Digilux 2 to the rescue!

[audidudi]

My neighbor's son-in-law is a filmmaker and is shooting a short film in-and-around my neighborhood over the weekend. I wandered over to watch with my DMC-L1 in hand, but after just three shots, the sound guy wagged his finger at me and then pulled it across his throat ... needless to say, I go the hint about the shutter being too loud!

So, I went home and grabbed my new-to-me Digilux 2. I've been shooting with a pair of DMC-LC1s for a couple of years now and just purchased the Digilux 2 to replace the LC1 I'm dedicating to IR-only operation. Although I'm still not completely convinced there is any significant difference in image quality between the D2 and LC1 when shooting RAW, there's definitely a noticeable difference when shooting .jpgs, as the D2's .jpgs are pretty much useable right from the camera whereas I find I'm always fiddling with the LC1's .jpgs and more often than not, end up creating my own from the RAW files.

Anyway, here are a few shots from this morning's filming...

[leicar888]

Nice color and sharpness quality in all of these photos, although apparently not equal to that which the Leica M and R lenses can create. I have been using a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 and its built-in 36-432mm zoom lens for two years and have been thinking of buying a Leica digital camera that is smaller but I am still not certain which one will please me. Meanwhile, your posting has given me more input on the Digilux 2 and I thank you for entering it.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by leicar888

Nice color and sharpness quality in all of these photos, although apparently not equal to that which the Leica M and R lenses can create.

Don't be too quick to judge a camera's performance by the images you see posted here, as they are resampled when uploaded and the image quality does take a bit of a hit as a result. For instance, compare the version of this photo -- http://members.cox.net/jeffreygoggin/L1000233.jpg -- to the one posted here. This is the exact same photo I uploaded here, except that it hasn't been resampled.

Anyway, that said, you're correct: The D2 doesn't have the same degree of resolution you can achieve with a M or R setup and a good scanner ... at least on a good day. For what it is, though -- my everyday carry camera -- I've found it's without peer, at least once you take into account its versatility (my now-deceased Sigma DP-1, for example, clearly captured better quality images, but only at one focal length and then only in RAW format.)

[leicar888]

You are so correct about the hit that one experiences when Web sites resample uploaded images! I scan my Leica M6 TTL and R8 negs and prints with my Epson V500 scanner and they turn out great, but when I upload them to my Flickr site and click on the 'All sizes' button the resampling effect looks terrible in so many instances.

[farnz]

Originally Posted by leicar888

... I have been using a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ20 and its built-in 36-432mm zoom lens for two years and have been thinking of buying a Leica digital camera that is smaller but I am still not certain which one will please me. Meanwhile, your posting has given me more input on the Digilux 2 and I thank you for entering it.

I have both the Digilux 2 and the FZ20 and the Digilux 2 is larger (you're not thinking of the D-Lux 2 are you?). Certainly the Digilux 2 has higher IQ than the FZ20 and I would strongly recommend it, if only for the sheer enjoyment of its manual feel, providing that you can do without the huge zoom. There are also many other reasons for choosing the D2 if you'd care to search these forums.

Pete.

[leicar888]

My goal is to purchase a very compact digital camera that can easily slip into my shirt or pants pocket. I've read reviews about one of those, the Leica C-lux 2, but all reviews state it is horrid at ISOs above 200 because of excessive noise and I need one that can give me very good images at higher ISOs. I love the quality of the images the Panasonic FZ20 gives me but, of course, it is not pocketable at all.