Is the Sony RX1R II a Leica Q killer ?

Is the Sony RX1R II a Leica Q killer ?

  • No Way - the cameras are substantially different

    Votes: 88 63.8%

  • Definitely - why buy the more expensive Q now?

    Votes: 50 36.2%
  • Total voters
    138
CameraQuest

CameraQuest

Head Bartender
Staff member
Local time
10:55 AM
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
6,681
Location
over the hills from Malibu
View My Gallery
Will the newly announced Sony RX1R kill Leica Q sales?

ADMIN EDIT
JANUARY 2020

eh, no
it seems not much of anything will stop Leica Q and Leica Q2 sales -

the Q's have become flat out best sellers for Leica --
despite many other cameras seemingly offering more for less

Leica has built up an enviable loyal customer / fan base that Loves Leica BEST
 
it's a pretty simple no. despite having the right lens, it doesn't have the right evf or manual focusing tab.
 
Depends on how it feels in the hand. The previous RX1 I tried felt disappointingly cheap given its price tag. The controls felt disconnected. The images are incredible, but the user experience, for me, was the opposite.
The Leica Q's user experience is phenomenal. It feels great, and is lovely to use. If the Sony can match that, then the Q will have problems. Yeah the Q has the 'better' sensor etc but at this point all these cameras are at the overkill point. The weak link is not the camera.
 
CameraQuest said:
Will the newly announced Sony RX1R kill Leica Q sales?
Click to expand...
No, but it will likely steal some. The question would be more relevant if Sony had a 28 and Leica Q a 35. As is, even the imaging side is rather different.

I have used the RX1R for about two years, and I'm not too happy with the camera. (The image quality is obviously fantastic.) The new version addresses at least some of the issues.
 
For me it comes down to the preferred focal length. I prefer 35mm and the Zeiss is a great optic. I would probably go Sony as I do not think the price difference between Leica and Sony is worth the price.

Do not get me wrong as I love my M9 and M2's but the only 28 I own is for a R6.2 and probably have not used it in a couple years.
 
I have a RX1r, I have zero issues with it. I bought it used a few years after it was released. It's a camera I can take basically anywhere and come back with images I really like. It is SO much better than the A7 I had. If I were looking to upgrade, there would be no hesitation on which I'd pick. I prefer 35mm to 28, so it makes that decision easy for me. Maybe in a few years I'll pick up a used one, the remote shutter options and tilt screen (possibly EVF depending on what it's like) would be the biggest reasons for me to change. The AF and MP aren't really that big of a concern to me personally. I don't really think you can go wrong with either camera, it's nice to be able to even have debates like this with all the extremely good options.
 
I don't think they compete against each other ... one is 28mm and one is 35mm. One is classic in its design (e.g. classic controls, etc.), one is new school in its design. One is sold in many stores, one is sold in only a few stores. One is a larger body camera, the other is, arguably, too small. One has a state of the art EVF, the other has a small pop up EVF that won't lock in place good enough to rest your eye against.
 
i dont think the pro ranks who will use these as reportage cams want that seemingly flimsy pop up evf, nor will they want to wait the time necessary to download 42mp images. i think both of these issues are also very real concerns for the enthusiast user as well. i am a 35mm fov lover, but those two things, esp the download time, will severely limit my enjoyment of this camera.

of course there will be a segment of consumers who must have the highest number of mps possible, just like there are those who must have a .90 aperture. most dont know why or how to use them, but theyve gotta have 'em!
 
I think for some people that were lusting over the Leica Q, the RX1R II would definitely shift their focus, especially with the built in EVF, I know it has for me. But the two cameras are so expensive that it's hard for me to justify buying a fixed lens camera over $3k, I think at that point I'd rather buy a interchangeable lens camera.
 
Hsg said:
Anyone who buys a Leica Q over Sony RX1R II must have a good reason to pay a $1000 more for almost half the resolution.
Click to expand...

28mm lens, proper manual focus, traditional controls, a larger camera with superior ergonomics, minimized menus, etc. 24 mp is good enough for most tasks that almost anyone would want to do.
 
DavidKKHansen said:
What if I want a 28mm fixed full frame camera? Can I pay Sony $1000 to get that?
Click to expand...

Do you want a 28mm fixed lens camera, or do you want a Leica 28mm fixed lens camera?

Those are two different 'wants'.


I'm not a Sony fanboy, I just like it when a company releases a camera that makes me smile - even though I'm not in the market to buy it.
 
Ya got to have a pretty powerful computer and lots of storage to push around 42 megapixels of imagery. Images half that size are more then enough. More megapixels does not equate to better images. I don't know of anyone other then Michael Reichman of Luminous-Landscape, who likes to crop that much.
 
I have 2 observations. I would imagine that there are many people who got excited and bought a Q (and will now justify that out of hand no-matter-what), even though they may have preferred the RX1etc... Secondly there is the market that kept Leica going in the bad-old-days and will buy anything that is more expensive because it is more expensive.

The Sony is the more traditional camera with it's 35/2, but Sony's design ethos is steeped in 'gadgetry'. You're either going to get along with that or not. I tend to adapt myself to the tools I want to use, rather than wait Plato's camera, or whatever.

I'll also offer the example of the X1 and the X100. The X100 was absolutely an X1 killer. It did everything the X1 could do, only better, and was a better representation of a Leica camera than Leica would or could make themselves, for the modern age. However you had then and still have now people who will swear by the Leica X cameras no matter their faults and see them only as a parent can.

So, in conclusion I think that the Q and RX1etc will safely live together as neighbors. They are both very expensive, and both (probably) excellent. I mostly look forward to the work done with both. I myself, and getting the Sony. Zeiss 35/2 and money in my pocket for the win.
 
I think each camera caters to a different portion of the same market. On paper, the Sony seems far superior. No offence to Sony fans, but In real life, I'm not a fan. I obviously haven't used the RX1R II yet but I have used the RX1R. Standard faire for Sony. IQ is great but UI is a mess. For me, user experience is very important and Sony just doesn't have what I'm looking for. I also am not a fan of Sony as a company. Denial of real issues like overheating (NEX7 and rumors of the same with the A7RII), ongoing requests to revamp the UI being ignored, expensive product being outdated on a 6 month +/- product rotation (I know it's the nature of the beast) etc. have made Sony a "no buy" for me.

While the Leica Q is not perfect, nor is Leica as a company, I think the user experience is far better. Leica, you get it, or you don't. Jewelry or a precision photographic instrument? One could also say buying a Leica could be more of an "emotional" purchase. Not to say that the Q isn't technically advanced...It is. It really is a very different experience from the Sony.

So, is the Sony a Q killer? I don't think so. I don't think that those who really are really intrigued by (and can afford) the Leica will move to the Sony. For some, the Q just doesn't make sense.

There is definitely room for both.

Just my opinion...

P.S. Picking up my Q today...
 
The Q is an elegant artist tool compared to the Sonys scientist field instrument.

I would choose the Sony simple because I could crop an in camera 50mm (equiv)jpeg better from that lens and sensor.
I want a 50mm lens version from Leica but it seems not to be.

I'm sure we'll see great results from both. Both will fail. Both will be heralded.
Hopefully with some luck.... Both will lead to future fixed lens full frame models with more modest price points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom