Hard to tell! It depends on your personal preferences and subjects. Looking at your photo work I can see no reason for any changes except weight and bulk. I currently own a Leica Q3-43 – excellent image quality, not too heavy and still compact. It is almost too sharp for portraiture, I have taken some self portraits;)- I feel a little restricted by the narrow field of view, so I am considering the Q3-28 for landscape, if my budget allows it. Something I miss dearly: an automatic enlargement as soon as you crop. Manual focus is well implemented though, the image gets enlarged as soon as you focus and is tack sharp. But of course you do not get the full size of the image, this slows you down and may affect precision. My other every day camera is a Canon EOS R5 – excellent, reliable, but a pain for my back and hand with heavier lenses. Best, Eva
>
Thanks Eva,
The votes have been counted and you win 🙂
On a serious note, thanks for your thoughts. It’s interesting that even with a Q3-43 you find there is room for improvement (crop implementation, need for a wider FOV). And I agree that my current set up is great, but you’ve guessed correctly that weight and size are the only negatives.
I’m still thinking whether that’s enough to justify another camera. It probably isn’t, but I do find myself leaving my current gear behind when I’m heading out the door, unless I know there’s a specific opportunity to photograph.
Sorry, my last post was incomplete. I think there is always room for improvement, that‘s what keeps the industry alive. As for the Q3-43, a panorama mode could do the job in most cases. I don’t mind stitching in Photoshop, but the files get huge. It would not work at the seaside with waves or otherwise with much movement. Price tag and justification – that is the eternal question. I am finding myself in the same situation. I now get out without a camera more and more often. Don‘t calculate the price per shot! It should be fun.
Eva
>
I am finding myself in the same situation. I now get out without a camera more and more often.
Am I understanding this correctly, Eva, that even though you have a Q (43) you tend to NOT bring it with you when you’re heading out?
Yes, I feel limited by the focal length of the Q 43 – 43 mm are somehow odd for me, and the camera could still be smaller and lighter.
Yes, I cannot familiarise myself with the focal length of the Q 43, and the canera could still be smaller and lighter. The Canon R5 or its smaller sibling, the R6, gets much more use, for macro work and astrophotography, but I would not bring it for every day photography, even with the small RF 35.
Understood. Thank you for the clarification. For me, the 35-50mm range has always been my comfort zone with 40mm as the ‘Goldilocks’ FOV. But I’m yearning to learn how to shoot a wider perspective.
Also, to your other point, I think any camera — short of the Ricoh GR — is going to be somewhat of a burden to bring along when heading out the door.
Nikon ZF
I think you’re safer with it, less likely to draw the wrong attention.
All are good systems, I would be happy to use any of them for the next decade.
I can’t disagree. There’s a reason I (subconsciously) ordered the cameras in my poll as 1.Zf, 2.RF, 3-Q3. I was definitely leaning toward the Zf but there are two things that make me hesitate. One, I really, really have become addicted to the larger sensor of the GFX. Second, all the nice Z lenses are huge, which defeats the purpose of having a light EDC.
Prosophos 
Hard to tell! It depends on your personal preferences and subjects. Looking at your photo work I can see no reason for any changes except weight and bulk. I currently own a Leica Q3-43 – excellent image quality, not too heavy and still compact. It is almost too sharp for portraiture, I have taken some self portraits;)- I feel a little restricted by the narrow field of view, so I am considering the Q3-28 for landscape, if my budget allows it. Something I miss dearly: an automatic enlargement as soon as you crop. Manual focus is well implemented though, the image gets enlarged as soon as you focus and is tack sharp. But of course you do not get the full size of the image, this slows you down and may affect precision. My other every day camera is a Canon EOS R5 – excellent, reliable, but a pain for my back and hand with heavier lenses. Best, Eva
>
Thanks Eva,
The votes have been counted and you win 🙂
On a serious note, thanks for your thoughts. It’s interesting that even with a Q3-43 you find there is room for improvement (crop implementation, need for a wider FOV). And I agree that my current set up is great, but you’ve guessed correctly that weight and size are the only negatives.
I’m still thinking whether that’s enough to justify another camera. It probably isn’t, but I do find myself leaving my current gear behind when I’m heading out the door, unless I know there’s a specific opportunity to photograph.
Sorry, my last post was incomplete. I think there is always room for improvement, that‘s what keeps the industry alive. As for the Q3-43, a panorama mode could do the job in most cases. I don’t mind stitching in Photoshop, but the files get huge. It would not work at the seaside with waves or otherwise with much movement. Price tag and justification – that is the eternal question. I am finding myself in the same situation. I now get out without a camera more and more often. Don‘t calculate the price per shot! It should be fun.
Eva
>
Am I understanding this correctly, Eva, that even though you have a Q (43) you tend to NOT bring it with you when you’re heading out?
Yes, I feel limited by the focal length of the Q 43 – 43 mm are somehow odd for me, and the camera could still be smaller and lighter.
Yes, I cannot familiarise myself with the focal length of the Q 43, and the canera could still be smaller and lighter. The Canon R5 or its smaller sibling, the R6, gets much more use, for macro work and astrophotography, but I would not bring it for every day photography, even with the small RF 35.
Understood. Thank you for the clarification. For me, the 35-50mm range has always been my comfort zone with 40mm as the ‘Goldilocks’ FOV. But I’m yearning to learn how to shoot a wider perspective.
Also, to your other point, I think any camera — short of the Ricoh GR — is going to be somewhat of a burden to bring along when heading out the door.
Nikon ZF
I think you’re safer with it, less likely to draw the wrong attention.
All are good systems, I would be happy to use any of them for the next decade.
I can’t disagree. There’s a reason I (subconsciously) ordered the cameras in my poll as 1.Zf, 2.RF, 3-Q3. I was definitely leaning toward the Zf but there are two things that make me hesitate. One, I really, really have become addicted to the larger sensor of the GFX. Second, all the nice Z lenses are huge, which defeats the purpose of having a light EDC.