going to be a Z7III, I could see that becoming a reality. I don't have any other than I wish it was a bit smaller and as above, would prefer a more sophisticated rear screen, otherwise no issues. Right, off to check out skinning options 🤗

I would pick the Z6III for most of those reasons also, but especially because with the adapter, it opens up the entire E Mount line, whether that be Sony's own lenses including the new 28-70mm f2, or the entire Sigma and Tamron series. Canon, you just get Canon. Everything lens-wise, bigger, heavier, more expensive. And potential fire-fighting duties. R6III vs Z6III makes more sense from just the body perspective?

Well out walking my dogs for the past hour, and came to the same conclusion. Other than build/brand/looks, but in the real world... It's an option I have been considering now that I have the Zf and that is dump the zooms completely and have instead: Zf + 40mm f2 as my candid, all day, walkabout, mid focal length option, plus, A7RV with 3x lens options from the Sigma contemporary line, the; 20, 65 and 90 and then use them either at those focal lengths, or at the turn of a dial to become; '30'/'100'/'135'...and that has a TON of appeal, - less overall range and less flexibility with any prime compared with any zoom, even with cropping, but smaller, lighter, higher quality results, better low light capability etc. And as you say, a used A7RV is FAR cheaper, never mind more capable than a Q3 and no bigger or heavier if the Q3 has a baseplate and thumb grip. But it's still not a Leica and wouldn't love it as much... But then, there is also the real world and the difference in cost could be the bucket list 2 weeks in Japan...

But it's ridiculous just how cheap S1Rs are now.

This mornings amusement: https://camerasize.com/compact/#934,917.1018,898.952,ha,t Leica Q3 43 but for me would need a base plate and a thumb rest and there is a bronze set available from PolarPro which looks ridiculously desirable 🤩 https://www.polarpro.com/products/leica-q3-accessories?srsltid=AfmBOorJs0qAPlW2wH0G9AHm4eHV97YOvl1QocFhgGtcfURYewDSkB5T Vs My poor man's Q3 43, my Zf with 40mm f2 SE lens, except not shown is the Smallrig grip. Vs My A7RV with Sigma 35mm f2 Contemporary which arguably, other than badge and heritage and all that shit, is probably better than the Q3 anyway. Have a set of 20mm f2, 35mm f2, 65mm f2 and the 90mm f2.8 in a small bag and you have something off the charts more capable than a Q3 in 28mm or 43mm flavour. And an orange baseplate is available and maybe if I look hard enough, a bronze one... https://www.digit-photo.com/3-LEGGED-THING-Ellie-L-Bracket-Universel-Orange-r3LEGGEDTHINGD16378.html

Well pretty much the only future type of camera I am interested in is a high megapixel point and shoot a la Q3. Right now, if I had the cashidos, I'd scratch that Leica itch with a Q3 43. 100mp would be even better for increased cropping ability. I know some moan about increasing megapixels in cameras and I am of the opinion that 24 is quite enough in most scenarios, but it's that ability to crop either in camera or in post that works for me. That purity of going out with a compact fixed prime camera but knowing you can crop the shit out of it. I've considered the GFX 100S for this purpose, the Hassie X2D (ha, way above my means), the Q3 itself, a used RX1R (a bit too old now) and the X100VI (not quite capable enough IMO) plus the A7CR. The only thing that bothers me abut the A7CR though is the shitty rear screen, the single card slot and something else I forget that put me off and made me realise the A7RV is just better, whether used as a fixed prime 'compact', or as a more advanced lens platform. But right now, if I had 6.5k euros burning a hole in my pocket, Q3 43 for sure. And maybe after the end of the 2025 season, I will... 😉

Compared with the S1R, badge aside?

Updated RX1R?

Possibly, but I don't see them as competitors. The SL2 and R5 sure, but neither with the Zf which is a different beast. The Zf really is more of that slightly larger personal camera with a prime that can do hybrid really well, but is not quite that lens platform that the other two in this mix are. I think all 3 options have merit, but for different reasons and ultimately as it usually does, it comes down to use case.

Well obviously they are playing the retro card a la Fuji and for anyone not coming from either shooting with the type of cameras the Zf is inspired by, or anything like the Fuji rangefinderesque or actual rangefinder body type cameras, the Zf body doesn't make much sense to those who have grown up with more grippy DSLR type designs. I came from that background using the type of cameras the Zf was inspired by for 5+ years at college, uni and then professionally so I'm OK with the format. Plus extensive use of Fuji X Pro 1 and 2's. The rear screen is a bit of an anomaly for this type of camera but actually, for stills especially, it makes a lot of sense and as someone who shoots maybe 25-30% in the portrait orientation, a very quick and easy system to use, along as you don't use a camera strap because camera straps make the use of these types of screen a real PITA. I don't (use a strap), but either the Spider Holster or a small bag, so not an issue. I did try a strap again but unless it is extremely thin for the first say 6 inches at least, PITA! Vs the Z6III, that camera is supposedly more capable and is definitely better ergonomically, but the older sensor in the Zf that it shares with the Z6ii, is arguably 'better'. More DR and from some extensive testing from others, just appears to have a nicer image. I think it's the same sensor as in the OG S5 and a few other cameras, possibly the OG Z6 also? This sensor does not offer the full frame 50/60p options etc that the newer sensor does, but it seems at the expense of outright image quality? I do think it's too big however and as someone who has added and needs an additional grip (despite my background with this style of camera) especially hopping backwards and forwards with more 'DSLR' type bodies, but wish it was at least 10% smaller. Weight is rarely an issue and I would rather it was smaller even if it got heavier. Anyway, not trying to defend the thing at all costs as many if not most of your points are quite valid, but my experience of it is it is one of those cameras where the reality of it is much better than the spec sheet or initial first impressions. When it first came out, I wasn't expecting it or looking for anything like it. But when it was announced last year, I was intrigued enough to pre-order one, something I rarely do. Initial first impressions were it was bigger than expected. Shot the thing and fell in love with it immediately and that rarely happens for me with cameras. Tried it professionally with mixed results on a few jobs and the two areas where it did not quite work for me were: A. Use of adapted Tamron zoom lenses which made for slightly odd handling. The Zf is better with primes for sure. B. Use of adapted Tamron zoom lenses without Sony body in camera corrections produced a few odd results that were not always possible to fully correct in post. So I sold it and bought a Sony A7RV instead which is without a doubt, a far superior bit of kit in almost every regard. Except: A. Low light and B. Fun. So I bought back a Zf on special offer for just over £1500 on special offer which was not far off what I sold my OG one to MPB for back in the Spring. Fun levels have been restored. In summary, as I have said before, I think it's one of those bits of kit you either gel with, or you don't, - very much a marmite camera. Personally, I love marmite won buttered toast so works for me. It's also one of those cameras you have to go shoot to double-check you gel with it. There is something in it's use, the rear screen res that I use exclusively, the shutter sound and feel that just does it for me. Now that one is one that I have been on and off the fence with and IMO is the 'new' Leica SL2. Arguably, the SL3 is more capable in a few areas, but at pretty much twice the price. Used Z8's are still not quite low enough for me, but I am off the fence now re. the Z8 and if I was going to trade my A7RV, ie, my pro work stills camera, for anything, it would be the Z8 based on what is available today. I checked MPB prices and the SL2 can be had for around €2.6k for a 'like new' one and the Z8 €3.8k, but just for some screen articulation alone, I'd need to go with the Z8. Still got a Leica itch to scratch some time. Maybe...