Leica Digilux 1

[marlof]

<a href="http://www.leica-camera.com/digitalekameras/digilux1/index_e.html">http://www.leica-camera.com/digitalekameras/digilux1/index_e.html</a><br /><br />Like Jason, I'm a big fan of digital photography. For a year or so, I've owned a Canon Digital Ixus (Elph) 300, and was very happy to use it as a point and shoot camera. It got me hooked on digital photography, and I wanted something that could replace my aging SLR (Minolta X-700) as well. For a long time I was indecisive whether to go for a digital SLR, or start with an "intermediate" camera, like the Canon G2 or Nikon 995 / 5000. I was almost certain to go Canon G2 (in fact, I advised Jason to get one before he went to Cancun), until I found out about the Leica Digilux 1.<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/leica_digilux_1.jpg" /><br /><br />[warning: thread contains 250kb of pictures] &lt;!><br /><br />As I've been a huge Leica fan for as long as I remembered, I was very interested in this camera. It offers full manual control, a very fast (and easy to use!) manual focus, next to all automatic features you can expect from a digital camera in this range. Still I was for a long time uncertain whether or not to buy this camera. The reason is that the images that were available on the web suffered from excessive noise / posterization especially in out of focus objects. Follow the discussion on <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1001">Other Digicams Forum</a> at DPReview.com and you'll know what I mean.<br /><br />In the end I decided to not trust the judgement of all the digital photography experts out there, nor the Leica lovers on the <a href="http://www.leica-camera.com/cgi-bin/site_forum_main.pl?3">Digital Forum</a> on the Leica site, but just my own experience. That's why I waited until I could handle a Digilux 1 myself, and could find out if it was "the one for me". I loved the look and feel of the camera, and was pretty pleased with the pictures it took. I did see the noise, but only on full screen viewing. On my 1024x768 screen they looked great, and every print (both A6 and A4) looked fabulous. So yes, this was "the one for me". I've used the camera extensively during my last holidays, and was very happy with it. In a reply to this post, I'll post some pictures I made (resized to 25% of the original size, no other digital manipulating).<br /><br /><img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/digilux1001.gif" /><br /><br />For those of you who want to share my passion, you can get a Leica Digilux Pocket PC 2002 theme I created <a href="http://207.34.121.16/images/digilux1.tsk">here</a>. Have fun!

[marlof]

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Brittany_A3.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Brittany_Watermouth.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Brittany_PerrosGuirrec.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Brittany_Carnac.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Brittany_Quinoualch.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/WestKappelle_dune.jpg

http://207.34.121.16/images/bregonje/Wanneperveen_sunset.jpg

[eosd30]

... a thread I can sink my teeth into.

Yes, the Leica does look really cool! I'd sure like to see more of your pictures if you have them! I was checking out the reviews on this little baby myself a few weeks ago.

I wanted a little pocket camera that I could carry around instead of my D30 and bag o'lenses, and the Leica and G2 were pretty near the top of my list.

But in the end, you'll be quite surprised to see what camera I decided on ...

www.pbase.com/piranha/mju

I truly lust after the EOS-1D (was using a borrowed one at a party last night). There's something surreal about contemplating leaving a camera in the car and realizing that the camera cost more than the car did. 8O

Hey, Marlof, thanks for the theme, it looks great!

Vic

[st63z]

Oh man, those are some beautiful shots.

[marlof]

Vic, as always, your pictures look astonishing, even when taken with the mju. And that's what I've said for a long time: the camera is the tool, the one behind it is what makes a great picture. A good shot that has technological faults due to the camera remains a good shot. A bad shot with the best camera in the world, remains a bad shot. My opinion of course, and I'm sure many will disagree. But the main reason I've chosen the Digilux is that it felt more natural to control to me than the G2. It does have its flaws (noise, posterization, hot pixels on longer exposures), but as with Pocket PCs, all cameras do. So in the end, I went for what felt right for me. As I've taken this holiday to get used to the camera, I'll be shooting more in near future, and put them up on pbase. I'll drop you a line when they're there.

[Brad Adrian]

...the camera is the tool, the one behind it is what makes a great picture...

Not to get too deep here, but it always bothers me when somebody sees a photo of mine they like and say, "You must have a very nice camera." My response is "And do you think a typewriter would have made Shakespeare a better author?"

[Jonathon Watkins]

...the camera is the tool, the one behind it is what makes a great picture...

Not to get too deep here, but it always bothers me when somebody sees a photo of mine they like and say, "You must have a very nice camera." My response is "And do you think a typewriter would have made Shakespeare a better author?"
Yup - my response is usually, "That was a very nice meal you cooked. You must have a good oven"

I personally went for the Canon S30. It is small, lightweight, has 3 Mpixels and has full aperture and shutter priority control. It's a great little camera! :D

[Mike Temporale]

The spec's on the camera look nice. SD & MMC?

I myself picked up a Canon G1 about a year and a half ago. I love the fact that I can take the CF memory out of the camera and plug it right into my iPaq. :D

[Mike Temporale]

Oh, and BTW, that's a great Audi picture. 8) Very different approach.

[eosd30]

Oh, and BTW, that's a great Audi picture. 8) Very different approach.

I like it too! Nice car, Marlof ...

For all you guys here who're into cars and photography (like me) check out this gallery:

www.pbase.com/piranha/xtype

I was helping a fledgling car magazine out and (much to my surprise, since it was my first time at a "real" car shoot) I got some images I'm pretty happy with.

Vic

[eosd30]

Oh, and BTW, that's a great Audi picture. 8) Very different approach.
I was helping a fledgling car magazine out and (much to my surprise, since it was my first time at a "real" car shoot) I got some images I'm pretty happy with.

Incidentally, at the end of the day, the road test editors let us (the two photogs) drive the Jags back to Manila from our shoot out in the country. I got the X-type up to about 160-170 kmh before I ran out of road and had to slow down. A shame ... wanted to see if I could break 200kmh! :vamp:

It's an ok car ... if I had the money for an X-Type I'd probably go BMW, Audi or Merc though (in that order).

Vic

[Jason Dunn]

...the camera is the tool, the one behind it is what makes a great picture.

Absolutely. Technology can ASSIST the talent, but not REPLACE the talent. I'm living proof of that - I still have yet to make even ONE shot like Vic. :wink:

[ppcsurfr]

Vic is that you? Is that really you???

Anyway... The Leica really looks lovely... and for more new digital cameras... you can look at the new Coolpix cameras... the Coolpix 4500, the Coolpix 5500 and what else...

Darn... I'm still thinking of getting a Nikon D100... It looks like the price is getting more competitive.

Those are really nice photos...

ppcsurfr

[mookie123]

...uhhh....Leika.

it doesn't matter if you can take a picture or not, that thing is a beauty. Leika is the Rolls Royce of the camera. Stuff of legend.

[Jason Dunn]

http://www.pbase.com/vipermike/canon_d60_images

Oh my. 8O THOSE are stunning. Even that Clie photo brings a tear to my eye.

[Venturello]

Someone please explain me what is the big deal of these Leika camera, tastes aside. Its boxy! Me, I find my Sony DSC 75 or my father's amazing 707 more pretty than this, but tastes besides, what is the big deal?

How is the image, is it fast? I couldnt find a review in the best digicam site online, http://www.dpreview.com/, so please explain to me what is the big deal. Must be plain ignorance from me, but I would prefer this one for example:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikoncp5700/

Also, with the price of this, which I be is high, how far away would a semipro digicam, which can use real lenses (my Sony's can't, the tele and wide lenses are a joke) and must be a lot better built than prosumer models?

Best wishes all!

Juan

[marlof]

I simply preferred the Leica ergonomics, and that was my important thing. For me, the controls on the Leica feel right. With the G2, Sony S85, Sony 707, Nikon 5000 and Nikon 995 I kept trying to look what to do ( yes, I tried them all; as I said, I decided not to trust other people's opinions but my own). The first time I picked up the Leica, I knew how to handle it. So I guess the Leica developers have a mind similar to mine. (Unlucky for them!) I especially love the manual focus ring that is around the lense. I love fiddling with focus, which is the main reason I wanted something next to my Digital Ixus.

Next to that, the speed from power up to shooting is pretty fast on the Leica. And it felt more responsive when clicking "spur of the moment" pictures. Many digital camera's give this lag between pressing the button and actually shooting the picture, but it doesn't feel like that on the Leica.

It has - by rumor - the same lens as the G2 and some Sony cameras, so it's good enough, but not the Leica lens as in their rangefinders.

The Nikon 5700 looks like an excellent camera. But I have always carried a 50 mm lens, and that's it. I had a telezoom with my SLR, but didn't use it too much. I doubted for a long, long time (since my last safari in Africa) if I wanted a super zoom in my digital camera ( PowerShot Pro 90 IS, FujiFilms latest, 5700, Sony 707) but decided against it. By the time I will return to Africa I'll use my SLR zoom for closeups, or get that digital SLR in the end.

SmartMedia and Memory Stick based cameras were in the end rules out by me (although I'm a big Sony fan). I have several Compact Flash and Secure Digital cards, but would have to get all new cards when I would get one of those cameras. They had to be miles better before I'd go that route, and so far I didn't see anything that was way better.

The price of the Leica ( EUR 1100 ) was close to that of the G2 to me ( EUR 1000 ), so that didn't stop me from getting it. A semipro digital SLR like the D100 is EUR 2500 without the lens, so that would be much more expensive.

As I said: this is "the one for me". That doesn't necessarily mean it's "the one for you" too. So far I'm happy with it 'though. And the design: I love it. And as you said: that's a matter of taste. To be honest: I paid money to get this design. Getting the Lumix LC5 from Panasonic would get you the same camera, with a different design. As I'm a design nut, I wanted this one. :)

[Marcel_Proust]

"what's the big deal with leica cameras" you ask?
well, the ergonomics for one. for street photography a la cartier-bresson there is nothing better. you want the camera to be part of your body.
the lens for another. they have a very special quality. both subjectively and objectively. it is hard to take a bad picture with a leica rangefinder.
unfortunately, i was very excited about this camera when it came out, but was very disappointed on testing it. it simply does not have good image quality. poor when compared to nikons and canons in a similar price range. this is a joint project between panasonic and leica i believe, and it is a failure. i would love a quality digital leica, but they need to bring their usual image quality to it before putting their name on it. it is pretty though.

[lawnman]

Me and my lowly Canon S330 digital elph bow to the photo gods :lol:
It doesn't have the specs of the other camera's mentioned but it sure does take nice pics when the taker manages not to screw it up.

[Venturello]

Thanks for the EXCELLENT answer Marlof, quite good points you made. I love Sony also, and I am married to Sony for now, since we have tons of memory sticks and accesories between me and my father. Right now what I hate the most about the Sony's we have is how badly suited they are for that 'spur of the moment' pictures. They are SLOW! (if you dont keep them on at the time when the spur might happen). Even if you keep them on, between the time you pull the trigger and the picture is really taken, you might loose (and will many times) an unrepeatable picture. I have learned to compensate a bit, but many times you cant do anything about it.

Well, I guess its the price for a technology which is developing, and nevertheless, I still LOVE digital.

[CoffeeKid]

...uhhh....Leika.

it doesn't matter if you can take a picture or not, that thing is a beauty. Leika is the Rolls Royce of the camera. Stuff of legend.

And that's what Leica is counting on. I hate to rain on the parade here, but FWIH, Leica doesn't make the camera, Panasonic does; Leica doesn't even make the lens - it's spec'ed and "approved" by Leica. And they had a previous digicam, a complete copy of a Fuji 1.5MP camera, and AFAIK, that one didn't even have a Leica-spec'ed lens (but had a slightly Leica premium price). It flopped.

A tell tale sign for me that this isn't up to spec with anything even remotely resembling an M6 (or the new M7): the tripod mount is not lined up with the lens, and looks suspiciously like a plastic mount (I could be wrong). Why is this important? Digital cameras have one serious advantage over film (out of many advantages) for many peoples' use - panorama making. You need a tripod mount that is lined up with the lens to make them as perfectly as possible. So many digicams screw this up, even the venerable Coolpix 9xx series and the new Coolpix "prosumer" line that just came out. You'd think that if Leica was out to make a piece of digital perfection, they'd pay attention to this kind of detail.

I could say more about the Digilux; I have a good friend who's been in photography for 25 years and owns an M5 and M6TTL and we've discussed the Digilux and his feelings about it. They aren't good. But I don't want to rain on the new owner's parade too much.

It's a capable digicam from early reports. In fact, it's a very good digicam, with a well spec'ed CCD, giant LCD in the back, good viewfinder with a good range of coverage, a quality lens (rumoured to be a Canon lens, and they make some of the best in the digital business), and has that classic rangefinder design and style. Again, from early reports, it seems to rank very well with other digicams in its class.

But a premium price has been added to it just by the slapping on of the Leica name, and while some Leicaholics are lusting after it for that very reason, other long time Leica users are kind of cringing.

And of course, I don't think they'll ever figure out (or want to figure out) how to spec a cloth shutter inside the digicam :)

Mark, who is still waiting for the perfect digicam. The Nikon D100 is a good step :)

[Kre]

As for me, I wont buy another digital camera before they start shipping with Foveons new X3 processor. According to specs, its designed to bypass even film in overall quality and resolution. Of course, this is yet to be determined for sure as the verdict isnt out on that yet, but Im very eager to see how a Foveon equipped camera performs. This processor is designed to increase speed and performance by decreasing processing steps and time, increase battery life, and of course, increase resolution, color depth, and overall quality. Cant wait.

:painting:

[CoffeeKid]

As for me, I wont buy another digital camera before they start shipping with Foveons new X3 processor. According to specs, its designed to bypass even film in overall quality and resolution. Of course, this is yet to be determined for sure as the verdict isnt out on that yet, but Im very eager to see how a Foveon equipped camera performs. This processor is designed to increase speed and performance by decreasing processing steps and time, increase battery life, and of course, increase resolution, color depth, and overall quality. Cant wait.

