Jump to content
marcb

THE Q vs SONY A7RII

Recommended Posts

Sonys UI is extremely complicated in my opinion.

 

I don't have a Q but an M, and I can say Sony UI sucks as much as Leica's.. but in a different way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used both. Sony makes computers. Leica makes cameras.

 

Let me fix that for you:

 

Sony can also make computers. Leica can only make cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, some Leica lenses won't work at their best on this 42MP, due to the differences in sensor optical layers.

From what I see so far I wouldn't really recommend it at least for the wides and some of the standards. Unfortunately the hope that the backlit sensor would help with smearing doesn't seem to have materialised at least on the lenses I own and have tried. What has improved greatly is the colour cast towards the edges which is reduced to an insignificant level. My 90 elmarit-M and apo-telyt 135 are a joy to use on it especially as the IBIS system makes magnified focusing so easy due to the steadied image. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Sony A7R and Leica Q - they are very different cameras and I use both depending on the job. If you don't need the ability to enlarge to poster size then the Leica Q is a great choice as it is superior ergonomically to the Sony and an absolute joy to use. If you have other lenses though and want something that is more versatile then the Sony is a great choice too.

 

If it was me and I had the budget for just one camera I would get the Sony - the second revision has fixed a lot of usability issues and will give you far more options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here in a way is the only comparison that makes any sort of sense, a physical one. Leica Q with grip and A7rII with FE28/f2 and basically they are the same size. Q weighs 800 grams (with grip) and the Sony 870 grams with FE28. The Q is about 1cm wider. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the size is really the issue, it's ergonomics and purity vs technical capability and flexibility (in terms of lenses).

 

Since I suffer chronic GAS, I really need to avoid a new camera system (I already have an m43 setup) so the Q's single lens stops me splurging on a heap of new lenses, which is what would inevitable happen if I bought the A7RII.

 

There seems little doubt they are both very very good cameras but aside from being full frame and a similar price they really couldn't be more different!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the choice between the Leica Q and the Sony A7 is very very simple. Assuming that the Sony 28/2 is at least equal (which by the way it is not, but the difference may not matter to you or may even be invisible to you), it comes down to camera body user interface and operation.

 

If you are in any way content with the way Sony cameras are operated and Sony sensors draw the image, then by all means get the A7R-II or similar A7 model as you will potentially end up spending dramatically less money and still be able to use a German lens, only from the blue guys and not the red guys.

 

The Leica Q choice needs to be a conscious one. You will be spending north of 4 grants on a fixed lens camera that doesn't use the most popular focal length and lacks features that the SLR/EVIL world takes for granted. If there is any doubt in your mind, you simply should not be buying the Leica Q.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the choice between the Leica Q and the Sony A7 is very very simple. Assuming that the Sony 28/2 is at least equal (which by the way it is not, but the difference may not matter to you or may even be invisible to you), it comes down to camera body user interface and operation.

 

If you are in any way content with the way Sony cameras are operated and Sony sensors draw the image, then by all means get the A7R-II or similar A7 model as you will potentially end up spending dramatically less money and still be able to use a German lens, only from the blue guys and not the red guys.

 

The Leica Q choice needs to be a conscious one. You will be spending north of 4 grants on a fixed lens camera that doesn't use the most popular focal length and lacks features that the SLR/EVIL world takes for granted. If there is any doubt in your mind, you simply should not be buying the Leica Q.

 

Can you please provide a link to this comparison in which the Q is deemed to be better than the A7rII with the FE28/2. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you please provide a link to this comparison in which the Q is deemed to be better than the A7rII with the FE28/2. 

 

What comparison? I have neither mentioned nor implied any comparison between the Leica Q and the FE 28/2 and I am sure you can google the various FE 28 reviews yourself. 

 

In a nutshell, the FE28 wantes to be stopped down at least to f2.8 to reach excellent sharpness, at least in the centre. Sweet spot around f5.6. Significant CA, especially off centre, wide open - requires f5.6 to be well behaved. 

The Leica Summilux-Q does none of that and there is the obvious f1.7 vs. f2.0 plus close focusing ability of 17cm vs. 30cm.

 

Just about the only aspect where the Sony 28 beats the Leica is distortion because the Leica does not correct this while the Sony does (or tries to because there is a fairly large amount of barrel distortion remaining).

 

We are talking about a cheap € 450,- Sony FE 28/2 here and I don't know why people would think that it was going to beat any Leica lens. It's an overall good offering with very good price/performance ratio (certainly better than any Leica in this respect). If you shoot Sony FE, you don't have much of a choice anyway.

