D-Lux 4

<p>before anyone asks yes, I've checked the archives. Has anyone had a bit more experience by now with either the D-Lux 4 or the LX3 because I want to get one but I'm wondering if there's another difference apart from the price. Also as I like to have a viewfinder are they any good?<br>

Advice appreciated.</p>

<p>Hi Ton,<br>

As I liked a lot shooting with my wife's D Lux3, now I've got the D Lux4, titanium coloured. I know price is higher than the black version, but when you look at the D Lux4 case prices, this coloured version has its own case included. And its a very nice compact camera.<br>

I bought it last friday, May 15, 2009. Hope to put a few images on my gallery soon. What drived my attention on it was the wider lens face to the D Lux3, a real improvement, I don't need a bigger zoom range.<br>

I'm not going to buy the viewfinder as I find it too expensive and obtrusive. My option will be the flash, have already ordered it.<br>

Cheers,<br>

Jose</p>

<p>Ton,<br /> <br /> those cameras are gems. Call me a snob but I mainly bought the D-LUX for the design ;)</p>

<p>However, from what I have read online, the JPEG conversion works better on the D-LUX 4. Only having one of the two (and not knowing anyone with th LX3), I cannot really compare, and I mainly shoot RAW. The LUX comes with a version of Capture One, which was helpful because the RAWs were not supported by other software initially - I think OS X still does not support it.</p>

<p>As for the viewfinder, it was too expensive for me, but I have toyed with an ldl Yashica Electro one and if you shoot wide angle, it helps. I may want to get the Panasonic view finder in the future.</p>

<p>Another great feature (I think) is the flash hotshoe. The little pop up flash is pretty useless, but I attached my Nikon speedlight to it, bounced it and that works (obviously not in TTL)</p><div></div>

<p>Differences, apart from price, are the in-camera jpeg processing, the bundled photo software, and in the U.S. at least, the warranty ... and mustn't forget the red dot. :-)</p>

<p>I realize, Ton, that you are not in the U.S. But that warranty difference may not be trivial. In the U.S., the DLux4 now has a 3 year Leica warranty (evidently extended from the original 2 year upon registration). Panasonic used to have one year parts, and 90 days labor, but now has 1 year parts and labor.</p>

<p>In the U.S. the Panasonic has evidently become a difficult camera to find. Not sure why.</p>

<p>(I have neither camera, so can't comment upon the impact of the difference in jpeg handling.)</p>

<p>thanks all.</p>

<p>as you know there is a lot of information out there as well as contradictory reviews so I'm glad to get some answers here.</p>

<p>Jose, I hardly ever use a flash so that would not be a consideration. Besides, as I understand it the D-Lux handles noise very well. Yes, the viewfinder is horribly overpriced but I don't see myself shooting photo's from a screen. The titanium doesn't do a lot for me to be honest.</p>

<p>Design can be a beautiful thing Benjamin and appreciating that is hardly snobbery. Software is not a real consideraton for me, I got everything I need.</p>

<p>Michael, the sole reason why I'm looking at these is that I want to have a P&S that shoots RAW. I bought a Nikon P5100 for my wife last year. Nice camera but no RAW. So how it handles JPEG is not really important for me. I checked though on the warranty and as far as I can tell it's three years over here as well. And yes, there's the red dot ;-)</p>

<p>While I can afford both I'm still wondering if all this justifies a price difference that's almost double. Some thinking to do I guess.</p>

<p>Ton,<br>

I have the LX3 and I like it very much.<br>

Pros:<br>

- Image quality is a lot higher compared to usual P&S cameras. The low ISO (80-100) images are comparable with the ISO 200 - 400 images of common DSLRs. Higher ISO values are not much of use. Still, I guess you can squeeze perfect B&Ws even from its ISO 800 images.<br>

- It has almost all the manual controls one my require.<br>

- The lens is fast and is of very high optical quality.<br>

- It is really small!<br>

- Candid shots are really easy. (Just remember to make the battery saving arrangements beforehand).</p>

<p>Cons:<br>

- The controls are too small.<br>

- The mode dial turns too easily.<br>

- The LCD screen is difficult to see under sun and it makes you more noticeable. (I believe you will end up buying the viewfinder attachment because of that).<br>

- The camera grows large with an attached filter (due to the size of the adapter).<br>

- The cap is not the most ergonomically sound solution to protect the lens.<br>

- Background blur is possible only for the macro work due to the small size of the sensor. (More DOF even under low light may be plus for you, however).</p>

<p>Looking for your new images with it, if you decide to get one :)<br>

Bulent</p>

<p>thanks Bulent. I'm sure gonna get one, just haven't decided which one yet. What you say is just why I want to get a viewfinder to begin with. Also I think it will save on battery power. In this case the increase in DOF I consider to be an advantage.</p>

<p>I have the LX3. I'm not concerned about the warranty. By the time this camera is 2-3 years old, I expect to buy a better model anyway.</p>

<p>I thought I'd like a viewfinder, too. But the price was a little off-putting to me. I don't want to spend half as much again as the LX3 cost just to get a viewfinder that's only sorta right when I'm at 24mm equivalent and useless the rest of the time.</p>

<p>I'm not usually shooting with the full sun to my back. If it's sunny, I'm usually shooting somewhat into the sun. That probably helps. I haven't had a problem getting an idea of what I'm shooting by cranking the LCD brightness way up. In fact, I have that as one of the 4 saved custom modes: ISO 80 and LCD as bright as it can be.</p>

<p>ISO 1600 sucks. Even when converted to black and white.</p>

<p>ISO 800 corresponds to what I'd see in 35mm film at ISO 1600. It's usable. Much more pleasing in B&W than color.</p>

<p>I've had my LX3 a few weeks, and I'm very pleased with it.</p>

<p>I find the pop-up flash perfect to add just a little bit of fill. I'm pleased that you can set exposure compensation for the flash. I dialed mine to -1 2/3, and I'm happy.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

<p>LX3 seems to be a good all around P&S. The Summicron lens is sharp. The D-Lux 4 and LX3 controls are small and you need to make sure that they are not accidentally changed.<br /> I use the LX3 as a back-up camera and as a polaroid substitute. Most of my work with the LX3 is done with a Voigtlander 28mm external viewfinder (used). Still looking for a used 50mm VF. Here are some test shots I did during a storm yesterday and later in the evenning after the storm had passed.</p><div></div>

<p>LX3 through the fog.</p>

<div></div>

<p>After storm in evening.</p><div></div>

<p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2474/3540661173_359f18027d_o.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="450" /><br>

<strong>Old farmhouse wash basin, Hartland VT - Leica D-Lux 4</strong></p>

 

I've been looking for one as well. But as Michael pointed out, they're pretty scarce in the US, unless you want to pay way

over list. In fact, recently on Amazon, the LX3 was priced at $749 while the D-Lux4 was $699.

<p>just did a quick check. The LX3 is widely available over here with a bottom price of € 388,00 which would translate into $ 525,00.</p>

<p>The D-4 on the other hand comes to € 695,00 which translates into $ 940,00. Quite steep. Your price of $ 699,00 would be € 517,00. That are some serious differences.<br /> Thanks all. Maybe we could set up a business Brad ;-)))</p>

<p>I have the D-lux 4, for about 4 months now. After I bought it, only on one occasion did I used another camera, and that one was for the tele end of a super-zoom. That's probably more significant than any words I could use to describe how I feel about the camera.<br /> <br /> I decided to buy to D-Lux 4 over the LX3 after reading many comments about them. My overall feeling is that there are real differences but the differences were being played down for fear of being branded snobbish. Those who do own both and came out saying the D-Lux 4 was better were being roasted everywhere. I decided to buy the D-lux 4. I will not answer to any challenges on this statement because this is my own judgement.<br /> <br /> I only want to add one more thing, for your overall consideration of whether to buy it. Before I used the D-lux 4, I have used about 7 previous models of Panasonic P&S cameras, over a period of about 6 years. That means I am very familiar with the Panasonic menu system and its style of controls.</p>

<p>Thanks Nee. Stating that one is better than the other can hardly be described as being snobbish but I know what you mean. Just like you I've read many comments about them. However, these contradict eachother quite regularly. It's to be expexted of course so asking here is always a good idea.</p>

