Note for German readers: Gold Box now on the RX1R (Click here).
It’s really great news that Sony finally got competition in the RX FF segment. Leica just announced their Leica Q camera (specs here at BHphoto). And I hope this will one more reason for Sony to finally unleash the RX2! Here is a short recap of the new Leica Q strong and weak points compared to the Sony:
advantages of the new Leica:
– ISO up to 50.000
– faster 28mm f/1.7 lens
– 3.68 MP EVF
– first reports indicate very fast autofocus in bright light conditions.
– better overall built quality and button layout
– longer battery life
– has a proper Q smartphone App
disadvantages of the new Leica:
– The RX1 is still a lot smaller
– video quality on the RX1 seems to be better
– The RX1 is cheaper (RX1 costs $2,800 and the Leica Q $4,250 although the Leica comes with integrated EVF).
Full Leica Q press coverage can be read at MirrorlessRumors (Click here).
142 Responses
RX1 is smaller BUT if you don’t count the ugly external EVF.
Let’s hope for an RX1m2 with integrated EVF 🙂 (yes, even if it’s larger than RX1/r)
You also forgot as advantages for Leica to have an DOF Scale and a much better manual focussing experience (Hardware side, as the Focus Peaking is better implemented in Sony offerings in my opinion)
Still bigger and you can use without the EVF. Personally, I’d prefer the smaller size, so I hope they keep it the same 🙂
RX1 is smaller BUT if you don’t count the ugly external EVF.
Let’s hope for an RX1m2 with integrated EVF 🙂 (yes, even if it’s larger than RX1/r)
You also forgot as advantages for Leica to have an DOF Scale and a much better manual focussing experience (Hardware side, as the Focus Peaking is better implemented in Sony offerings in my opinion)
the sony is wort next to nothing in 4 years…. the leica still hold 80% of it´s value.
Leica Q is able to quickly toggle among the 28mm, 35mm, and 50mm views. It is quite an interesting and useful feature if implemented with a higher mp sensor.
competitor? The Q’s IQ smashes the RX
And you know this from…?
I bet you can’t tell the differences if doing a blind test.
We can conclude you were lucky enough to have tested both in order to form such a strong opinion, no? Although one would hope the Q would have an advantage in IQ given its disproportionate, yet not out-of-this-world price… In any event, I never place any trust in sample shots and will be happy to see the first real-world reviews out there.
Why is that?
What I’ve seen so far is that the Leica 1.7/28 is not a match to the Zeiss 2/35. The Zeiss has the smoothest bokeh and tack sharp wide open at the same time. I’d also say that the Sony sensor has an edge over the one used in the Leica.
The integrated EVF is of course a significant advantage and the lens controls and MF control on the Leica is also nicer.
So IQ wise I think the RX1R is better and I prefer the Leica body and touch screen.
DPReview have review up including studio scene. Huff has review up. All who reviewed it said the IQ is better on Leica, including high ISO. AF is miles better.
IQ is better based on the feedback from reviewers. DPReview have also studio shot so you can compare it against RX1R. AF is miles better so is high ISO.
High ISO from the Leica looks similar or worse in RAW at the same output size.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=leica_q116&attr13_1=sony_dscrx1r&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&normalization=compare&widget=241&x=-0.14961464494381055&y=0.5707603764253923
New pair of eyes you need – there’s much less detail in Sony than in Leica result
Doubtful with 160% sight. I was talking about noise performance. If you don’t see that, you could take your own advice.
On a side note, usable DR is worse too with more shadow banding at low ISO.
Ookeyuu, I’ll leave it at that.
I haven’t seen these before.
True, there is no difference and if any, Sony still has the edge.
Especially if you read the text, details is same, really but Leica seems to have more green noise and Sony more purple noise, either of which turns to grey grain with a good raw developer.
Sony has the edge? Erm….ok….
Everyone can pick something…
But I think you have a fetishised interest in annoying everyone here.
https://disqus.com/by/bodez/
All i care about is max IQ. I shoot at base ISO 95% of the time. I don’t think I’ve ever shot anything at ISO 6400 in my life. I rarely shoot at or more than 400.
Sigma Merrill series might be for you, I’m getting impressive results from little DP2M.
Yes, it’s very impressive. The IQ is truly incredible. I’m turned off by the reviews though, it sounds incredibly frustrating and slow to use.
