Leica Q vs Rx1r II

[ramosa]

That was a good read, but I still feel that camera shake will affect both a 24mp and 42mp image equally. Ming goes on to talk about the "potential" issue with the difference in pixel pitch when resizing, but I've never noticed it in practice.

And while we're on the subject of the Q, don't forget that IBIS/OIS will degrade images even worse than the theoritical issues that Ming talks about. I never use OIS on my Q because it is very noticable. Also, banding is a real problem at any ISO for the Q, versus the exceptional Sony sensor. So I feel the Q offers no real-world advantages over the RX1 when it comes to capturing clean images.

Lastly, as a 35mm shooter myself, I'd like to warn you that the Q's actual focal length is much closer to 24mm than 28mm. I end up cropping the images ALOT. I love the handling of the Q but there are too many compromises for me to keep it any longer. So it will go when the RX1R II comes.

Zonyuser:

Good to get your reply. I hear you completely--and haven't been trying to ruffle your feathers. Sometimes, forum discussions lack for nonverbal communication cues that would be present if, instead, we were talking about this over coffee. Heck, I have learned from your comments, can sense your great interest in this all, and fully understand your opinion. Yea, the FOV remains my only concern. It's not a deal-breaker, but still present. You're right. It seems the Q is wider than 24mm. Some say 26mm--and I have read 24mm elsewhere. Similarly, the RX1r was really 31mm-32mm, instead of 35mm. (I wish these companies would be more precise. Ha!)

Yes, if I get the Q, I wouldn't plan on using OIS unless it was really needed (per the potential degradation). You mention a banding problem on the Q. At what ISOs have you seen it? (I haven't shot with the Q, so your experiences on this camera are definitely appreciated.)

Are you going to order the RX1r II on Thursday? If so, darn exciting.

 

[Zony user]

To be sure I have this correctly in my mind

What is the pixel pitch for the Q and what is it for the Sony RX1R2 or the A7R2? TIA.

12MP -- 8.45 um
24MP -- 5.97 um
36MP -- 4.88 um
42MP -- 4.53 um

 

[Zony user]

Zonyuser:

Good to get your reply. I hear you completely--and haven't been trying to ruffle your feathers. Sometimes, forum discussions lack for nonverbal communication cues that would be present if, instead, we were talking about this over coffee. Heck, I have learned from your comments, can sense your great interest in this all, and fully understand your opinion. Yea, the FOV remains my only concern. It's not a deal-breaker, but still present. You're right. It seems the Q is wider than 24mm. Some say 26mm--and I have read 24mm elsewhere. Similarly, the RX1r was really 31mm-32mm, instead of 35mm. (I wish these companies would be more precise. Ha!)

Yes, if I get the Q, I wouldn't plan on using OIS unless it was really needed (per the potential degradation). You mention a banding problem on the Q. At what ISOs have you seen it? (I haven't shot with the Q, so your experiences on this camera are definitely appreciated.)

Are you going to order the RX1r II on Thursday? If so, darn exciting.

No problem at all. I feel the same way and appreciate your views as well.

As for your question, the banding occurs in 2 instances. 1) When you try to push/compensate an underexposed scene using ISO 6400 and above. 2) In post, when you try to pull out details from the shadows. The DP review test (link below) may help you better illustrate the issue. I must say that the banding shows up unexpectedly sometimes, and that makes it hard to put a finger on the problem.

Leica Q First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review

And yes, I'm ordering on Thursday. Hopefully they ship before Christmas

 

[ramosa]

No problem at all. I feel the same way and appreciate your views as well.

As for your question, the banding occurs in 2 instances. 1) When you try to push/compensate an underexposed scene using ISO 6400 and above. 2) In post, when you try to pull out details from the shadows. The DP review test (link below) may help you better illustrate the issue. I must say that the banding shows up unexpectedly sometimes, and that makes it hard to put a finger on the problem.

