Sony RX1R vs Leica M 35/2

[stump4545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

if one uses a Leica M and a 35mm f2 lens for most work, what does one give up by opting to go with the Sony RX1R?

 

seems IQ is similar, smaller, ligher, less expensive, raw works with LR, with attached optical viewfinder seems like a score, if one is ok with a 35mm 24/7.

 

what am I missing?

 

is there still something missing from the purist rangefinder experience besides its not a Leica?

[Guest Marc G.]

i don't know if manual focus works that well on that RX1 as I never held it, so I can only give theoretical thoughts.

 

-autofocus seems to be mediocre on the RX1

-you throw away the lens once you switch to another model while you save the glass you invested your money in with the interchangable solution

-battery life seems poor on the RX1, I can get about 1000 shots out of a M9 battery, M240 has even more battery life

-using a viewfinder eliminates the size advantage

-no shutter speed dial

[pfhrased]

Practical differences are fairly obvious: no rangefinder, you can't take the lens to a new body, no shutter dial (mode instead), small body means somewhat awkward to hold for some people - but on the plus side more compact, amazing low-light performance, autofocus, you'd probably never need another camera if all you want is 35/2 full frame, less buggy, better bokeh than the Leica 35/2 imo.

 

Less immediate issues: it won't appreciate in value and it's less of an heirloom item.

[Ecaton]

Best MF and ZF functionality imo with a M & M lens, versus ok AF and ok MF with the RX1. In the hands of an experienced shooter the M is faster.

RF shooting experience with clear and bright OVF versus EVF and screen live view. The RX1 lens has a quite pronounced barrel distortion. Max shutter speed of 1/2000 only with the lens wide open requires ND filter or stopping down. Micro contrast of the M9 files at low iso beats the RX1. The advantages of the RX1 are known, resolution, DR, impressive high iso performance, beautiful lens rendering. Raw files from good light shooting with the M9 require less tweaking.

[stump4545]

what makes the "Rangefinder Experience" so great?

 

i have never used liveveiw, electronic viewfinders, focus peaking and wasn't sure if these handy tools slow down the rangefinder.

[Guest Marc G.]

what makes the "Rangefinder Experience" so great?

 

i have never used liveveiw, electronic viewfinders, focus peaking and wasn't sure if these handy tools slow down the rangefinder.

 

what do you mean? nothing slows down the rangefinder. it's purely mechanical. the RX1 doesn't have a rangefinder so the whole camera lacks this feature :confused:

[stump4545]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

sorry drifted.

 

well, the Leica M has live veiw and focus peaking.

 

i guess what I meant was do all of these nice new seemingly really good features get in the way of fast, discreet, looking through the rangefinder, quick focus and shoot?

[Guest Marc G.]

sorry drifted.

 

well, the Leica M has live veiw and focus peaking.

 

i guess what I meant was do all of these nice new seemingly really good features get in the way of fast, discreet, looking through the rangefinder, quick focus and shoot?

 

no, why should they?

 

these are all features that have to be activated separately. you can use the M240 just like an M9.

[Yarosuav]

I bought the RX1 while waiting for my M to come back from the strap lugs check, but ended up returning it. Don't get me wrong, I loved the image quality of the RX1 and the lens rendering, it really is something special. I sill keep going to back to the pictures I took with it and love them. I'm also a one lens kind of guy and was really hoping to like the RX1.

 

However, I just couldn't get over the handling issues of the RX1, mainly the autofocus performance, it realy is slow and frustrating. Everytime I used it I wished I could just grab the M and focus myself (and I'm by no means a rangefinder veteran - the M is my first Leica). RX1 is also quite small and awkward to use, lack of built-in EVF doesn't help either.

 

But again, the image quality is astounding... I hope Sony gets its act together and deliveres an RX2 whose operational side equals its image quality. And give us a built-in EVF please.

[spoons]

Let me say this...

 

 

....the Sony is amazing and perhaps it's the future. I often wonder if my instinct for putting a camera up to my eye and being disappointed when a camera doesn't have a little window ( forget the EVF in this instance ), is just being a little bit older and old scroatish and that maybe there is nothing wrong in having just a screen and holding the camera at arms length.

 

The IQ is beautiful and let's face it, more than any of us need. I, like most of us often obsess about a micron worth of lack of focus. I'm doing it right now as I decide on a 35 for my M. What are we waiting for ? We do it with phones and computers don't we. I'll just wait until the next version comes out. Are we using this as an excuse not to take pictures ? Look at some of the most famous Leica photographs taken with what we would now consider a milk bottle. Did they obsess and wait ? Research is great and we are right to do it.

 

I think from a professionals point of view, and this is defined by how you make your living, not on artistic or creative abilities ( I have the S + S24mm + S30-90 + M240 + 50mm 1.4 ASPH ) it's a little bit about the theater of it all and as a relative minimalist, I shoot mostly daylight and travel with hand luggage ( sort of ), I have often to put up strobe heads at low power and cards and flags to make it look like I know what I'm doing.The problem is that there is no mystery anymore and everyone takes pictures that they think are worthy of print. I find it more and more that the people I am working with are slightly resentful that I am 55 and earning in a day what they earn in a month. Regardless of my 38 years in the business of no money, no work etc etc.

 

I shot for a NY magazine in Vermont last year, it was a shoot in two parts.I took my usual stuff with me and the art director asked me where all my gear was. I had one bag with an eos 1ds 3 and my Lumix GF1 with a 14mm fixed lens on. One of the shots I needed was of the 'sitter' with her horses and collection of random dogs. I wanted to have her and them running through the grass with the setting sun behind her and so I chose the Lumix and held it down near the ground as we ran through the long grass with everyone in tow, just pushing the shutter button when it was ready. The pictures were really great and more than I could have ever gotten with a Canon, a Leica or anything. Anyway, the AD didn't like that I didn't have an hmi and big unweildy camera with lots of dials and buttons as this represented what she considered a mastery of my tools, and regardless of my wonderful shots didn't book me for the second half of the job. It doesn't matter. I made the choice as a professional that this was the appropriate tool for the job and the AD thought that she or anyone else could have done the same. "I'm not paying you for just running around with a happy snap camera".

 

So, what am I saying ? The sony is great,it's not really part of an extensive system but as part of a kit, faultless, but no piece of equipment is going to everything and answer all challenges, just like not one lens is everything. We make compromises and choices. It's not an eggs and eggs comparison so look at it for what it is.

[algrove]

The RX1 manual focuses just fine. I own one. I have experience with it. No theories here. It AF's just fine for street photography. I shoot from the hip with it often. The EVF is the best I have used and I own an M. The RRS RX1 grip helps. It has ISO advantages over the M. Hey, it's not a RF camera.

[MarkP]

? Look at some of the most famous Leica photographs taken with what we would now consider a milk bottle.

 

:

 

I made the choice as a professional that this was the appropriate tool for the job and the AD thought that she or anyone else could have done the same. "I'm not paying you for just running around with a happy snap camera".

 

Sounds like the AD shouldn't have been hired for the second half of the shoot.

[mah]

The Sony RX1 is certainly an amazing camera, but putting it head to head with New Leica M 240 is unfair in my opinion, I own both cameras and appreciate the capability of the RX1, but the new M is a serious beast, although below link is for a shot using the new 35mm 1.4 ASPH. Summilux on Leica M, which is not the equivalent to the lens on the RX1, but it shows details colours that cant be matched on RX1:

 

The Perfect SimCity | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

RX1:

 

Jounieh | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Thanks.

[CalArts 99]

I often wonder if my instinct for putting a camera up to my eye and being disappointed when a camera doesn't have a little window ( forget the EVF in this instance ), is just being a little bit older and old scroatish and that maybe there is nothing wrong in having just a screen and holding the camera at arms length.

 

My 4x5 metal folder has only a screen and I use it at arms length.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

if one uses a Leica M and a 35mm f2 lens for most work, what does one give up by opting to go with the Sony RX1R?

 

seems IQ is similar, smaller, ligher, less expensive, raw works with LR, with attached optical viewfinder seems like a score, if one is ok with a 35mm 24/7.

 

what am I missing?

 

is there still something missing from the purist rangefinder experience besides its not a Leica?

Its a Sony.................its like comparing washng machines with welding googles:D

[Leicafanatics]

Its a Sony.................its like comparing washng machines with welding googles:D

 

lol....very funny

[Mixalis]

I also own both an RX1 (with EVF) and an M. I have the greatest respect for the Sony. It is well built and incredibly compact for what it is and as far as I am concerned the IQ is excellent. The 2.4 Mp EVF is exceptionally good, much better than the Olympus/Leica unit on the M. That said, I always feel more at home with the rangefinder on the M and use it in preference to the EVF whenever possible. I agree with other contributors that the manual focus with magnification is very quite good, similar to that of the X-Vario, and the focus peaking is a help. That said, I seldom use the RX1 in manual because nothing really compares with the manual focus of a Leica lens. Autofocus isn't the fastest in the world, as others have said, but it compares well with the Fuji X series without being as good as the Olympus OM-D.

 

Sure, the RX1 is not a Leica but it is a brilliant effort by Sony. The build quality is excellent and, apart from the silly gold band around the lens as it joins the body, there is little to complain of. The M with a 35mm 'Cron is ultimately a better and more satisfying camera but the RX1 is snapping at its heels. And lets not forget the huge price difference. For the money, the Sony is a bargain and I doubt that it will disappoint.