Oh yes, it’s very slow if you like to chimp after each photo – recording on SD card takes ages (i’m using 95Mb/s cards) but it doesn’t prevent you from taking photos. Another downside is that SPP (raw converter) is slow too and a bit buggy, SSD and folders that don’t contain hundreds of photos help quite a bit. I haven’t tried latest SPP yet, mostly focused on DPQ range and SPP5 gives me great results for Merrill files
Thanks, I don’t chimp but if it means a locked up camera between shots and missed shots i’s not going to work. I also heard the af is sluggish and the focus by wire manual focusing is not great. What’s your experience with that?
AF definitely isn’t something to call home about, it’s decent in good light, can hunt in low light – but I hardly use it in low light due to limitation of low-light performance, unless I’m after B&W which you can happily shoot at ISO1600 and B&W conversions from Merrills are astonishing.
I’m using camera mostly for static subjects where I would like to capture as much detail as possible (landscape, architecture..) or for portraiture, in which case I’m reducing sharpness in SPP because even toddlers look like Benjamin Button after he was born – just too much detail. Manual focus is something I’ve tried once and decided not to do it again 🙂
Thanks. Well it sounds like a brilliant camera within its parameters, the samples I’ve seen look really good. The right tool for the right job.
Shoot medium format, then!
Don’t like the size? D800
Don’t like the size? A7r.
Don’t like Sony? Olympus sensor shift multi-shot high res.
Don’t like that?
Like Hexx says, Sigma Merrill.
You can’t have everything and you are not everyone.
In the great scheme of things, max IQ can only be had with larger sensors. So, you want max IQ but within the limits of your wishes which are not the same limits or wishes everyone has.
So, pick on anything you want but don’t sound like the evangelist who has seen the light and everyone else is blind next to you. That just makes you soun like a b i t ch
lol. are you finished?
It’s you who is whining like a little bi tch. I’m just pointing out one camera is much better than the other at base ISO, where most people shoot. Given the Sony is 2 years old that;s no surprise. FYI – I do shoot Medium Format. I need small cameras too.
The Truth? You can’t handle the truth.
The low iso of the leica looks objectively superior based on those samples, Why shouldn’t it? The camera is nearing 3 years old.
How is a large, 2.5 to 4x more expensive medium format camera an acceptable alternative to a super compact fixed lens camera? You are arguing that there is no use at all for an rx1 / Q camera simply because someone stated the obvious when comparing two files.
I appreciate that. Like I said, though, he is more vested in annoying people around SAR than actually contributing. Look at his history. He even told someone that because he/she’s using sub-par brands of cameras will always have sub-par clients. What kind of reasoning is that? I remember Alex Majoli shooting with Olympus P&S and working for TIME, or Eli Reed in Korea shooting with Sony and Daniel Beherulak shooting with Panasonic. Where does that half-arsed pointy nose logic come from?
go look at the comparisons online, the Q is mind blowing. Much sharper and it has some of the best colour I’ve ever seen in a 35mm camera.
I doubt anything would smash the rx1, maybe better but not smash and even if it is better it wont be by much.
Haha, here we go again : “smashes”, “much better”, “max IQ” etc. The difference is minor and that is if we base ourselves on a single type of shot from the “oh-so-reliable” Dpreview.
Sony needs to respond today ?
In this niche category, the RX1 is the competitor and has been leading since 3 years ago. Based on Sony’s track record on their recent camera performance, I have no doubt that they do something better than the Leica Q at a lesser cost.
Summilux better than RX lens. Therefore IQ is better from Leica product.
No doubts !
Video ? It is photocamera only for me.
The RX1 was revolutionary when it was announced. But id gladly trade a little bit of size for an integrated, left side EVF as Leica did. And I love the 35 and 50mm crop modes borrowed from the Ricoh GR. The Leica even improves upon the GR by showing rangefinder style frame lines. Very cool. Leica should have weather sealed the Q, but it sounds nearly perfect. I hope Sony answers with 36+ mp, weather sealing, and a price under US$3K.
I’d put money on 48mp…
That would be great
The price you wishes would be nice, but given the cost of the A7RII (a different camera, I know) I guess a > or = 3500 euros price tag..
Could be. But at that price, it stays a niche
Leica is how much in EUR?
In Sterling they want £2900 which, if direct conversion, means ~EUR3900
Oficial price in euro is 3.995
And the not so official-street-thug price?
🙂 need to wait for used or display models..
Hehe. In time.
