索尼相機鏡頭評測 徠卡q3對比索尼a7cr 區別沒你想象的大

Hey, what's up guys. Alex here with a new video. And today we have a real fun comparison between the brand new Sony A7CR and the brand new Leica Q3. I've owned both these cameras since they launched, and I've really fallen in love with both these cameras. They're great full-frame compact cameras that can do so much. But is one better over the other? If you're in the market for the Q3, should you consider the A7CR, or vice versa? Let's find that out. If you're new to the channel, I am a photographer based out of Miami, Florida, and I primarily shoot with Sony and Leica. Like I mentioned, I've owned these cameras, and I've purchased both these cameras with my own money, and this video is not sponsored whatsoever. For this comparison, I wanted to make it as similar as possible, and I decided to use the Viltrox 28mm F1.8 lens with the Sony A7CR, since it matches the 28mm focal length, and it's pretty close with the aperture. The Q3 is at 1.7, so 1.7 to 1.8 is very minimal. As far as the 28mm focal length, you really only have two options on Sony, and that is this Viltrox F1.8 and the OG Sony 28mm F2 lens that came out almost 10 years ago. So your options are very limited, and I am using the Viltrox for this comparison. Now, if you saw my previous video on the Sony A7CR, I prefer to use that camera with the Sigma 50mm F2, but check that video out if you want to see more about that lens and that combo. So, I'm going to cover price, I'm going to cover build quality and ergonomics, and then I'm going to cover the most important one, image quality, and then we'll find out if there is a winner in this comparison. So let's go ahead and get to price. So the Leica Q3 comes in at $6,000, and it is a full-frame body with a 61MP sensor and a built-in 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. This camera is packing quite a punch, it also shoots in 8K for video, and it has Leica's triple-resolution technology, which means it can shoot at full-resolution 61MP, it can shoot at medium-resolution 36MP, and small-resolution at 18MP. That makes this camera extremely flexible when you look at file sizes, image quality and all the features it has. At $6,000, even though it is a really good kit, it is on the pricier side. Now for the Sony A7CR, the camera comes in at $3,000, and the Viltrox 28mm F1.8 lens comes in at $380. So that is $3,380, and almost half of what the Leica Q3 costs. The A7CR is also a 61MP full-frame sensor, that also has triple-resolution technology. It's a little different, though. You have 61MP, you have 26MP, and then you have 15MP. So it's not like-for-like, unless you're shooting in the full-resolution mode, but it also does have that triple-resolution technology. Now the Sony is an interchangeable lens camera, which means it doesn't have a lens built-in, which also means it has IBIS, or internal body image stabilization, to keep your shots nice and steady. It only shoots in 4K, not 8K, but it does have a full set of features, as far as S-Log goes and everything Sony provides. The Leica does beat it in video features, from a Kodak perspective, because you can shoot up to 8K, but the Leica does not have any inputs for microphones, and the Sony does. So it really is kind of awash in features. From a photography perspective, they are almost identical. As a matter of fact, if money is not an object, pairing these two cameras could be the ultimate compact kit. But when it comes down to pricing, the winner here really is the Sony. At half the price, you can't argue with $3,000. It's a lot of money, and you are getting almost like-for-like features. But what about build quality? Are you getting inferior build quality in ergonomics? Let's go ahead and look at both these cameras. The Leica Q3 is made out of a metal body. It's extremely lightweight. As a matter of fact, it's deceivingly light. You would never think a camera of this nature would be this light, but it is. It still feels very sturdy. The Leica Q also has weather sealing, so I've seen people use this in heavy rain and all kinds of weather conditions, and the camera has survived. I also do have to note that this lens does have image stabilization, and it does have a macro feature, so when you look at the Q3's build quality and ergonomics, this kit is really awesome. I will say the camera is on the smaller side, and for someone like me with larger hands, I do add a thumb grip and an additional grip to make the camera comfortable. Looking at the Sony, I'm not sure what this camera is made out of. Probably some type of composite, maybe mixed with metal. It's hard to say, but the camera does feel sturdy. Nothing about this body feels cheap, and I'm actually pretty surprised by the build quality of this camera. As far