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
BlackXList said:
Between the brands I'd much rather go with Sony than Leica. I have an RX100, I've not noticed any of the menu problems people complain about from Sony, but then I was born in 1980, so perhaps I'm just used to it.
Click to expand...
Haters gonna hate, hate, hate 😀

When menus are the biggest problem, the camera must be good. But people hated the NEX menu system, I still don't understand why - it worked fine for me. And I didn't even grow up with "my first Sony" 😱

Looking forward to the Sony RX1 mark II vs Leica Q shoot out!
 
BlackXList said:
For me, it would be the Q, solely because of the Focal length.

Between the brands I'd much rather go with Sony than Leica. I have an RX100, I've not noticed any of the menu problems people complain about from Sony, but then I was born in 1980, so perhaps I'm just used to it.

The real Q killer for me though is the Ricoh GR.
It's APSC, it has a slower lens, but my god it's good, and I could shoot 6 of them to destruction for the price of a Q.
Click to expand...

I can see where you are coming from... I ordered the RX1R II but the Q is sexier. I also feel like the GR is the better fit for me for 28mm. I don't have an issue with Sony menus because I don't need to access them much. But Sony cameras don't feel so great in the hand IMO. The results are nice though and having 42mp, a relatively fast zeiss lens, high ISO, an EVF, and wide dynamic range in a tiny camera is just crazy to me. Most likely could make usable 4x6 foot prints. 😉
 
On the feel of Sony cameras; my RX100 has Aki Asahi skins on the front and top plate, it makes it handle a million times better than when it comes out of the box.

I could say that it's bad that I have to add things to it, in order to get proper handling, but then I put a thumbs up on my GR and it makes an already great camera truly wonderful.

The menu thing, I do understand the frustration people feel when it feels like the camera is getting in their way, or is laid out in a way that feels counter intuitive, I don't get along with cameras that have an uncoupled light meter because taking a reading, then transferring it, then recomposing just throws me off, and I can't get comfortable.
Equally, the Canon EOS M with 22mm lens is one of the most unhelpful, frustrating pieces of equipment I've ever attempted to use, and I HATE the touch screen, based on that experience, I don't ever want a touch screen on a camera.

So there's definitely something to be said for good vs bad design/menu design, and if people feel the camera gets in their way, then I can understand that too.

It's just not something I've come across in my (limited) experience with Sony cameras, I've been able to put the only options I need in easily accessible places, and get on with shooting.
 
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...

It may have more resolution, but will it render more/better detail in print? I doubt it. Sony may have the sensor technology, but Leica/Panasonic have the microlens patents - and those count.
 
I voted no. Different cameras for different types of people. If I had more money I would buy the Q. I was going to, but then they came out with the Typ 262. So I am saving up for that instead to replace my M8.

I have not yet handled the Q, but if it is like the X Vario, which it seems to be, than I'd say it is 10x better than the RX1R Mk II. I never got on with the RX1 ergonomics. The lens is too big and the grip side is too cramped. Came close to buying it a couple of times, especially now that you can get one in mint condition for half price, but every time I hold it, I hate it. The X Vario, though, I hated the paper specs but in person, whoah. I loved it the minute I picked one up in my hand.

I have the A5100. It takes good photos and even better videos, but I don't enjoy shooting with it. With M mount lenses it's fiddly and the haptics are not enjoyable to use. With native OSS lenses it's a simple point and shoot, and I bought it mainly for video so it's not much of a concern to me. The Ricoh GXR is far better, feels more like a camera than a computing device. And I prefer the Mode 2 peaking feature of the GXR 100x more than the A5100's.
 
Addy101 said:
But people hated the NEX menu system, I still don't understand why - it worked fine for me.
Click to expand...
Good for you. I found it terrible - and now I have a 5N with a dead menu button that makes the system even worse. The NEX is a menu-driven system. It's not really a set-up-once-and-forget-it type of deal if you use the cameras capabilities extensively. It is also complicated and weirdly organized. Depending on what you are doing, you need to dive in and out of the sub lists found under the major menu icons. It's slow when you need to work fast.

Sony has since dumbed the hated NEX menu structure. And the one used in the RX1 family is clearly superior. It remains a very heavily populated list, but at least it is now quicker to view and browse. This one actually makes sense. Funnily enough, the RX1 series is much more a camera that you could set up once and then just use.
 
Ruhayat said:
I never got on with the RX1 ergonomics. The lens is too big and the grip side is too cramped. Came close to buying it a couple of times, especially now that you can get one in mint condition for half price, but every time I hold it, I hate it.
Click to expand...
I have used the RX1R for a couple years now, and I am no fan of the overall handling and ergonomics either. It's usable, though. I also found the camera slightly too small, but this can be addressed quite nicely by adding a half case. This is the only camera I have ever felt the need to use one on.
 
Lss said:
Good for you. I found it terrible - and now I have a 5N with a dead menu button that makes the system even worse. The NEX is a menu-driven system. It's not really a set-up-once-and-forget-it type of deal if you use the cameras capabilities extensively. It is also complicated and weirdly organized. Depending on what you are doing, you need to dive in and out of the sub lists found under the major menu icons. It's slow when you need to work fast.

Sony has since dumbed the hated NEX menu structure. And the one used in the RX1 family is clearly superior. It remains a very heavily populated list, but at least it is now quicker to view and browse. This one actually makes sense. Funnily enough, the RX1 series is much more a camera that you could set up once and then just use.
Click to expand...
Too bad for you... No digital camera works with a broken menu button btw.

I own the A6000 - the menu system is just as complicated, it just looks like other menu systems and that apparently is important for some people. You have six main pages that are divided into up to seven sub pages with the A6000. The NEX menu had six pages with no sub pages: just know your main page and scroll to the item you want to change. How complicated is that? How is that slower? If anything, I found it easier to get to an item then go from the Camera menu to sub page 5 of the Adjustment menu with my A60000.

But people differ. If you don't like the NEX system, get a newer camera with the newer menu system. Lets just agree to disagree.

That is, I guess, enough about the old menu system - now back to the present RX1 II - Q debate.
 
jaapv said:
It may have more resolution, but will it render more/better detail in print? I doubt it. Sony may have the sensor technology, but Leica/Panasonic have the microlens patents - and those count.
Click to expand...

Theoretically it should, but also you can down-sample a high resolution image.
 
I would imagine both have IQ that is sufficient for most of us. It would come down to focal length choice and haptics / ergonomics... and perhaps the extra $950 (but at this price point, it shouldn't be what keeps you from the Q).

That said, I went with the RX1R II since I feel the Ricoh GR II is sufficient for my 28mm needs.
 
kbg32 said:
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.
Click to expand...

I would have to invest in a lot more computer, and right now I just cannot see investing in a Xeon based computer with 64mb of ram.

Although I can dream that Larry Gagosian will discover my work, and suddenly that Xeon will cost "a mere bag of shells."
 
Storage is cheap ... and if using the Sony A7R (36mp files) is anything close to the 42mp files of the RX1R II... I was able to use a 3-4 year old iMac to process those files without any issues. I've upgraded my computer since then, but I don't think it's as huge of an issue as people make it out to be.
 
jsrockit said:
Storage is cheap ... and if using the Sony A7R (36mp files) is anything close to the 42mp files of the RX1R II... I was able to use a 3-4 year old iMac to process those files without any issues. I've upgraded my computer since then, but I don't think it's as huge of an issue as people make it out to be.
Click to expand...

Well I was exaggerating, not a problem until one is combining a lot of files. Not really a joke about Larry though.

I don't think I could ever really sell enough to justify any of these cameras. 😱
 
photomoof said:
I don't think I could ever really sell enough to justify any of these cameras. 😱
Click to expand...

We will all justify whatever it is we spend our disposable income on... and others will think we are fools if it's not what they think money should be spent on. Nothing wrong with not buying these cameras at all...
 
jsrockit said:
We will all justify whatever it is we spend our disposable income on... and others will think we are fools if it's not what they think money should be spent on. Nothing wrong with not buying these cameras at all...
Click to expand...


I love the thought of disposable income, as though I really have some to dispose of.

It would be better if the guys outside of the subways, said "have any disposable income to spare?"

Mostly I currently dispose mine on bicycles and travel, at one time I really disposed of a lot of money on cameras, but not so much these days. You will notice in today's avatar, I am visiting Peggy G in Venice?
 
Samouraï said:
Don't forget that they replaced that awful, plastic, port flange. I bemoaned its existence when the A7 and A7R were originally released, and now it's nowhere to be found. And to reiterate the firmware update that included an uncompressed RAW option is a great win for Sony users.

It seems they listen to users after the fact. But for some reason it also seems as though there isn't a single photographer among the engineering or design staff. It's baffling.

That said, all I want is a non-af fixed lens 50mm compact with fully manual controls and no lcd (just a nice EVF). Throw in a full frame Foveon Merrill or a monochrome sensor and I'll be set for the next decade or so. Maybe I'd be the wrong person to ask.
Click to expand...

I do know for a fact that Sony uses photographers quite extensively through the camera design process. They've signed on people for this purpose since the DSLR days. However, they might not be representative of photographers in general, and especially not photographers on this forum.

Being dedicated Sony users, the people they work with are going to be fairly used to the design and ergonomics. That or they won't have a frame of reference - when the A7 came out there were no competitors in the same price range. There still aren't any. They'll also generally like Sony - which pre-selects for a certain group with particular tastes. And then there's the underdog psychology of being in third place to two giant competitors. Half-baked designs are preferable to doing nothing at all, but only if you don't have much to lose. That selects for a certain type of goal in engineering.

And the RX1rII is the best reflection of that. It's designed as a dedicated backup camera, ideally for someone who already has an A7rII. The controls carry over. The camera is as small as possible while including the maximum amount of immediate control and functionality, which makes it complicated. That isn't an oversight - it's a tradeoff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom