It is the lens, eg it has distortion and does not cover the full sensor (dark corners at f8). I saw this with Canon g7x and but that is much cheaper P&S. Check the dpreview first impressions on lens performance:
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/leica-q-typ116/7
"Lens sharpness is impressive even wide open, and appears to reach peak sharpness in the center around f/4 to f/5.6. But even by f/2.8, you're most of the way to the sharpness of f/5.6.
Even wide open, the resolving power of the lens is enough to induce aliasing with the AA-less 24MP sensor. Corners, however, are notably less sharp wide open compared to the sharpest they get - at f/5.6. What's particularly interesting is that corners never quite sharpen to the tack sharp levels of sharpness achieved by more centrally-located objects. We have a feeling part of this is due to the mandatory distortion corrections applied to the Raw file by ACR. We took a look at the uncorrected Raw in
RawDigger, and sure enough there's a good deal of barrel distortion that requires correction for a proper, rectilinear image. This correction of distortion requires stretching of the image at the edges/corners, which requires resampling of pixels, ultimately leading to some sharpness cost. Still, performance is rather spectacular across most of the field, and the small cost in edge/corner performance is - we think - is only likely to bother the most discriminating of pixel-peepers. It's also worth noting that optical correction of distortion in-lens would likely have increased the size/bulk of the camera and, furthermore, wouldn't necessarily guarantee sharpness benefits at corners. In other words, every introduction of an optical element has pros and cons."