edward_piercy Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 <p>Well, I've made the decision finally. My old Olympus E-10 digital being too heavy for the current state of my health, and the costs rising daily for my BW film addiction with outsourcing the lab work (I don't do wet work), I've decide that I am going to go with the new Leica D-LUX 3 introduced at Photokina.</p><p>It may be a Panasonic hardware-wise, but it has the Leica image processing, which I think will be worth the added $120 US. The Panasonic images that I've seen are great, so I imagine that the Leica images will be even better. Best of all it's small and light for me to carry, and I won't have the film expense going any more.</p><p>Incidently, the other threads here on the survival of Leica, it seems to me that Leica is playing it pretty smart acutally, so I wouldn't give them up for dead quite yet.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsimmons Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 I don't know definitively, Edward, but I think the image processing is the same for the Panasonic and the Leica. I'd do a little more research on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
len_smith Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Edward Piercy wrote: >It may be a Panasonic hardware-wise, but it has the Leica image processing, which I think will be worth the added $120 US. The Panasonic images that I've seen are great, so I imagine that the Leica images will be even better. Best of all it's small and light for me to carry, and I won't have the film expense going any more. Well Edward, it strikes me that you appear prepared to wager $120 on the idea that the D-Lux 3 has different image processing to the Panasonic version of the same camera. Personally, I would not waste my money. If you think that the Leica branding and warranty are worth $120 over the Panasonic, then that's fine. But I doubt very much that there is even the slightest difference in the image processing. Why not save $120 and buy some more memory, or a nice protective case for the Panasonic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian hilmersen www. Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 The D-Lux 3 seems nice, but I guess I will guess I will continue to use Olympus for SLRs - weather proof bodies and lenses is really nice for the type of photography I use it for. A protective case? I would save my money. Yes, it will protect - even from use! Film cost? I you develop yourself it isn't that high is it? You should remember that a removable hard drive etc quicly adds to the cost of a digital wonder. Seems like you are needing an excuse to buy the camera...IMHO that you want it, and that it will give you pleasure should be enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piotr_panne Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 As a health dividend, with the 12 rolls of quarters saved, you could work your way up to bench pressing the whole five pounds and be ready for anything Olympus throws at you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Enjoy your new camera. I am considering an upgrade to my P&S to something decent, but just to suppliment film cameras. I would pop for the Leica brand also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_stobbs3 Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 If you go through the tehnical specs for both cameras you may find clues as to how similar the image processing is. Before spending the extra money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_r._fulton_jr. Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Go for it Edward. It's worth $120 just to have a Leica. Not many will care if you have a Leica, but nobody will care about the "Panasonic". Have fun....it's worth the little extra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Edward, I've got a Panasonic LX-1 and really like the camera. The LX-2 has many advantages, where are all embodied in the D-Lux3. You'll love the cameram whichever you buy. As for the Leica vs. Panasonic debate, I don't think there's much difference. I also don't think that you get any "Leica image processing" advantage. I use Photoshop CS2 to process the RAW files, the Panasonic software was mediocre. Skip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljt Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 In Jpeg mode, the Leica versions of the cameras tweak the colour settings. I imagine they turn down the saturation, contrast, etc from the Panasonic defaults. More subtle colours. In RAW mode, there's no difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chip l. Posted September 30, 2006 Share Posted September 30, 2006 Like Skip I have the LX-1. One of the main reasons at the time the delta between the LX-1 and the D-Lux 2 was like $200. At the time I did not realize that the Panasonic had a 90 parts/ 1 year labor warranty. I did not see the value at the time for the 2 year Leica warranty and Photoshop Elements being bundled (I have CS2, and have been doing the Lightroom beta). With the LX-2/D-Lux 3, I hope that the likes of DPR will do a side-by-side comparison test of these new cameras. I would like to see what these Leica tweaks are. What would have been great is for all digital Leica cameras to have used the DNG RAW format. In the end the $100US "official" difference between these two cameras, I would go the Leica D-Lux 3. Regards, Chip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now