as weather sealing goes, I couldn't find anything from Sony's website that states what kind of weather sealing it has. I think the Leica here does have an advantage, because you also have to pair a weather sealed lens if this camera is weather sealed to make it a full weather sealed body. This Viltrox 28mm isn't fully weather sealed, so having this combo in the rain, probably not the best idea. Again, from a build quality perspective, I think both are absolutely great, but if I have to pick one, I'm going to pick the Leica. It just feels more premium, it feels better put together, and that's because the lens and body are part of one kit. With the Sony, it's all going to depend on what kind of lens you have, and when you compare this Viltrox 28mm lens from a build quality perspective to the Leica, there is no comparison. The Leica is also significantly smaller and lighter. That's because, again, when you design a camera with one lens, you're able to shrink the components. For example, the Leica has a leaf shutter instead of a traditional shutter, because it only has to work with this lens. The Sony, on the other hand, is interchangeable lenses, which means it has to be a little bit bigger, and it just compromises the sturdiness of the camera, and introduces different variables when you factor in what kind of lens you're putting on. Again, there's nothing wrong with the Sony. It's absolutely great, but I have to pick a winner here, and the winner in build quality is going to be the Leica. But what about image quality? That's what matters the most. A lot of people talk about the Leica look. Is there such a thing? I think this comparison was the most interesting, because before I did it, my initial thoughts were there was no way the Sony with a $300 lens could keep up with a Leica and a Summilux lens, which is praised. I've used this lens for years. I think it's great, but I was surprised. For this next part, I'm going to break it down into two sections. I'm going to go ahead and play a slideshow of images, see if you can tell the difference between the Leica and the Sony, and then we're going to do some pixel peeping. For the slideshow, all the images without a model in it have not been edited and have only matched white balances. They were shot with the exact same settings, exact same location, and I only adjusted the white balances so we can compare like for like. For the pictures with the model, aka my wife, I have edited those with my preset, and again, I've also matched the settings like for like, white balance I tweaked, but the preset is the same. So let me go ahead and roll the slideshow and see what you guys think. OK, let's do some pixel peeping. On the right, we have the Leica. On the left, we have the Sony. Both these images were shot with a tripod. Both have my preset, and the only difference is the white balance. I essentially try to match them as close as possible, and that is the only difference in these two images. You're going to notice off the bat that the Leica produces a wider shot, and that is because the Leica 28mm is more of a 26mm on the Q series, and the Sony 28mm we'll touch on that a little bit later in the video. But looking at the colors, I was actually surprised at how similar they are, and to the naked eye, it's kind of really hard to tell a difference. If you zoom in, they're both also extremely sharp in the center. As a matter of fact, I think the Leica is a hair sharper, but like, not drastically sharper in the middle. And the only big difference you see in this image is that the Viltrox lens has more green fringing in the background in the highlights versus the Leica. The Leica still has some green fringing, but not as pronounced as the Viltrox. Again, very surprised at how similar these images are, considering this is a $380 lens. But, these are shot wide open. Let's take a look at other images, different f-stops, and see some of the differences. Again, here on the right, we have the Leica. Here on the left, we have the Sony. These do not have any edits. Only tweak is the white balance. These are both, again, tripod shot wide open at f1.7, 1.8. Zooming in here, they're both extremely sharp in the center. What's interesting, though, is if you go to the corners, you're going to see that the Viltrox is actually pretty sharp, and the Leica is starting to smear here in the corners. Now, this is shot wide open. Let's go ahead and zoom out, and let's take a look at f2.8. Here at 2.8, zooming in in the middle, both are very sharp. Looking at the highlights, you can see that they both look very similar, and I think the biggest thing here, if you go to the left-hand corner, again, the Viltrox is getting sharper in the corners, and the Leica is still displaying some smearing. This is