new d-lux 2 from Leica

StuartR said:
I don't know...personally I just don't get this one. It appears to be absolutely identical in features to the Panasonic model, yet it costs 200 dollars more. Is a three year warranty worth that extra cost?
Click to expand...
It might be worth it if the reliability issue of a previous Leica-Panasonic collaboration, the Minilux, is any indication. It might be best not to buy until all the kinks are worked out and the price drops (which is probably inevitable).

Richard
 
We may be making a mistake when we try to judge the output of the Leica D-Lux 2 by looking at output from its Panasonic "twin".

I would suggest that everyone interested download the two image samples from the Leica website and examine them. Photoshop tells me that the image dimensions for both are 30"x53.333". Go to "view;actual pixels", look at the dark areas and see if you can find the kind of noise seen in the Panasonic review done by dpreview.com. I can't see it.

If someone can explain the disparity I would love to hear a reason.

Download the images at:
http://www.leica-camera.com/digitalekameras/dlux2/downloads/index_e.html
 
What I find unforgivable is that Leica is prepared to put their badge on a product that is far from being best in class, like Leica Zeiss makes lenses for third party digicam manufacturers, but avoids re-branding them as Zeiss-Ikon, even if, in the case of the Sony DSC-R1, the product is probably the best in its class.
 
fgianni said:
What I find unforgivable is that Leica is prepared to put their badge on a product that is far from being best in class...
Click to expand...
Maybe Leica’s management wants to keep Leica solvent. Maybe they just want to keep paying their people instead of putting them out of work. My sense of propriety isn’t so highly developed that I can criticize Leica for that.
 
I am confused:
Unless Leica has a far better processor/chip in the Leica Model D-Lux 2 then Panasonic has in the LX 1, I can't believe that the picture on their web site was actually taken with the D-Lux, even at its lowest ISO setting.
Hard to believe that there can be that much difference between two identical camera's, even with a 2-3 hundred dollar price difference. If there is, then the Leica becomes the back up for my Nikon D2X. Someone please tell me what processor chips are used in both camera's.
 
Last edited:
I have seen results exactly the same as the leicas taken with the panasonic, there are some more samples around the internet. Anyway, I find the noise at iso100 to be a bit too much, though i do like the camera and might get the LX1.
 
zeos 386sx said:
Maybe Leica’s management wants to keep Leica solvent. Maybe they just want to keep paying their people instead of putting them out of work. My sense of propriety isn’t so highly developed that I can criticize Leica for that.
Click to expand...

Are you really convinced that selling low quality products branded Leica will help them from a financial point of view?
 
fgianni said:
Are you really convinced that selling low quality products branded Leica will help them from a financial point of view?
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that the "D-Lux 2" is a low quality product?

"As befits a camera with such a wide range of photographic options on offer, the LX1 has a fairly conventional - conservative even - design that has echoes of the rangefinder cameras of the 1950's and, dare I say it, has a touch of Leica about it. Despite its diminutive dimensions the LX1 puts a class-leading level of control at your fingertips, offering direct access to virtually every aspect of picture-taking, from white balance to ISO to shutter speeds, apertures and file size / quality. It's worth mentioning that the build and finish are fantastic, and the LX1 is a real pleasure to hold and to use."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx1/page2.asp

Until we can actually see and test the "D-Lux 2" I must accept that its Panasonic "twin" is reflective of its quality. So I have to ask - To what "low quality" Leica product are you referring?
 
The venus engine sensor II is horrible for the noise ...

The FZ20 have least noise than the FZ30...
 
My two cents here...

Back a few years ago when 5MP was king in the digicam world and I was getting ready to take the plunge, I remember much the same hand-wringing over the levels of noise in the Minolta Dimage 7i, which also had a killer lens and other features oriented towards the serious shooter. After much anguish, the guy at the camera shop where I checked it out said, "Shoot with it for 30 days and if you think it's too noisy, bring it back and not only will I refund your purchase price, I'll give you a discount on ANY camera you choose to replace it with." I took a chance and bought it.

I shot with that camera for almost four years and never once had a problem with noise at any ISO setting. Not one. Zero.

Yes, the noise from the Panasonic looked horrible in some of the test shots. Yes, there was noise in some of the gallery photos, but y'know something, the noise didn't look all that bad in the real world shots to me... kinda like the few times I used ISO 400 color film.

The feature set the Panasonic/Leica has (critical controls easily accessible and not buried in menus, image stabilization, and that gorgeous 16:9 ratio) in such a compact package is really making me look hard at this camera... and I mean seriously hard. I think this camera could be worth my hard-earned dollars come this Christmas.
 
zeos 386sx said:
Maybe Leica’s management wants to keep Leica solvent. Maybe they just want to keep paying their people instead of putting them out of work. My sense of propriety isn’t so highly developed that I can criticize Leica for that.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind both the D-Lux 2 and LX-1 are made by Panasonic in Japan.
 
Ok, I admit that the camera is a nice shooter in bright light but why pay top dollar for 8Mpixel and a Leica lens when you can't shoot in low light?
Noise reduction in postprecessing is not a problem, but you'll trade sharpness and detail for less noise, which is not a problem for smaller print sizes.
But why pay top dollar for 8Mpixel and a Leica lens when you print up to 5x7 only?

The sensor from the Fujifilm Finepix F11 combined with the Leica body, that's what I want!
 
Bear in mind that my opinion above comes from a guy who rarely shoots anything (film or digital) faster than ISO 200, so my usual working methods are built around that preference/prejudice. I'll admit the cathedral interior shot was pretty nasty, the others at ISO 400 looked OK; 200 and below seemed perfectly acceptable to me.

I wonder if the sensor itself is inherently noisy or if it's a problem with the noise reduction algorithm. If the latter, I would guess that they could address the issue with a firmware update. There's a lot of promise there and I'd hate to see them miss the mark.
 
dkirchge said:
I wonder if the sensor itself is inherently noisy or if it's a problem with the noise reduction algorithm. If the latter, I would guess that they could address the issue with a firmware update. There's a lot of promise there and I'd hate to see them miss the mark.
Click to expand...
"...at ISO 80 and 100 the results are slightly noisier than most 6 and 7MP cameras, but they also show a lot more detail and look a lot sharper, so this is probably more a reflection of Panasonic's approach to noise reduction than a serious problem with the chip."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx1/page15.asp
 
I think I will still get the LX1 to use as a take anywhere camera. I have been looking at compact digital cameras and cant find anything that seems as fun as this. I had the new minolta dimage x1 for a few days but I promplty returned it because it was one of the most unusable cameras I have ever layed hands on.


ps: here are some more shots taken with the camera, though you cant view them at 100%

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=15260303
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom