Leica SL vs Sony A7R II Side-by-Side Comparison

October 21, 2015 | Mark Goldstein | Compact System Camera | 22 Comments | |
News image

If you're interested in how much bigger the new Leica SL mirrorless camera is than the Sony A7R II, then look no further, as we've compiled a gallery of side-by side product shots of the two cameras.

As you can see, the Leica SL body isn't that much bigger than the Sony A7R II - it's the Leica SL 24-90mm f/2.8-4 zoom lens that was launched alongside the SL camera which really skews the comprison between the two systems.

A side-by-side comparison of the Leica SL and Sony A7R II cameras.

Image Gallery

Click on a thumbnail to see the full version.

Tracker Pixel for Entry

Your Comments

22 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#1 The Photo Fundamentalist

I fear Leica has focused too much on form over function here. I would be amazed if such a lack of buttons is not a major drawback for professional users (assuming they can afford it) who need to access functions quickly. It looks a bit 'boutique' for my liking and may technically perform well, but who is going to build a professional system around a camera that takes $250 batteries and with such a price on the body? I think Leica has missed a golden opportunity here. This camera is billed at having the first truly pro features for a mirrorless camera, but costs the earth and has not one single compact lens on show at this stage. Why choose this over a D810 for practical shooting, for example? That's easy to answer in the case of small, light, less expensive offerings (A7R2/XT-1 etc), but with the SL its almost impossible to do so. Dual memory card slots? I fear this will go the way of the Leica T.

12:16 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#2 steven k

I really appreciate the larger size of the SL, the price of course is ridiculous.
The Sony A7 series is amazing technology but I find it still to small in size.

I was really hoping for a new M with the EVF they use in the SL. IMHO this would be the bomb

2:34 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#3 Brian Davies

The Leica 'not much bigger than the Sony'?! I must get new glasses...it looks at least a third bigger. It's also ugly, expensive and, IMO, will pan

4:20 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#4 Gordon H

Leica keeps mucking around with camera bodies when lenses are the most important element of the camera. Leica lenses are the best ever made by anybody for almost anything

Just leave things alone.

4:26 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#5 Mike Daley

The EVF alone in the new Leica is worth its asking price. Those who complain about its high costs need a reality check. There is a reason why an ocean front mansion in Palm Beach costs tens of millions more than a 2 bedroom ranch in Dayton Ohio. There is a reason why a Bentley costs more than a Dodge Dart. Shooting with a Leica is an experience unto itself in every way imaginable.

5:46 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#6 Tim

Leica are amazing at things they make and produce.
Being a Leica M user i wont be thinking of going this route however i am sure it will be as good as other Leica Bodies and Superb Optics. Price is not debate here!

6:07 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#7 Michael Zeleny

This looks like a great complement to my S system, and a fine reason to pony up the cash for the Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95 ASPH and Vario-Elmar-R f/2.8 35-70mm ASPH. Yes, I make money with my cameras.

6:28 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#8 kak

It would have been nice to see photos with a lens attached. Photos of body only are about as useful as photos produced with body only ;) We need to see the whole package to get a true comparison.

8:58 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#9 Mike Emerson

The Leica is not much bigger that the Sony A7RII? Are you kidding? It's huge! Looks like a Fisher Price toy too. Oh dear! An expensive camera to laugh at like the Hasselblad Lunar.

9:49 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#10 Ben Woodard

Can you do a comparison of the lenses and the cameras with the roughly equivalent lenses? Like the Sony Zeiss Vario-Tessar FE 24-70 f/4 vs. the Leica Vario-Elmar-SL 24-90 f/2.8-4

10:14 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#11 YourFace

@Mike Daley - your annoligies don't really fit here IMO. Yeah shooting with a Leica, something like an M9, is truly an experience that is unique and possibly more enjoyable when compared to others. However the SL and A7x cameras really aren't THAT different according to the specs. They are in the same class, just not in the same price range. You can't compare a Palm Beach mansion on the water with 7 bedrooms and 10 baths to a 2 bedroom house in Dayton, Ohio. Not only are they in two completely different tax brackets that are further away from each other than LA is to NYC, but more likely than not a family looking to buy that Palm Beach house has completely different needs and requirements than the family looking at the house in Ohio. You can compare that Palm Beach house to a 7 bedroom house in Miami Beach though. You can't compare a Bentley whatever to a compact car like a Dodge Dart, someone looking to buy either car would never consider the other for multiple reasons, as you already know. But you can compare a Flying Spur to something like a MB S Class.

