alee Posted December 3, 2015 Share #141 Posted December 3, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Surprised at the lack of reviews on the RX1R II. Enamored with the size and the boutique nature of the kit. Think the sensor is likely better than the Q. Suspect the lack of OIS will make it a deal breaker for me. May still buy one if the reviews are good... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Hi alee, Take a look here Any Thoughts on How the New Sony RX1R II with 42mp Will Compare?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
microview Posted December 3, 2015 Share #142 Posted December 3, 2015 Well, we are all waitng for Mr Huff's promised full review, although he's been distracted by the Leica SL, it seems. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alee Posted December 3, 2015 Share #143 Posted December 3, 2015 Well, we are all waitng for Mr Huff's promised full review, although he's been distracted by the Leica SL, it seems. Resting his tired muscles after carrying the SL with the zoom around. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 8, 2015 Share #144 Posted December 8, 2015 (edited) I got to test out my friend's RX1R II for a few hours. Here is my short impression. 1. AF is definitely faster than the original RX1, but noticeably slower than the Q. 2. The EVF may be a touch brighter with better clarity than the Q, but the refresh rate on the Q is better. I'd say it's a wash. 3. Camera operation and image playback is laggy. Sony must be using the same processor (as the 24MP sensor) because it feels at least 50% slower than the original. This was very disappointing.I had high hopes for the RX1R II but I think I'll pass. I've realized how spoiled I am with the operational speed of the Q..... the RX1R II felt really slow. Edited December 8, 2015 by Mr.Q 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted December 8, 2015 Share #145 Posted December 8, 2015 I had high hopes for the RX1R II but I think I'll pass. So you don't have to change your name to "Mr RX1R II". Doesn't sound half as crisp as "Mr Q", anyway 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 9, 2015 Share #146 Posted December 9, 2015 So you don't have to change your name to "Mr RX1R II". Doesn't sound half as crisp as "Mr Q", anyway Agreed Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moto Mark Posted December 10, 2015 Share #147 Posted December 10, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I've used the RX 1 ( nice to have a friend in the camera biz) and I vas very close to buying one. I like the idea of one camera, one lens. These days my 35 Zeiss lives on my M6, I can't remember when I last used another lens on it. Now with the new version I'll really have to take a long look at it before I commit to the Q. I'll be renting a Q after the first of the year and hopefully that will help decide as I'm still not sure the 28mm on the Q will work for me. Edited December 10, 2015 by Moto Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 10, 2015 Share #148 Posted December 10, 2015 Something I posted on Steve Huff's website. You could tell I'm comfortably back on the Q bandwagon now I own both the RX1R and Leica Q, and I am currently testing the RX1R2 which I will probably return. Quite frankly, I do not like it. Chad, your review is great but I find it too generous when talking about the Sony’s. Yes the RX1R has better high-ISO capabilities (1 stop worth) and more DR (maybe 1 – 1.5 stops worth) But the Q has features that are far superior as well. OIS that can compensate for 3-4 stops in the low light situations. Shutter speeds up to 1/16000, which is 3 stops worth in bright situations. So the Q is a much more versatile tool in most real-world lighting situations. And how often do you need 14 stops worth of dynamic range? Maybe 2-3% of your photos? Certainly none for your photos above. You make it sound like the sensor advantage applies to most or all your photos, when in reality it is a very limited advantage. Besides, in most situations (ie landscapes) you could compensate for dynamic range with multiple shots (HDR) and then you get 20 stops lol. So in my humble opinion, DR is a vastly overrated feature in the internet world. Back to the reason why I’m returning the new RX1R2. The operational speed is too slow. It feels so laggy. Yes, the AF speed may be 30% faster than the original RX1R (still slower than the Q btw) but reviewing and zooming in on images must be 30% slower. It would have been OK 3 years ago in 2012, but unacceptable in 2015. The lagginess is a complete letdown after getting used to the Q, which is probably snappier than most DSLR’s. It’s the same reason I returned the Sigma DP1 (in fairness the Sony is much faster, but you get the idea) Usability still stinks with RX1 and now it’s even worse with the new model. Sony needs to work on their menus and better processing for a more pleasing shooting experience. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv1857 Posted December 13, 2015 Share #149 Posted December 13, 2015 After many months of dithering, perusing the web, and now having spent some time with both the q and the rx, I have finally decided to buy the rx. Reasons are as follows and as you will see, they are quite personal and therefore not generalisable. 1. Better ISO performance. I shoot at relatively high shutter speeds with fast moving subjects both at home and in the street. 2. Ability to crop. I can get a nice a4 print at an equivalent of 80 mm focal length. 3. Flip screen. I like to shoot from waist level occasionally. 