Jump to content
ajayk

Zeiss ZX1 vs Leica Q

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Zeiss with its first camera with fixed focal length of 35mm and integrated memory (yes no cards) and light room is ready to take on Q. Any thoughts ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Provided the sensor is up to scratch, I would take this over the Leica Q in a heartbeat for one simple reason: I prefer the 35mm focal length over 28mm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Internal memory and embedded LR are not arguments to me, who would do serious LR editing in a tiny LCD screen?

35mm is nice though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Zeiss with its first camera with fixed focal length of 35mm and integrated memory (yes no cards) and light room is ready to take on Q. Any thoughts ?

Maybe slightly premature? This camera is still in the development stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica Q and Zeiss ZX1 are very different concepts. Those who use a Q know why they do this and what they have in a Q is a digital camera that works almost like an analog camera. A ZX1 is exactly the opposite of a Q. A camera that works like a modern smartphone.

 
In the future, both cameras will continue to find their customers without making life difficult for each other.
 
I myself wouldn't want a Q that looks or works like a ZX1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Internal memory and embedded LR are not arguments to me, who would do serious LR editing in a tiny LCD screen?

35mm is nice though.

You wouldn't. But you might automatically add your images to LR CC, upload them to the cloud storage, and find them on your desktop or other devices. Its value depends on how the transfer from the camera happens. It looks like it has to go via a smartphone app, which isn't much of a step forward from using the new Leica Fotos app, which can transfer images from camera to LR CC in-phone. But if the camera can connect to any other wifi network, and thus bypass the phone app, that could be a big step forward in convenience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Zeiss is massive compared to the Q and nearly 1/2 pound heavier.

https://leicarumors.com/

Because of all its built-ins, it's designed as a load-to-web camera, and that puts in within the cell phone environment. But it's a big, bulky camera that certainly requires thinking about, while the cell phone doesn't require a "should I take this with me?" decision. Despite the Zeiss's innovations, I don't see it as major competition to the Q.

Edited by bags27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first sight, this camera does not attract me, although it is innovative.

 

A couple of years ago I wrote to Zeiss asking them to produce a digital version of the Zeiss Ikon film rangefinder. That camera was as good as the equivalent Leica, if not better, and was a pleasure to use.

Edited by Viv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss did look into it and found that it would be too expensive to bypass the patents and manufacturing expertise that Leica holds. Such a camera could not have been priced competitively. They said so publicly at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Zeiss is massive compared to the Q and nearly 1/2 pound heavier.

https://leicarumors.com/

Because of all its built-ins, it's designed as a load-to-web camera, and that puts in within the cell phone environment. But it's a big, bulky camera that certainly requires thinking about, while the cell phone doesn't require a "should I take this with me?" decision. Despite the Zeiss's innovations, I don't see it as major competition to the Q.

People tend to add bulky half-cases and handgrips to their Leicas. Add a handgrip to the Q and the size difference, though still there, is not too much.

And a Leica M with Summicron 35 is actually heavier, and still seen as a carry-everywhere camera by its users.

I find the CL too small without grip and prefer the size and heft of the M240 over the M10.

 

it all comes down to personal preference and market segment differentiation.

 

I don't think it is meant to compete with cell-phones, rather to integrate the photographic functionality of one into a serious camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Internal memory and embedded LR are not arguments to me, who would do serious LR editing in a tiny LCD screen?

35mm is nice though.

Who would do serious editing on a phone or tablet? Yet Snapseed and LR mobile are quite popular.

 

i must confess, when on holiday, that I upload some Leica shots to my iPhone, edit in Snapseed and put onto Facebook - and sometimes this Forum

.

Serious edting means ACR-Photoshop on a couple of Eizos to me. I would not even use the light type of laptop that I would care to carry in my hand luggage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss did look into it and found that it would be too expensive to bypass the patents and manufacturing expertise that Leica holds. Such a camera could not have been priced competitively. They said so publicly at the time.

 

 

Do you have a source for this statement? I can't imagine that a product development should not take place at such an innovative company as Zeiss because of patents.

 

After all, that was not a problem with the Zeiss Icon, which was an M-compatible camera. And most of the patents will probably be held by Leica because of the rangefinder. I can't imagine Leica holding any special patents for the digital components that are so special that they can't be avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss Ikon? Their RF camera was from before the M3. It is a well known anecdote that the director of Zeiss walked up to Ernst Leitz on the introduction of the  M3, shook his hand and said : "You've won" 

 

No I don't have a reference. It was discussed extensively in this forum around 2008-2009. AFAIK the main reason was development cost and projected retail price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Zeiss Ikon? Their RF camera was from before the M3.

 

 

No, I mean this Zeiss Ikon (Zeiss ZM), which was available from the year 2005 until a few years ago and which, to my knowledge, is based on Voigtländer technology:

 

 

https://kenrockwell.com/zeiss/ikon.htm

 

Many people thought that the rangefinder in this camera was better than the one in the M, analog or digital.

 

If this camera was available for purchase today, I'd buy one right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Zeiss Ikon was slow in focussing. That was the biggest disadvantage of that system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that was a nice camera. I found it a bit clunky, but far better than a Bessa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy