New PanaLeica

[harvey_edelstein1]

The sensor size is just one factor, it looks like Panasonic did the same as Pentax/Samsung and shunk the electronics on the sensor and made the sensor locations large, this is explained in the Dpreview announcement.

 

The fact that instead of F4 the Leicasonic lens is F2/2.8 will make low light photographs easier to get. Hopefully ISO 1600 will be usable. At least there is a hot shoe and manual focusing, Ap and Sp modes and manual mode.

 

If this is good I may be selling my Rollei 35se and Minox 35.

[Spearhead]

<i>On the other hand samples provided by Panasonic at ISO 80 look much better, and there are some decent-looking photos taken with the camera here, including B&W JPEG.</i><P>The samples provided at "here" are also at ISO 80. The problem is that virtually all mid-range digicams produce quality images at their lowest ISO. They also all seem to lose quality very quickly with ISO increases. As someone who shoots more at night than during the day, I've given up on my various digicams for anything useful and gone back to the dSLR. I've had the Ricohs (GRD and GX100) and don't find them to be any better, in fact, they are significantly inferior in image quality to the Canon G series in my experience at higher ISOs.

[Sanford]

I hope Panasonic has extended the warranties to a full year like everyone else instead ninety days like a cheap TV.

[eric friedemann]

Good point, Sanford. Similar Panasonic digicams currently on the market have 1 Year Parts/90 Days Labor U.S.A. Limited Warrantys, which blows. I'd consider the $30-40 extra for an extended warranty money well spent- just like with my iPods.

[orvillerobertson]

I really like a couple of things about my now ancient Digilux; the user interface was relatively well-designed, and the button and

switch layout at back and top made sense. I was able to use it without carrying the manual around for weeks like with my wife's

Canon DigiElph (which is admittedly her favorite camera). The Digilux turns on rapidly and has almost no shutter delay. I'll be

checking out one of these Panasonics in a few months to see if they can do some of these neat tricks. My problem was that i lent the

Digilux to my niece, and she pretty much returned it to the soil, but it still works well enough to keep for another 2 or 3 months.

[blakley]

<i>The samples provided at "here" are also at ISO 80. The problem is that virtually all mid-range digicams produce quality images at their lowest ISO. They also all seem to lose quality very quickly with ISO increases.</i>

<p>

I agree with you there, Jeff. That's why I'm waiting for real reviews. I have a DMC-LX2, and it's a "good" camera in bright light and "ok" in low light. But in really low light I have yet to find a P&S that's really good - at least for color work. Hope springs eternal, though....

[ray .]

DP1 RAW files shot at ISO 800 are very clean and noise free.

[travis1]

fuji f11?

[travis1]

btw, the noise on my lx2 at 800 is "unusable". At 400, you better pray there are no shadow areas. I gave up using it after a while. In a lit room at night, iso 400 cannot give you handholdable speeds...and 800 is useless, so the cam is useless at night.

 

OTOH, the ricoh G series gives very good grain-like noise at 800 especially in b/w.

 

jmo

[eric friedemann]

"DP1 RAW files shot at ISO 800 are very clean and noise free."

 

 

It would probably be more realistic to say that DP-1 images are relatively clean and noise-free at ISO 800:

 

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma-dp1.shtml

 

 

And you'd hope the DP-1 would shoot well at higher ISOs- it costs $750 at B&H. By way of contrast, I'd expect the new PanLeica to start retailing at about $400.

[ray .]

I wouldn't rely on one example from one reviewer.<p>DP1 ISO 800 RAW:<p>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mhartel/2657555668/sizes/o/

[eric friedemann]

Fair enough, we'll assume for the sake of argument that because of its smallish APS-C sensor, the DP-1 performs well at ISO 800. It will still cost almost twice what the PanLeica will cost.

[aizan_sasayama]

"PanaLeica or LeicaSonic?"

 

Panica.

[Uhooru]

Travis, when you say "especially in b/w" do you mean shooting in b/w mode or on your conversions?

I'm a little interested in the GRD1

[joshroot]

<i>"It will still cost almost twice what the PanLeica will cost."</i>

<p>

And there is the fact that the DP-1 does not have a 24mm lens. Which may be a tipping point for some as much as price or ISO performance.

[eric friedemann]

"And there is the fact that the DP-1 does not have a 24mm lens."

 

 

If I understand the specs, the new PanaLeica will have a 24mm lens, but with a caveat. It will be a 24mm equivalent lens when shooting in HDTV format- 16:9, a more extreme format for most who are used to 35mm format- 3:2 . If you want to shoot in a less extreme aspect ratio, you will get less wide angle. This was the case with, for instance, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2:

 

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasoniclx2/

[joshroot]

<i>"It will be a 24mm equivalent lens when shooting in HDTV format- 16:9,"</i>

<p>

That would be very disappointing it were the case. But I wouldn't' doubt it.

[Greg M]

Nope, you'll get a 24mm field of view no matter the aspect ratio you shoot at with the LX3. Panasonic changed the setup of the LX3 compare to the LX2, which I own. True, with the LX2 you have to be in 16:9 capture to get the widest angle, but not on the LX3. Read the specs on Panasonic's website. You'll get 24mm whether you shoot at 16:9, 3:2 or 4:3.....18mm with the wide angle adaptor.

[Greg M]

From the announcement by Panasonic..

 

"Normally, to produce an image of 3:2 or 16:9 aspect ratio, a 4:3picture will be cropped, so the picture does not retain the best resolution . However, the CCD in DMC-LX3 can reproduce images shot with the lens set from 24mm to 60mm in any of three aspect ratios; 4:3, 3:2 or 16:9, so you can always capture dynamic, richly expressive shots with a wide perspective."

 

They've re-done the LCD and it now works like the one fitted to the TZ5. Check the pictures of the LCD, which is much less elongated from the one on the LX2..

 

http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0807/Panasonic/LX3_back.jpg

 

At any aspect ratio, you'll get a 24mm field of view.

[eric friedemann]

I stand corrected.

[joshroot]

And I stand encouraged again. I really hope PN gets one of these in the near future. I'm very interested.

[Greg M]

Here's another interesting link from the debut in Hong Kong which was just put up over on the Panasonic Forum at DPReview. Can't read any of the text, but the images look good..

 

http://www.dcfever.com/news/readnews.php?id=2280

[Greg M]

I don't follow this stuff too well...an engineer I am not, but this looked like an interesting answer to the wide angle end question at the three aspect ratios..

 

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28755140

[eric friedemann]

The graph is worth a thousand words.

[doug_nelson3]

If the lens/sensor combination gives clean images, decent resolution and true natural colors without the ever-popular candy-color enhancement, I believe I could go for this one. There are 28 finders around, like the old Kobalux/Bower, the Russian cheapies, or Stephen Gandy's 28/35 he sells at Cameraquest. No digicam finder is but so accurate, anyway. At least the accessory shoe seems to be centered.