malte_bernholz

Per, I was very intrigued by your comparison with your slides. After 15 years with my loyal Nikon F3, I have decided it is time to go digital. My selection has come down to Digilux 2 vs. Canon 20D + 17-85mm travel zoom.

Per, do you have any experience with the results from dSLRs? I am not interested in specs or features, but only in the quality of the final result. After spending several nights surfing photo after photo on the net, I have the impression that the Digilux 2/LC-1 photos have more "3D" to them than the dSLR photos, which mostly looked "flat" to me. Am I fantasizing over the Leica "glow"? Here are a few hypotheses:

1) the Digilux 2/ LC1 jpegs all have more contrast/sharpness/saturation added after the shot by either the camera or the photographer. If we did the same to 20d+17-85 photos, we would get the same ?3D? effect.

2) all people willing to pay the high price-tag of the Digilux 2/LC1 and on top of that publish their photos, are confirmed pros. They would produce pics with great ?3D? with any camera

3) I am fooled by the high DOF of most Digilux 2/LC1 photos. At wide angles and small apertures, the 20D+17-85 would create exactly the same effect.

4) the digilux 2/LC1 lens does indeed produce images with more ?3D?

What do you think???

Best,

Malte