Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              12       13       end
  

Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions
  
 
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


I've gotten a number of messages asking about my thoughts on the Leica Q having come from the RX1 and A7 series so I thought it might be on interest to share them here with everyone. After the RX1rII stopping being available to purchase new, I went ahead and bought the Q (got a good deal on a used one) on a leap of faith, after the opportunity to shoot with a rental RX1rII for a few days. It was a bit of a gamble as I was going to also rent the Q, but that would of added a few hundred dollars for the rental fee's, and the deal on the used Q certainly would of been gone, so crossed my fingers and hoped for the best.

To cut to the chase; its a simply fantastic camera!

Now I'm not going to fill this post with comparison photos, edge crops etc. You can find plenty of that on the web, but really, that doesn't tell you much about actually shooting these cameras. Both can produce great files, but they are worlds different in shooting experience, and looking at images really isn't going to tell you that, so I'm going to try to focus a bit more on what it was like actually using them, though I will say I'd suggest trying to rent one or both.

AF and MF experience...

First and foremost the biggest difference is AF; the Q AF is fast and I'm talking m4/3 Panasonic fast, which makes sense given they designed it. Set it to touch AF and anywhere you touch on the LCD the camera instantly focuses on, even in low indoor light. Its probably the fastest focusing camera I've ever owned, at least for AF-S. The RX1rII (hereon out called the RX2 as its easier to type) is pretty good in decent light, and feels faster than the original, but indoors it really slowed down, and also wasn't that accurate even when it confirmed focus. Better than the original by a mile, but man... in anything but good daylight its a night and day difference between them, and really that was the main thing that swayed me to the Q.

Q has some odd implementations for its AF though in some modes. In the point AF mode, you can use the d-pad on the back to move the AF box around anywhere on the screen. You don't need to double tap a direction first or anything, its just always assigned moving the AF around, and works with the camera to your eye as well. Can't change the size of the box though which hasn't proven an issue, but is something I'd like as an option.

Now in face detect mode, the camera reverts to area AF if it doesn't pick up a face, which is pretty common, but I do like the RX2 ability to set the camera to point AF, and then turn on eye detect/face detect via a custom button. With the Q its like the original RX1, if you want face detect, you need to have multi area AF.

Then there is touch AF, which again is a little odd....if you have the AF assigned to the shutter button when you touch the screen, the camera focuses on that point and you can take the shot. However, if you half press the shutter again it won't AF, you need to touch the screen again. If you have the AF on set to the back thumb button though, then it works in what I'd call normally. You touch the screen to move the AF point around and press the back button to focus. Works great and really touch AF selection is something I really did miss on Sony cameras. Only thing I do wish it offered was the ability to use the touch screen with your eye to the EVF, but Panasonic didn't want to give every feature away I guess lol.

Finally, you can't assign a button to switch AF modes, you need to hit menu, then the AF mode option, which is just one extra button press, but I would like the ability to customize this instead of having WB or Exp Comp or File Size as the limited options.

Now it might seem like I had a lot of complaints about the AF and its limitations, and some of the implementation leaves me scratching my head, but I can deal with all of it because the AF is fast, and its accurate and that trumps all for me. The Sony's give you a lot of options and customization, but then in use, I got a ton of hunting and missed focus indoors with the RX2, so in the end, which is better ?

For the way I've worked with the Q though, the AF modes get the job done. I normally like the AF on a back button anyways, so for me, using the LCD to move the point around and the back button to focus works perfectly, BUT, someone else might find this an issue.

Given the 28mm focal length I really don't find I miss eye AF either. Awesome feature for sure, but one that I really like more on a lenses like a 55/1.8 or longer. If the face is in focus, the eyes are in focus at 28mm, and honestly, I think the camera might actually be trying to focus on the eyes anyway, just not specifically telling you that it is. Again, I would prefer an option to switch to face detect on the fly like the Sony, but I'm just as happy touching the rear LCD and putting the AF point where I want it on the face, and this works much better with animals as well. Basically for me, the face detect is for when I hand the camera off to others, at least on the Q.

One thing I didn't touch on is AF-C, simply because I don't really use it on this style of camera. The Q has a tracking AF mode like the RX2, and its also got AF-C, and it seems to work pretty well in the little time I played with it, but ultimately like any mirrorless system, its not a DSLR, and its not going to work that well, at least to my standards. Same goes for the A7rII et al., its nice to have, it can get you some keepers, but I've got a nice D3s sitting on the shelf which I'll grab with a 70-200/2.8 when I want to shoot the dogs running around etc. I'm just not going to use a RX2 or Q like that, so really you'll have to look elsewhere if you want some feedback on how either camera will work tracking the kids running around etc.

One final thought regarding the AF as well, and that is the Q lets you save all your customization in the user profiles, so if for example user 1 can be face detect with the AF assigned to the shutter, and user 2 can be touch AF with focus assigned to the back button, which makes it really easy to switch how I use the camera. I really dislike how Sony gives you a ton of customization, but then doesn't let you have multiple profiles for all that customization! I so wish I could have a MF optimized setup with peaking etc, and then another with eye detect etc but all the customization is global and really the user slots are near pointless.....

Finally, some peoples favorite AF mode, or lack there of.....Manual Focus. The Q pretty much nails this one, with one issue. Unlike a focus by wire setup on the RX2, the Q has a proper direct MF ring, with a real focusing scale, and its got the same feel as a M-mount lens. You just push the thumb tab on the button all the way to the right to go into AF mode. Simply brilliant, and this means you can zone focus, have your focus settings saved when the camera goes to sleep or turns off etc. If you wanted to pretend its a MF only camera and you've got just a M-mount lens attached, that is exactly how it will work. Very well done and I think for some people this really will be a huge selling point.

Another area where Leica really got it right is focus peaking. It actually works the way you think it should and shows you just what is actually in sharp focus highlighted, not a vague area of relative focus like Sony provides. You can actually critically focus with it and get in focus results, how about that! . Furthermore, on the Q you can have just peaking, just a magnified view or peaking AND a magnified view. This is nice because I don't want/need a zoomed in view and peaking together and want peaking just with the normal view. I'm not certain if Sony fixed this on the Rx2 or not, but on my RX1, you can only get peaking when your zoomed in, which was lame. The one issue with the Q's MF though is that you can't move the zoomed in portion around, its just in the center, which is really all I'd ever use, but still would be nice to move it around as an option as I'm sure some people like that.

In a way its almost ironic that the camera has such great MF ability and feel given how fast and accurate the AF is. The AF is so good that I don't know if I'll ever really use the MF, and for those who enjoy the MF experience, this camera really delivers, but then such a fantastic AF system is going to waste. Nice to have choices though right ?

To sum up, the Q has what I consider a much better overall AF system in terms of speed and accuracy than the RX2, and far more enjoyable MF experience.

To be continued....

Edited on Jan 02, 2016 at 09:15 PM · View previous versions



Jan 02, 2016 at 07:32 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


EVF and LCD....

The RX2 EVF pleasantly surprised me, I was thinking it would be kind of small like the RX100, but its actually quite large, feeling just like the A7rII EVF, if not slightly larger on paper. It works a lot better with the eye cup but then you can't retract it and that is just begging to get lost as it doesn't attach too securely. Works good til it doesn't you could say. The Q EVF is higher resolution on paper but I didn't really notice much difference in actual use. Both are very good, and probably the two best on the market short of the 4meg one in the SL. If I had to pick I'd say the RX2 is slightly better but have no real issue with the Q one, its every bit as good as a A7rII or similar.

One nice thing that the Q has is a hi/lo option for the sensitivity of the auto EVF/LCD switch. Sony could really take note of this feature to say the least!. The Q doesn't have a button to switch between them though, so its one or the other, or auto. Luckily the auto switching works near perfectly, switching when its up to your face, and not when your body is just near the sensor. Sony's feel like they want to switch when your within about 2 feet of the camera and can be a little annoying....

The pop-up EVF on the RX2 is pretty clever and works well, save for the eye cup issue. Much better than the RX100 where you had to pull it out before using it. I found I really just left it up though as there is little reason to retract it unless your putting the camera away, where it does fit into a bag easier. All and all its a cool feature, but I'd really rather just have one built into the top right of the camera like the Q and not have to worry about retracting it, wear and tear on that part etc.

I'd say its really a wash between the two as both get the job done and are pleasant to use, feeling nearly like an OVF at time.

The RX2 has the tilting LCD which the Q doesn't. Might of been a nice feature to have on the Q, but I think it was an issue of form over function. The fixed LCD just fits into the overall design of the camera better, though tilting can be handy at times. For me, this wasn't a real issue though as I don't really use the tilting LCD very often on my cameras that have it. Maybe for a ultra low level shot with a UWA zoom on the A7rII I might pull it out, but on the RX2 I didn't really use it once. This isn't to say others don't, but at least for me I don't feel I'm giving up much not having it.

