p.51 #1 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
I just wanted to report back from page 45 that I decided to get the Leica Q. The recent development of the RX1R II getting delayed in Japan was the final nail in the coffin. I was sitting on the fence, but Sony practically made the decision for me.
The 28mm fov will getting used to but I'm loving the camera and it's images so far. It should make for a excellent pairing with my A7ii and FE55. Perhaps that's one of the few things that the Q will do better than the RX1R II
Thanks for all the advice, and have fun with the RX1R II which seems to be an excellent camera as well.
p.51 #2 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Zony_user wrote:
I just wanted to report back from page 45 that I decided to get the Leica Q. The recent development of the RX1R II getting delayed in Japan was the final nail in the coffin. I was sitting on the fence, but Sony practically made the decision for me.
The 28mm fov will getting used to but I'm loving the camera and it's images so far. It should make for a excellent pairing with my A7ii and FE55. Perhaps that's one of the few things that the Q will do better than the RX1R II
Thanks for all the advice, and have fun with the RX1R II which seems to be an excellent camera as well....Show more →
I did the exact same thing, got a deal on a used one so the price difference wasn't too bad. Love the ergonomics of the camera and the simple direct control, love the touchscreen for AF point selection and how you can still shoot the camera without needing to use the touchscreen, and the 28mm FoV I'm actually really liking, especially with how much subject separation it produces despite being such a wide angle.
Coming from the RX1, I'm also quite impressed with the AF speed, but especially the ability to go into electronic shutter mode above 1/2000th. Needing to screw on/off ND's was kind of annoying.
I think the RX1rII really should of had either an electronic shutter option for faster shutter speed (the A7rII using the same sensor can do this) or have a built in ND filter (might required too much lens group redesign I guess?)
p.51 #3 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
millsart wrote:
I did the exact same thing, got a deal on a used one so the price difference wasn't too bad. Love the ergonomics of the camera and the simple direct control, love the touchscreen for AF point selection and how you can still shoot the camera without needing to use the touchscreen, and the 28mm FoV I'm actually really liking, especially with how much subject separation it produces despite being such a wide angle.
Coming from the RX1, I'm also quite impressed with the AF speed, but especially the ability to go into electronic shutter mode above 1/2000th. Needing to screw on/off ND's was kind of annoying.
I think the RX1rII really should of had either an electronic shutter option for faster shutter speed (the A7rII using the same sensor can do this) or have a built in ND filter (might required too much lens group redesign I guess?)
After shooting with the Q for a week now, I think there are 4 things I will miss from the RX1R2.
1. Swivel LCD -- This is a great feature to have on any camera. However, I rarely shoot with the LCD on my A7II (maybe 2-3% of my total shots) because I vastly prefer shooting with a viewfinder. I think I'll miss it most when the camera is mounted on a tripod. That's when a swivel LCD really helps.
2. Bokeh -- The Summilux on the Q is excellent in most categories and it's bokeh is great too.... unfortunately nothing comes close to the dreamy bokehliciousness of the RX1 Sonnar. It's also a bummer that the aperture switches to F2.8 when in macro mode. I really miss the shallow DoF of the RX1.
3. Dynamic range -- It's mind-boggling that the DR of the RX1R2 is better than the original because I was able to make HDR images from single files. Again, the Leica is not bad either, it's just that the Sony kills every other manufacturer when it comes to sensor tech.
4. Custom buttons -- The Q only has two custom buttons with limited options. I would really like to assign the Delete button for choosing AF mode (touchscreen preferably) I really hope Leica updates this with the next firmware.
What I like better on the Q
1. 24MP -- As I explained earlier, I believe this is the sweet spot for me. Any more resolution just slows down my workflow.
2. Manual focusing -- I've gotten used to the RX1's focus-by-wire, and it was very effective when given the time to focus critically. The Q is also focus-by-wire but the focus throws aren't velocity-dependent. It focuses like a proper mechanical lens so it's much quicker and more intuitive. Also, the lens stays at F1.7 while focusing, so you can focus with a shallow DOF even if you choose a smaller aperture. This really helps nail the focus, along with the focus-peaking which is much more accurate than Sony's.
3. Operational speed -- The Q is faster and snappier at pretty much everything it does. My RX1 and the RX1R2 I tested always felt a half-step behind everything I tried to do. Not a knock on Sony btw. The Q is superior to most mirrorless cameras I've tested in this regard.
4. EVF -- The RX1R2's EVF was bright with great clarity. I think it's even better than my A7II and equal to the Q. However, I only felt that way WITH the eyecup attached. And from initial reports, the included eyecup already seems to have reliability/durability issues, so I have to give this one to the Q until a third-party manufacturer comes up with a better solution.
5. Color -- Leica truly excels here. Skin tones are excellent OOC. I'm basing this off the colors of my RX1 and A7II, and assuming the RX1R2 has similar Sony color palettes.
What I think is a wash
1. Size vs Ergonomics -- Let me explain. Yes, the RX1 is smaller, but both cameras desperately need a grip because the RX1 is too small and the Q is too slippery. I have a RRS L-bracket with grip fitted to my RX1, and I probably would have done the same to the RX1R2 (if I had gone that route) Likewise, I have a handgrip and thumbs up fitted on my Q. With those accessories, both cameras are no longer pocketable and needs to be stowed in a bag. So it's a wash.
2. High-ISO capability vs Image Stabilization -- The RX1 has 1-2 stops worth of extra ISO capability but the the Q has OIS that compensates for 3 stops worth of shutter speed. So when shooting in low light, it comes down to choosing between high ISO noise vs soft edges with OIS. Pick your poison.
3. AF speed -- I think both are fast enough for it's intended purpose (street use)
I've yet to experience banding from my Q files, so I think that concludes my initial thoughts. Alot of it is personal and you can't go wrong with either camera imho. Neither is perfect.
p.51 #5 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Pretty much agree 98% with that...
I don't really find the "macro" mode being f2.8 to be much of an issue though, because I usually shoot at f5.6 or so with close up subjects. I actually would love to have the focus stacking feature of the m4/3 cameras because I find it tough to get enough DoF otherwise. Shoot something like a flower bloom from a foot away and you need to really stop down to get even half the thing into focus, otherwise its just a sliver of focus across the image, which to some is cool I'm sure.
I actually like the Q's rendering better too, its very much like a 28 Cron, smooth, but not too creamy, has a little bit of a harder edge to it, which having compared with the RX1, I found I actually prefer in about 7 out of 10 shots. RX1's Sonnar is of course lovely too, but sometimes its a little too smooth, which I previously wouldn't of thought possible lol. I like how the Q's 28 can get great subject separation, but provide just enough detail of the image to keep some context. It doesn't obliterate the background into just a blur, but it certainly renders it away in a way that doesn't distract from the main image.
For sure would like to see some more customization on the Q though. They just did a FW 1.1 update but it didn't actually address any of the complaints...go figure
At the end of the day though, either camera is pretty fantastic and can produce images that previously just weren't imaginable from such compact little cameras
p.51 #8 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
I had a chance to see the Q recently. One thing which to me simply does not work is the size.
Just came back from my vacation where I used my RX1R a lot.
Not only is the size great as it's that small, it is also my backup camera and it is great it's small.
I use it with the RRS grip and it helps with the handling a lot keeping the size ... small
Leica Q is huge! And it feels, not sure how to describe it... hollow(?). I'm sure it could be smaller.
2nd thing - can't get how bad the lens is without the digital corrections. Seems Leica would be
the last company on earth to do this kind of extensive digital cooking, but somehow they are excused by the fans.
As always I guess... And the lens is bigger than the RX1R lens. Strange.
Kind of anti-leica. Maybe it's not a Leica, but a Panasonic after all?
p.51 #9 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Let's not start a war over this.
Some have tested both and prefer one over the other. For some, size is a big consideration, others prefer 28mm and so on...
Like phiber wrote, it's nice to have the choice.
For me personally, it comes down to size, lens and sensor. Everything else I'm willing to compromise.
Size and compactness is important to me because the RX1RII replaced my Ricoh GR.
The Sonnar 35/2 is one of the best 35mm lenses I've ever tested and because Sony glued it on the camera, it makes my choice easier. The lens draws beautifully with smooth bokeh, bold colors and high micro contrast but what surprised me the most is how versatile and almost perfectly flat-field it is at any distance. The A7RII sensor is unarguably the best on the market today, and given the choice to have the same sensor on a compact fixed lens camera is hard to dismiss.
p.51 #12 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
I don't get people saying the Q is big and heavy...
It weights just 15 grams more than the A7rII sans lens, and is just 3mm wider but 15mm shorter in height, and isn't any deeper when a lens is mounted on the Sony
So unless the A7rII is suddenly this huge camera that can't be carried anywhere (which didn't everyone buy for its compact size) how can the same be said for the Q?
For that matter, the Leica M's were always said to be such a great size by everyone and the Q had a nice size savings over them, and much lighter.....
Some seem to confuse the Q with a Canon 1d series it sounds like is all I can guess, because it's no harder to walk around with all day than an Alpha 7 series camera. Plus your wallet is lighter too, so that helps
p.51 #13 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Some posts have been removed. This is not a Leica vs Sony thread and although comparisons were welcomed, personal attacks won't be tolerated. Thanks for your cooperation.
p.51 #14 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
Some posts have been removed. This is not a Leica vs Sony thread and although comparisons were welcomed, personal attacks won't be tolerated. Thanks for your cooperation.
OK perhaps my choice of words were poor. I apologize. I did not mean it to be a personal attack.
snowboarder wrote:
I use it with the RRS grip and it helps with the handling a lot keeping the size ... small
Leica Q is huge! And it feels, not sure how to describe it... hollow(?). I'm sure it could be smaller.
I do not agree. Look at the comparison photo below. My RX1/R with the RRS grip is practically the same size as the Leica Q.
p.51 #15 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Given either of these fine options are certainly not inexpensive, as much reading of comparisons is useful, and above all else, trying them hands on via renting, not just playing with them in a store. Lens rentals has both cameras available and for reasonable prices.
Might seem silly to spend $200 for a weeks usage, but it really tells you a ton about how the camera actually works for ones shooting needs. Better to spend $200 and find something is too slow, too limited etc, than spend $3300+ on a camera.
I'd at the very least suggest renting a rx1, the original version (cheaper) to get an idea of what a fixed lens camera is like.
looking from above without hoods the Q lens definitely sticks out significantly farther. i really don't understand why anybody would use the expensive rx1 hood btw. a step down ring keeps pocketability and functions just as well.
for my own use i find the Q to be significantly bigger because it doesn't fit in a coat pocket near as well as the rx1 (neither does the a7, but with the 40 cron it's still better than the Q), but i never add grips or anything on to my cameras.
looking from above without hoods the Q lens definitely sticks out significantly farther. i really don't understand why anybody would use the expensive rx1 hood btw. a step down ring keeps pocketability and functions just as well.
for my own use i find the Q to be significantly bigger because it doesn't fit in a coat pocket near as well as the rx1 (neither does the a7, but with the 40 cron it's still better than the Q), but i never add grips or anything on to my cameras.
I was simply replying to a person who claimed the RX1 with the RRS grip fitted is small, yet in the same breath said the Leica Q was HUGE. That is not true, as you could clearly see in my comparison shot.
p.51 #19 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
sebboh wrote:
looking from above without hoods the Q lens definitely sticks out significantly farther. i really don't understand why anybody would use the expensive rx1 hood btw. a step down ring keeps pocketability and functions just as well.
sebooh,
I have both set-ups: original hood and step-down ring (49-37mm). I use the step-down ring when carrying the camera on my coat. However, I have not tested how efficient the step down ring idea is. Have you seeing any tests on this?
p.51 #20 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Surelythisnameisfree wrote:
The photo isn't quite fair though as the Leica needs some kind of grip - more so than the Sony given the body shape and centre of gravity.
You're right, it isn't fair. But that's not the point. I'm just pointing out that what he described is not true.
Even without the RRS grip, the size difference between the RX1 and Q is being exaggerated. If the RX1 is a small camera, the Leica Q is a medium sized camera. Does this look small and HUGE to you?
