Originally Posted by rbelyell
i think what you say makes sense, but is not always that simple. if you are really into the 'style' of result you get from the m9, i would be willing to bet you will not ultimately be pleased with the 'style' result you get from the sony. ive done both. nothing beats the rx1 resolution (til now). but thats not the end of the story, at least for me. i love looking at the kind of results i get from ccd, so while it blew me away for awhile, ultimately the surgical sony resolution left me cold and i sold it. i thought it would be as you said, the last digital i'd buy. instead it just unexpectedly turned me off sony's look and told me in very stark terms what was important to me.
It is definitely possible I will like the Sony results less than those from the M9, but I do also shoot the A99 (often with Leitaxed R lenses) and like those images, so there is some hope. I think where I am more likely to be dissatisfied is with the user interface of the new Sony. At one time I thought some of the same AF wizardry would sell me on the RX100 Mk IV, but the handling left me cold when playing around with it in the shop. I would give the RX1R II more of a chance to grow on me, however.
The larger size and extra $1000 for the Q makes me think of it and the M240 / M-P somewhat as substitute goods: if I'm going to pay that much for something that size, why not go a little further in both directions and get a camera that takes all my M lenses. The Sony strikes me more as a supplemental camera. If I were to get one, I would still want to keep my other systems.