jdrose Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Hello, I have been looking at the Digilux 2 for quite a while now...from the intial release to the second hand sales on eBeware. I have noticed that most reviewers are turned off by it's high noise, sensor MP, and it's glacial RAW write speeds. You know what? Every image I have seen from this camera has been creamy, sharp, and coloful. The reviewers tend to ignore that. I saw a well-used Digilux 2 trade for $599 recently. In spite of it's technical deficiencies, would this camera be a "must have" purchase at the $500 level? --- JDR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_bretteville Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I've had mine since the beginning of March '04. The only complaint I have is the 6second save time of RAW shots. Even if the camera is abit noicy at 400 it dosen't look bad if the shot is converted to B&W. Mine is mostly stuck at ISO100 and I live fine with that. Like any tool you have to learn how it works best for you. Yes, it was expendive when new, but boy has it been fun using it. It still churns out great images and I have no regrets. At $600 is 1/3 of the original price (if I remember correctly) and that is, IMHO, a excellent image quality for your money even by today's standards. - Carl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishik_tuna Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I have a digilux 2 it creates simply marvelous images outside, in the daytime. On a tripod, it takes great pictures in low light with long exposures. Only iso 100 will produce noise free images. at iso 400, my kids canon p&s cameras take better pictures. if you take pictures indoors or in low light, forget about...shutter lag makes action photography a real guessing game. There is no shutter noise. it is essentially silent. changing iso and white balance is a little cumbersome, and you will also find that the auto-white balance is not super-reliable. forget about using the little eyepiece viewfinder, it sucks. RAW is just about unusable (the amount of time it takes to write a RAW file could be used as a test for attention deficit disorder...it is unbelievably slow). My opinion is that only a Leicaphile (a.k.a. Leicaholic) could love this camera. I plan on "gifting" my digilux 2 to my son, and maybe getting a canon 5D. At least that way i can use my R glass on it with an adapter. For $600? your probably getting a better camera with the Nikon D50... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_david Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 It's a great camera and a good buy at $599. The lens is great. The AF is so-so, but the ability to scale focus instantly counters this. Best ergonomics of any digital P&S. 5 mega pixel is good enough up enlargements up to 11x14 (maybe larger but I haven't tried it). The EVF is no substitute for a rangefinder viewfinder, but it didn't bother me. The only thing I didn't like on my LC1 (same as Digilux 2) was the fact that the sensor went bad. It cost me $165 to have it repaired which is not a lot considering they changed the sensor and board. Apparently this is not a rare failure so warrantee status is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_s Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 If you can actually get a good working camera for $500, sure, go for it. Comments about noise and Raw write speeds are mostly justified, but nevertheless, I liked the camera when I had it and used it extensively. The Digilux 3 feels less like a rangefinder camera and more like an SLR, so the Digilux 2 may continue to have it's followers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbg32 Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 JDR, I have a brand new in the box, black LX2. $500 shipped in the ConUS if you are interested. Same camera as the D Lux 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishik_tuna Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 the raw image storage time is so long, that you will think the camera is damaged the first time you use it. if your taking a picture of anything that moves, even slowly, it will out of sight by the time you can take your second image in raw mode. oh, did i mention that automatic metering is kinda crappy as well. again, i have a lot of other digital cameras to compare it to cause the whole family is loaded up with digital cameras..more often than not, automatic exposure settings on my kids p&s digital cameras does a better job than the Digilux 2. I've had my leicaflex sl's for about 35 years. I still like them, and use them, and even bought a used on recently. I kinda can't wait to get rid of the Digilux 2 and get something that works better..it's just frustrating that it's so limited in it's usability. yes, you can compensate for many of its shortcomings, you can use a tripod, you can bracket exposures and use the histogram, and generally "manage" the exposure settings, and yes, with the right light it produces really nice images, but you know what? so do other digitals...the "automatic" exposure control usually does not pick the correct exposure, the work flow with this camera consists of taking a picture, viewing it on the LCD, correcting the exposure, and then reshooting the picture, maybe even a third time. Also, the automatic white balance not infrequently screws up, and then you've got some work to do in photoshop to try and correct the color balance. I guess for $2000 i expected something that would routinely outperform a $300 digital camera...well it doesn't. after you get it, tell us if you think it was worth $599 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishik_tuna Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 i guess the question to ask all you other digilux 2 owners out there...would you buy it again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_david Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Good question Ishik. I liked mine, but the answer is no. I'm swapping it for an R-D1 which is what I should have bought in the first place. The Digilux 2 is a good point and shoot, but a poor substitute for a rangefinder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard_korites Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 <It cost me $165 to have it repaired...> Not to gloat, but simply to put things in perspective, I would like to mention that Sony fixed my 717's sensor and paid shipping both ways, and it was well beyond the warranty period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob F. Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Here's another way to approach it. The Digilux II has 5MP. At 300dpi, that works out to 6.5" x 8.6". Is that a big enough print for you? Six MP works out to around 7 x 9.5" or so. For a full quality 8x10 (7.5x10, really) you need 6.75MP. To fill a letter-size 8.5x11 print, you need 8.4MP. The flip side is that you need more storage space for larger files. So if you don't need large prints, maybe 5MP is enough. Though I just bought a Western Digital 250GB external hard drive for $100.00. I don't expect to fill it up anytime soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_david Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Yep Bernard, I'm well aware Sony, and many other manufacuteres fix the problem for free. Arg. That's why I mention it's important to check Leica repair policy before buying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
don_e Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 There's a reasonable review at dpreview.com If I were in the market for another p&S, I'd grab it at that price -- well used, but well cared for. Like most small-sensor digitals, I wouldn't expect too much in the way of shooting speed, or optimal performance in low light. I use a Panasonic FZ30. Imo, the Matsushita sensors have gotten a bad rap in the reviews. Without heavy-handed in-camera ip juju, such sensors are noisy above 200 iso. I think (not sure) the Digilux 2 produces raw+jpeg, a useful feature. Good Luck, Don E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishik_tuna Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 i don't have a rangefinder, so i can't compare the digilux 2 to that camera. i can compare it p&s digitals like sony, canon, casio...and i'm telling you the digilux 2 is a crappy point and shoot! It takes superb pictures, under very specific conditions, and otherwise takes below average pictures...why pay $2000, or even $599 for a camera that is outperformed by $300 digital p&s, and completely outperformed by a Nikon D50 for $599? Nikon is 6 megapixels, SLR, larger sensor size, iso 200-1600, 2.5 fps RAW shooting, rated 4.7/5.0 at DPREVIEW, "highly recommended" Digilux 2, microscopic sensor size compared to Nikon, 17 seconds to write a RAW file!!! (this means shooting RAW at 3.5 fpm (fpm=frames per MINUTE)iso 100-400 (reviewer bemoans lack of iso 50 to generate a "silky smooth image"...how about just a better sensor, rated "recommended" but pricey. I mean i have one, but its convinced me never to buy a small sensor digital again...the optics are great, the camera "feel" is great, i could live with the slow raw write times, but the crappy sensor is just a deal buster...the leica part (lens) is great, the panasonic part (sensor) is garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank uhlig Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 I do not know the DL2. But from what I hear in the posts above it makes me think I would not buy this dud for 50$. Why buy a dudsy camera in the first place. I would not want to use it, with all its quirks and shortcomings. But your mileage (= tolerance) may vary. So good luck, you seem to be already hooked. $ 200, maybe if you are so deeply hooked and can afford a door stop..., but not $ 600 