Sony RX1R II vs Leica Q: The $4,000 Question
On the off chance your great aunt just left you $5,000 and you have a burning desire to have a fixed focal length, full-frame sensor point and shoot, you now have two great options: the Sony RX1R II and the Leica Q.
Why would anyone in their right mind spend that kind of cash on a non-zooming, non-interchangeable lens camera? Well, a fixed focal length means you can really optimize the image quality for a given sensor/lens combination. And let’s face it, heavy cameras are hell on your back, and difficult to travel with. #firstworldproblems! Let’s look at the specs!
Speed: 1/4000 – 30 seconds
Electronic shutter. Speed: 1/2500 – 1/16000 second
- Built-in WiFi & NFC
- Built-in optical low-pass filter
- Articulating rear screen
- Built-in WiFi
- 3″ LCD Touchscreen
In reviewing the specs, I’m torn. I love the faster lens of the Leica Q, and the focusing mechanism is reportedly lightning fast.
On the other hand, the Sony RX1R II is smaller, which is arguably one of the most important features of a compact point and shoot. I like the faster flash sync, better ISO range, and I have a suspicion that the articulating screen is going to be more practical than anticipated. But 42MP seems a bit overkill. I have enough trouble handling my 36MP Nikon D800 files.
If you’re in the market for either of these cameras, it’s unlikely that the $1,000 price difference will matter. So which feature(s) will sway you to part with your dear great aunt’s money? And why not one of each?
Updated: Both units support WiFi.
“…And let’s face it, heavy cameras are hell on your back, and difficult to travel with.”
I feel tho thorry for you. Wewe and twuwy I do!
-traveler in 1979 carrying a full Hasselblad system, 35mm, tripod and camping gear trekking through Alaska. 80lb on my back, give or take 10, 15 lb, depending on how hungry he was likely to get.
Ok, ok. I don’t carry that much any more. But then, it’s not 1979 as well and I manage to keep the pack to maybe 39 lb (homage to 39 steps!) and hike a couple of miles on flat terrain.
The Sony wins — hands down. And I’m a big Leica fan.
The Leica looks nice and hits a lot of the sweet spots for a Leica shooter, but $4,200+ for a point-and-shoot that will likely last 5-years or less is ridiculous. And an f/1.7 Summilux? Sorry, anything less than f/1.4 simply isn’t a ‘Lux — it’s a Summarit (f/1.5), a Xenon (f/1.5), or a Summarex (f/1.5). Putting the Summilux name on a lens that’s just f/1.7 cheapens the name and brings the rest of the brand down.
The Sony — on the other hand — is smaller, lighter, has the articulating rear screen, has the best-in-class sensor, is $1,000 less, is Version 2 of the product, and doesn’t lie about their lens branding.
Near the 28mm nominal focal length of the Q, the Summarit-M 35mm is f/2.5 not f/1.5.
…and then you actually try to use the cameras.
The Leica wins hands down on ergonomics and sheer usability. No contest. The Sony is a miniaturised computer with a billion buttons and a menu system designed for visiting aliens. Its cramped grip, just because it wants to be on the “I am the most compactest” list, turns me off every single time I lift one. And the battery life… Hmm. 300+ on the Q, 200+ on the RX1.
In terms of image quality, it’s a toss up between whether you prefer the Leica look or Zeiss. For everyday shooting, I prefer the Leica Q output.
For video, though, I’d take the RX1. But only if I don’t have my Blackmagic Pocket around with me.
You dont know so much of what you talking aboute Mitch… If you was so big Leica fan then you have maybe read that this is a fixsed lens for sute the Leica q 100& and becouse of that this lens become a 1.7 f but it is the same summilux as the f 1.4..
And the same is it for Sony it has allso a fixsed lens from Zeiss, and hade probely be a f 1.4 to if it was a normal lens.
For me it was no qestion what I wanted to buy after I hade us boute of them some days, I buyed the Q becouse of faster fucus speed, and much better viwfinder. So I think it is big difrends of all user what them like to ther Camera If you want a Slow Sony as not can be used for stree photo then you buy the Sony, The Sony is aboute like fast as Fuji XT-1 and to us that one on street photo end up for me that I truved my XT-1 in the osen under a day I tok pics in my City. So think what you will us the camra for before you bay it.
This is easy…the Q. The Leica lenses beat Sony’s by a mile. I have the Q and wouldn’t trade it for two Sony Rx1rs.
Doesn’t the Sony have Wifi as well?
You are correct. I’ve updated the article. Thanks.
Actually the problem with Nikon is they over process the files, which is why the d800-d800e files were 71mb vs Sonys original A7r which was 42mb. I dont get where people are complaining about sonys file sizes vs nikons. The A7r II will hardly top Nikons ridiculous file sizes. The 42 mp makes complete sense paired with a wide angle fixes lens. It gives you so much crop ability and zoomability for photos you want closer. People love the Leica brand more the tech itself. Between the two its a no brainer, the RX1r II out performs in IQ, build, and sensor technology. With 1/2000 flash syns vs 1/500 thats embarrassing coming from a company renowed for its leaf shutters. People who think the file size is the only problem between the two, they arent going to buy this camera anyways because thats not a realistic reason, for the RX1r II or A7r II
Sony original A7R raw is not 14-bit uncompressed files.
Sony A7R II 14-bit uncompressed files (with recent update) is 82-86mb.
I had the RX1R and now have the Q. I vastly prefer the simplicity of shooting with the Q, and since I like shooting wide, much prefer the 28mm focal length (there are many times I wished it was even wider). I have had many Sony cameras and now have the A7RII and the Sony menu system is still complicated versus the beautiful simplicity of the Leica menus. I also like shooting wide open in sunlight with the Q and the faster shutter speeds available help there too. Manual focusing on the Q is a pleasure as well. Processing 24MB files is easier then 42MB, although sometimes I like to crop significantly and in that case the RX1R would come in handy for the higher resolution.
However I loved the RX1 as well and the output was excellent. Assuming the autofocusing speed with the new RX1 will be much improved over the original, and if you like shooting with a 35mm focal length, it will be a pretty amazing camera too. If they offered a 50mm in either camera I would get it and the 28mm/50mm combo would be perfect. I like the ability on the Q to push the button on the back to crop to 35mm/50mm, although of course you get less resolution.
Leica wins!
And RX1 lacks image stabilization!