Leica D-Lux 3

I think the Leica is simply a re-badged (and more expensive) Panasonic DMC-LX2. I tested the Panasonic and found the results really poor. Probably ok at 100 ISO but very, very noisy thereafter, with horrible noise-reduction smudging. Shooting RAW didn’t seem to help things much and there didn’t seem to be a great increase in dynamic range. There was also a fantastic amount of hot pixels in my 1600 ISO tests. This might have been ok for postcard size prints, but I’m not interested in that… If you can, do what I did: take an SD card to a shop and take some test pictures to see for yourself. I ended up buying my second Ricoh GR instead. I had sold the first one, thinking that there were better alternatives but, having tested most of them, I have come to the conclusion that there aren’t. That said, I would be very interested to know if there are any people out there actually doing serious reportage work with compacts in general and the Ricoh in particular (apart from Alex Majoli, that is…!).

Hi Clint,

I have had my one for a week now. Generally its “ok” baring in mind its basicly a point and shoot with a few manual controls. People who want one or are thinking about getting one need to bare in mind that its not the kind of camera that you will use to get published. I actually have been using my one as a side-kick to my film cameras for recording and image of where i am shooting and then using the microphone mode to record via sound some details of where I am and what I am doing. I then later relate the info back to my film shots. (eleimates the need for a dictaphone)

Everybody knows that the camera has a noise problem, big deal shoot it 100 ISO. if you cant handle that shooting a higher ISO will have an effect on your images thats too bad. I carry a little $5 mini tripod with me for times when 100 ISO wont suffice.

Yes its the same as the Panatronic, but its a LEICA. It will hold its value more and it looks way cooler.

Generally overall pleased, images seem to be sharp and the 16:9 widescreen shooting with the 28mm equiv is brilliant. however it has a reasonable amount of barrell distortion on this setting, but after all it is a “POINT AND SHOOT CAMERA”. Dont buy one to replace your SLR. Any of questions you can ask me. Dpreview have a write up for the LX-2 and some good samples you can download and print etc, the camera is the same so you can take it as gospell that the review and image are the same for the Leica.

Best wishes, and remember its a “LEICA”

P.S. If you get one order the leather case – OMG its so cool, looks like a tan leather Leica IIIg case. wicked

Well, I’m working a couple of long term projects. Earn my living from a non-photo day job. I have to say that I depend mostly on Leica M’s. I have used them out on the streets up in Portland, OR. Portland has about the largest per capita population of young runaways in the nation. (I’m older and want to runaway)

Regardless, David’s points are well taken. You may want to look into a Ricoh GR or a Leica M2 or M6 something like that if you’re looking for small. So if you don’t need digital for immediate feedback, I’d look at the point-n-shoot film cameras.

Check out this persons site. http://www.depth-of-field.org/en/page3.xml

Yeah, a few months ago I was searching pretty hard for a digital point-and-shoot that I could keep in my hip pocket and shoot with whenever I saw something worth snapping up, but came to the conclusion that they’re all crap and there was nothing worth spending my $$$ on, except perhaps the Ricoh GR Digital (but even then that is really really noisy above ISO 400). So, I just found a 23mm f2 for my old OM4 and kept shooting film. I know this isn’t the question you’re asking, Clint, but like Paul said, if you don’t need instant feedback and you can be bothered with the little extra effor that shooting film takes, I honestly think you should save your dollars and find a cheap old manual SLR or somthing with a fast lens… results will always be better compared with the current stock of point and shoots, particulalry in low light.
Ed.

More a reply to David´s post – half the work I have exhibited in Centre Pompidou right now was shot with the Ricoh GR Digital – this includes a 130cm x 87cm print from the camera.

It´s a nice little camera for getting close to people who are apprehensive about having their photo taken and recently while on assignment in the Democratic Republic of Congo, it was the only camera I was able to use discretely enough to get photos of people on the streets of Kinshasa where tensions were running high and foriegner+camera=lynching, essentially.

The gallery via Flickr in my LS profile on here is exclusively shot with that camera as well.

Finally, while I definitely use this camera the most extensively, almost every one of my colleagues in the photo department at Fabrica carries one too.