If the Q would have launched together with the RX1 back in 2012, it would have made more sense than an RX1 (£2500+£350 for RX1 and EVF) then.
Maybe the Q is a sign that Sony got something right with the RX1 at that price level, even without the halo brand effect of Leica.
I’ve preordered, but am so wary that there will be an rx2 with new technology… i guess bottom line is the image, and even the focus tab etc of the leica is so helpful towards achieving that rather than just pure tech display. And im a sony fanboy who is invested in a7.
As a former Leica shooter where my primes averaged 2600 a pop I can say I don’t miss it too much, but this one is definitely on my WishList. I do miss the simplicity and overall build quality of the Leica even though I’m committed to the A7rII. However, the added size and weight are very much welcome when compared to the smaller form factor of the Sony. For me, this would be a very worthy travel cam as the A7 is creeping away from that with it’s higher quality glass like the new f1,4 35 that is sitting on my desk. Count me in ~
Got my Q yesterday evening. True, RX1 is smaller, but I have never considered it pocketable.
Handling and overall feeling is better on the Q.
It’s a 28mm, quite silly to try to compare the bokeh with the 35mm f2.0 Zeiss, but the lens is great, the macro scale is useful and cool, and it offers a good subject isolation at f2 even being a 28mm (I just looked at the files on the lcd, I’m far away from my imac)
Would love to hear your thoughts on the Q in general
I can’t say a lot yet: I just set the options and tried it, I need more time. So far I can say that the AF is fast, similar to that of Olympus Em5mark2, surprisingly fast indeed.
The handling is good, better than the fatter M digital cameras.
The weird thumbrest on the back is smart and helps a little: for sure better than the plain rx1.
Weight is just right: less and it could have given a sense of fragile, it’s just right.
The lens is a piece of engineering: the guy at the Leica store told me that the macro function (with the dedicated distance scale) was an expensive part.
Just some quick shots confirmed me that it suffers from a field curvature: focusing on the center and then recomposing the photo by putting the subject on an edge result in back focus (not a big surprise though, it’s a wide angle after all).
DNG files are not compressed, a plus to me compared to those of Sony.
EVF is the best I’ve seen so far.
Wifi connection is fast and reliable: better than that of Olympus. There’s no lag at all while you move the camera and look at the live view on the iPad.
Marco, can you please confirm if you can shoot DNG only? I’ve read that you can only have JPEG or DNG + JPEG
Right, JPEG only, or DNG + JPEG. The JPEG only is there to be used with the Leica Q app I suppose.
Thank you
Is it focus-by-wire?
I got the Leica Q yesterday. Since there’s no ACR yet I’ve only shot JPG. Early impressions of the Q relative to the RX1: manual focus implementation is better, camera feels better in hand, integrated EVF is best in class, autofocus is faster, face recognition AF more accurate, startup time is faster, and the Q has a DOF scale on the lens–meaning it’s better for street than the RX1.
Image quality is about the same, which shouldn’t be a surprise; 24MP sensors haven’t improved much in the three years since the RX1 was released. Q frustrations: battery door is flimsy (wtf on a $4K camera?), switching back to AF from MF is less graceful than it should be.
The Q feels like a camera that happens to have a computer inside. The RX1 feels like a computer that takes pictures. They’re both great cameras. Decision comes down to whether you prefer 28mm or 35mm and which one feels better in hand, since image quality is similar.
Similar IQ up to ISO 1600, and even then, the Leica files won’t be as robust. I know this because I tried an M240 before in a similar way to Tobinators. When I brought the files back home, the Leica has a distinct lack of shadow leniency to rescue, if you wish to push that. Highlight rescue is about on par, but higher ISOs are not. Banding is not visible on the base file of ISO 1600, but will be if pushed a bit. It begins to be visible at 3200 on a base file and gets worse above that ISO. This is just a sensor thing and where Exmor makes sense vs others.
Unarguably, though, Leica does design cameras like cameras that most of us grew up understanding as cameras. Sony, however, looks like it wants to depart from the traidtional feel of what a camera is. Perhaps their look and feel are more appreciated by youngsters better than those of us which learnt on film era ergonomics. I remember the Nikon F6, when it launched, to be considered the utmost in ergonomic design and the last scream of film camera development. It had no shutter speed top dial, or iso speed top dial and it didnt need lenses with aperture rings. No one then complained it didnt have an F2/F3 feel.
