I would love to own this camera and the Q. Because I will take 35 over 28 I'd go with the Sony. If the Q were 35 I would already own it. In the meantime I am pleased with the RX1r.
I have handled the Q and was blown away except for 28. Others would feel the opposite.
There is something for everybody out there.
gbvalli: For me it's impossible to appreciate the images' quality by the DP' viewer. "Fit to screen" doesn't work. My browser is Google Chrome version 46.0.2490.86 m, under Windows Home Premium .
I am in the same boat. There is nothing I can do to make the images larger. I run Chrome and Windows 10.
Love Tony Bennett doing Cheek to Cheek.
nicoboston: Surprisingly [or not], there's nothing about the build quality and the durability of these cameras. They are supposed to be "pocketable", so we should be able to take them everywhere without special precautions. I have purchased 2 "G" Canon in the past: G2 in 2001, G10 in 2008. 14 (!!!) and 7 years later, respectively, both cameras work perfectly and have only minor scratches.
In contrast, my X30 went back to Fujifilm for repair twice and has now a loose hot shoe :-(
I do not have a Sony, but I know that RX100s have quite notorious reliability and durability issues. They have certainly brilliant studio performance, however I do not live in a studio.
Sadly, reliability and durability are not even discussed in your roundup.
Every camera brand has had issues.
Some good shots. A good way to spend the commute.
I got to handle a Q and I was in love with everything except 28mm. Depends on what type of shooting one does. I would be cropping too many shots. For others the Q would be perfect. The camera is stunning and quite a little brick. As of now for fixed lens I am sticking with my RX1r (I). No regets on that purchase. It is a great camera.
dom33: I don't like any of them and not because of the mood or dress trashing. Composition, setting, and lighting is not my taste. last one (15) for example. spotlight lighting against barn. Photograph screams artificial lighting.
No, you are wit remember? Trolls don't last on the DPR.
andyus08: obviously, this is a type of art ( and I admire the the technique here), but I don't understand why a couple would like this type of offensive wedding (to me it's kind of weird) as wedding is the most beautiful thing ever happened to man and woman. And I agree with some of the folks here that the couple may be an experienced model. IMO, it's a great showcase.
mr bird: Wow, this site is full of negative people.
I love honesty! Thanks for sharing about your life.
Orcio14: Technically, pictures are pretty good, however they probably reveal serious psychological problem of Mr John Michael Cooper.Fire, dirty shovel and kelpie at the wedding? Mr. John Michael Cooper had, I think, a very difficult childhood. It would be interesting to create a psychological portrait of the Author.
You are "mad". Cool story bro, tell it again.
FRANCISQUAN: I wonder what Claudia Winkleman would think of the bridal dress in flames after her daughter’s horrific accident on Halloween in which she was rushed to hospital with severe burns.
Something like generic comments.
ThatCamFan: Photo nr1 screams "moron" because so many things could go wrong and its dangerous. I do like most of the images but that fire one im calling him an id**t for.
"*giggle*" I bet you do that every time you see Bieber!
Dyun27: I'm very surprised by a lot of these negative comments. What's the big deal about trashing a wedding dress? The images are well-done. Obviously not everyone is going to feel the same about weddings or wedding photos. He had some fun with it. If people want to pay him to shoot them, who cares if they're not what many of you are expecting they should be? At least a pinch of original thought went into them, instead of the thousands of replicas gracing millions of wedding albums across the world. Marriage is not all bliss. Nice to see some artistic honesty at last. :D
"hi" to you to!
It is called having an opinion. Dom33 contributed something and you didn't. As shocking as this may be to you photography is the subject of the DPR forum.
mcshan: Different isn't always better.
Trying to be a wit and you are half way there.
Different isn't always better.
What a silly article.
SergeyMS: Just attempt to clone Sony RX1. But RX1 is more Leica, than Leica X...
It too awhile but I would think the Q (2015) pushed most of the important buttons. Good job by Leica although I personally would prefer a 35mm lens.
utku67: The moment SONY manages to produce RX-1 in such a way that the view finder naturally becomes the natural geometry of the camera's form and allows to use Leica lenses, then I will definitely buy one.
I feel that way about having an articulating screen.
Gerardjan: Great shots mate! Forget about the negative reactions. Being a pro myself, I can only say "Top job!"
We disagree and that makes the world go around. I believe much can be learned from constructive criticism.