This would make a darling street camera.
I am not convinced it is better than the original RX1 for that use. The foldable viewfinder was a good idea for the RX100 which is pocketable, but is less practical than the optional electronic viewfinder for a camera like the RX1. The added resolution will be lost most of the time because the camera is not stabilised. The adjustable low-pass filter is a strange gimmick and appear to have be invented to avoid manufacturing two different cameras.
Basically, when I see this camera (or the Leica Q), I wonder if the manufacturers actually try to use the devices they build for us. A camera with a fast lens and a 24mmx36mm sensor has only one advantage over a smaller camera like your Ricoh: one has better control of depth of field, so one can use it to the kind of pictures which benefit from depth of field control as was practiced on the original 35mm film cameras. For this, the RX1 has the perfect lens: its 35mm f/2.0 is one of the very best there is.
It has the perfect lens, but it has one of the worst ergonomics on this planet. It is almost unusable without an additional viewfinder. So what does Sony add? A
foldable viewfinder. This is not practical at all: one cannot put the camera back in the bag without folding the viewfinder, which is a flimsy contraption. You can actually see the problem on the Sony presentation: they put an extra eyepiece on the viewfinder all the time. You cannot fold the viewfinder with this thing on.
Oh: and Sony removes the flash, which was essential for fill-ins and forgets about stabilisation. I am not impressed.
As to the Leica Q, the camera ergonomics are perfect: focus, aperture, shutter speed adjustments are just as one would like them to be. But what was Leica thinking when they designed a lens with 13% distortion?
Give me the Leica Q with the Sony/Zeiss lens, sensor-based stab and make it a bit smaller and I would be interested, even at the price they want for these gadgets.