at f2.8. Let's take a look at f4 real quick. Here we have f4. Again, Leica on the right, Sony on the left. Zooming in, they are both getting really sharp now in the middle, and in the corners, the Leica has caught up, but it's still showing some smearing in the corners. I will touch on this in a little bit, but pretty surprised here that this $380 lens is outperforming the Leica in corner sharpness. Let's go ahead and take a look at another image. Here for this next image, I wasn't able to get them as close with the white balance, but both shot wide open here. Zooming in, and from a center sharpness perspective, they are pretty close to identical here. I'm very surprised at the Viltrox how it's able to keep up. Looking at the corners, again, this is not as obvious, but it's sharper here on the Viltrox, and it's showing some smearing on the Leica. This is at 1.7. Let's take a look at F4. Here at F4, we have the Leica on the right, Sony on the left. Zooming in, again, both are incredibly sharp. Both look pretty good, and now they both look fairly similar here in the corners, and really hard to tell them apart here in these shots. Let's take a look at a few more images. Here we have another shot of Spaceship Earth. On the left, Sony. On the right, Leica. Both shot wide open. Zooming into these images, they are both very, very sharp. They both look really good. Going to the corners, they both look good. Kind of hard to see any smearing here because of the trees, but overall, center sharpness is very, very close. As a matter of fact, here in the highlights with some of the fringing going on, you see it a little bit more on the Viltrox than you do on the Leica, but the Leica still displays it. I'm honestly so surprised here at the sharpness of this Viltrox lens compared to the Leica Q3, but this lens has its flaws, so let's take a look at them. Here we have another shot wide open, and zooming in, again, you're going to see that sharpness is, again, very similar. Very, very surprising. Now, the Viltrox is keeping up with sharpness, but where it shows its weaknesses and its price point is here in the purple fringing in the trees. You can see just way more pronounced on the Viltrox. Also, in this shot, it looks like the sun was hitting the lens in a certain way, where on the left-hand side there is some flaring going on on the Viltrox, and on the Leica, it's very well controlled. So, the differences here are more in the chromatic aberrations, the flaring, purple fringing, not necessarily the sharpness. Let's take a look at this image at f4 and then move on to high ISO. So, taking a look at this image at f4, you're going to see more of the imperfections on the Viltrox, the flaring on the left-hand corner, the flaring on the right-hand side now, versus on the Leica, it's well controlled. When you look at sharpness, you really can't complain here with the Viltrox and the Sony kit, and sharpness isn't everything, and you can see here how with a budget lens, you do get some of those imperfections and you're seeing them bright as day here in these images. Let's take a look at high ISO and see how the Leica Q3 compares to the Sony A7CR. OK. So, let's look at this final set of images, ISO 6400. Both have my preset. Again, the only tweaks are the white balance. I do have to note that I took six images with the Sony, six with the Leica. With the Sony, all six were sharp. With the Leica, two were sharp. So, the autofocus does make a big difference. Zooming in, here, I personally think the Viltrox looks sharper here in the middle, but like we've seen in all images, you can also see some green fringing here in the background in the bokeh balls, and it's more controlled on the Leica. You still see some of it here on the Leica, but it's just not as much as you do on the Viltrox. But from a sharpness perspective, I think the Viltrox looks better here, and zooming out, they both look fairly similar. The noise pattern also looks fairly similar here at ISO 6400 until you scroll down. So, when you look down at the dress, this was very interesting, and I think it's because of the phase detect autofocus. I could be wrong, but the noise pattern here in the Sony is like a checkered pattern. You can see these squares, and you see them all over, and that's a very interesting noise pattern, versus on the Leica, it's just noise, which is definitely more flattering and pleasing. I will say though, these images, if you run them through Adobe Lightroom Denoise, you can remove all that and have a perfectly clean image, and that's just the beauty of the world we live in today. So, let's go ahead and wrap up our thoughts. OK, so what did y'all think? I was actually surprised at how close this comparison was. Not because of the cameras, but because I