<p>The D-Lux 4 is an amazing little camera. Here is a great example of what this thing can do<br /> http://www.boxedlight.com/dlux4/</p>

<p>PS, Jim's images are all Jpegs. </p>

<p>I don't have the D-Lux 4 but I do have the D-Lux 3 which I use whenever I need a small point and shoot that I can easily conceal. I was able to borrow a friend's LX-3 though when he complained to me that it was difficult to get background blur. Playing around with it, I discovered that it's a bit similar to the D-Lux 3 especially when you want background blur. Just set it at a wide aperture, a fast shutter speed and use manual focus instead of auto. I may be wrong but I've tried it on both cameras and it works alright for me.</p>

<p>Hello Ton,<br>

I have had an LX3 for a bit over a month now.<br>

Like you, any software advantage with the Lux 4 would be lost on me.<br>

If one really wants, Panasonic sells a 4 year extended warranty for $100 so I can't see and Lux advantage.<br>

I like the little "bump" grip on the LX3...I understand Leica will sell you a grip should you so desire.<br>

Bulent, you are right about the buttons...the biggest problem..the only one I've had is with the joystick...I usually shoot in aperture priority, moderate aperture...f4. My right thumb sometimes nudges to joystick and I discover I've been at f8 (minimum aperture) for some time...often this means shutter speeds slower than I would prefer. It's something I need to keep an eye on.<br>

Eric, you are right, high ISO color is bad, B&W better...</p>

<p>Ton, I'm the guy from Street and Doc asking you about NL and Queen's Day. I'm back now. When I get my act together I plan to put a few up. Thanks for your advice. And you were so right, Bruges is an "open air museum."</p>

<p>Usually shoot RAW but here was playing with the LX3's "Dynamic B&W" jpeg mode.</p><div></div>

<p>Flat light</p><div></div>

<p>Lx-3 is a bit cheaper than Nikon D60 with the kit 18-55 3.5-5.6 zoom. Which camera will give sharper images? (a cheap zoom or summicron?) And which is better - D60 at ISO800 or LX-3 at ISO200 ? (we consider 2.8 and image stab.)<br>

I am afraid of too soft low resolution zooms like cheapest pentax and canon 18-55.</p>

 

<p>Benjamin,<br>

That SB 900 must be quite a sight on a D-Lux 4!<br>

Do you put the flash on the camera or mount the camera beneath the flash?<br>

;-)</p>

<p>I know it's a different camera entirely but purely for IQ for a compact digital, the Sigma DP-1 or the DP-2 coming out will blow everything else away. Beautiful RAW files, 12X18 prints look great, very useable ISO up to 800. DSLR size sensor in a small package.</p>

<p>Joe,</p>

<p>indeed, the SB-900 is bigger than the D-LUX 4!!! Flash was on camera. I have not repeated the exercise, but I was at a party and had both things handy. Light was dim. Have not tried the Pop-up for fill, but I will....</p>

<p>Ben</p>

<p>I've had an LX-3 for about 3 months. This was my first Panasonic, and the interface and lack of a viewfinder took a bit of getting used to. I continue to be disappointed in the lack of support for the RAW files in Aperture. As I've gotten used to the camera, though, my shots have steadily improved. I am genuinely impressed by it. It is not a replacement for a DSLR, but it's a whole lot easier to carry around when I don't want or need the extra weight. For macros, in particular, it's fantastic.<br>

For samples and info, I would check here:<br>

<a href="http://www.lx3-photography.com/">http://www.lx3-photography.com/</a><br>

Given current prices, I'd go with the Leica, as the included software is better. I paid $407 for my LX-3 when I bought it on Amazon; at that price, I don't think the additional cost of the Leica is worth it. But, that's just my opinion, and take it for what you paid for it. The most frustrating issue I've had is that I have not found that any of the accessories are available at any price (from reputable resellers like B&H, Adorama, etc.), which has been frustrating as I am interested in the wide angle converter and the case. You can always find things on eBay, but you'll overpay, and I'm not sure the sellers are always providing what they say they're selling me.<br>

In short, though, I don't think there is a bad decision to be made here. Go witch whichever one feels better in your hand or that you like better.</p>