M240 uses different sensor than Q. I can use M240 at 6400 (it’s push) only if I nail exposure.
I don’t know where I read it, but I must have stumbled upon it a couple of times for me to remember it like that. OK, then.
Do you not see banding with 6400? I only shot the M240 to ISO 3200 because I felt that would be enough to get an image of what could be possible. I didnt push the files beyond. Thought it was enough. From the outside of the shop, banding was visible in the mid-dark areas. If you have contrasty photos or crush your blacks, it won’t be as visible, but I flatten my photos a bit and I felt it was a bit too much for a £5K camera.
3200 is fine, 6400 you do need to nail exposure for capture containing shadows, if you don’t and you start to push things around you do get some banding – strangely enough, CaptureOne seems to be handling this much better than ACR (I’m CaptureOne user and haven’t tried latest LR or ACR).
Regarding £5K camera – I was lucky to get mine when Leica ran promotion £500 off camera body and I actually bought mine from RedDotCameras because they were selling it for old price £4799 rather than new price of £5100 which means I paid for mine £4299.
Good catch. My finances would need a bit more solidity, even for the ~£4k price. I do appreciate the feel and the style and solidity, but I was never convinced enough for money. I guess my main gripe was that, in the end, it was how the work turns out to be that matters most and how much I could extract from every quid spent is what I care the most.
I use C1 as well! but I have the Pro for Sony only version. Couldn’t say no to that for £25! MUCH better than Lr, which I used to use before. You can also use it with 3 screens if you do the floating tools. Now I have so much space!
Well, finances 🙂 credit card cried. I haven’t bought a body since X-Pro1 which I bought long time ago so it wasn’t that bad, only half was covered by credit card.
very interesting short review, thank you
Thank you Marc .. Nice little review
I think the most appealing part with the Q is the 28mm lens. I don’t get why they would use a 28mm though, but for someone like me that mainly shoot landscapes, urban landscapes and travel 28mm would be a focal length that would work in most scenarios.
Would never buy the Q for real though since i simply can’t afford such a luxury item that only has one FL and i’d rather buy a A7r II…
I dont concider 28mm advantage over 35….35/2 over 28/1.7 any time
I know how you feel. 28mm is weird and awkward. 🙂
personal preference, I’m a 28-50-90 guy, my friend is 21-35-90
Fair enough 🙂
But gotta love Nifty Fifties 😀
A week late?
Roughly…
It’s surely odds-on that the next generation RX1 will have a BSI sensor, like the A7R II. It would allow for much improved AF performance and a silent shutter mode (albeit that’s less important on the RX1) as well as 4K video etc. That the Leica has a faster lens is surely a trade-off of the shorter focal length. The combination of the focal length and aperture means that they will have much the same front element diameter.
What the DPReview test shots appear to show is that the Leica lens is notably sharper in the corners. If Sony are to match that they will have to improve the lens too.
It wasn’t so long ago people were saying that the RX1 has one of the best lenses ever made. Not trying to say anything in particular, I just find it interesting.
People seem to be fond of hyperbole. Witness the ridiculously overstated remarks like “blows of out the water” and similar that are used for what are often relatively small differences in real life situations. Personally I would think the fairly significant difference between the FoV of a 28mm and 35mm lens might be a more important deciding factor. It’s a large enough difference that it will impact on the type of photography that they are suited to.
One interesting possibility would be that if Sony was to put the A7R II sensor into the replacement for the RX1, it could lead to a more flexible platform as it would allow for more cropping. I rather wider lens with that capability would still be perfectly usable with an APSC crop at about 18MP.
Agree.
Me too. I agree with Steve though, in the DPR sample at least, the summilux is a noticeably better lens.
Wondering if DPR has a wonky copy of the RX1R or something, if you compare it to the RX100 mk III over say… the balsamic honey vinegar bottom center, the RX100 is noticeably sharper too. Now the RX100 III is a great little camera, but we’re talking about pocketable zoom here. If this is representative, I’m not sure why possibly people ever raved about this RX1R lens.
It’s funny, I was just looking at the RX1 test scene the other day and thought they didn’t look so hot. You may be right or there may be something else at play here. I haven’t looked at the Q, but there was something decidedly ‘off’ about the RX1 shots (not that I have extensively tested one either).
doesn’t look like an user error though, centre is tack sharp, is it possible that there’s some field curvature on the lens?