I too have been waiting for the Foveons, but it's been a long time now, and I can't help but thinking we've got another iPix proprietary bullcrap in the making. I was hoping that Nikon might spec the chip for their D100. Perhaps they're waiting to put it in the next version of their D1 series of cameras. A D2, maybe? :)

Mark

[marlof]

And that's what Leica is counting on. I hate to rain on the parade here, but FWIH, Leica doesn't make the camera, Panasonic does; Leica doesn't even make the lens - it's spec'ed and "approved" by Leica.

Agreed so far, although Leica did help spec this camera, which helped in getting the controls there where a photographer would expect them to be. And that probably helped in getting lag time down. But Panasonic had a big vote in the design as well. I can't explain the use of SD cards any other way, and I would have preferred the use of much cheaper CF cards. But where Sony has its Memory Stick, Panasonic has its SD card.

But this is better than with the previous offerings. Those weren't spec'ed by Leica at all. It was just a FujiFilm camera with the - nice enough - Porsche design and a Leica badge.

A tell tale sign for me that this isn't up to spec with anything even remotely resembling an M6 (or the new M7): the tripod mount is not lined up with the lens, and looks suspiciously like a plastic mount (I could be wrong).

The mount is metal, as is the rest of the body. The lining up is something that I can't understand. Why don't digital camera makers just line up the tripod mount with the lens? This is an issue with many, many cameras and something that's beyond my understanding.

The Digilux 1 is not a Digital M series. People who want it for that should turn away. I would love to have a true rangefinder in my digital camera. I love the manual focus using a Leica rangefinder, but in the Digilux you end up with a regular viewer like in many other camera's.

I could say more about the Digilux; I have a good friend who's been in photography for 25 years and owns an M5 and M6TTL and we've discussed the Digilux and his feelings about it. They aren't good. But I don't want to rain on the new owner's parade too much.

I don't mind at all. As stated: I was very well aware of the limitations in this camera, and that it's not a Leica Leica, it's a Panasonic Leica. That has its downsides, but also its upside: it is more in the regular camera pricerange (as stated for me it had a similar price as the Canon G2), than in the typical Leica pricerange. I don't know if I could afford a Leica Leica Digital M series....

The Digilux 1 has advantages that still caused me to choose this one as explained above. And that's where it's different from the previous offerings. And while the Leica Digilux 1 is not a Digital Leica M, on the Digital Forum on the Leica site there are M series owners who really like the Digilux 1. But there are also M series owners who really dislike the Digilux 1. I guess it's all up to your own personal experience. That's why I went out, and tried it myself while being aware of the limitations. And that is something I would advise anyone to do: try it, and don't judge on a book by it's cover or just by what other people (including me!) say. It's too much a personal preference that causes such choices.

[eosd30]

http://www.pbase.com/vipermike/canon_d60_images

Oh my. 8O THOSE are stunning. Even that Clie photo brings a tear to my eye.

Mike Malloy is a heckuva photog and I've always liked the way he shoots. Nice guy too.

Vic

[Bob12]

Looks like a nice acquisition Marlof. Like PDAs, cameras are something that appeal to different people for different reasons. I've always preferred the SLR cameras and just acquired a Canon EOS D60. So far, I have no complaints. It shares the same lenses and flash that my EOS-1N uses so that's a plus for me.

[Jason Dunn]

As for me, I wont buy another digital camera before they start shipping with Foveons new X3 processor.

Ditto for me - I went "mid range" with the G2 instead of doing digital SLR - I'm waiting for Foveon...let's hope it's more productive than Waiting for Godot... :wink:

[CoffeeKid]

I don't mind at all. As stated: I was very well aware of the limitations in this camera, and that it's not a Leica Leica, it's a Panasonic Leica. That has its downsides, but also its upside: it is more in the regular camera pricerange (as stated for me it had a similar price as the Canon G2), than in the typical Leica pricerange. I don't know if I could afford a Leica Leica Digital M series....

The Digilux 1 has advantages that still caused me to choose this one as explained above. And that's where it's different from the previous offerings. And while the Leica Digilux 1 is not a Digital Leica M, on the Digital Forum on the Leica site there are M series owners who really like the Digilux 1. But there are also M series owners who really dislike the Digilux 1. I guess it's all up to your own personal experience. That's why I went out, and tried it myself while being aware of the limitations. And that is something I would advise anyone to do: try it, and don't judge on a book by it's cover or just by what other people (including me!) say. It's too much a personal preference that causes such choices.

Fair enough Marlof, and let me just say, thank you for taking my comments in the spirit they were intended. I really didn't want to make anyone feel down on a major purchase they made; just that I was kinda hoping for a true "M series" digital myself :) (plus, I've recently been on a tear about a major brand name (and normally very respected) in the espresso world that has been slapping their brand on inferior, Taiwanese made junk... it's still fresh in my head).

one other thing I wanted to write but forgot to in my long post... someone else in this thread said the oft heard comment "it ain't the camera, it's the guy behind the lens"...

Okay, I do believe that, but it's not that black and white. If a person isn't comfortable with a camera, or it is designed poorly, or doesn't just "fit" you right, your photos WILL suffer. So in some aspects, the camera does matter - at least its design.

You mentioned that the feel and use of the camera was very natural to you, and to me, that means even more than the Leica name on the camera - it means you have a tool that will possibly become second nature to use, or better put, part of you. The fact that it has good technical specs is a bonus.

Lastly, I also want to add that the photos were first rate!

Mark

[eosd30]

one other thing I wanted to write but forgot to in my long post... someone else in this thread said the oft heard comment "it ain't the camera, it's the guy behind the lens"...

Okay, I do believe that, but it's not that black and white. If a person isn't comfortable with a camera, or it is designed poorly, or doesn't just "fit" you right, your photos WILL suffer. So in some aspects, the camera does matter - at least its design.

I tend to agree with Mark. A good camera in good hands makes for good output. All your talent and creativity are wasted if your equipment isn't capable of letting you express what you "see" in your mind's eye.

Or maybe I'm just trying to justify another impending visit to www.bhphoto.com :devilboy:

Vic

[PBennett]

Marlof,

I, too, am in the market for a major camera upgrade (digital, that is). Your remarks, and my subsequent research, have really intrigued me about the Digilux.

I have seen some great photos posted. But, most were taken outdoors. I realize all digital cameras are at a disadvantage inside, but my question is: how good is the flash for indoor photos? And, are there lighting problems with short movies taken in normal indoor lighting?

TIA,

Phil

[marlof]

I, too, am in the market for a major camera upgrade (digital, that is). Your remarks, and my subsequent research, have really intrigued me about the Digilux.

I have seen some great photos posted. But, most were taken outdoors. I realize all digital cameras are at a disadvantage inside, but my question is: how good is the flash for indoor photos? And, are there lighting problems with short movies taken in normal indoor lighting?

Phil, in my research before buying it, I read about three flaws in this device of which you should be certain that they won't bother you in the long run before buying it:

A. The noise/posterization in out of focus objects. Many dislike it, I see it, but I don't mind. View the original size of the pictures posted on pbase (through DPreview and the Leica site you can find several Leica pictures), and see for yourself if you'd be bothered with it. Many state the quality of the pictures is obviously below that of the G2 or Nikon 5000. I think in the end, both G2 and Nikon 5000 might provide better pictures. It's just that getting to those pictures was something I didn't like too much (the ergonomics), and I loved handling the Leica. And although the G2 and Nikon 5000 might have given me better pictures, the Leica gives me pictures that are satisfactory to me.

B. The Leica has some problems in extreme low light situations. The first is that there is no autofocus assist light, which causes you to use manual focus in some situations.

In regular use (if the objects are not too close) when it's very dark and I need the flash I set the manual focus on full range (don't know the English word), and the aperture on 8.0. Then you can shut the display off, and use the optical viewer to see what you're going to shoot. The flash is good, but not great. Happily the Leica has a hotshoe, so you can use an external flash, that - through bouncing it off the ceiling for instance - can give much better results. If you plan to use a flash a lot, the G2 might be better, and that and a dedicated Canon flash would give you the best results.

One advantage of the good size of the Leica (to my hands at least) is that I've taken pictures as low as 1/10th of a second without a tripod, and they still were sharp. With my X-700 I could never go below 1/30th of a second. I've found it doable to take pictures in well lit rooms on ISO 100 settings.

I don't like the results of this camera when using it in the ISO 400 setting. It gives too much noise to my taste.

C. There are reports of hotspots (pixels on the censor that get too hot, therefor not registering the colors rights) when the censor runs hot. The reason for this might be similar as with the Canon G1 : the screen might cause hot pixels. I have had those hotspots on some pictures, but only when I had shot many shots straight after each other using the both display and flash.

As for the movies: it's ok, but most certainly not better than ok. Then again, I'm spoiled with a Canon MiniDV camera quality, and I've never seen movies taken with still cameras that I really liked. I never take movies with the Leica.

Man, I do love talking about digital cameras....

[PBennett]

I, too, am in the market for a major camera upgrade (digital, that is). Your remarks, and my subsequent research, have really intrigued me about the Digilux.