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl_bretteville Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Would I buy again? At $1800 - no. At $600 - yes. Tuna: If your RAW write time is 17 seconds it is your SD card that is too slow. It is universally accepted that the minimum time used is 6 seconds. Even my old 33x Lexar card gives me that, not to mention the Ultra IIs As for the enlargement size of a D2's 'only' 5mp image I've had a 60x90cm done from a JPEG - that is 23.6x35.4 inches. My wife just got a C-Lux 1 which is 6mp camera - there is no way the JPEGs from that can stand up to the ones from a D2. The Vario-Summicron on the D2 is a fantastic lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ishik_tuna Posted October 20, 2006 Share Posted October 20, 2006 Oh, i stand corrected..the Digilux 2 has a blazing fast RAW write time of 6 seconds......or 10 fpm..... is there any camera made that has a slower RAW write time? if there is, I'd like to know. You know, I have the camera, I really like somethings about, other things are just inexplicably bad (basically, for high quality image, you have to shoot iso 100). I feel cheated having paid that much, for something branded as a Leica, and not getting the Leica experience we all know and love (a camera that lets you take extraordinary pictures with ease). You occasionally get an extraordinary picture with the Digilux 2, but it's a fussy camera to use that requires a lot of tweaking and checking to make sure you've got the best image. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_crawley Posted October 21, 2006 Share Posted October 21, 2006 I had a Digi 2 for a year now. $500+ is a good price. Let's talk about all this noise about noise. Have you seen the pictures that the film guys take with their rangefinders? Grain and more grain. A little noise shouldn't bother a true rangefinder gone digital. You'll love the Digi 2. I do. I have a Nikon D50, and even though it can write raw in half the time, I still love my leica D2 more. Besides, I shoot in fine JPEG and convert to TIFF in Photoshop which is a lot easier anyway and I lose very, very, very little quality. Takes up a lot less storage space, too. JPEG shots are quite fast. Buy the Digi 2. You'll get marvelous pictures from it. If these other "so-called" experts aren't getting good shots, they're not very good photographers. I just won first place in the Texas State Fair with a picture from my Leica Digilus 2. Beat out a lot of Nikons, Canons and a few "film" M boys, as well. Great lens. Great focus (manual not automatic, but who wants to use automatic???) and dependable shots over and over. I do a lot of shooting at ISO 400. Still looks good. Nuff said. Put down the cash and start enjoying a truly fine camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wai_leong_lee Posted October 22, 2006 Share Posted October 22, 2006 I tried the Digilux 3 at the launch. Didn't like the handling. Cameras are not just about the quality of the pictures. Handling, weight, ease of use, ergonomics, viewfinder brightness, etc. count too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r_quan Posted October 23, 2006 Share Posted October 23, 2006 I totally agree with John Crawley. I love the B/W mode and have shot alot at iso 400 with great results. Even better after some Noise Ninja. The EVF is bearly adequate but with accessory VF's in the hot shoe and zone focusing with abundant DOF I can street shoot like any Leica M. I shot hundreds of photos at a Hollywood studio commercial set in low light and the pictures are quite good - the actors were thrilled. Recently my D2 sensor went belly up (Chris David - where did you send the camera?) and I am missing it dearly. I still have my backup Nikons (D2x, D2h, D70, D100 and now a D80) but much prefer the Leica D2. For my type of shooting I need the utter silent shutter, non-eye level live framing with the 2.5 inch LCD, and that sweet f2 Vario-Summicron lens. D-SLR's are used for my sports shooting but personal street shooting - gimme a Leica D2. Does the M8 have LCD live preview? If so I might switch. At $599 I would get a D2. Ebay prices have stayed surprisingly high. The lowest price I saw recently was at a local camera show for $900 and at that price it was sold. If you don't really know if you want it pass and let someone who knows and loves the camera to buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainrivera Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Beware of sensor failures. I just bot one on ebay and it arrived with a bad sensor. Seller told me it worked when shipped and wished me luck with the extended warranty Leica is offering. I am awaiting confirmation that Leica will repair for free.. If not, I am going after the seller with guns a blazing! Do a search on Digilux 2 sensor. Unfortunately I did not know about this issue until I got the camera. 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