Nick932: I know that the liking/looks is a personal opinion but looks quiet ugly with this pop evf periscope. It is almost humorous. Even though Leica Q is slightly larger looks a million times better without this evf periscope. 130 x 80 x 93 mm vs 113 x 65 x 72 mm
HAHAHA cause there is NO PAPER and even if there is it is ALL WRONG. Otherwise please feel free to dispute mine HAHAHA, please! You said that you dont care but why you keep coming back here defending yourself. Oh you dont want to lose dont you :(? Pooooorrr you getting into this messy situation defending something you dont even understand. Did I ever mention one point about functionality or features in the first place? Oh now it will be hard to get out :(, but you know you can just disappear right?
So you have two cars, now you have three care which is a 50% increase, does it seem "slightly larger"? My theory is supported BY NUMBERS. What is your based on armchair scientist? HAHAHA
Just cut that 1.2x 1.3x parts right there. Show me some REAL numbers and we will talk. HAHAHA
I don’t even use Sony nor do I hate Leica, but the original comment is biased, ridiculous, unscientific and plainly WRONG. Just because you think it is not so much doesn’t mean your idea is supported by any mean. Why people always want to defy REAL numbers are beyond me. Oh but have to admit, feel good to DESTROY another couple of WEAK minds. HAHAHAHAHA.
Since both are cylinder shape, the volumes are then:Sony: 43.2*(56.65/2) ^2*3.14=108831.2Q: 57.23*(65/2) ^2*3.14 = 189813That is 1.744105 times So of course in total Q/Sony = (372000+189813) / (213402.81+108831.2) = 1.743Even if you change the diameter of the base to be 1/ 2.8 for the Q and the diameter to be 1/ 2.1 for the Q, it is still 1.58 times more volume than the Sony. Ok now toss in EVF (look up to see how small the EVF is) , error margin etc… let say I am off by 0.2 (WIDE WIDE WIDE margin), the Q is still 1.38 to 1.54 more bulky than the Sony which make it HARDLY “slightly larger”. People always use “estimation” and personal biases on this board.
Alright I don’t even know why I feel the urge to reply to posts like this. I think it’s just my ego kicking in. But again this reminds me of how I should NEVER make any comment on this board, it is just plainly a big waste of time dealing with s****d people.http://camerasize.com/compare/#638,6251, The bodies:The thickness of the base of the camera is roughly 1/2.5 (72/2.5) for the sony and 1/2.6 (93/2.6) for the Q compared to the total thicknessWhat are the volumes then:Sony: 28.8*113.3*65.4 = 213402.81Q: 35.76923077*130*80 = 372000That is 1.74 times 2, The lenses:Of course the thickness for the lens is the rest of the total thickness. These will be the heights in the volume calculations:Sony = 72 -28.8 = 43.2 Q = 93 – 35.756 = 57.23In addition, the lens diameter is roughly half the width of each camera:Sony: 113.3/2 = 56.65Q: 130/2 = 65
Mass * thick? What measurement is that? hahahahaha. Just stop there please. You can't deal with height*width*length and now you change to mass * thick? Give me a break.
And even if it is 1.5. it is 50% - see my original point: It is hardly "only larger". I don't even bother to point out the fact that the evf box take a lot less volume than that because you are multiplying the width and length of the camera base to it.
uhm.... do I need the EVF to shoot?
1, Lol these cameras are not three-dimension box-shaped. What are they then? A line?2, I don't go by "much", I go by number. If you omit the lens on the Q to make it smaller, omit the lens on the RX as well. Now who is misleading here? 3, I am not debating the functionality, big hands and small hands , I am merely talking about size only. Who is more accurate here? 4, Give me a break. How big is that evf when extended out? Oh let me use your phase "slightly larger"? Which claim is more ridiculous?
Quite a misconception that the Q is "only" larger. You are considering things in one dimension. What you have to understand is the difference here needs to be aggregated through three dimensional difference:
130 x 80 x 93 /(113 x 65 x 72) = 1.82 or 82% more
The Q is almost twice the "bulkiness" of this RX.
brycesteiner: What's for Dinner?