I have seen some great photos posted. But, most were taken outdoors. I realize all digital cameras are at a disadvantage inside, but my question is: how good is the flash for indoor photos? And, are there lighting problems with short movies taken in normal indoor lighting?

Phil, in my research before buying it, I read about three flaws in this device of which you should be certain that they won't bother you in the long run before buying it:

A. The noise/posterization in out of focus objects. Many dislike it, I see it, but I don't mind. View the original size of the pictures posted on pbase (through DPreview and the Leica site you can find several Leica pictures), and see for yourself if you'd be bothered with it. Many state the quality of the pictures is obviously below that of the G2 or Nikon 5000. I think in the end, both G2 and Nikon 5000 might provide better pictures. It's just that getting to those pictures was something I didn't like too much (the ergonomics), and I loved handling the Leica. And although the G2 and Nikon 5000 might have given me better pictures, the Leica gives me pictures that are satisfactory to me.

B. The Leica has some problems in extreme low light situations. The first is that there is no autofocus assist light, which causes you to use manual focus in some situations.

In regular use (if the objects are not too close) when it's very dark and I need the flash I set the manual focus on full range (don't know the English word), and the aperture on 8.0. Then you can shut the display off, and use the optical viewer to see what you're going to shoot. The flash is good, but not great. Happily the Leica has a hotshoe, so you can use an external flash, that - through bouncing it off the ceiling for instance - can give much better results. If you plan to use a flash a lot, the G2 might be better, and that and a dedicated Canon flash would give you the best results.

One advantage of the good size of the Leica (to my hands at least) is that I've taken pictures as low as 1/10th of a second without a tripod, and they still were sharp. With my X-700 I could never go below 1/30th of a second. I've found it doable to take pictures in well lit rooms on ISO 100 settings.

I don't like the results of this camera when using it in the ISO 400 setting. It gives too much noise to my taste.

C. There are reports of hotspots (pixels on the censor that get too hot, therefor not registering the colors rights) when the censor runs hot. The reason for this might be similar as with the Canon G1 : the screen might cause hot pixels. I have had those hotspots on some pictures, but only when I had shot many shots straight after each other using the both display and flash.

As for the movies: it's ok, but most certainly not better than ok. Then again, I'm spoiled with a Canon MiniDV camera quality, and I've never seen movies taken with still cameras that I really liked. I never take movies with the Leica.

Man, I do love talking about digital cameras....


I checked out the photos and they're no problem to me. From yours and other descriptions the handling, ergonomics seem well suited to my taste.

I'm not a big fan of autofocus. For some reason the camera's brain doesn't think like I do (surprise! surprise!). The reason I asked the question about the flash was my disappointment with both Nikon and Canon digital indoors. If it had a hot shoe I might be happier with them. (BTW, do you use an external flash for any of your shooting?)

I wouldn't plan to "take movies" with a still camera. (I also have a miniDV to do that). I just wondered whether the option was workable at all in those extreme situations.

Thanks, BTW, for your heads-up on the Leica. What I'm looking for is a good camera to take snaps, quick shots of people, buildings, etc and be able to pop the SD in my iPaq or Mac to either print or put on the Web.

Have a good one.

Phil

[madmaxmedia]

That's a nice looking camera, very old-school and non-digital looking. It looks like it has good ergonomics, and has some speed (shot time, power on time, fast lens.)

It seems expensive compared to the G2 though, although both look to be great cameras. If I had more money I might very well buy this Leica. If I was rich, I'd buy a D30 or D60 with the pro-level CCD, and some nice fast lenses. That would set me back 2 or 3 grand but hey I'm rich right?

As it stands in the real world, I just bought a G1 for $350 on EBay. The expensive AC adapter is missing, but I already have one from my Canon camcorder. It's also missing the 16 MB flash card, but that's a throwaway anyways.

[PBennett]

Well, after much research and thought, I talked myself into it. My new Leica should be here tomorrow. Damn things are almost impossible to find in the US (backordered from coast to coast) but I was able to find one at a discount. I'll post some more after I get to play with it.

(This is worse than waiting on a new PDA :roll:

[marlof]

So the Leica virus bit you too, huh? Please keep us posted on your experiences, I'm curious how you like it!

[eosd30]

As it stands in the real world, I just bought a G1 for $350 on EBay. The expensive AC adapter is missing, but I already have one from my Canon camcorder. It's also missing the 16 MB flash card, but that's a throwaway anyways.

Wow, that's a nice deal. I've been toying with the idea of a G1 or G2 as a backup camera to my D30 ... they use the same BP-511 battery pack and charger, they both use CF cards, and if you have a Canon 420 or 550EX flash unit, it'll work on either camera.

