opinions on the panasonic DMC-L1

[paul_verwer]

I have been using an OM-2n for years, which I like a lot because of its easy

control over exposure, its small size, and the excellent zuiko optics. But I

find myself scanning most of the slides I make anyway, so I have been looking

for a digital camera offering a similar level of control and quality for some time.

 

The L1 seems to offer most of the things I am looking for, and prices have

dropped spectacularly recently, but apart from its nice features (such as simple

control over shutter speed and aperture), it also received some criticism regarding:

1. the small, dim viewfinder

2. the ergonomics (in particular the shutter release button)

3. noise at higher iso values.

 

In particular the first point worries me; according to some the viewfinder makes

manual focusing almost impossible. On the other hand, the photos shown here on

the list taken with this camera (e.g by Godfrey) look magnificent.

 

Does anyone have an opinion on this camera, e.g. compared to a more recent

camera like the Oly 510, which is still less expensive than the L1, including

the 14-14 and 40-150 mm kit zoom? Is the L1 viewfinder really that bad? Or is

the Leica/panasonic 14-50 mm by itself already worth the 700 euro they are

currently asking?

 

Paul.

[mharris]

It's a fantastic camera that's even better with the Leica 25mm 1.4 lens. Manual focusing can be hard but not impossible. I have adapters for Nikon lenses and Leica R lenses. You won't find another camera that can use so many different lenses.

 

Yes it does have noise at higher ISOs but with the 25mm 1.4 lenses that's not a problem. If I didn't already have one I'd still buy it. The kit lens is worth the price of admission.

[Greg M]

You say you like the OM for its' small size? If that was high on your list of wants, it should be a major detractor to the L1, which is oversized and boxy, especially compared to a camera like the E510. The 14-50 Leica lens is spectacular, but again, very big, in part because of the image stabilization being built-in, for what it is compared to the 14-54 f2.8-3.5 Digital Zuiko.

 

All that said, the L1 is very retro in it's controls and appealing. I played with samples many, many times in the store when it was first available and was very tempted, but the price was way outta whack with everyone else, so it never went any further than that for me. Now that the prices have dropped, I already have way too many camera to even think about getting one. If you like the retro part of it, you'll most likely like it, but the ergonomics are unlike most any other DSLR you could name today.

 

The other issue has to do with, what are your plans down the road in terms of additional lenses? Have you looked at Panasonic's lens offerings? Quite scant. With the exception of the 14-150, there are no other tele offerings, and the other maker of 4/3rd system lenses, Olympus, is putting image stabilization in the bodies, not the lenses, so you have no option for a dedicated tele zoom with image stabilization to go with the 14-50.

 

Panasonic seems to be more of a micro-niche DSLR system that cannot decide how serious they want to be about putting out a complete system of lenses, and the ones they do have on offer are way overpriced.

[patrick j dempsey]

Look up "L1 OM lens" on an image search. The OM 50mm f/1.8 lens that actually looks large mounted on an OM-1 looks absolutely tiny on the L1. Just because it is shaped somewhat like a Leica M camera does not mean it is anywhere near the same size. The Leica 24mm f/1.4 is a MASSIVE lens. If you want an OM sized 4/3s camera you need to be looking at the Oly 420... it's the smallest of the pack but the downside to all 4/3s cameras is large and heavy fast wide and normal lenses. This is not the OM system where you get 10 super compact lenses from 16mm to 50mm.

[godfrey]

<center>

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2331/2535061780_e32ff47776_o.jpg"><br>

Water - Sunnyvale 2008<br>

<i>Panasonic L1 + Olympus ZD 25mm f/2.8<br>

ISO 1600 @ f/5.6 @ 1/1600 sec</i><br>

</center><br>

Thank you for the compliment.

<br><br>

I read a lot of negatives about the L1. When the prices dropped last May, I bought

one on the basis of the lens and didn't know much about the body. Since I got it, I've

found most of the negative mish-mash was meaningless: it proves to be a truly

excellent camera. My feelings now are that, given the superb lens it comes with and

the excellent finish, features, and image quality, it was actually worth the high price

even if the marketplace didn't want to pay it.

<br><br>

It's not the fastest camera or the best spec-sheet warrior... Look elsewhere if you

want to be proud of the spec sheet.

<br><br>

The viewfinder is fine. It's not as good as an Olympus E-1 or E-3 (or whatever), but

it's better than a lot of the cheaper cameras. Manual focusing, even with a Nikkor

20mm f/3.5 AI stopped down to f/5.6, is satisfactory ... with a fast lens, like a

Pentax 50mm f/1.4 or the aforementioned Summilux 25/1.4, it is just fine. In a

pinch, switch on Live View and hit the magnify button for that extra bit of critical

manual focusing accuracy. The *vast* majority of the time you're going to use the

excellent autofocus anyway, and if you are manual focusing it's the only 4/3 System

body that has focus confirmation ... and the focus confirmation is pretty darn

accurate.

<br><br>

Body wise, it is nearly identical in weight, width and height to a Leica M ... just about

the same size as your OM2n without the prism hump ... and about 10mm thicker,

front to back. The standard 14-50/2.8-3.5 lens is large and heavy, but that's what

you get for its speed: it works brilliantly. Fit the camera with an Olympus 25mm f/2.8

or 35mm f/3.5 Macro lens and it is virtually identical in the hand to a Leica M, jut a

little thicker.

<br><br>

The noise characteristics are just fine for me. Yes, there's noise at high ISO and DR

reduces ... same as for any camera to one degree or another. Too much worry about

nothing.

<br><br>

Regards image stabilization: it's certainly useful if you need it. But I use a tripod with

longer lenses most of the time and you turn IS off for that. For short lenses it is a

nice plus but certainly non-essential. Fast lenses are more useful.

<br><br>

Both the standard lens, the Summilux 25/1.4 and the Panasonic/Leica ultrazoom 14-

150 are super performers. The Olympus pro-grade lenses are also super performers,

also the 25/2.8 and 35/3.5 Macro. The adapted Nikkor, Pentax, and Olympus lenses

I've used on the camera all work nicely too.

<br><br>

I've sold more photos in the past year made with the L1 than with all my other

cameras. I liked it enough that three months after I'd been using it I bought a

second. I'm very glad I did so. It's simply a good camera that works, with excellent

available lenses, excellent ergonomics. If your needs are outside what it can do in

sequence shooting or some specialized lenses not available for 4/3 System mount,

you need something else. But for almost anything else it's a delight.

<br><br>

Godfrey

<br><br>

[paul_verwer]

Thanks for all your replies, I found them very useful!

 

Paul

[paul_verwer]

For those of you still checking this thread: after giving it another week of thinking, i ordered one, which I received yesterday.

 

Paul