chazzzzy
Newbie
I don't think Charlie is allowed to post pictures from the M8.... something to do with Non-Disclosures and all... part of the agreement when accepting a camera prior to its release.
Matthew Runkel
Well-known
I LOVE IT! I had been pretty convinced these were authentic posts but was still waiting for Sean to come through on his promise to explain why they were not "pitch-perfect," as I had pronounced them. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=397040&postcount=186 The bottom line for me was that anyone motivated to spoof this little community would be too much of a goofball, frankly, to put together a convincing fabrication, let alone one that could fool the forum's owner.
Now I think I'll look into tickets for the upcoming concert in Seattle . . . unless someone cares to propose that there is no upcoming concert
Now I think I'll look into tickets for the upcoming concert in Seattle . . . unless someone cares to propose that there is no upcoming concert
Ascender
Established
More Opinions
More Opinions
Hi MelanieC and Rover.
I do indeed have the D-Lux3 which I was going to put on ebay but since changed my mind. It’s a great camera to use and having that 16.9 ratio certainly is a novelty and makes for some really nice compositions. I don’t know why I wasn’t that overly impressed with it though, I guess I’m a culprit/victim of pixelpeepers anonymous! I did have the LX-1 for a day or so and sent it back because it was really unacceptable in terms of it’s ungodly noise levels. Now if the question you are asking is does the Leica version warrant the extra $200 or so, is it that much better in terms of image quality and the aforementioned? You’ll have to be the judge of that so I suggest you get to a dealer and stick an SD in and see for yourself as I don’t profess to be any kind of expert. I will say though that I go through point n shoots like people go through bowls of ‘cheerios’….well not quite but you get my meaning. The point n shoot that I keep coming back to is the Canon SD700IS. It is just such a brilliant little performer not just in terms of it’s noise level control but also things like shutter lag or in this case…lack thereof. The only problem is that it’s well…….a Canon and there is about as much identity in owning one of those as there is in eating McDonalds. So I keep trying to find alternatives. One camera I really did like and you might want to consider is the Leica C-Lux1. It truly was a pleasure to use and I’d still be using it if it weren’t stolen from a friend who was ‘loaning’ it. I think the golden number in terms of pixels on that size sensor is between 5 and 6. Which is sort of the reason I’m none too impressed with the 10mp D-Lux3 and LX1 respectively.
I’ve noticed that as the MP count increases, so does the shutterlag and to tell you the truth, I find that more annoying than digital noise which can more or less be dealt with in the post.
The bottom line is that both the D-Lux3 and the LX-1 are noisy and don’t really give you that much better images than a 6 MP camera worth it’s salt from any manufacturer (bar Samsung and it’s appalling NV series…what a shambles and what a shame…could’ve been somebody great). So it’s really about the picture taking experience, that said I will keep the D-Lux3 for it’s style and confidence that it instills. Also you cannot beat that wonderful 16.9 aspect especially in movie mode which I use a lot with the kids.
I hope this helps some.
-Charlie
PS, I also have a Ricoh GRD and it is a superb camera albeit somewhat limited for some by it’s fixed 28’. I went to Germany and brought back a bunch late last year for some photographer friends and we all loved it. Problem for me was that it was a little on the big side and more importantly had a crap movie mode. Nonetheless it is a great and very rewarding camera.
More Opinions
Hi MelanieC and Rover.
I do indeed have the D-Lux3 which I was going to put on ebay but since changed my mind. It’s a great camera to use and having that 16.9 ratio certainly is a novelty and makes for some really nice compositions. I don’t know why I wasn’t that overly impressed with it though, I guess I’m a culprit/victim of pixelpeepers anonymous! I did have the LX-1 for a day or so and sent it back because it was really unacceptable in terms of it’s ungodly noise levels. Now if the question you are asking is does the Leica version warrant the extra $200 or so, is it that much better in terms of image quality and the aforementioned? You’ll have to be the judge of that so I suggest you get to a dealer and stick an SD in and see for yourself as I don’t profess to be any kind of expert. I will say though that I go through point n shoots like people go through bowls of ‘cheerios’….well not quite but you get my meaning. The point n shoot that I keep coming back to is the Canon SD700IS. It is just such a brilliant little performer not just in terms of it’s noise level control but also things like shutter lag or in this case…lack thereof. The only problem is that it’s well…….a Canon and there is about as much identity in owning one of those as there is in eating McDonalds. So I keep trying to find alternatives. One camera I really did like and you might want to consider is the Leica C-Lux1. It truly was a pleasure to use and I’d still be using it if it weren’t stolen from a friend who was ‘loaning’ it. I think the golden number in terms of pixels on that size sensor is between 5 and 6. Which is sort of the reason I’m none too impressed with the 10mp D-Lux3 and LX1 respectively.