I realize this is more or less a Leica thread, but since we're on the topic of digital photography anyway, I'd like to share another gallery of photos that I shot just last night at a friend's place ... a mutual friend of ours wanted to put together some photos for a modeling portfolio.

It was only my second time to ever hook my D30 up to studio lights and now I'm devastated, I really want to pick up a set of lights! It just does SO much for the photo and makes the image look so professional. Sigh.

Though I've been putting away a little money towards my photo addiction, I didn't really budget for lights in the near future and I'm utterly distraught. Aaaaugh. :crazyeyes: When will it end???!

The images are at

www.pbase.com/piranha/ruby

Vic

[madmaxmedia]

Nice photo thread that has popped up here!

Anyways, congrats PBennet on your new Leica! It looks like a really nice camera, something that you would just enjoy taking pictures with.

Those are really nice photos Vic. Nice lighting and very natural shots. I normally am shooting my 1-year old daughter and avoid any flash whenever possible as it ruins the atmosphere. But studio lighting is a totally different thing...

My pics are at www.madmaxmedia.com. Many are your typical snapshots for family viewing (from Argentina), I think I'm going to split up my galleries so I can have a collection of my personal favorites. Sometimes my wife complains about the weird pictures I put up ;)

[Terry]

I recall a past PPCT where some company was working on a 35mm size digital drop in film. That (IMHO) would be wonderful. I could continue to use my Canon EOS 7 (I love my Canon) and also use the drop in with a Point and Shoot (there are times I just don't relish the idea of leaving my Canon in the car).

I pretty sure Jason was the poster of the humble device...anyone remember?

(A Foveon version with an SD card would be killer)

[Jason Dunn]

I recall a past PPCT where some company was working on a 35mm size digital drop in film.

Wow, you HAVE been reading for a long time! ;-) It turns out that 35 mm "digital film" thing was almost a hoax - the company never produced anything beyond a prototype from what I've heard.

[PBennett]

Marlof,

Just a quick note to say I received my Leica today. I have to say, you were right. After just a few minutes of using the camera, I felt that it just "fit" with my way of doing photography. The controls all were easy to use, just where I wanted them. Major camera makers should all look at the menu system. It is simple, logical (for me), and able to be used without resorting to reverse polish notation. I'm even intrigued by the manual. I could actually learn something. ;-)

Well, give me a few days out of town to play with it and I'll give you more. Remember, if I don't get a lot of work done in the new few days it's partly your fault. :-)

Have a good weekend,

Phil

[PBennett]

Marlof,

While I'm having fun becoming acquainted with my Digilux, I have a question for you. Did you get the Leica case to go with yours? I haven't been able to get a lot of info off the internet. Even my distributor said he'd seen the new boxes but hadn't taken one out. My question is: is this a "form-fitting, protection-type case" or is it the "load our camera and a bunch of accessories in with it" case?

Thanks for any info you can add.

Have a good weekend. (This is one sweet little camera)

Phil

[Terry]

Wow, you HAVE been reading for a long time! ... the company never produced anything beyond a prototype from what I've heard.

A shame...a better idea would be a replacement camera back that included the digital section...

WRT reading a long time: Too bad I haven't posted as much as I read...I'd be higher than a pupil!

[marlof]

Did you get the Leica case to go with yours? I haven't been able to get a lot of info off the internet. Even my distributor said he'd seen the new boxes but hadn't taken one out. My question is: is this a "form-fitting, protection-type case" or is it the "load our camera and a bunch of accessories in with it" case?

Yup, I have the Leica case. It's a form-fitting, low level protection case. Although the soft leather feels great, I can't recommend the case. It protects against dust and sand, but is not padded so it won't help you in case you bump into something. Next to that there are (much to my displease!) zero pockets for accessories, not even pockets for SD cards, included in the case. If size is very important, this case might suit you. I took it for carrying the camera-as-is around with me, while having a more spacey digicam case for times when I go on a field trip and would want to take many shots.

I'll take some shots of the case and Leica with my Digital Ixus when I'm home, and post them in this thread.

[madmaxmedia]

Hi Leica owners,

Unforunately my G1 has some dead pixels and I will be returning it. I have been watching very closely this Leica and the Panasonic equivalent (to save money.) I had a couple of questions-

1. How fast to power up?
2. How fast is the autofocus, compared to other digicams? I have heard that it is faster.
3. How is the shot-to-shot times? I have read that in continuous mode you can squeeze off up to 8 shots before buffer is full (at high quality JPG setting.)
4. Finally, how is the image quality at 100% viewing? Most images have looked quite good, although all those complaints about posterization, etc. have me wondering...