The Q LCD is also a touch screen of course which is a feature I really miss on Sony's. Being able to select an AF point just by tapping the screen is really handy. The Q is unique though in that while it has a touch screen, the camera can totally operate without ever touching it, which is nice. I don't really like having to use a LCD to access menu's and such. On the Q to adjust ISO for example, you hit the ISO button and then can either turn a dial or thumb button to change the ISO, or, you can tap it on the screen. Neither way is really faster than the other. You can also swipe to go through images, pinch to zoom in on them etc like a smartphone if you want, but that is about it as far as the touch screen goes. I use it for moving the AF point around and scrolling around on a zoomed in image and that is about it. Its a nice option to have though, even if its just for AF point selection and I don't see why Sony hasn't offered it in more cameras.

I think its hard to pick a real winner in this category but I'd probably go with the Q for its touch LCD and always ready EVF, though the tilting LCD of the RX2 makes it close


Overall handling/build/interface.....


Both cameras are built very well and really do feel like are at least somewhat worth the high price tags they command. There is a premium level fit and finish to both of them that just feels different than a plastic consumer level product.

The Q probably wins out with some little touches though. The aperture ring on the RX2 very nice and solid, and clicks into macro mode with the feel of a precision instrument. The Q does as well, but its got little touches like the focusing scale sliding up to reveal a macro scale which is very clever. I much prefer the aperture ring at the end of the lens barrel on the Q as well. On the Rx2 its so close to the body and just doesn't feel as accessible, but I'm really nitpicking since both are great.

I've heard some complaints that the Q feels "hollow" which I don't get at all. Its a solid hunk of metal with zero flex, essentially a slightly slimmer M body. Strangely I've also heard people complain the Q is too big and heavy, which again I don't get because it weights no more than a A7rII body only. Not featherweight, but not hollow, and not heavy. I think it feels exactly like it should for its size, and the same can be said for the RX2. Hiking with either of them I barely could tell they are there.

RX2 is a little smaller, but I wouldn't call the Q big by any means, its about the size of the A7 with 35/2.8 attached. Its not going to fit into your pocket, but I don't find the RX2 does either. RX2 would be the winner if the smallest size is important, but I do find the RX2 feels best with a grip, which does increase its size a little.

I know some people think the Q needs a grip as well, but it actually fits my hand quite nicely, with the thumb depression fitting exactly where I'd want it. I think anyone with large hands might find its too far to the right though. The Thumbs-Up grip looks to be a great (if not expensive) option for these folks.

The Q is quite basic in its interface while the RX2 has a ton of customization. The Q has pretty much everything you need though with a dedicated ISO button, EC dial, SS dial on the top plate, with an A mode for Av shooting, and aperture/A mode on the lens. I don't find myself wanting more options, but the RX2 certainly delivers for those who want that type of stuff. You could say have one button set up for DRO mode while the Q doesn't even offer anything like that.

I'd say the RX2 is the winner as its far more customizable, but the Q certainly has all the basic functions one needs right at your fingertips. It really comes down to if you want/need to toggle things like watercolor mode, HDR, bracketing etc on the fly.

The RX2 has like 20 options for every 1 the Q offers. The Q menu is like 4 pages total, while the Sony gives you something like 30 menu pages across 6 or 7 tabs. The Q you can figure out without ever looking at the manual, the RX2 has probably 25 options I had to look up in the manual..... I will say once you get your head around the RX2 and customized the way you want it works pretty smoothly, but I've been shooting Sony's for a number of years so I'm pretty familar with them. Q by far is the easier camera to just pick up and shoot with.

To sum up, the RX2 does feel like a highly customizable piece of modern electronics with every bell and whistle you could imagine (and then some), while the Q does feel more like a traditional analog camera. It does however have a a sweep pano mode, a minature mode, and some presets like "beach", "sunset" etc under one menu tab though, so Leica did give in a little to consumer pressure I suppose. These are pretty well hidden away though. To each his or her own which of these design styles is preferable.

For me, the Q always can do what I want with no more than a button press or two. The RX2 generally can do the same, after I spend time setting it up the way I want.

To be continued....



Jan 02, 2016 at 08:36 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Battery life.....

