ajayk Posted September 29, 2018 Share #1 Posted September 29, 2018 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 ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 29, 2018 Posted September 29, 2018 Hi ajayk, Take a look here Zeiss ZX1 vs Leica Q. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Keith_W Posted September 29, 2018 Share #2 Posted September 29, 2018 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. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voxen Posted September 29, 2018 Share #3 Posted September 29, 2018 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. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted September 29, 2018 Share #4 Posted September 29, 2018 Way too big and heavy. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted September 29, 2018 Share #5 Posted September 29, 2018 All hypothetical until the Zeiss camera is available to be compared. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NERICSSON Posted September 29, 2018 Share #6 Posted September 29, 2018 I wish Q had that ISO dial 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 29, 2018 Share #7 Posted September 29, 2018 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmschuh Posted September 29, 2018 Share #8 Posted September 29, 2018 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. 8 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted September 29, 2018 Share #9 Posted September 29, 2018 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. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antigallican Posted September 29, 2018 Share #10 Posted September 29, 2018 The Q is such a lovely thing in the hand and the lens has that Leica ‘sharp but not clinical’ look. It would be a lot to give up. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bags27 Posted September 30, 2018 Share #11 Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) 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 September 30, 2018 by bags27 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #12 Posted September 30, 2018 (edited) 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 September 30, 2018 by Viv 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #13 Posted September 30, 2018 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. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #14 Posted September 30, 2018 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. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #15 Posted September 30, 2018 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. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmschuh Posted September 30, 2018 Share #16 Posted September 30, 2018 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #17 Posted September 30, 2018 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmschuh Posted September 30, 2018 Share #18 Posted September 30, 2018 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: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 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. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 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. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/289990-zeiss-zx1-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3603292'>More sharing options...
Gobert Posted September 30, 2018 Share #19 Posted September 30, 2018 The Zeiss Ikon was slow in focussing. That was the biggest disadvantage of that system. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 30, 2018 Share #20 Posted September 30, 2018 Yes, that was a nice camera. I found it a bit clunky, but far better than a Bessa. 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.