Digilux 3 = budget M body?

[albertwang]

I wonder whether the upcoming Digilux 3 will be a budget version of the M body. Of course, the L1 is 4/3 mount but it would be good to have a less expensive version of the M8 for prosumer use.

[stunsworth]

It will be a copy of a Panasonic body, it will be an SLR, it will use a different sensor, it will have a different lens mount, it will have a life determined by how many Leica have contracted Panasonic to make. So no, it will not be a budget M body any more than the D2 was.

[krabat]

Too bad. Are you sure? What I am looking for as a successor of my beloved Digilux 2 is NOT an SLR. Why doesn't Leica stick to the concept of the DL2?

Regards, Peter.

[stunsworth]

Hi Peter, probably because they can only stick to whatever Panasonic offers them. All the recent Leica digital cameras seem to have gone out of stock while still selling well. I assume Leica have a deal with Panasonic to build say 10,000, Panasonic build them in one batch and then ship them to Leica as required. When the last one ships that's it, end of line.

[albertwang]

Why should the D3 be a repackaged L1? That would be too much duplication...

[stunsworth]

Duplication is the whole idea. It saves both parties, Leica and Panasonic, money.

[krabat]

Thank you for your quick reply, Steve, although the contents of your reply does not comfort me...

Alright, fortunately, my DL2 is doing its job perfectly until now, so there is no real need for a new camera (though I started dreaming...).

Regards, Peter.

[stunsworth]

Peter, these are just my assumptions based on the fact that the previous Panasonic/Leica collabarations have involved putting a new skin on existing electionics. Perhaps the future will be different.

[marknorton]

I really doubt Leica have been able to devote many resources to the DL3 and we're likely to see a re-badge Panasonic. At that price level, I have no problem if it repeats the D2 experience.

[modschiedler]

Peter, I think offering a system with interchangeable lenses clearly exceeds the concept of the D2. Also, the D2’s electronic viewfinder wasn't really a big hit – a true SLR viewfinder wouldn’t be too bad, would it? (If it’s of reasonable brightness). Of course, the D3 will, as the D2, be a rebadged Panasonic – this is the nature of a collaboration which means an advantage for both sides: Leica benefits from Panasonics electronics (and don’t have to develop components on their own), Panasonic benefits from Leica’s optics in order to become a serious player in the photo market.
The reason why they bring out a digital SLR is that this segment, at the very moment, is the most profitable one. The question, however, is, whether 4/3, of all, wouldn't turn out as a dead end. Maybe it’s no coincidence that Olympus had been on its own for several years.
A budget version of the M body is something Leica will never ever produce. Their rangefinder is too sophisticated a piece of technology, and what’s more, they fear that the reputation of the M would suffer then. And, hey, in digital terms it already exists – made by Epson. For the D3 there’ll be no chance to use M lenses – but I think you will be able to adapt R lenses.

[albertwang]

Yes, but the Epson has been discontinued. So that possibilty is out the window there.

[modschiedler]

Oh, really? I thought it has even been "updated" recently and is now named R-D1s?

[gareth_c]

Originally Posted by modschiedler

Oh, really? I thought it has even been "updated" recently and is now named R-D1s?

Yes, but they are essentially left over R-D1 bodies that have new firmware and an "S" added. When they get bought up that will be the end of it, no new ones being manufactured.

I love mine but to be honest I would feel Epson were taking the mick if they released a new RF camera. The QC and support of the existing bodies doesn't exactly endear me to Epson.

[gareth_c]

Originally Posted by albertwang

Why should the D3 be a repackaged L1? That would be too much duplication...

Because all recent Leica Digital cameras have been 'duplicates' of Panasonics (Digilux2, DLux2 and Clux1).

[geoff]

Originally Posted by albertwang

I wonder whether the upcoming Digilux 3 will be a budget version of the M body. Of course, the L1 is 4/3 mount but it would be good to have a less expensive version of the M8 for prosumer use.

Leica is schedule to offer their own version of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 Four Thirds DSLR. Most likely it will be labled as a Leica "D" series camera not a Digilux 3 even though DSLRExchange.com has just posted an image of it and are referring to it as the Digilux 3.

http://www.dslrexchange.com/forums/s...=2593#post2593

A real Digilux would have an electronic shutter and a true live LCD preview.

[modschiedler]

But, Geoff, the L1 will indeed have a live preview, and so will the Leica equivalent (not to mention electronic shutter)

[geoff]

Originally Posted by modschiedler

But, Geoff, the L1 will indeed have a live preview, and so will the Leica equivalent (not to mention electronic shutter)

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 does not have full live preview in the practical real world sense. This is more of a marketing statement than a useful function.

To achieve live view, with the L1, the mirror obviously needs to be raised out of the way. However, there is about a one second delay from the time the shutter release button is pressed to the time of actual image capture because, reportedly, “the mirror has to come down and the shutter close before the exposure can be taken.” This delay is impractical for any type of live action photography.

Therefore, I do not consider this to be true live view as functionally and traditionally available and offered on the Digilux 2.

The LiveMOS sensor used in the L1 is a bit of a mystery in regards as to how in behaves either like a “interline transfer” or “full-frame transfer” sensor. A interline transfer sensor can control the start and stop of light falling on it. Hence an electronic shutter. A full-frame transfer sensor cannot, therefore mandating the need for a mechanical shutter.

Why, on the L1, would the “the mirror [have] to come down and the shutter close before [an] exposure [could be] be taken.” if the LiveMOS sensor behaved similar to a interline transfer sensor?

[albertwang]

So if the D3 has an electronic shutter that means no mirror is needed?

[geoff]

Originally Posted by albertwang

So if the D3 has an electronic shutter that means no mirror is needed?

A hypothetical Digilux 3 with an electronic shutter would not be dependent on a mirror.

However, if the primary design objective of a camera is to provide through the lens viewing by means of a viewfinder, then a mirror box assembly would be required to achieve this goal–in essence a SLR design. It would make no difference whether the shutter was physically mechanical or electronic.

Traditionally, the Digilux line has not been based on a SLR design. However, properly incorporating a sensor that could control the start and stop of light falling on it (electronic shutter) would enable a highly functional camera that could perform double duty as a SLR and, with the mirror locked up, as a true live LCD preview type camera.

Again, if the Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 truly has such a sensor, then why would the mirror have to be released and dropped down and then back up again to capture an image when in supposed live preview mode?

[adan]

Alfie: Just out of curiosity, can you identify ANY general-production camera that has a purely "electronic" shutter?

A word to the wise - digicams (such as the Digilux 1 and 2 and D-luxes and so on) have mechanical/electric leaf shutters in the lens, that close and open and close rather like the leaf shutters in Hasselblads or Bronicas.

A couple of the Nikon DSLRs had electronic exposure in addition to the mechanical shutter (allowed 1/500th flash sync, for example) - but the new replacements seem to be dropping this feature.