I’ve noticed that as the MP count increases, so does the shutterlag and to tell you the truth, I find that more annoying than digital noise which can more or less be dealt with in the post.
The bottom line is that both the D-Lux3 and the LX-1 are noisy and don’t really give you that much better images than a 6 MP camera worth it’s salt from any manufacturer (bar Samsung and it’s appalling NV series…what a shambles and what a shame…could’ve been somebody great). So it’s really about the picture taking experience, that said I will keep the D-Lux3 for it’s style and confidence that it instills. Also you cannot beat that wonderful 16.9 aspect especially in movie mode which I use a lot with the kids.
I hope this helps some.
-Charlie
PS, I also have a Ricoh GRD and it is a superb camera albeit somewhat limited for some by it’s fixed 28’. I went to Germany and brought back a bunch late last year for some photographer friends and we all loved it. Problem for me was that it was a little on the big side and more importantly had a crap movie mode. Nonetheless it is a great and very rewarding camera.
MelanieC
Well-known
rover said:That is how you got Joe to buy that make-up bag. I am on to you, I will be a much tougher sell.
Au contraire. I tried to warn him. If I remember correctly, this is the photo I posted:
It's not my fault he decided to buy the thing after that.
I can assure you that the D-Lux 3 looks nothing like a makeup bag.
Ascender
Established
Let it go Iπakl, posting the images ain't gonna happen. Mathew, if you really want to come to Seattle consider yourself my guest. Give me your name and the name of whoever you want to bring and there will be tickets left at wiil call.
-Charlie
-Charlie
R
Rich Silfver
Guest
Ascender said:
The EXIF data on the photos showed that they were taken today, the file names are Charlie... and they are posted on the seal.com site
Somebody, hopefully Sean, tell me how this is part of the hoax?
If it is I must say my hat off as it's very well done.
ffttklackdedeng
Registered User
Ascender said:
Since the Leica support was not able to confirm that the Panasonic underwater case would work with the C-Lux1 back then, I went with the Pana FX-01 - so maybe the numbers are a little different to the C-Lux1. Anyway my comparisons came to ca. 4MP real resolution at 100ISO, 2.5-3MP at 200 and ca. 2MP (!) at 400ISO. The image stabilization helps a lot, so it stays set at 100. It's a joy to use, nevertheless.
marbrink
Established
Melanie,
I wouldn't recommend the D-Lux 3. There's some very aggressive noise reduction with JPEG's. Yes you can shoot RAW but it's probably the camera with most noise out there. It doesn't look good. There are better compact cameras. Panasonic totally killed the camera when they stuffed 10mp in that tiny sensor when even 8mp was too much. It's a shame they didn't keep it at 5 or 6mp. They could have made a beautiful camera because the body and the lens are very good.
I'm so tired of all this marketing mp crap.
I wouldn't recommend the D-Lux 3. There's some very aggressive noise reduction with JPEG's. Yes you can shoot RAW but it's probably the camera with most noise out there. It doesn't look good. There are better compact cameras. Panasonic totally killed the camera when they stuffed 10mp in that tiny sensor when even 8mp was too much. It's a shame they didn't keep it at 5 or 6mp. They could have made a beautiful camera because the body and the lens are very good.
I'm so tired of all this marketing mp crap.
I have to find a little digi elf to play with. It may not be sexy, but worth the look it sounds like.
SnapperJ
Established
Hello Charlie
I would be interested to know about your photography interests, what type of subjects do you like to shoot and are you able to wonder about taking photos like the rest of us or are you dogged by “Cockroaches”?
