Leica X Vario vs Sony RX1 - actual performance hinted by (lack of) eBay resales

[michaelbrenner]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Given all the buzz (much of it negative) about the Leica X Vario and the buzz (most of it positive) about the Sony RX1, and considering both cameras sell at about the same price point ($2800), I was curious what when all the dust settled was the actual performance like. For a hint of performance received versus performance expected, I thought the used market would be a great proxy. And, what better place to look than eBay? I would think if the Leica X Vario were so bad and the Sony RX1 so good, that we would see a lots of Leica X Vario cameras up for resale and few if any of the Sony RX1 cameras.

 

However, just the opposite. I was unable to locate (as of 8/13/13) a single used Leica X Vario offered for sale on eBay but was able to locate many, many used Sony RX1 cameras offered for sale.

 

Of course the Sony RX1 has been on the market longer (since September 2012 for Sony vs June 2013 for Leica).

 

However, my conclusion is that the Leica X Vario very much outperforms the poor buzz it received while the Sony RX1 underperforms by a wide margin the hugely popular buzz it received.

 

I suspect the reason for this is as follows. Now bear in mind that I do not own a Leica X Vario or a Sony RX1 - yet. I'm strongly leaning towards the Leica as I was very happy with my X1, but because of all the hullabalu, I was also checking out the Sony RX1. I'm merely drawing inference from the market forces I am able to perceive via the eBay used market proxy.

 

Back to the reason for the Leica X Vario far outperforming its expectations. I surmise it is because the Leica X Vario has what is commonly considered a slow zoom lens. It used to be that 400 or 800 ISO resulted in grainy noise rending such exposures unusable. Not so with modern digital cameras. I suspect that the Leica X Vario is able to handle the higher ISO's very well and this offsets the relatively slow lens. Because Leica was able to manufacture a slower lens, they were able to make it with much, much higher quality than what might be expected. Hence, the huge discrepancy (no Leica X Varios for resale but many Sony RX1s).

 

My surmise is that even though the Sony RX1 has the bigger sensor and the faster lens, that the Leica X Vario mitigates the slower lens it has with high ISO performance and offers a much higher image quality because it can do so given the slower lens. Pure genius if you ask me...

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

Anyone with both cameras who might be able to offer comments?

 

Anyone with a technical knowledge able to support, refute, or shed more light?

[michmo57]

1 used XV sold on ebay in July. shutter count 1531. Damage letter A on back of camera rubbed off .Listed 3 times before it got a bid. Camera finally sold for 2120.00

[Fang]

Maybe few Leica X vario did manage to get off the retailer shelves, hence none to be re-sold on ebay ?

[barjohn]

I owned the RX-1 and currently own an X Vario. First, on lens quality, I think it is very close. The RX-1 lens tested by DXO at 33. This is very high and few zooms are that good. We don't yet know how the Leica will test but Lloyd Chambers at Digilloyd.com will be testing it soon and comparing it to several cameras including the RX-1R. My own experience says it is extremely close and the X Vario might have slightly better micro-contrast. Second, high ISO performance. The Leica has much more noise at ISO 3200 and above than the Sony. It is at least a stop better in my experience. However, the X Vario has very good high ISO performance, it is just that the Sony is better yet. Third build quality - Again very close but the Leica is slightly better in my opinion.

 

A few other comments. camera speed, the Sony is faster in almost all aspects and has a far better EVF. Additionally, the Sony software is much more stable and predictable. The Leica software has some idiosyncrasies and bugs that need to be addressed. I plan to write up a more extensive review article later. I need to complete more extensive testing to detail these such that they are repeatable and fixable by Leica.

 

Which one to buy? It really boils down to whether you need the zoom range or can live with a fixed 35mm focal length and how the ergonomics work for you personally. Both are excellent choices. I find that I need the zoom focal lengths and these work pretty well for me. Neither camera is perfect and both could use improvements.

[michaelbrenner]

When I read Steve Huff's review of the Leica X Vario, even though he was quite critical, I will say my favorite pics were from the Leica X Vario, although I thought the Sony RX1 produced excellent images as well. But I preferred the "feel" of the Leica shots for that particular photo series. Could just be his choice of images. I look forward to seeing more shots from both cameras and also hearing back more detail on how the Leica lens tests out.

 

One of the things I really enjoyed about the X1 was the fixed length 35mm lens (effective). I had hoped Leica's next release in the X series would be a full frame camera with a fixed 35mm lens (true). But I'm curious about the Vario. As one changes the focal length of a variable length zoom lens, the picture perspective and "look" subtlely change, allowing more artistic flexibility. To me at least, using a zoom offers a different look and feel to the subject versus merely cropping a picture, a look and feel I much prefer.

 

Of course the downside is size and lens speed. I could take my X1 literally just about anywhere. I had it in a belt case, and I took it everywhere from off-shore sailing races to exploring New York City. I suspect the Leica X Vario will not as easily conceal in a belt case under an outer shirt due to the size of the lens. Not sure about the Sony RX1, either, but I believe its lens is bit less bulky.

[tangotang04]

I have M9 and bought XV. XV is auto focus, can zoom. The image quality is really wonderful. The weight is just same about fujifilm X100, not heavy. I like enjoy to use it !

[tompoes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I read Steve Huff's review of the Leica X Vario, even though he was quite critical, I will say my favorite pics were from the Leica X Vario, although I thought the Sony RX1 produced excellent images as well. But I preferred the "feel" of the Leica shots for that particular photo series. Could just be his choice of images. I look forward to seeing more shots from both cameras and also hearing back more detail on how the Leica lens tests out.

 

One of the things I really enjoyed about the X1 was the fixed length 35mm lens (effective). I had hoped Leica's next release in the X series would be a full frame camera with a fixed 35mm lens (true). But I'm curious about the Vario. As one changes the focal length of a variable length zoom lens, the picture perspective and "look" subtlely change, allowing more artistic flexibility. To me at least, using a zoom offers a different look and feel to the subject versus merely cropping a picture, a look and feel I much prefer.

 

Of course the downside is size and lens speed. I could take my X1 literally just about anywhere. I had it in a belt case, and I took it everywhere from off-shore sailing races to exploring New York City. I suspect the Leica X Vario will not as easily conceal in a belt case under an outer shirt due to the size of the lens. Not sure about the Sony RX1, either, but I believe its lens is bit less bulky.

 

I have both the Sony RX1 and the Leica X Vario and whilst i like the Leica X Vario the image quality is not comparable. The Sony is full frame and comes with a superb Zeiss lens and provides a much better image quality. The Leica is more versatile and is in image quality slightly ahead of the Fuji X E1 with the 18-55mm lens.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Given all the buzz (much of it negative) about the Leica X Vario and the buzz (most of it positive) about the Sony RX1, and considering both cameras sell at about the same price point ($2800), I was curious what when all the dust settled was the actual performance like. For a hint of performance received versus performance expected, I thought the used market would be a great proxy. And, what better place to look than eBay? I would think if the Leica X Vario were so bad and the Sony RX1 so good, that we would see a lots of Leica X Vario cameras up for resale and few if any of the Sony RX1 cameras.

 

However, just the opposite. I was unable to locate (as of 8/13/13) a single used Leica X Vario offered for sale on eBay but was able to locate many, many used Sony RX1 cameras offered for sale.

 

Of course the Sony RX1 has been on the market longer (since September 2012 for Sony vs June 2013 for Leica).

 

However, my conclusion is that the Leica X Vario very much outperforms the poor buzz it received while the Sony RX1 underperforms by a wide margin the hugely popular buzz it received.

 

I suspect the reason for this is as follows. Now bear in mind that I do not own a Leica X Vario or a Sony RX1 - yet. I'm strongly leaning towards the Leica as I was very happy with my X1, but because of all the hullabalu, I was also checking out the Sony RX1. I'm merely drawing inference from the market forces I am able to perceive via the eBay used market proxy.

 

Back to the reason for the Leica X Vario far outperforming its expectations. I surmise it is because the Leica X Vario has what is commonly considered a slow zoom lens. It used to be that 400 or 800 ISO resulted in grainy noise rending such exposures unusable. Not so with modern digital cameras. I suspect that the Leica X Vario is able to handle the higher ISO's very well and this offsets the relatively slow lens. Because Leica was able to manufacture a slower lens, they were able to make it with much, much higher quality than what might be expected. Hence, the huge discrepancy (no Leica X Varios for resale but many Sony RX1s).

 

My surmise is that even though the Sony RX1 has the bigger sensor and the faster lens, that the Leica X Vario mitigates the slower lens it has with high ISO performance and offers a much higher image quality because it can do so given the slower lens. Pure genius if you ask me...

 

Any thoughts on this?

 

Anyone with both cameras who might be able to offer comments?

 

Anyone with a technical knowledge able to support, refute, or shed more light?

 

The comparative qualities and 'bondabilities' of the two cameras cannot really be assessed by the numbers of secondhand sales because there have been very many more Sony RX1 cameras made than X-Vario models. They are two very different cameras as regards design, specification and performance.

 

dunk

[michaelbrenner]

I would have to agree with you on the face of things this how it appears, but I would also suggest that the crux is not how many cameras a manufacturer produces at a given price point but rather what the consumer demand will be and their relative satisfaction.

 

If for example, Sony produces two RX1 cameras for every Leica X Vario, and we assume that demand for Sony RX1 cameras is double that of the Leica X Vario, then it may stand to reason that we could expect the Sony to have twice as much presence in the used market place, assuming the user experience were the same for both cameras. Say we found 100 Sony RX1 cameras for resale, then I would expect (under the aforementioned assumptions) roughly 50 Leica X Varios to up for resale, but that is not the case (not even close as there were no Leica X Varios up for resale to be found).

 

Another argument might be that there are so few Leica X Varios available that those who bought them are going to keep them and not resell them. Yet I would think that if I bought the Leica X Vario, even if I were one of the few to get one, if I were vastly disappointed with it, there would be no way I would let a $2800 camera sit on the shelf. I would absolutely try to find a buyer for it and recoup at least a portion of the initial cash outlay.

 

However, I suspect the relationship between available product and the used market place is more complex. For one thing, from what I understand, this is relatively new territory for Sony while Leica has a long and well-established history. So I would think that even if Sony outproduced Leica at 2:1, it would be Leica with the credibility and track record for producing cameras in that category and price point. As a relatively new entrant, I would think Sony would have a bit of a hill to climb.

 

On the other hand, like you say, they are different cameras in design, specification, and performance. But they are very similar in several key aspects: both are high performance relatively compact mirrorless cameras and both have high quality lenses and sensors. Of course the most obvious draw to compare the two is the very close and unusually high price point for cameras in this category. Critically, the Leica has a zoom while the Sony has a fixed length prime lens. But the Sony counters with a full frame sensor and good performance under low light.

 

I would love to see a comparison of real world photography between the two. For example, street photography under various lighting conditions. Perhaps some landscapes and macro photography, and some architecture and portraits. As the market for these two cameras matures it will be interesting to see the product they turn out as well as the forms and style of photography the two cameras gravitate to.

[colonel]

Sorry, I completely disagree with the OP.

Sony have sold logarithmically more RX1s then the xvario, and now some folk are upgrading to the RX1R.

This is a meaningless comparison.

 

On ebay.co.uk EU there are no RX1Rs but an x-Vario with no bids.

BTW I think the xvario is great but this is the reality.

[michaelbrenner]

I have both the Sony RX1 and the Leica X Vario and whilst i like the Leica X Vario the image quality is not comparable. The Sony is full frame and comes with a superb Zeiss lens and provides a much better image quality. The Leica is more versatile and is in image quality slightly ahead of the Fuji X E1 with the 18-55mm lens.

 

Any chance you might be able to post some side-by-side examples of the Leica X Vario and Sony RX1? Preferably similar lighting and conditions and utilizing each camera to the best of its capabilities to capture the moment.

 

Many comparisons have been made elsewhere under controlled conditions of, for example, F5.6/200 on each camera in comparison under studio lighting, etc. That's highly technical and a real pain in the neck to do and is not what I'm talking about. What I'm suggesting is to take a real world situation which is something you might normally use the camera for and attempt to capture the moment using each camera to the best of its capability. So the shutter speed, ISO, and aperture may not necessarily match for a given shot.

 

So if you get a moment, perhaps you might post a few images... pretty please:D

[dkCambridgeshire]

The two cameras are different tools designed and produced for different markets and there is not much point in comparing them. They both perform very well but are so different it's pointless trying to ascertain which has the better performance. Few would compare a Mazda MX5 with a VW Golf.

 

dunk

[tom0511]

My thought is that both are obviously very good cameras, and it is easy to choose:

 

do you want zoom? -> X-Vario

do you like 35mm only, but therefore get a faster lens and better high ISO -> RX1

 

Who cares how many people sell something on ebay

[Ecaton]

Of the eight XV which were sold WW so far, two were already dumped into the used market with a few dozen shutter actuations only. I.e. a 25 % rate of unhappy customers:p.

I`m sure, some will want to draw as bold a conclusion from my statistically accurate and relevant post as OP did based on his facts stated.

[barjohn]

While I'm sure sales have been slow, where do you get that only 8 have been sold world wide? I doubt if Leica or dealers will provide this information. As for resales, I have only seen two listed but I don't put a lot of stock in that as a data point as the camera is still too new to the market. I certainly would not be surprised if only a few hundred had been sold as it is not a cheap camera and thanks to Leica's really bad marketing they caused the camera to get beat up on introduction as many of us, including me, were really hoping for a CL replacement.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Of the eight XV which were sold WW so far, two were already dumped into the used market with a few dozen shutter actuations only. I.e. a 25 % rate of unhappy customers:p.

I`m sure, some will want to draw as bold a conclusion from my statistically accurate and relevant post as OP did based on his facts stated.

 

Fact is ... for all your negative posts about the XV there are many more positive posts by other forum members. Statistically you are in a minority. No offence intended. Just stating facts.

 

dunk

[Ecaton]

While I'm sure sales have been slow, where do you get that only 8 have been sold world wide? I doubt if Leica or dealers will provide this information. As for resales, I have only seen two listed but I don't put a lot of stock in that as a data point as the camera is still too new to the market. I certainly would not be surprised if only a few hundred had been sold as it is not a cheap camera and thanks to Leica's really bad marketing they caused the camera to get beat up on introduction as many of us, including me, were really hoping for a CL replacement.

 

Pure sarcasm from my side-not meant to be serious with my previous post. Of course I do not have any data;).

[spylaw4]

Dunk beat me to it!

[Ecaton]

Fact is ... for all your negative posts about the XV there are many more positive posts by other forum members. Statistically you are in a minority. No offence intended. Just stating facts.

 

dunk

 

For once, you could try to read carefully. My post was referring to the OP`s way of drawing bold conclusions based on non-facts. I did not comment on the XV and its obvious shortcomings as they are meanwhile known sufficiently well.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

The assumption that the main reason for a resale is an unhappy user is not quite solid.... Maybe the spouses of the resellers objected to the looks of the camera...