The RX1 Sonnar, althought known to have a mid zone dip when close down, still remains one of the top 35mm lenses ever made. I know this. I’ve owned many (35mm Contax G, 35mm Biogon ZM, 35mm f2 ZE, 35mm 2.8 C/Y, 35mm 1.4 L, 24mm 1.8 E, CV 35mm 1.2 II) and I can say that from stuff I have seen online of lenses I have not owned or tried, only the Sigma 35mm ART can have the sharpness the RX1 Sonnar can have with better distortion, but not the fall-off or the bokeh. So, yes, the RX1 lens is all that.
The Leica 28mm shows a better mid zone at close down apertures (where RX1 sonnar begins to falter because of astigmatism) but the edges I would say have negligible differences. Wide open, though, that may be another story altogether. Where the Summicron 35 is better in the mid zone than the RX1 closed down, it isn’t wide open. Again, I’ve had hands with both. Tobinators had a fairly simple and non scientific comparison between those two and you can see how they do wide open and stopped down.
The 28mm from Leica is excellent, no doubt, but the DPReview sample only gives us stopped down apertures and what I would imagine are relatively close distances. How big is that chart and how far apart are the cameras? That is important, too. If anything, R Scheffler did an outstanding comparison among 35mm lenses a while back and, again, it showed how much the RX1 can deliver on many scenarios. The Leica is now pitched against the RX1 just because the concept of the cameras is the same.
Both the Q and RX1R studio shots were shot at f/5.6, if you hover over the little i icon it gives the settings.
As far as the distances, I don’t have a number in front of me (although I’m sure you could work it out from the currency), but it doesn’t seem ridiculously close or anything, definitely a few feet away — and a zone where most of us would be shooting a lot of our pictures from.
Mid zone dip, stopped down. Not wide open. Wide open, RX1 has a thoroughly excellent degradation from centre to corner where the corners only lag slightly behind, but remain very sharp nonetheless.
See this:
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-Cyber-shot-RX1-Carl-Zeiss-Sonnar-T-2-35-review-Is-this-the-ultimate-moderate-wide-angle-lens/Sony-RX1-lens-versus-competition
Compared to the Sigma Art, the RX1 only begins to be on par or maybe slitghly behind at stopped down apertures and only in the mid zone.
What are you saying, that the RX1R is excellent at f/2 and lousy at f/5.6?
My point is that the DPReview samples don’t reconcile with dxomark or what people say about it. This isn’t really a subjective deal, it gets obviously beaten by cameras like the RX100III. I’m wondering if they had a decentered copy or something, it’s all over the place.
No. The RX1’s performance at f2 is outstanding compared to other 35mm lenses at f2…if not the best bar none.
Stopped down, however, on the sharpness front the RX1 will show a mid zone dip, which may make it look as if it lags behind compared to other excellent lenses (especially at f4 and f5.6) but its not lousy by any means. This is all most obvious when you are doing an A – B comparison and, again, mid zone, not the whole thing!
Looks like DPReview sample does have some oddity to it. In my experience, the mid zone dip is nowhere near as pronounced as on their sample.
I think Sony’s biggest shortcoming of the RX1 cameras (r and non-r) has not just been the lack of a built-in EVF, although I understand they wanted to make the smallest FF camera possible. To me, the biggest shortcomings were an apparent negligence of covering customer concerns about AF speed or other functionality features that could have been added with a FW update: peaking without magnification, improved face detection, lens start-up at last known distance setting, etc.
Another short coming was the also apparent waste of an EVF that comes as an accessory, an a pricey one at that (even if it was the best EVF tech at launch) There is no guarantee that you could use it on other cams, or future cams, except for the RX100m2 which by now is 2 gens behind the current RX100m4 which has the better lens and the better video codec along with the RX100m3.
It WOULD be nice to have a great super EVF with the same contacts and backwards compatible with the RX1/RX100m2 if they launch a new one with the RX1m2, but then people would feel like the RX1m2 should come with a built-in EVF and I don’t blame them. It should do.
The Leica Q may show Sony how some things need to get done in the design department, but I think Sony’s objective with the RX series is to have the smallest, most capable hardware possible so don’t be surprised if the disapointment sets in when you get a pop-up EVF on the RX1m2. My guess is that the Leica Q is too large for the RX dojo.
How is an EVF accessory a waste? If you don’t want it, don’t buy it. It’s not like you can use the EVF on the Leica Q on another camera. Only the Leica Q could be said as being wasteful by having an EVF which not everyone might use.