BTW have you even tried the camera yourself? Is the EVF really that good? Worth it for someone to pay more than double the A7RII, just for the EVF? Or are you saying that just by looking at the specs? IMO the EVF along with the dual memory slots, bigger battery, touch screen (although it not being "tilt-able" is a draw back for me) and possibly slightly more robust build (with emphasis on possibly and slightly) is a plus over the A7x cameras but I can't see how those 4 things alone make it worth more than double the price.

PS- before I am labeled a brand whore I would like to add that that I own an A7RII and a M9. Both of which are the perfect cameras for me depending on what I plan to do.

10:52 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015

#12 Victoria Cook-Johnson

Is there an EF adapter in the works so I can use it with my Canon L lenses in the meantime?

10:52 pm - Wednesday, October 21, 2015


Ridiculous stalinist style design

9:17 am - Thursday, October 22, 2015

#14 Joe

Camera Size got it wrong big time. They say the Leica SL Typ 601 is thinner than the Sony RX100 IV @ 39mm vs 41mm or my A7r.


11:49 am - Thursday, October 22, 2015

#15 Grappo

Hi Mark! Why shoot so close and wide? Makes proportions of both cameras look monstrous to say the least. (Which I know for a fact at least one of them is not!)

3:31 pm - Thursday, October 22, 2015

#16 Mike M

If Sony was brave enough to introduce with the A7 a 24-90mm with f2-f4 aperture we be having the same conversation about the large size of the lens. Sony intentionally produces f4 and f1.8 glass to keep the size proportional. Just look at the size of the finally introduce 35mm f1.4.

11:11 pm - Friday, October 23, 2015

#17 ric

This Leica SL is a definite failure.
(I guess SL stands for Sure Lose)
Just like the hopeless Leica T was a failure.
(T for Terrible)
The form factor is completely wrong. It is too freaking big for a mirrorless. It is too heavy.
The lens choice is pathetic and grossly over priced.
The SL body is over priced.
You already can adapt Leica R or M lenses to Sony A7 series cameras.
Cut the crap about SL being from block of milled aluminium to justify the price.

3:46 am - Saturday, October 24, 2015

#18 Rene HAZARD

I appreciate my SONY A7 with all my leica M & R lenses. I can change my body with a new Sony when a major thecnical evolution come. I don't need SL or any other expensive Leica body.

8:11 am - Saturday, October 24, 2015

#19 ken sherman

I just saw the Leica SL at PhotoPlus. It is big, heavy, ugly, ultra expensive and awkward to handle. It looks like the R-3 and feels and handles like the old Argus C-3. The viewfinder was disappointing too. I don't understand how they could get the whole design so wrong yet name it after the venerable Leicaflex SL....it's too bad that Leica has become a prestige name piece for the ultra wealthy and totally out of reach for the working photographer, even though they make the best lenses. I used to use the SL and R system with Kodachrome when it was around, getting fantastic results that ruled supreme and don't understand why they've strayed so far.....looks like the Sony A7RII still represents the better concept.

10:35 pm - Friday, October 30, 2015

#20 Luka

All Sony a7 are just sexy old fashion cameras, more like Leica M.
Leica SL is clumsy monster.

6:47 am - Wednesday, November 11, 2015

#21 Jay Dooreck

I own the Sony alpha 7R11 with a 55 1.8 a 35 2.8 and
24-70 F4 I find my quality amazingly good. What is Leica giving you but a red button on a heavy body. You carry around
the Leica with there 24-70 all day and see how your hand and back feels. I very rarely use my 24-70 only the 35 2.8!and 55 1.8 if I am doing street photography. Can you put Sony remount lens with an adapter on the Leica?

2:43 pm - Tuesday, December 1, 2015

#22 Jay Dooreck

I have the Sony A7R11 fun frame with Carl Zeiss Lens
35mm2.8,55mm 1.8 and 24-70.. fixed f4. I been thinking about getting the Leica Sl with two lens the summalix 35 1.4 and 50mm
1.4 Is there any difference in quality of the photos to warrant getting the Leica

3:57 pm - Monday, December 21, 2015