Photography

I have both and love them a lot; M has been my go to camera for creativity, versatility and value retention along with world class quality M lenses!!
However Q has become my “weapon of choice “ for travel due to its compactness and superb versatile features including “zoom” or crop mode.
Just my thoughts.
Disclaimer; I am not professional photographer and just do it for my personal satisfaction and enjoyment. The joy I get out of using M is second to none.
Regards

Great to hear you love them both!
A simple question (maybe no simple answer): if you had none of them and wanted to buy only one, which one would you go for?

No doubts whatsoever

This was about 10 years ago, but I also remember comparisons between examples of photos from several cameras. Posters could not pick out the Leica shots vs a canon or Nikon or sony. Reminds me a bit of audiophile forums where some posters claim a massive difference when there is no measurable frequency response change. Then again I do think there is value if you enjoy it, and it compels you to use it. I feel like it's more important to get a setup that you will actually use, with ergonomics/feel etc. I view it like my turntable. I don't necessarily think it sounds better than cds with occasional pops and occasional speed issues, but I do enjoy using it so it's worth it to me. My 2 worthless cents.

Most probably technology has converged and there is no huge difference between a Canon and a Leica. However, this is not very important for me. Even if a Nikon was a slightly better camera, what matters to me most is that I love to use the camera and that I can appreciate and enjoy the pictures it produces.
Many thanks for your post!

I used AMEX points to get it all those years ago.

I put every business expense possible on my AMEX card though. All my UPS shipping charges added up to about 50k a month 😁

probably for 35mm Leica mainly for the lenses, and Hasselblad for medium format. Masterfully built cameras and lenses, and the format was determined by how large you intended to enlarge the photographs.

I am aware that an expensive camera will not make me a good photographer. I hope to find a tool that makes me want to use it often and learn along the way.
Good point about Lightroom and post processing!
Thanks a lot!

It's a great point, digital is supposed to be post processed just like film and prints were supposed to be pushed, pulled, nudged and edited in the development process. No post work in digital is like the film equivalent of shooting a point and shoot on generic kodak 400 developed at the 1 hour photo stand and at that point phone cameras are pretty great. FWIW I travel with just a Sony 35mm and an android tablet for light editing and uploading to the cloud, as someone that came from a film background the biggest area of continuous learning for me is on the post side.

If you want what an iPhone can't do, consider medium format, specifically the Fujifilm GFX series.

However, your list of requirements seems like it would be better served by two cameras than one. Street photography, travel, portraits, and landscapes are pulling in different directions, especially if you also want small size/weight.

If you have a really clear, honest understanding of the size of camera and lenses you want to travel with, that will help narrow the options a lot. I'd suggest looking at a camera like Fujifilm X100VI and asking yourself: which of my needs would this satisfy, which would it not.

I hope that if I leave out the rare portrait I can cover the other stuff with one camera. Medium format probably would limit the times I actually carry the camera with me, so I guess something like a X100VI or a Q3 would be a good starting point.

Size, weight, feel in the hand, ease of use, etc. I mainly use the camera for travel and city-based photography. I continue to grow in my comfort with using it — exploring and experimenting— and for me that experience never ends and is delightful. 

Thank you orahu. I might well go the same route.

I have a Q3 28 and I keep considering an M.

The M is totally different and will not give you the same success rate as a Qx. You also have to consider the OVF with a manual rangefinder mechanism is harder to master than an EVF with autofocus.

Your best bet is to talk to an AD and arrange to borrow or rent an M with either a 35mm or 50mm lens for a week. If at the end of the week you are frustrated by your failure rate but thoroughly enjoying the different process then buy one. Your success rate will only increase.

If the failure rate is too much, then either Q3 28 or Q3 43 will be wonderful partners.

I‘ll check whether the local Leica store is open to renting it out over several days. The guy store manager was very nice and competent.
Interesting that, at the level you‘re using the Q, you are considering an M. Love your work!

I use a Sony RX10 Mk iv and I chose it because it has a reasonable close up 24mm and long reach zoom @ 600mm, quick focus for action shots. It’s not too heavy or large, and has a non-removable lens. Close

You hit it spot on that today’s more serious zoom cameras are incredibly versatile, and at the fraction of the cost of, say, an M system.

To me it is more important to engage with a scene or picture in a different way than I do using the iPhone. And that this process creates a different picture, in the best case a nice one. I really like for instance to use a viewfinder instead of a display, and I‘d like to try to work without a zoom and see where this takes me.

I always love the posts from your walks! With the way you use your cam, to take macros of flowers to flying birds, your camera choice makes total sense.

I think the Q (former owner here) is pretty fantastic for walking around, but somewhat handicapped by the fixed lens. As an only camera it has limitations. I sold mine.

The requirement is mostly based on my ignorance of "the huge photo world". I don't have the experience to judge the pros and cons of all the cameras out there that on paper could be suitable for me. So, to take a watch analogy, my thinking is to stick to the Rolex or Patek of cameras. Simply trusting that this is quality hardware that you can get services in 10 years. My goal is to prevent the desire to upgrade as soon as you move up the learning curve. In this respect, Leica is a brand I trust. And if along the way I realize I'll be happier with a different camera, the Leica resale value means that the loss may not be greater than by buying a Fuji or Sony to start the journey.

but nothing will give you an experience and a long-term love affair like an M. Since you are deciding between the Q & the M, my advice, FWIW is to go for the M. It may not seem logical at first and you will have doubts when you first start out with it, but in time, the handling will become second nature. You will enjoy and embrace its simplicity and aesthetics and how it slows you down to enjoy the experience of creating a photo. With my modern Leica & Hasselblad camera collection, I have often asked myself which one I would keep if I could only have one - the M11. However, all this is from a hobbyist photo buff with no formal training in photography and only doing it for fun and passion. So the best course of action IMO is to try them out before committing. Hope this helps.

I am tempted to dive into M system photography and the learning this requires. I only do it for passion and for myself. I don’t need every picture to be good - I hope that every year I can take a really good one or two. The one thing that is a slight concern is that I won’t ever really get used to the M and that the failure rate will frustrate me and keep me from using it. But then, I normally cope with new stuff. So best to take the plunge and try.

Thank you for sharing your experience and advice!