The Panasonic can be found for about $650, which doesn't sound bad at all for a fast handling, good quality camera...

thanks!
Steve

[marlof]

Steve:
- From switch on to ready for taking shots is 3 seconds in my unscientific test
- Autofocus on the Digilux feels pretty fast, compared to the Digitul Ixus I have. I have no other cameras to compare with.
- You can shoot 4 images in continuous mode when saving highest quality images (low compression) or 8 when in high compression mode.
- As for image quality: you gotta take a look for yourself, and don't take anybody's word on this. At the Leica digital forum, and the Other digicams forum that I pointed out in my first post you can find links to pbase collections containing full size images.

[madmaxmedia]

Thanks so much Marlof!

I have done some relatively extensive viewing of sample images. It seems that the 'perfect' camera does not exist, but for each there is a camera that is the closest.

The image quality does not look as good as the G2 to me, but still better than other 4 MP's I have seen. I see some loss of detail and a little grain, but neither is objectionable to me. Other cameras exhibit loss of detail in the form of irregular looking blotchiness that annoys me far more.

Keeping in mind of course this is at 100% viewing. I think it's important to do this when evaluating cameras, but also keeping in perspective that actual usage will be different (image reduction for web, or printing at smaller sizes.)

[Jason Dunn]

Well, FWIW, I love my G2 - very nice camera. I wish the shutter lag wasn't so slow though - I've missed shots waiting for it to "catch up" to me.

[madmaxmedia]

The G2 is a great camera if my G1 was any indication. I think if you are generally shooting landscapes, still lifes, or regular portraits, then the G2 image quality will be best (especially with ISO 50 and excellent RAW mode.) Looking at sample pics it is definitely the best (in my eyes.)

But the best way to describe my own usage would be similar to 'street photography'- moving subjects, variable light, brief shooting opportunities. For this type of photography I think the Leica/ Panasonic will work best. I feel Leica/Panasonic did a great job in tailoring a camera for this type of usage. Almost every other camera I have considered has fallen short in one significant way or the other (typically a slow F2.8/f4.5 lens that prevents low to moderate light photography.)

[Jason Dunn]

Good point. As always, pick the right tool for the right job. Unless it's a Palm...unless that job is hammering nails. But I digress... :lol:

[madmaxmedia]

This is very interesting. It actually jives with my impression that the Panasonic/Leica noise looks different to me than most digicam noise. It's monochromatic, almost like film grain and relatively acceptable to my eyes. Most digican noise (especially high ISO noise) consist of color noise that is very distracting to me. Combine a low-light shot with red, green, and other color noise and the result is not good.

I don't know if I buy their explanation, but anyways...

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1001&message=3098293

---
Thank you for your e-mail. Our technical staff has advised that information
has appeared on various web sites regarding the image quality of the DMC-LC5
still photos when viewed at 100% size on a computer screen.

The concern centres around the fact that some parts of the picture
occasionally contain what appears to be noise, making it appear "posterized"
or "solarized". This is evidenced by a granular appearance on the surface
of a photo being shown on a computer monitor, occurring occasionally in
areas with mild colour transitions, mild contours, or three-dimensional
attributes.

This granular appearance is similar to what would appear on larger prints
from analog film. This information is very important for the expression of
depth and surface character --> the three-dimensional appearance of a
printed photo. This three-dimensional quality is not typically
characteristic of most Digital Still Cameras. The reason for this is that
most Digital Camera manufacturers optimize their picture quality for
two-dimensional viewing on a computer screen. Thus, they look good on the
computer screen, but may lose some of their depth and surface detail when
printed. The Lumix picture, on the otherhand, is optimized for print
quality and attempts to recreate the photographic characteristics of film,
and as such, contains this information that may look strange on a computer
screen, but contributes to its excellent print quality. We feel that it is
much more important to focus on print quality, rather than on-screen
quality, since people want to print high quality photos from their Camera.
The on-screen photo is usually used for viewing and e-mailing, where high
picture quality is not the primary concern, and is not even achievable on a
monitor.

Please be confident that these "artifacts" that occasionally appear on the
computer screen are not noise or compression artifacts, and do not show up
in the printed photo. They are an important part of the image data,
responsible for mild colour and contour changes that provide the printed
image with its excellent detail and three-dimensional characteristics. And
even when this phenomenon occurs on-screen, the printed photos look great.

In addition, please keep in mind that a number of these on-line reviews are
done by people who have never actually used the cameras and are based on
images they have downloaded over the net, often a degraded image quality.
Serious photographers do not take these reviews seriously since they feel
that photo quality should only be judged on photos, not on computer
monitors. We encourage you to view a printed photo, or better yet, one that
has been developed, before judging image quality based on what you see on a
computer screen. Many of our retail dealers can show you printed photos
from our Camera.

We hope the above information is helpful to you.

Sincerely,
Customer Care Centre
Panasonic Canada Inc.

---