With cameras like the RX1 or the Q, the whole thing dies when the body dies. You could say you can salvage the EVF for another RX1 (I have two) but from my experience of getting the EVF for my former NEX 5n, no other camera but that generation of NEX could use it. You couldn’t keep the EVF as a “back up EVF” in case the NEX 9n was ever launched with the same contacts and fit as the 5n EVF. No, once you sold the 5n, the EVF had to go with it either on the same sale or to someone else.
I did not mean the EVF being a waste of utility, because it is neeed. I meant the EVF being a waste of investment, becuase it is something you are certain not to keep unlike an old body of the same mount: i.e, keep NEX 5n while upgrading to NEX 7. Keep A7 while upgrading to A7II.
RX100m2 -> RX100m3 (no external EVF) -> RX100m4 (no external EVF)
Those who bought the EV1MK for the RX100m2 had to sell at not a small loss if they wanted an RX100m3 and sold their RX100m2.
I would keep one of my RX1s if the RX1m2 came with an integrated EVF and keep the EV1MK with it. No question about it, but the mentality behind the accessory EVF is more monetary rather than “optional utility” because at RX1 price and level, EVF should be included/integrated.
Worth also noting is that unlike interchangeable lens cameras, of which lenses do not depreciate so fast in value, RX1 and Leica Q depreciate their value at body speed even if their lenses are best in class. The EVF goes down with them.
Looks beautiful .. And well priced (for a leica) .. But I think that the next FF RX camera will kill this baby in resolution , AF speed and IQ
Give me a RX-2 35-70 Zoom, not everybody wants a point and shoot with 28 mm FF.
OR a 35-60 would be great like a Fuji Z645 MF from the analog times:-))
Electronical shutter for Sync (X) above 1/500.
The RX1 already have leaf shutter that can sync in every speed.
Smart move by Leica. The design, focal length, price point… street shooters will eat this up.
This is sure to cut in to RX1 sales a little.
Sony’s best response? Integrate the viewfinder on the RX2 and offer a Zeiss branded .75X conversion lens?
They already got a good 28mm + converter design, and a masterpiece of a sensor, RX2 has potential.
Let’s not forget the telephoto conversion too.
Either way, those lenses are bound to be huge to cover for the FF sensor and keep the quality up. See what Fuji had to do with the X100 complementary lenses. They are big, and that’s for 16mp in APS-C. 24/36/42mp on FF is far more demanding.
That being said, a faster refresh EVF with cleaner output and better DR would by my preference over MP EVF. Apparently the Q has rainbow effect on its EVF if you move a bit fast.
I would find this solution ideal:
RX1m2 v1 – Same 35mm Sonnar or a stop faster
RX1m2 v2 – 50mm
RX1m2 v3 – 24mm
I would snatch all three if that was an option over A7rII and any three lenses.
Let’s not forget the telephoto conversion too.
Either way,
those lenses are bound to be huge to cover for the FF sensor and keep
the quality up. See what Fuji had to do with the X100 complementary
lenses. They are big, and that’s for 16mp in APS-C. 24/36/42mp on FF is
far more demanding.
That being said, a faster refresh EVF with
cleaner output and better DR would by my preference over MP EVF.
Apparently the Q has rainbow effect on its EVF if you move a bit fast.
I would find this solution ideal:
RX1m2 v1 – Same 35mm Sonnar or a stop faster
RX1m2 v2 – 50mm
RX1m2 v3 – 24mm
I would pick up all three if that was an option over A7rII and any three lenses.
What Leica created here is also very good value proposition for current Leica users, especially the ones who are in the market for 28mm lens:
Leica 28 Summilux f/1.4 – £3975
Leica 28 Summicron f/2 – £2775
Leica Q (whole camera) with 28 Summilux f/1.7 – £2900
If you take the RX1+EVF at launch price (UK £2500+£350), the Q looks very sensibly priced.
If they were both launched at the same time, I would have leaned more towards the Q, even if my preference is a 35mm lens.
Indeed, RX1 is nice camera, AF a bit slow and little bit small for my hands but once grip is added it’s very good. The other downside was (is) lack of EVF. I was thinking really hard about getting one when it came out. 35mm is something I’m used to from my days with X100 even though later I’ve been using more of 28-50-90 combinations (X-Pro1, Mamiya, Hasselblad)
Yes, AF speed should have been improve as to not look as if Sony never cared for customers that supported their idea which in turn gave support to the launch of the Q. I feel the choice of 28mm was needed instead of looking like “another RX1” if it had a 35mm lens so there is more of a difference on the delivery although the concept is the same.
