ray . Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Ton, I'd be interested to see some samples where lighting contrast was significant.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 7, 2009 Author Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>be assured, so would I ;-) I'll see what I can do</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill a. Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Luca,<br> Thank you for the concise explanation (having come into the thread late). As an LX1 owner, the noise improvement would be welcome.<br> Bill</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Dudes, all this hand wringing over things like batteries and viewfinders. You guys are killing me. Batteries for these cameras are small. Stick a couple extra in your pocket (if you even need that) and be done with it. What's the big deal? And why do you need a finder for a 24mm field of view? Point the camera and shoot. That's why it's called a point and shoot. Plus the screen in most situations works great if you need perfect Cartier-Bresson geometric precision if that's really your deal. I know, old habits die hard. But sheesh, I dare say hundreds of millions of people are using these kinds of compact cameras with amazing success as we speak.</p> <p>Btw, one thing with the DP1/ DP2.... easy to get out of focus backgrounds oof whatever if that's what you want. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Wha?<br> <a title="Untitled by Chaospress, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3042/2767762150_3554282e32_o.jpg" alt="" /></a><br> GRD</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Well said, Ray. Just so well said;)</p> <p>Great little cams with a very very nice lens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p> </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Nice flower photo taken with one.....</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 7, 2009 Author Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Ray, why so sarcastic? People ask these questions and I for one am happy to provide answers if I can rather than mock them. As for the LCD screen it's not very usable in some situations simple as that. And I don't need a finder but I prefer one and the reasons for that I have given. Whether you or anyone else finds that ridiculous is of no consequence to be honest.</p> <p>One of the questions I'm happy to answer is actually yours. I've been out tonight and took some high ISO shots.These you can find <a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=915902">here.</a></p> <p><em>"Well said, Ray. Just so well said;)"</em> <br /> you wanna light the fire some more Allen?<em><br /> </em></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_burke3 Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Thanks to my eyesight problems (presbyopia - 'far-sightedness') I find the LCD screens on cameras pretty much impossible to use unless I'm wearing glasses - everything is a useless blur without them. However, when I'm out and about I don't need glasses for anything beyond the first metre or so. Hence trying to use an LCD screen leads to a 'glasses off; glasses on; glasses off; glasses on....' situation. So I look for a camera with a viewfinder, e.g. a DSLR or a Leica M, because I can see the scene I'm taking a picture of perfectly through the VF. In my case a DLUX4/LX3 with a VF would be a good solution.</p> <p>I already know from a test in a shop that I simply cannot see the image on the LCD with either of these cameras, or indeed all others. Even using a DSLR screen gets problematic, e.g. checking the histogram.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtk Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>The digital Hexar AF is reportedly in the pipeline... 4/3 from Oly....June 16 supposedly. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 7, 2009 Author Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Tom, you should also <a href="00TZje">check this thread</a> if you haven't already. The original viewfinders on both the D-Lux4 and the LX3 are quite expensive. There seem to be good working alternatives though.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray . Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Didn't mean to offend... just trying to make the point it's not that difficult, but I understand if you're not familiar. Really, never met a camera that couldn't take a good photo.... unless it was flat out dead.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anders_carlsson Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>One feature in favor of Canon's G10 has been that you can set the focal length that the camera wakes up to, so to speak. I think this is done by saving settings in one the user © modes. Has a similar feature by any chance been added to the LX3 by means of firmware updates lately? Or does the Leica version perhaps have it?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berg_na Posted June 7, 2009 Share Posted June 7, 2009 <p>Ton - I think that you will find your new LX3 to be a very capable and flexible camera. It's video performance is quite decent and the wide angle coverage is really helpful in travel photography. Here's a short video captured with the LX3 (click on the thumbnail image for the video page):<br /><br /><a href="http://vimeo.com/5048164"><img src="http://ts.vimeo.com.s3.amazonaws.com/149/371/14937171_160.jpg" alt="" /></a><br> <br />The B&W mode of the LX3 is also very good:<br /><br /><img src="http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/7261/ggbridge.jpg" alt="" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 <p>Ray, some Chinese camera's spring to mind.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 <p>Anders, no & no</p> <p>Berg, thanks</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acarodp Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 <blockquote> <p>Dudes, all this hand wringing over things like batteries and viewfinders. You guys are killing me.</p> </blockquote> <p>You should not over-interpret it... The LX3 is a pretty good camera, so one ends up discussing a bit over minutiae. You know, for the sake of discussing. Enter any bar and you will find people spending more time than this discussing sport, and not even the one they do, but the one of professional teams to which they are irrationally attached. Or the privat life of former un-reality show contestants. I guess our dissertations over the merits of LCD vs viewfinder are highly significant in comparison. What actually stops me from going on arguing with Ton on the LCD is basically the absence of beer. If we were in the aforementioned bar, and there was an excuse to find to order one more beer, I can go on forever :-D.</p> <p>On the usability above 400 ISO (one more good beer-excuse): yes, it is still usable if you need, but I feel you are a bit on thin ice regarding DR and chroma noise. So I prefer not to go up there especially when shooting night city scenes where contrasts are strong or when you want some postprocessing latitude. The nice thing, you don't really need so much. I spent an evening at Munich Christkindlmarkt (the Chrismas market) and never needed to go above 400 ISO.</p> <p>L.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 <p><em> <p><em>"Well said, Ray. Just so well said;)"</em><em > <br />you wanna light the fire some more Allen?</em><br> <em ></em><br> <em>Jeez,Ton,i was just being playful.....chill my friend. Okay, i'll sit in the corner and quietly berate myself.</em><br> <em></em><em ></em><br> <em>I don't know Ray another fine mess you have got me in ;)</em><em></em></p> </em></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 <p>Excellent review, Ton.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 <p>forget it guys, and while you sit in that corner have a blonde one with that dog of yours, or wasn't that a self portrait you uploaded in the Couples thread ;-). Maybe just a cultural difference and anyway I have no sense of humour worth mentioning.<br /> <br /> About time this thread ended anyway.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anastigmat Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 <p>Very impressive little camera, particularly if the screen is turned off, a 50mm viewfinder fitted in the accessory shoe, aperture priority and pre-focus.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonmestrom Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 <p>One last thing, I received my viewfinder yesterday and used it out there. It does make for a significant difference.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd_jacobs Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 <p>I'd love to have the viewfinder. In the meantime I've got an old Ansco bellows camera with a fold down 'viewfinder' I may remove and stick on top.<br> Todd</p> 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