Leica Q First Impressions Review: Digital Photography Review

And yes, I'm ordering on Thursday. Hopefully they ship before Christmas

Thanks for your input here! I had previously seen the linked article, but read it much more closely per your recommendation. Please let us know how you like the RX1r II. I know you can order it on Thursday, but don't know when it'll ship.

 

[jlindstrom]

I missed the shaky hands bit, apologies to Juha.

The OIS works quite good on the Q. I could shoot at 1/5 with it turned on, although I really don't find situations where I need such slow shutter speeds. Leica recommends to turn it off for better IQ, so I really never use it.

No apolgies needed. I may have exaggerated a bit with 1/500, but I was definitely at the deep end with original A7r and it's 36mp already. A Leica M240 with it's 24mp was much more manageable.

Naturally if you uprez a 24mp to 42, the shake will show up. But the point is that, you rarely need 42mp images and in their native sizes the shake will show up immediately on the 42mp. At the same time, keeping the 24mp image at it's native resolution it might not show up or at least wouldn't be as bad.

This is for the most part about proper shooting technique and using tripods etc support when critical sharpness is needed, but I like the more relaxed setup of a 24mp and not having to worry about support so much. And in all honest, even 24mp is more than I would usually need.

With these "rules" in mind and Q having OIS, it's simply easier camera to hand hold for "Joe average" like myself.

//Juha

 

[Show Performance]

As a Sony shooter and long time advocate of the RX1 (I've also had some hands on with the RX1RII), I was anxious to give the Q a try but it was vaporware here in Austin, TX. The fates rewarded my wait and somehow Ashwin's Q made its way into my hands yesterday via a sale to a good friend of mine.

I'll be shooting the Q this weekend at the FFF music fest alongside my a7RII with the Batis.

Initial impressions are that the Q is a very well sorted camera that can be shot quickly with great results. I understand why some would lust after its design and honestly, if I was going to buy a digital Leica this would be the one. The 28/1.7 does indeed draw beautifully as is apparent by almost any sample image we've seen but my first reaction on seeing the images in LR was "wow, it looks like it came from an RX1". Both cameras will reward with sharp subjects and excellent bokeh wide open, and both are wonderfully sharp stopped down.

The differences between the cameras are significant though:

The Q is considerably larger and heavier
The Q has OIS
The Q feels more like a traditional rangefinder
The Q can seamlessly shoot at higher shutter speeds with electronic shutter - wish the RX1 had this
The Q has a wonderful digital zoom feature that let's you effortlessly switch between 28/35/50 and have those FOVs preserved in RAW. The digital "frame lines" are a nice touch too.
The Q's menu system is basic compared to the new RX1RII. I prefer Sony's tab system even if it could be better organized. Having to scroll through the Leica menus is tedious. This is subjective of course.
The Q's EVF is nice but it renders shadows with a blue tint and highlights tend to be yellowish (especially indoors). I much prefer the more natural rendering of the RX1RII EVF. There is also a bit of smearing in the extreme corners of the Q's EVF - minor but it is there.
The Q files are not as rich and malleable as the RX1's. If you believe DXO Mark, the original RX1 has the highest DR score of all the current Sony bodies and it just destroys the Q when it comes to highlight and shadow recovery. I'm seeing noise in Q files at 200 ISO in shadows that is nonexistent in the thousands of RX1 files I have edited. I'm a bit anxious about shooting the Q in concert low light scenes.
The Q's AF is very quick although I got several missed focuses last night. Will be watching this closely. I have only tried the RX1R on the floor of Photo+ so can't comment too much on AF but it felt plenty fast and if it is as accurate as the a7RII system, then I will likely prefer it.

Everything about the Q screams Leica with the only hint of Panasonic collaboration found in the battery compartment. I find it interesting how each brand has a unique signature from a UI perspective and Leica are masters at baking their DNA into everything from the physical design, materials and software. This completeness of the package is what helps Leica command the prices they do. At the end of the day, I guess I am a bit too plebian for the brand but applaud Leica for building the Q.

 

[Show Performance]

After three grueling days shooting the festival, things are more clear.

I have a strong affection for most things about the Q, except for the sensor and EVF. I just can't live with the dynamic range performance and the odd white balance choices the Maestro system wants to make. Overcast skies were often badly blown out and unrecoverable while shadows lost detail when pushing, plus banding issues (see last photo). Not great at all.

The Summilux renders beautifully but so does the 35/2 in the RX1 and I prefer that fov. The AF was very good for single point shooting - I captured fast action bmx and skate perfectly. As a street camera, I would seriously enjoy shooting fleeting moments with the Q if the light was right, but I find myself moving beyond the traditional focus methods and embracing the new magic that the a7RII system can perform - eye AF, subject tracking, etc. My assumption is that the RX1RII will inherit all of those features and performance. I also found myself wanting the tilt screen for many moments - raising the camera to eye level brings immediate attention to the shooter and I missed several candid opportunities.

My favorite part of shooting the Q was the digital zoom feature with the accompanying frame lines. The implementation of that feature is just perfect. I really hope Sony does something similar.

Oh, and lots of cute girls said "nice camera" so there's that. No doubt, the look and feel of the Q is outstanding.

At the end of the weekend, I can say it was a fun experience but I'm firmly committed to the RX1's big brother with its smaller size, better EVF (more natural rendering), 35/2 lens, advanced AF system and much deeper files.

And the girls like that cam too.

full disclosure, I am a Sony Image Artisan but have been posting here for many years on a variety of cameras and platforms and everything I share is personal (unpaid or solicited) opinion. I love playing with all the tools and the Q is a fun one. If it had a Sony sensor in it, I would have a real problem.

 

[Vivek]

Chad, if you had not pointed it out, I would have thought it was some sort of corrugated roofing on the last picture. It is actually quite nice!

 

[Show Performance]

Chad, if you had not pointed it out, I would have thought it was some sort of corrugated roofing on the last picture. It is actually quite nice!

Vivek,

Unfortunately that is just black tarp. I agree, the effect is not so bad here but prefer not to worry about it showing up more conspicuously in other images. I haven't done any research on the problem but it struck me that the banding was likely from the electronic shutter - similar to issues with the a7RII in silent mode. The problem with the implementation of electronic shutter in the Q is that it is a default and the user doesn't have a way to turn it off (someone please correct me if I am wrong). So if that is indeed the cause of the banding, there is no remedy.

 

[iiiNelson]

Vivek,

Unfortunately that is just black tarp. I agree, the effect is not so bad here but prefer not to worry about it showing up more conspicuously in other images. I haven't done any research on the problem but it struck me that the banding was likely from the electronic shutter - similar to issues with the a7RII in silent mode. The problem with the implementation of electronic shutter in the Q is that it is a default and the user doesn't have a way to turn it off (someone please correct me if I am wrong). So if that is indeed the cause of the banding, there is no remedy.

If I remember correctly the M240 had a lot of the same banding issues in mixed light while shooting in medium to high ISO (ISO1600+.) It was one of the other reasons I held on to my M9 for quite a bit longer.

Hopefully Leica can issue a firmware update if that's the case of not being able to turn the electronic shutter off.

 

[mmbma]

The Leica of course. It just works.

Sony has so many silly functions packed in among the real useful ones it is so uninspiring to try to work through.

 

[ptomsu]

No doubt the Q!

 

[iiiNelson]

The Leica of course. It just works.

Sony has so many silly functions packed in among the real useful ones it is so uninspiring to try to work through.

I've found that living with a Sony is much easier than trying it in store. With the quick menu and the custom buttons I rarely go inside the main menu except to format memory cards.

That at being said either camera is capable of producing great images. The bigger question to answer is do you want 28mm or 35mm IMO.

 

[rich_]

I'm looking forward to trying out the new Sony to see how the performance has improved. I owned the previous version and the images it produced were more pleasing to my eye than from my 35 Lux Asph and M9/240 although it did show noticably more distortion causing me the pain of ticking a profile box in Lightroom for future imports! It was just the speed of operation that let me down. 28MM isn't so much my thing.

 

[harmsr]

I'm torn on the decision. I currently have both. I shoot concerts, musicians, CD covers.

My previous kit was Nikon D810, 35 SigArt, 50 SigArt, and Nikon 85. Obviously I'm close and not using the 70-200.

I also used an M240 with either the 50 APO or 50 Nocti and the original RX1r. I really preferred the RX1r images over the 35 Lux FLE on the M240.

Since the introduction of the Q and the SL. I sold everything else. The SL and 24-90 are absolutely amazing. I have been using the Q as my second wide angle body and just love the shooting experience.

The Q is fast and just a dream to use ergonomically. This is where the dilemma comes in choosing between the Q and the RX1r ii.

I prefer the 35 mm focal length over the 28mm. It's just how I see the world when framing in my head. The Q beats the RX1r ii in many areas. Better view finder, better micro contrast, preferred colors, more natural handling for everything except exposure comp. (no direct access without hitting the Fn button first), better battery life. When images are sized the same between the two cameras, I always prefer the Leica. The things in favor of the RX1r ii are the incredible detail you get from the 42 MP sensor and the ability to crop if needed.

From a work standpoint the Q is much faster and more natural to use.

From a personal camera to take with me traveling, it's almost worth giving up my preference for shooting the Q to have the smaller size and increased flexibility of the RX1r ii. The ability to crop and have the tilt screen are real advantages.

I DREAM of a Q with a 35 MM lens, the 42 MP sensor, and a tilt screen. Then I would be in heaven.

 

[Vivek]

I DREAM of a Q with a 35 MM lens, the 42 MP sensor, and a tilt screen. Then I would be in heaven.

What would you be shooting then?

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

...Oh, and lots of cute girls said "nice camera" so there's that. No doubt, the look and feel of the Q is outstanding...

Chad, cute girls are my work, are my life, either with vogue or top notch agency or private. I never EVER heard a girl (cute or not) saying "Ho, this is a nice camera". This is a man thing, girls do not care about gear. I agree with what you say but this part is just utter overplayed IMHO.

Keep cool and fly safe

 

[cam]

Chad, cute girls are my work, are my life, either with vogue or top notch agency or private. I never EVER heard a girl (cute or not) saying "Ho, this is a nice camera". This is a man thing, girls do not care about gear. I agree with what you say but this part is just utter overplayed IMHO.

Keep cool and fly safe

Ummmm, respectively disagree.

You're obviously not hanging out with the right girls.

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

Ummmm, respectively disagree.

You're obviously not hanging out with the right girls.

The day girls start to worry about gear, I'll go with Men. I'm serious. Hopefully, this day is far away !

Baiting ppl with the argument "girls like this camera" is so over the top than it trigger my inner misanthropy.

 

[biglouis]

I had a tough time deciding between both the RX1Rm2 and the Leica Q both of which were on pre- or back-order.

I had used a RX1 which is how I got into owning my main kit which is a A7R, A7S and a variety of lenses. So, I knew what I would be getting with the RX1Rm2.

I'd tried the Q several times, first time I was unimpressed but the second time I related. I remembered how simple my life was when I shot with M bodies both film and digital.

I've also warmed to shooting with a fixed 28mm lens by using (and promoting to anyone who asks my opinion) the fantastic Ricoh GR (still the best value for money camera for serious digital photography out there, imho).

So, in the end it was an emotional decision. I realised I wanted to shoot with a Leica, I wanted the unfussy controls and the wider lens (which crops much better to 1x1, imho).

Both cameras are obviously fantastic. You cannot really fault them and basing arguments on specs will not help. Which camera will help you take compelling photographs?

That's the question and deep down only you know the answer.

Just my two cents.

LouisB