4. More discrete. People really do notice the q. 5. I like the bokeh much more. The bokeh from the q seems too 'choppy' for my taste. I will however, miss the following. 1. The q is fast - start up, play back and af. 2. The q's evf is nicer. 3. 28 mm gives slightly greater optionally for street shooting. 4. Battery life on the rx is poor. 5. On first inspection the q was better to hold but it became more and more uncomfortable as time passed. A thumbs up on the rx and grip on the q solved my problems with both (but made the q look even bigger). Despite my decision I will keep returning to this thread just to draw inspiration from the marvellous images that so many of you are producing. Goodluck with your choices. viv. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 13, 2015 Share #150 Posted December 13, 2015 The Sonnar on the RX1 series is a magical lens. I agree that the creamy bokeh is unbeatable. For me the decision was easier because I still have the original RX1R, which still produces near identical images. I plan to keep it for shooting my cats (lol) and for landscapes. Good luck! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted December 18, 2015 Share #151 Posted December 18, 2015 Mr Huff has posted his thoughts at last: seems a close call! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgrayson3 Posted December 19, 2015 Share #152 Posted December 19, 2015 I picked up the Sony at B&H the other day. Cramped and slow, it was much less appealing than I had expected. I understand that different people weigh the process vs. the final image differently, but I find that I just stop using a camera if I don't enjoy it. And I have yet to feel let down by the Q's images, but then I've always been a 28mm FoV shooter. --Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramosa Posted December 21, 2015 Share #153 Posted December 21, 2015 (edited) I'm sure the RX1r II will be a great camera. The question, though, is whether you can live with the Sony-style user experience and haptics. When I used the RX1r for a year, it was clear that I could not. Also, I found it too small even when using a half case. That said, different strokes ... Edited December 21, 2015 by ramosa 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KLManhattan Posted December 23, 2015 Share #154 Posted December 23, 2015 Many on this forum's largest complaint about the Q was the choice of 28mm versus 35mm for the lens. Therefore, I would expect this camera will impact Q sales. What I hope is that this camera spurs Leica to more rapidly bring out some firmware updates to address the issues in the thread on requested firmware changes so that the Q will be a better camera and maintain an additional edge in usability over the Sony. The Zeiss lens is a very good optic with better edge-to-edge performance than the Q's without software correction; however that is probably easier to achieve at 35mm than at 28mm. I would be very surprised if this camera didn't impact Q sales even though I think the Q is a better camera. It will certainly produce competitive images and its performance will probably be very close to the Q's and it is $900 less costly. Logic says that matters in the market. I guess we will see... The actual cost difference is closer to $700. The RX1MII does not come with a lens hood which costs $175. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Thompson Posted December 23, 2015 Share #155 Posted December 23, 2015 The Sony hood is on sale at B&H, $78 until Jan 2. I just ordered a second one as I am keeping my RX1R along with the RX1RII. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted December 24, 2015 Share #156 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) Any Thoughts on How the New Sony RX1R II with 42mp Will Compare? 97 vs 85 http://leicarumors.com/2015/12/23/first-leica-q-typ-116-test-score-posted-at-dxomark.aspx/sony-rx1r-ii-vs-sony-a7r-ii-vs-leica-q-typ-116-camera-comparison/ Edited December 24, 2015 by erick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Thompson Posted December 24, 2015 Share #157 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) And how often do you need 14 stops worth of dynamic range? All of the time. I want my photos to express what my eyes see. My M has been in the safe since I received the RX1RII and I prefer the M interface. Edited December 24, 2015 by Mr. Thompson 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 24, 2015 Share #158 Posted December 24, 2015 All of the time. I want my photos to express what my eyes see. My M has been in the safe since I received the RX1RII and I prefer the M interface. If you need 14 stops of DR for all your photos (btw your eyes only have 6.5 stops worth of DR) I suggest you learn how to expose properly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cirke Posted December 24, 2015 Share #159 Posted December 24, 2015 (edited) If you need 14 stops of DR for all your photos (btw your eyes only have 6.5 stops worth of DR) I suggest you learn how to expose properly. our eyes can exceed 24 stops (dynamically), Edited December 24, 2015 by jaapv ad hominem Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted December 24, 2015 Share #160 Posted December 24, 2015 our eyes can exceed 24 stops (dynamically), Dynamically? That is pure nonsense. Are we talking about videos or stills? A photo is instantaneous and static. Try going into a dark room for an hour and have someone flash a light in your face. You'll go blind and wonder where that 24 stops went LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.