Yeah of course I prefer one of my M series anyday but he has asked for info on the leica D-LUX 3, but by all means go buy an MP or a M7 i have both and they are great. The GR is good also but ancient firmware, handles like a digital camera out of the later 90’s. Nice lens however, less barrel distortion than the leica, i gave my GR to my little brother, has some good features, you can set the focus to infitiy and stop down, then just use the bright VF to frame, for reporatage the GR is king.

If reportage is what you want it for NOTHING in a digital compact can beat the GR despite its ancient internals. I use my D-LUX for pictures of my dog, ebay etc. Im going to ask for my GR back!

Adam, that’s very interesting – thank you. I went to the Fabrica expo at the Centre Pompidou two days ago and enjoyed it. I’ll have to go back and look more closely at your work, especially as I am experimenting with making similar large prints. Do you use an external viewfinder on yours or just the lcd?

Ummmmmm ahhhhhhhhhed and bought the GRD…..28mm lens..lives in a pocket,,,,,,,,,, the leica lives in a pocket as well, not mine “apocketfullofnoise” 16:9 medium format country

Imants : How many beers had u downed when u wrote that?

I’ve been looking around for a small, Leica M replacement as well. Nothing I’ve found quite works out. I had been very excited about the Panasonic with the 14-55 Leica lens (L1?), until I found out how huge it was. Sigma is coming out with a new camera, the DP1:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092604sigmadp1.asp

which looks interesting. Fixed 28mm equivelent lens, 14MP sensor. No optical viewfinder, but one could easily epoxy a viewfinder on the top. Rumors say it will be out in February. I’m going to wait and hope.

You want a digital M6 or M7? M8 it’ll be…

it’ll be very expensive

IF you want a small digi point and shoot, look at the Fujifilm Finepix f30

Also, new canon G7. Looks nice, checked one out the other day, viewfinder is small but usable, 10mp, one drawback, as with all the other options, no RAW, which seems terrible, but with the very long RAW write times of the other options perhaps it is better to shoot good JPGs and then convert to TIFF. Worth a look

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06091405_canon_g7.asp

I played with the G7 too, I like the dial on the back.

The problem with almost all compacts is poor low-light performance. If you are in good light, then the D-Lux is fine too. But low light? Maybe this new Fuji F30 (haven’t seen one) but otherwise it’s still the domain of DSLRs or a 35mm camera.

By the way, that Sigma thing doesn’t have a hot shoe for viewfinder. Bummer. Otherwise it’s very interesting.

I’ve been thinking about getting the M8 but it won’t suit me for my type of work (mainly boxing) so as it’s a rather big investment, I’m not real gung-ho about getting one – but it’s a Leica.

No need for the amber Nickmard this wood duck can misspell with the best of them, The Sigma could be a way to go with a bit of spit I am sure that one can sick on a Cosina/Voigtlander 28mm finder after all it is about function not about clothes horse mentality. The 1.7 sensor though not ideal is a cut above what is in the market, though if the lens is crappy it is back to square one

Problem I see with the Sigma is the f4 optic…. meaning 3200 iso in low light is going to be necessary… ick.

David – I use both the LCD and the external viewfinder on the GR. Depending on the situation – say for instance at night when the LCD is useless and the light of which attracts attention, I’d switch it completely off and use the viewfinder to frame and remain more or less incognito. Also the viewfinder is nice to just keep in your pocket as you can pull it out easily and check the framing of a given situation you may find yourself within to see whether it is worth pulling out the camera to shoot – again, remaining very low key.

The LCD is nice when you have to shoot at difficult angles and/or want to be very certain of your composition – however, I’m sure I’m not saying anything new.

If you go back to the expo at Beaubourg, the one from the GR that’s blown up huge is the shot from Alaska on the opposite side of the two I shot in Japan and the Congo. Upon close inspection, you can see that it is digital, but really only if your nose is right up to it. The two on the other side are shot on Fuji film as a comparison – the Congo being pushed 2 stops up from 400iso. Otherwise, all work being shown for the portion from Alaska was shot with that camera, and about half of the work being shown from Japan – the rest was shot on film.

Really glad to hear you enjoyed the show!

Adam- thanks for the info. I was back at Beaubourg today but it looks like I’ll have to return armed with this new info… Not too much of a hardship because of the wonderful Rauschenberg exhibit upstairs !

Cheers, haven’t had time to see the Rauschenberg myself yet – passed it up for the Yves Klien, but will definitely get to checking it out too!