I am really looking a this as an option, but my heart seems to be setting on a modified A7r and a ZM distagon 1.4 that I have seen some people at Fred Miranda shoot with. It appears to make the A7/A7r compatible with M lenses in a way that the M240 already is, but with 36mp.
A7RII might be better option. I never really like A7R. My fiend he owned one for about 2 months and borrowed it to me for a couple of weeks. I didn’t like handling (shutter release button in wrong place), didn’t like how loud it was – new MK2 seems to be fixing all those problems and adding on top also IBIS and more resolution.
What modification have they been doing to A7r?
Google Kolarivison.
What they do is they place a thinner filter stack in front of the sensor and you stop having colour casts and smears on the edges and corners of images with problematic lenses.
A7/A7r/A7s can have this mod done for the princely sum of $399. For a second hand A7r that I have seen hit $1500, a $2000-or-there-abouts M compatible body is a bargain.
Yes. I hate the noise (love the RX1 for that) but there are places and situations where I wouldn’t mind an A7r and 12 more mp.
Are they addressing the cast/smear on the A7rII was well? I am keeping an eye on that cam and if it is more silent, I may wait for a Koralivision mod for it before buying.
Over at LuLa forums somebody commented that BSI might have positive effect and play nicely with problematic lenses – I guess we will have to wait until August to see the results.
I see. I don’t mind waiting and seeing. Working on a project now with the RX1 and I wouldn’t finish it before September or thereabouts. By then, if the A7rII plays nice with ZM lenses, I’m in. If not, then wait for the RX1m2 or go A7r with the mod and ZM. I am fairly certain maybe someone could device a curtain change for the A7r to make it more silent…?
very interesting results shown there with 21mm VC
Imagine with less extreme lenses.
That’s why I’m so attracted to doing this.
How does it affect the color?
No idea. Never really minded much because I always do a bit of post on my colours to tame them down, so… can’t help much on that front.
Leica design is boring….Rather like Fujifilm and Olympus for their classic argentic alike design
Agreed. Obviously, great cameras, but boing indeed.
Ugh, it’s hard to find a camera uglier than xt, and Fuji cameras are generally primitive looking.
fuji xt are not uglier there are old school 😉 but it s better than Leica box 😉
No all the details are crammed together and I feel uncomfortable in the stomach just staring at one for a little while, Nikon’s Df is arguably better.
XT is not uglier , its just vintage… but it s nicer than a Leica box with round corner ( looks like a flattened ellipse)
I gotta say I like the Leica approach much better, with the bodies or with the lenses, the T is a little ugly though, too plain for the price.
Now with that new sensor from A7RII the RX2 can be a beast of a camera.
I can’t recall if the RX1 has this but one of the neatest feature the Leica Q has that is not mentioned in the pros above is that it has focus ring hard stops and 2 focus scales (1 normal and 1 macro), I also like it how everything is very analog, push the focus ring all the way to get into Aperture priority and such, push the focus ring upwards (ala Fuji) to get into macro mode and etc. Really innovative from Leica and been awhile since they release something exciting. Also it seems the tech that comes with the camera is pretty up to date, good job on that one as their previous cameras like the Ms always come with outdated technology.
Kudos to Leica!
I wonder if this mean that a modern M is coming next. Something like the X Pro 1 with the hybrid viewfinder but with the features of Leica Q.
I’m thinking about exactly the same. Over at LaVidaLeica is interesting article about the future Leica camera -> http://lavidaleica.com/content/future-leica-m-cometh
The lens controls are perfect, how I imagined every decent lens should be, but the trend is to go the cheapo Sony E way with everything electronic.
A very nifty camera for Leica aficionados, not sure this will compete directly with the RX1 due to the price difference.
At least in the UK:
Sony RX1R – £2150
EVF – £300
Together – £2450
For £450 more you get:
– higher resolution EVF
– faster AF
– a bit faster lens although different focal length
– touch screen
– WiFi
– warranty
– LR6
– Non bolt on EVF
– Leica dot
a bit pathetic response
Higher resolution EVF is not true, it is most like a 3.7/3 because it does not display all the colors at the same time. suffers from rainbow tearing, delay…
Worse control layout worse high ISO and worse DR.
All around as a camera i guess Leica is better, but not for the price.
Size, weight, pocketability, being a 35mm and better sensor overall(Leica has more natural colors) and cheaper i guess sony has a beter value for what you get.
– resolution of the EVF is 1280×960 (so it is higher)
– what’s the delay you talk about? so far all reviews say that it’s the best EVF
– worse control layout? care to elaborate? you have aperture on the lens, shutter speed dial on the top – what’s worse about it?
– worse high ISO and DR? there are reviews out there saying that high ISO is on par with RX1R – don’t forget, this isn’t the same sensor like in M240
– size – can you really put RX1 in your pocket?
Not to start an argument, but the RX1 is considerably smaller and lighter and depending on the country the price difference with the Q might be more substantial.
You should search for more reviews about this cameraand specialy about their EVF…
Dpreview shows about the High ISO and DR, just look there.
Yes, i can put on some pockets a little bigger ones on my jacket, the Leica is just too big for it.
Worse control layout is really debatable, but the ergonomics that are intrinsic to control layout in this case are better on the RX1, Leica is just a brick with some buttons on it. But i never used the touch screen of them, so i can reconsider it not exaclty a complete advantage of the RX1. But for me the EV comp and the dial are easily reachable and better built on RX1, with the EV having +-3 wrote on the top of the dial.
Directly from dpreview: The electronic viewfinder on the Leica Q is a Liquid Crystal on Silicon (LCoS) display and has an effective resolution of 3.68 million pixels. LCoS technology, which is a field sequential system, only shows you 1.04M dots at any given time, as it cycles between red, green, and blue. While the image on the screen looks great, some may find ‘color tearing’ to be an issue when blinking or panning the camera.
So it’s the crap used on LX100…
Control layout. Look at the two, Some buttons of the Leica are under the EVF, very awkward position to use them, at least almost impossible to use them when looking on the EVF, theres no diference on the buttons texture or positioning other than height, so if need to use it take of the evf from your face and visualy search for it. Not a good ideia.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/leica-q-typ116//images/nexttorx1back.jpg
Don’t know – looks more like a personal preference. I have M240 which has very similar layout and haven’t found myself in a situation where I would be left confused.
Surely, if you’re used to dSLR, Sony A7 or Oly cameras you might find it less to your taste and would prefer different layout and some customisable buttons.
I use only aperture ring, focusing ring, shutter speed dial and shutter release button 😉
Ming said that the CMOS is worse I remember, if practical usability caps at ISO3200 that really doesn’t sound impressive for FF, besides this piece of “news” is days old…
Might be worth re-read Ming’s article. He’d use it at 6400, 12500 emergency and for his ultraprints he’d use 1600
Hmmm, I probably mixed the numbers up but it gave the overall impression that the CMOS doesn’t really offer FF grade performance.
Hey admin, you forgot to mention that lens has Optical IS as well that provides about 2.5 stops advantage over a non-stabilized lens.
I did get to try out one in person though and it seems to be quite a bit larger than the RX1
Well, Lecia finally made something modern and it is indeed impressive. However, same as the RX1, a lot of money for that last ounce of quality when you consider the existence of cameras like the Ricoh GR, Coolpix A, X100T. The good thing is that we finally see a type of camera that was missing for many years.
WOW. Seems, Leica finally got it right.
Getting ready to AF M?
Indeed they build great camera but the Marketing Dpt should remind the R&D one that a great camera might look great too :p… We don’t just buy a hi-tech brick :D…at £2400. It’s like selling an Aston Martin Vanquish (and its usual specifications) with the design of the VW Combi 😉
Be afraid…..be very afraid……
$2800 for RX1 LMAO it’s less than $1800 in China
Hardly a “competitor”….it’s bigger and more expensive. If it was smaller and cheaper and would take away sales from the RX1/ RX1R & Sony THEN it’s a competitor. Better to say an “alternative’ to the Sony. I’ll watch it fade away into the “rich and niche” market especially once the RX1 Mk2 is released. It’s only saving grace will be the red dot logo for huge street cred, and it’s lens, …….which will be remarkable I suspect.
That’s why I opened up discussion stating UK prices 😉
Now Sony needs to up their game and release the RX2 with curved sensor and a 35mm 2.8 lens in the size of the Olympus XA, and double battery life of the RX1 also. GO SONY!
The Leica Q is quite an excellent camera. I only wish it had the famous Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 lens, instead of the cropping modes.