We are just serving yesterday's tuna casserole left-overs. It's still tasty right?
Nah last year's tuna you mean?
Everlast66: Which stock exchange are Sony listed on to open a long position?
... and maybe a short for Canon ...
Meh, if analysts/investors know anything about camera, Canon's stocks should be on fired sales now. Short positions would be too expensive. Getting some Sony's calls to catch the market's inertia would be superb.
justmeMN: OM-D E-M5 Mark II 417g (Body only).
Canon SL1/100D 370g (Body only).
Canon T6i/ 750D 510g (Body only).
Nikon D5500 420g (Body only)
Nikon D3300 410g (Body only)
Plasticky low tier bodies vs premium top of the line magnesium alloy bodies. Nice comparison.
tkbslc: Why does it make so many FF shooters angry when people using cameras with smaller sensors have access to nice lenses that they can use to make good photos? Is it some kind of defense mechanism so they can feel better about buying FF?
A paltry 8 elements in 5 groups with a design from 1993 and a new 2015 lens with 17 elements in 15 groups including a load of expensive elements (1 aspherical, 3 super ED, 2 ED, 1 super HR, 2 HR lenses...). No weather seal either. In term of light gathering also more than one stop faster (and I wont go into how big and heavy Nikon bodies are to save you some faces).
Equivalence in term of construction indeed...
And your tone is way off. Instead of being considerate (as you claimed), you have to laugh off and highlight every single LARGER, SMALLER and HEAVIER words. Yeah what a way to be polite and constructive.
M43 is not just about LIGHT, it is about VERSATILITY.
Terry Breedlove: Ok so 50 MP is cool for some but way over kill for most. It just seems that Canon and Nikon are still in the megapixel wars when other companies such as Olympus and Sony are innovating and producing new cameras chocked full of technologies most of us really want and need. The two big boys at the top are living in yesterdays reality building boring plastic bubble cameras.
@Turbsy:A NEW gimmick that works.@ Plastek: yeah so late Canon did not even have it. Although everyone can already see how good that gimmick is for landscape. OH WAIT! I thought this canon is about landscape!
Meh camera at best.
aris14: Heavily overpriced.
"Pro" Lol :))
RaghavBaijal: What I find a bit worrisome is NOT that it is lagging behind the current competition in IQ, but the fact that Canon users will have to contend with this for the next 5 Years!! At which point I am guessing that even M4/3 sensors will perform much better than this perhaps even in the High ISO department.
Fact is, M43 already outperforms this outdated sensor. Check on DXOmark
Daniel L: Just a reminder to the toddlers here
With or without WIFI/4K/touchscreen. The price point is $1,799, you can't afford it anyway. Go play with your cellphone and call mommy for monthly allowance while you at it.
Strong talk heh? My MONTHLY salary makes this looks like a TOY. How rich are you big mouth?
Edit: still not buying this toy anyway, this thing deserves to be in the TRASH bag together with Daniel L.
Zvonimir Tosic: First the amazing GX7, now LX100. This is brilliant; real thinking outside the box.
Haha, yeah sure. For a product this inferior it's only place is in the pocket. Why hide this Pana beast under any pocket. It should be on my neck all the time.
Feel so amused when you dare to call my whole list a laundry and offer pocket-ability as the only difference when the difference in volume is a mere 22%. My pocket cover that 22% so easy but I don't even feel need to hide my Pana beast. I guess some others do though. Period.
Win by a landslide:+ Aluminum v. Magnesium alloy + More range, bigger sensor, more DOF control+ 25 v. 49 focus point + viewfinder 1.4M v. 2.4M 0.59x v. 1.39x+ ready for this? 1/2000 (pathetic) v. 1/16000+ 10fps v. 11fps+ no touch screen v. touch screen+ HD v. 4K+ Mono speaker v. Stereo speaker
So for being a bit bigger and $100 more, you WIN BIG.