Well, the Q battery (which is actually a Panasonic battery FYI) is about twice the size of the RX2 battery if that tells you anything. In the time I had the RX2 I always ran out of power when I was out shooting, though admittedly I was probably taking more shots, reviewing images etc more during my review period than I would in actual shooting, but I think the fact remains you'd probably want at least one spare battery for the RX2 minimum. They are pretty cheap and tiny though so you could easily carry a spare in even a shirt pocket, so I don't know if its really as big of issue as some people make it out to be. Q seems to make it through an outing on one battery, but I've got a few spares I carry just the same. My Nikon D3s can get about 4000 images per charge and I hardly ever think about the battery. Modern mirrorless seem to get 200-300 and it just is what it is.... carry spares as needed if you shoot a lot.


Electronic Shutter and max shutter speed....

This is another big one for me, right up there with AF. The RX2 with its leaf shutter as a max speed of 1/2000th wide open. The Q has a leaf shutter with a 1/2000th max speed as well, but it can also go to an e-shutter for 1/16,000th max speed. Since the RX2 doesn't offer a built in ND filter (would of been a nice feature) this means your either using a ND filter or stopping down a bit on sunny days. I typically have carried a 3 stop ND filter with my RX1 over the years which works well enough, but is a bit of a PITA to take on/off. Sometimes just a polarizer and stopping down a little can work though in a pinch. I really like being able to shoot the Q wide open at the beach though without needing a ND all the time.

Strangely, the Q doesn't let you select the leaf or E-shutter. Given the leaf is so quiet I guess there isn't a real point of wanting to use it at 1/250th, but usually cameras have the option. The Q just says if your in Av or want the SS higher than 1/2000th it will go electronic (and silent).

E-shutter isn't perfect of course for motion, but still is a big win for the Q offering it in my book.


The Q can shoot at 11 FPS as well, while the RX2 tops out at 6 FPS I believe. Personally I just use either in single shot mode so this isn't a big deal for me, but I guess under certain circumstances having 11 FPS could be nice..... but 6 FPS probably would catch something as well.....


The Q offers OIS which the RX2 doesn't. Having IBIS in the A7rII I don't really find it that important for me shooting. While it works well, I find I always get subject motion blur at slower shutter speeds so I'm usually at 1/125th or faster, therefore I usually keep it turned off.

I don't think the RX2 is really missing much not having it, given its just a 35mm lens. At 200mm then yeah, it helps a lot, but I doubt I'd have it on even if the RX2 had it. Though at the same time, the 42meg sensor does show a bit more hand shake than the 24 meg Q sensor.

I've tested the OIS in the Q, (though Leica suggest turning it off for best IQ unless you really need it) and it did give sharp shots at 1/8th a second, so its good for 2-3 stops at least. Maybe useful for nighttime scenics and keeping the ISO down a bit, but nothing I see myself making that much use of. Just the same, nice to have the ability to turn it on/off.

Summing up this section, I found the Q to have better battery life, a useful e-shutter, , faster FPS, and OIS, compared to the RX2. How much real world difference some of these will make is debatable.

The e-shutter is the only one that really made a huge difference in my time with them, but your own mileage may vary

Last but not least, some thoughts on the 28 vs 35mm lenses, coming soon....



Jan 02, 2016 at 09:14 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


28 vs 35mm....

Well, which one do you prefer ? That alone goes a long way towards helping one pick the "better" camera for their needs. I actually like 28mm myself, really finding I enjoyed the focal length on the Ricoh GR, and when I had the Fuji X100 I often used the conversion lens. 35mm to me is just sometimes a little too tight for scenics, and on the A7rII I found I enjoyed the 28/2 more than the 35/2.8 FE. Since I liked 28 and the Q has a 28 its a pretty good match.

Its worth noting that the Q is actually a little wider than 28mm, and the RX2 is a little wider than 35mm by the way.


Both camera's offering in camera cropping (which really one could just do in post) that do offer at least the feeling of more versatility. There is just something about being able to see the framing vs trying to guess where you'd want to crop later. What is nice is that the RAW/DNG's are uncropped so you can go back and crop a little less if the in camera capture was too tight.

The Q gives you 28/35/50, while the RX2 is 35/50/70 with the main difference being the Q shows virtual "frame lines" while the RX2 just crops the EVF/LCD image. Having shot RF's in the past, I kind of like the frame lines, especially for the 35mm framing. Gives me that ability to see outside of the frame, just like on a real RF, or on a Fuji X100 with the OVF. Again though if I'm being honest I'd like to see an option for either frame lines or a zoomed in view, but I would probably use the frame lines option.

You do lose resolution using these modes. On the Q the 35mm framing gives you "only" a 15meg file. Basically your getting a cropped 28/1.7 15mm file with a 35mm FF equiv FoV on the Q, and I believe a cropped 35/2 24meg 50mm FF equiv on the RX2.

Think about that for a moment in the context of cameras like the Fuji X series..... what is their latest 50mm equiv ? Why its a 35mm f2.0 lens, on a APS-C sized 16meg sensor giving a 50mm equiv FoV, or a 23mm f1.4 lens on a 16meg sensor giving a 35mm FoV, so even in their cropped modes both the Q and RX2 are giving IQ that equals some other mirrorless systems, so that is pretty impressive to me.

Anyways, I find that I enjoy having the 28/35 option on the Q more than I like 35/50 on the RX2. I'd rather have wider than 35mm more times than I'd rather having tighter than 35mm. Again though it just comes down to what and how one sees the world.


Speaking just for a moment about the lenses, both are fantastic. The RX2 Sonnar is the best 35 I've shot, and the Q 28 Lux is the best 28. The RX2 Sonnar is easily up to the 42meg resolution too, in the event any RX1 owners were wondering.

The 35 Sonnar is quite lovely with its super smooth rendering, its just so creamy. That said, I actually prefer how the Q's 28 renders even though its not quite as creamy. Its not remotely harsh or nervous but has a little more character. If anything it reminds me very much of a 28 Cron. Can't say one is better than the other here as its totally subjective, but in comparisons I did, the 35 Sonnar almost felt so smooth it was a little boring. The Q's 28 also provides far more subject isolation that one would expect from a 28. Both are very sharp across the frame, even wide open, and both have a fair degree of digital correction. Your mileage and taste may vary.


Hardly needs to be said but the RX2 has the edge in resolution. The 24meg Q sensor with no AA sensor is fine and good though, sharper than the A7 and A7II, RX1 etc. I don't really need 42 meg, if even 24meg, as 99% of my images just go on the web. 24meg's is plenty for me and maybe even preferable to 42meg if it might of meant a far cheaper RX2. Just give me a RX1.5 with 24meg sensor and EVF for $2200 or so and I'd totally take that over a $3300 42meg version.


RX2 has maybe a stop and a half more DR and at least a stop better noise levels. This sounds huge on paper and web discussion but in reality I think its sometimes splitting hairs. I just don't shoot at ISO 12,000 that much, so in my real shooting, at ISO3200 or so, both look good. Q did show banding above 6400 at times, but the 1.1 FW seems to have solved that. Q has pretty good DR as well, enough that I can edit images to taste, but I sort of like darker shadows opposed to being able to pull up shadows 4+ stops and get that near HDR look, so for my editing, both cameras have plenty of latitude, with the RX2 being technically better.

If you want the best resolution, DR, noise levels etc, its the RX2 no questions asked, but I think in actual shooting, the Q, just like the A7II and other current 24meg camera's will hardly disappoint. Basically any 2015 camera has a level of performance I never would of imaged possible just a few years ago.

Finally, lets talk about color for a moment. The Q really produces great images that I don't find need any real tweaks. Its a bit more contrasty and saturated than the Sony, but to my taste it looks great. Sort of a modern Kodachrome look. The RX2 has the typical Sony color, and is pretty identical to the A7rII. Its not better or worse, just different, just as Nikon looks different than Canon. With proper profiles you can get any of them looking both accurate and/or pleasing to the eye.


So (very) long story short....both cameras are fantastic and capable of producing great images. They are also fairly different in terms of handling, shooting experience and features.

If you want the best sensor on the market and like 35mm, the RX2 can't be beat

If you want 28mm, a very good sensor, and a super responsive camera, the Q is worth a look.

For me, after shooting with both of them 5 days, the Q was the clear winner. It always felt like it just plain worked, got out of the way and never made me think about it. The RX2 I felt like I was often spending time dealing with the AF, diving in menu's and pressing buttons.

In the end, while the price was a few hundred dollars higher, the amazing AF, 1/16,000th shutter speed, and 28mm lens made the choice pretty clear to me.


Hope this might provide some useful info for people considering either camera, and tell you a bit more about what its actually like shooting with them, good and bad, than just seeing some 100% crops

Cheers



Jan 02, 2016 at 09:58 PM
Gary Clennan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Thanks so much for the detailed information millsart.


Jan 02, 2016 at 10:11 PM
Taylor Sherman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Great comparison!