was comparing a $380 lens to a Leica lens, and the comparison should not have been this close. The Viltrox lens is sharper corner-to-corner, and that completely just blew me away. I was not expecting that. Now, it does have more imperfections when you look at purple fringing and chromatic aberrations, but I was really surprised at the fact that the Viltrox is sharper corner-to-corner, and this is because the Leica is actually shooting a wider lens. Let me explain. Because Leica has this lens built into the body, they're also doing some built-in digital corrections. When you import these RAW files into Lightroom, the corrections are already applied. You have to use different software to actually remove the corrections to really see what the lens is doing, and this lens is by no means perfect. It's actually a bit of a wider lens, and it's corrected digitally to give you a closer-to-28mm focal length, even though it's still a bit wider, and that's why the corners don't look great. They look smeared because they're being digitally corrected. As a matter of fact, another YouTuber, I think his name is Chris Frost, which he does, by the way, incredible lens reviews, I'll link his video below, shows the true lens without the corrections. It kind of goes over all the imperfections, and it explains why this Viltrox 28mm lens is actually sharper corner-to-corner. But does that make the Sony a better kit and combo? That's where it gets tricky, and that's where it comes down to preference, and I'm going to have to use a car analogy here. So, a brand-new Tesla can now be as fast as a brand-new Ferrari. Does that make a Tesla a super car? No, it doesn't. It's a very different experience. If you put both those two cars in a straight line, both will be extremely fast, and the Tesla might win. But when you take it on the track, when you drive it, there is no replacing a Ferrari, at least not yet. And when you look at these two cameras, I like to think of that analogy, because when you look at the Leica Q3 and the kit it provides, the size to performance and the experience of using that camera, there is no comparing it. The reason why I say that is, when you take that camera with you, you're limited to a 28mm lens, and you're limited to that body. It's small, it's compact, easy to pack and take everywhere. It's a very good experience. With the Sony, you can get the same performance, but you have an interchangeable lens system. That means you can take more lenses, which means more options, which means you take away that simplicity of just taking one camera and one lens. Now, you might have more self-control than I can, and you can just take that camera with you with one lens and have the same experience. I can't. I just recently came from a trip with my Sony A7CR where I took three lenses. Why? Because I can. And that is the inherent problem with having an interchangeable lens system versus a camera with a built-in lens with limited options. It just changes the experience. Also, when shooting the cameras, they're both drastically very different. The Sony is a machine. The Sony feels, I want to say, almost ten times faster than the Leica from an autofocus perspective and from a use perspective. It feels like a computer. There's nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact, you're going to get sharper results more often. You're going to nail focus more often. You're not as connected to the camera. The Leica is a slower experience. You actually have to put some effort into nailing the shot. And it's that connection that makes the Leica experience a unique experience. I'm not saying it's better. It's a unique experience. So in this comparison, my conclusions are simple. If you want to be connected to the camera, you want a camera with one lens, the Leica is the winner. If you want the best all-round camera, the Sony A7CR is an incredible package and value and compact. And there's so many things I could add to that sentence. You won't be as connected because of just inherently a different camera, different system. But if you want to get incredible images, this camera will do it. So don't look at it from an image quality perspective. You'll be able to get the same images with both cameras. You're not going to get a Leica to get better images because that's not going to happen. You can reproduce the same image with any camera system. You're getting a Leica for the experience. And to some, that experience isn't worth it and you're not going to spend $6,000. To others, they absolutely love it and we can't fault them for it. So long comparison. What do you guys think? Let me know in the comments down below. As always, please like this video, please subscribe, and I will see you on the next one. Have a good one, guys. Peace.