I would be interested to know about your photography interests, what type of subjects do you like to shoot and are you able to wonder about taking photos like the rest of us or are you dogged by “Cockroaches”?
iñaki
Well-known
Ascender said:
Don´t worry, I thougt the problem was with the firmware not being final, but if you are not allowed to post I understand it.
Ascender
Established
rxmd...
rxmd...
this isn't some kind of game that I want to continue. This is an attempt to exchange user opinions of matters of interest which are being hampered by people doubting other peoples integrity. As for name dropping, that's the second time someone on this forum has accused me of that. I was wondering, don't the socalled names that one drops have to belong to those more famous than ones self? If I was going to drop names mate, I very much doubt whether it would be of those belonging to people in the photgraphic industry. Don't be a fool, you cannot drop names if people keep picking their business cards back up and handing them to you.
-Charlie
rxmd...
this isn't some kind of game that I want to continue. This is an attempt to exchange user opinions of matters of interest which are being hampered by people doubting other peoples integrity. As for name dropping, that's the second time someone on this forum has accused me of that. I was wondering, don't the socalled names that one drops have to belong to those more famous than ones self? If I was going to drop names mate, I very much doubt whether it would be of those belonging to people in the photgraphic industry. Don't be a fool, you cannot drop names if people keep picking their business cards back up and handing them to you.
-Charlie
Last edited:
cobalt
Newbie
Hello Charlie,
your input is very much appreciated. Please don´t let the rude people here get to you.
A Leica camera is such a beautiful well made tool, it is such a joy to be able to share the excitement.
your input is very much appreciated. Please don´t let the rude people here get to you.
A Leica camera is such a beautiful well made tool, it is such a joy to be able to share the excitement.
Sparrow
Veteran
Is it making sense now?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
You mention Leica employees with their first name, insinuating that you know them quite well; I guess being a Leica employee involved with M8 development does make a person more "famous" in a way within the Leica fan community. And you mention a number of celebrities, who don't belong in the photographic industry per se. I don't know why you mention these people, of course, but I guess your criteria are met.Ascender said:
Incidentally, I don't think they have to be more "famous", I guess it's sufficient if they are somehow significant in a context; after all this kind of a rhetoric device is usually employed to underline one's own position. It also doesn't change much with who does it.
Fine with me.Ascender said:
Philipp
Last edited:
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
He is.rover said:
He is.rover said:
I guess I was a bit oversceptical. Sorry if I offended anyone.
Philipp
Ascender
Established
You know what is so truly amazing about all of this? It is that Sean is so pathetic that he still insists on holding on to this hoax theory. I mean, what on earth have I to gain by saying I have an M8 if I didn't? Are you that sad a human being that you honestly think that another person would get their kicks by making up a stupid hoax about a CAMERA!!!! A woman perhaps but duuuuude...... a camera? So I've posted the pictures and you are indeed such a loeser that you cannot be gracious in defeat and let it go. You still feel the need to talk about some "hoax" theory ike you're the FBI or something. Sean, dude..... get a life!! Please for your own sake. Or maybe it is I who needs to stop waisting my time and leave you all to it. Go write about a camera that you don't even own Sean... you just do that and be happy with your hoax theories. I'm off, I've had it.
OK, let's get some perspective back here.
Enough with the who is who has what. I have an M3, so what.
Sean has not been around to see the "pudding" so to say, so I think we have to hold off on the "holding on to the hoax stuff."
And RJ, take a break.
My goodness.
Deep breath, I have had my coffee now.
Good Morning everyone.
Enough with the who is who has what. I have an M3, so what.
Sean has not been around to see the "pudding" so to say, so I think we have to hold off on the "holding on to the hoax stuff."
And RJ, take a break.
My goodness.
Deep breath, I have had my coffee now.
Good Morning everyone.
Hey Charlie, do you ever wear glasses? How visible are the framelines in the M8? 35 and 28mm lines visible with and without the specs?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Keith novak said:
Obviously this flipant ode was a trifle premature ... please allow me to retract it ... for now! :angel:
-------------------------^---------^---^---^---^---^---^