Jan 02, 2016 at 10:30 PM
loosh
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Thanks for the info. I'm very tempted, but having a hard time justifying these cams over the Ricoh GR for a secondary camera, mostly due to size. I'll cave eventually.


Jan 02, 2016 at 10:33 PM
CVickery
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Thanks millsart ... love my Q


Jan 02, 2016 at 10:59 PM
Canon Rumors
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Thank-you for your thoughts, I have ordered a Leica Q.


Jan 02, 2016 at 11:04 PM
waterden
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Excellent. Very helpful, thank you.

My Q reservation came up at the same time as my tax return so I passed 😠. I think I shall have to put it on again. The trouble with 3 months wait is it gives you too much time to reconsider 🙃.

One question - Some have noted an overly bright evf. Was this a problem for you?



Jan 02, 2016 at 11:16 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



mbphoto_2.8
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Will get the Q once they drop below 2 grand used.

Your write-up swayed me completely



Jan 02, 2016 at 11:25 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


No issues with the EVF brightness for me. Its certainly a change of pace if one is used to an OVF in dimmer light, as the EVF certainly is brighter under that type of shooting condition (an advantage over OVF's really) so maybe that is what people are referring to ?

I've never felt a desire to turn the brightness down, and its always felt plenty bright and accurate even on the sunniest of days.

Doesn't exactly match the LCD as its got maybe a touch more contrast, but then again, no camera I've owned with an EVF has ever matched the LCD, including the RX2.

Might be possible to adjust the JPEG settings, such as contrast, and see if that affects the EVF image, works on Sony's.



Jan 02, 2016 at 11:25 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Cheers for that trustworthy real world look at these two fine cameras, for taking the time to inform us. Quietly away from the mainstream Leica are growing as a force in modern photography, and every one benefits in one way or another.




Jan 03, 2016 at 12:57 AM
Spyro P.
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


It's funny that a company with little to no tradition in AF all of a sudden churns out a camera with such responsive and reliable AF system... is that Panny's doing?


Jan 03, 2016 at 01:35 AM
Kit Laughlin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Thanks millsart; I am not in the market for either camera but I love to keep up with the latest developments, and your write-up hits all the points I would be interested in.

And (@philip_pj): yes, isn't that interesting about Leica. If they ever come out with a longer FL fixed lens camera (4550mm EFOV) I would have to take a long hard look.



Jan 03, 2016 at 01:48 AM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Spyro P. wrote:
It's funny that a company with little to no tradition in AF all of a sudden churns out a camera with such responsive and reliable AF system... is that Panny's doing?


I'm sure its Panasonic's doing, because this camera feels just as fast, even in very low EV levels, as m4/3 cameras like the GH4 and GX8, which is really saying something. Olympus often gets a lot of the m4/3 credit for their excellent IBIS, but Panasonic has the quickest AF.



Jan 03, 2016 at 01:55 AM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Where are the pics?


Jan 03, 2016 at 01:59 AM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


While I said this wasn't about about of comparison shots between the camera's or anything, I figured for fun I'd post just a few random samples from the backyard and sitting on the couch, from my first day with the Q. Nothing fancy or overly artistic, just me throwing a battery and card in the camera and having at it. This is really the type of snapshots/slice of life stuff I enjoy using one of the most expensive cameras on the market for lol . In all seriousness though, I really do want/expect my camera's to work as well shooting a fine art landscape shot as they do a backyard BBQ party, and its funny how many technically good camera's just feel awkward and cumbersome taking snapshots sometimes. Case in point, the A7rII. Great camera, amazing IQ and every feature you could ever want, but darn if I haven't blown a ton of family snapshots with the thing because I forgot to set one of 20 different parameters back to a more appropriate mode.




















Great auto WB indoors, and the touch AF makes it so easy to put the AF box right on the eye where I wanted it







Love the way this lens renders....hints of 28 Cron for sure




Jan 03, 2016 at 02:06 AM
millsart
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Just was playing around with this one and pushing it to the extreme. While the files aren't quite as malletable as the latest Sony ones, they actually can take a pretty good amount of tweaking in post.

You can push the RX2 files further, but I think the Q can certainly go past the point of good taste without breaking a sweat.







Jan 03, 2016 at 02:09 AM
uhoh7
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Leica Q vs Sony RX1rII - My in depth impressions


Love these. I think we know they are both technically pretty good, so I promise not to whine for multi aperture comparisons

But it's really fun to see both of these new phenoms in action. More please




Jan 03, 2016 at 03:00 AM
1
       2       3              12       13       end






FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3              12       13       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password