 

The bottom line is: you may care about, let's say, the look of the Summilux-Q vs. FE 28/2 or you may not. If you do not care, why would you spend the premium on a Leica?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is that of course you can't compare the two but I thought I would play a long a bit with peoples need to do so. IMHO as a 28mm lens the Q is probably without parallel, I find it to be better than my 28 cron was on the M (of course there is the new 28 summilux but I have no experience with it). The FE28 for what it costs is also very good but not in the same league. At the moment if I could only have one camera in the world without a doubt it would be the Leica Q

Edited by viramati

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite true really. Sony makes computers and cameras but their cameras are a bit like computers though they are learning to make better photographer's cameras. Leica make cameras and in a way are now learning how to make computers and with the Q I feel they have got the mix about right.

Without a doubt the A7rII will be a incredible image making machine but in no way does it have the manual/analogue features of the Q

You said it more clearly (but that's what I was getting at)

... And I really tried to like a Sony that I had. It just wasn't right for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me fix that for you:

 

Sony can also make computers. Leica can only make cameras.

Or, maybe, Sony can only make computer-like cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, maybe, Sony can only make computer-like cameras.

 

Do you shoot with a film camera ?

Otherwise, you should explain what a "computer-like camera" is, and why Leica digital cameras are not "computer-like".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just went into Best Buy and had the new Sony A7rII in my hands (finally). Personally, I did not like the way the Sony felt due to the ergonomics (for me) and heaviness. It felt weighty.  Basically, it was rather clumsy in my hands, and did not feels as secure as the Q. Also, even though I easily embrace technology, it was not nearly as intuitive as the Leica. I really don't want to think too much when I take photos, other than the end results to be achieved.  IMO the viewfinder is not match for the Leica Q. Of course, the Sony is part of a comprehensive system with a very high pixel count. Surely, those seeking maximum system flexibly will embrace the Sony A7rII.  

 

Subjectively, I take the Q, for my purposes any day of the week. Not a contest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on, we can compare them for weeks. Both will do the job. But leica is lieca. If you care for the brand then it is leica, if you don't Sony is the master of light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on, we can compare them for weeks. Both will do the job. But leica is lieca. If you care for the brand then it is leica, if you don't Sony is the master of light.

Respectfully, I don't think it is simple. When you a spending plus $4000 to $5,000, tangible differences become significant. And there are differences. Obviously, we all are subjective in our perspective.  Ever since I sold my M6's and lenses, I was not a fanboy. After comparing both cameras, I am back in the Leica camp. It just had to do with spending some time with both cameras. Good luck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just get serious:

 

Find a M9 or 240, and pick from the feast of glass of all size and price.

 

Both Q and A7r2 are highly restrictive platforms in comparison, to me anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just get serious:

 

Find a M9 or 240, and pick from the feast of glass of all size and price.

 

Both Q and A7r2 are highly restrictive platforms in comparison, to me anyway.

 

The M9 or 240 are both a) much more expensive and

much more demanding of the photographer so are unlikely to be an option for those looking at the A7RII. For those considering the Q they are likely to either have no interest in a "full fat" Leica or already have one and see the Q as either complementary or an alternative to buying a 28/35mm lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The M9 or 240 are both a) much more expensive and

much more demanding of the photographer so are unlikely to be an option for those looking at the A7RII. For those considering the Q they are likely to either have no interest in a "full fat" Leica or already have one and see the Q as either complementary or an alternative to buying a 28/35mm lens.

No they aren't.

 

A7r2 with lens is bigger than 240 or M9. Good lenses for A7r2 (over 3K by itself), are not cheap. Sonys loose value very fast. So an M9 for 3k or a 240 for 4100 and bargain RF glass is just worlds above for nearly the same dollars, even at the Q's 28mm.

 

For the budget: used A7 original for 700 + Kolari thin stack mod 400 and you have very near M240 quality 35 and wider, and many lenses like the 50 cron are as good or better than the 240.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The M9 or 240 are both a) much more expensive and

much more demanding of the photographer so are unlikely to be an option for those looking at the A7RII. For those considering the Q they are likely to either have no interest in a "full fat" Leica or already have one and see the Q as either complementary or an alternative to buying a 28/35mm lens.

+1. I have no interest in a "full fat" Leica system, regardless of cost. Been there with 2 M6TTL's and five Leica lenses (21, 35, 50, 75, and 90).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×