Digilux 2 in 2008

[greenboy]

Hello Leica Forum Members,

Like everyone else, I have always hearted Leica cameras. I'm thinking about purchasing a Digilux 2 with a replaced sensor. I read reviews online for it but they are mostly from when the camera originally came out.

How do you guys think the Digilux 2 stacks up in 2008? Is it worth the plunge or am I buying something that is nearly obsolete? Perhaps, someone would be so kind to provide some insights on whether or not purchasing a Digilux 2 now would be a wise decision today.

Thanks so much for any thoughts!

Green Boy

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by greenboy

How do you guys think the Digilux 2 stacks up in 2008? Is it worth the plunge or am I buying something that is nearly obsolete? Perhaps, someone would be so kind to provide some insights on whether or not purchasing a Digilux 2 now would be a wise decision today.

Well, seeing that I just purchased one myself two weeks ago to go with the pair of DMC-LC1s I also have, I'm probably not the person to give you unbiased advice on this matter.

That said, it's still a very good performer, even today. It's not state of the art -- not even close, in fact -- and it's not very well suited to shooting at anything other than ISO100 or for making large prints, but if you're willing and able to work within its limitations (of which there are many, as you no doubt know), then there are few cameras that can combine its IQ and traditional mode of operation for anywhere near its price.

Frankly, I find it telling that while I also own a DMC-L1, which is "better" than the LC1/D2 in almost every respect, I have no special affection for it. Perhaps if the L1 wasn't quite so large or its image quality were better still, I might be tempted to retire my LC1s and D2, but it is and it isn't, respectively, so I will continue using them for as long as they continue to achieve results I find satisfactory. Such as the image below, which I shot with the D2 in the parking garage at work as I came back from lunch earlier today...

[dugby]

I too, am one of those who has both a D2 and L1 (aka Digilux3).

And whilst I find the L1 images are better all-round than those from my D2, I still cannot live without the D2.

If you search back through this forum, much is written about the D2.

I keep and use my D2 for the occassions where I want a light weight and no noise (mechanical noise) camera, eg like shooting in the middle of a Classical music solo performance........ or taking to dinner parties, where it takes great indoor flash shots
and the camera's qaintness can also be an interesting discussion point.

I describe the D2 as having a very narrow band-width of usability. However within that narrow band, it produces fantastic images, which are still world class in 2008.
ie....
ISO 100,
reasonable light sources, and
if a low shutter lag is required, use the Manual Focus.

If you buy one and don't like it, it's resale value is strong.

and some must-have accessories:
Leica Mini tripod
Leica Macro Elpro-D lens element
Leica Remote Shutter Cable
Lumix EverReady leather case, or Crumpler Zieube slr case (I have both).

[spylaw4]

I can only (mostly) endorse the above two comments.

There's a thread about Distinctive Look, which might clinch it for you!. And many others in the same vein here if you do a search.

As far as accessories go:
Spare batteries!
Mini tripod - Leica or Manfrotto (which is more compact)
Remote cable release (it's electrical)
Compact travel charger (you can get one through a certain auction site)
Case to taste (if you must)

The Elpro-D or it's Panasonic equivalent may be a nice to have depending on your style, as might the wide angle add-on converter.

You really won't regret it IMHO. I'm keeping a tight hold of mine.

Goodness me - I've just noticed I've reached 2355 posts - must keep my mouth shut!

[Adrian Lord]

Mine is still a much-loved workhorse but I do find the shutter lag and low light performance frustrating.

[jerryharwood]

Well, I don't think you will regret buying the D2; I bought mine in 2002, possibly the first one in the UK- I still have it, and have just had the sensor replaced in Solms, under warranty, plus new leather, and a service.
I find the camera ideal for work shots, similar to the M6, but don't expect miracles ! as far as I have determined, the major downsides are - hopeless for action shots, due to the electronic viewfinder, and foliage at a medium distance is useless; high points- brilliant for close ups, especially if you can find the elpro lens attachment !

[stuny]

Green Boy -

Even though I have a camera that is far more versatile and produces wonderful results, I'm with our colleagues -- The D2 is light, quiet, relatively small, exceptionally free of vibrations (hand holdings best friend), and produces excellent jpegs right out of the camera, or RAW, if you prefer. My only disagreement is that I've had very satisfying results in low light, as shown below, all from our India trip on our site, 70% of which I shot with the D2. I used the D2 as recently as yesterday, and brought it along as my only camera in late May to my Niece Cheryl's wedding.

In short, go for it.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Originally Posted by greenboy

Hello Leica Forum Members,

Like everyone else, I have always hearted Leica cameras. I'm thinking about purchasing a Digilux 2 with a replaced sensor. I read reviews online for it but they are mostly from when the camera originally came out.

Green Boy

G, I have been using a D2 since it appeared, and have posted that I would not give it up.

However, I recently purchased a second M8 as a backup body and will now be selling my D2.

This camera had a sensor failure and has just come back with a new sensor, a CLA, and a 1-year warranty. If you have interest, would you pm me? It is posted in the Buy/Sell section.

Regards,

[ajthornbury]

Hi,
I have had a D2 for about two years, and I've also had the sensor replaced.
I also use an Olympus E410. The D2's images are just as good as the Olympus, providing you don't crop too much.
The E410 is a very good camera and I am well satisfied with it, but of the two I still prefer the D2. I wouldn't sell it for any price.
Alan.

[krabat]

I have a DL2 since March 2004, and I am still pleased about the pictures! I like this camera very much, and I would not give it away, regardless the poor ISO perfromance of the chip.

Regards, Peter.

Rügen-1.jpg

[elansprint72]

Originally Posted by jerryharwood

............. the major downsides are - hopeless for action shots, due to the electronic viewfinder,..............

VSCC June 06 D2 251 copy.jpg

Yes; it's pretty rubbish.
I've been shooting motor racing action with the D2 for three years. Strangely, the picture editors seem to like my work. However, I bow to your superior knowledge.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Yes, the trick in using the D2 for action shots is NOT to use the evf or viewing screen.

In my case, I use zone focus and a viewfinder, following the action with the external viewfinder. For this kind of photog, the trick is to learn the delay in the shutter and accomodate it in your own head. You CANNOT use the evf, because what you see will be gone when the shutter is actuated.

[elansprint72]

Originally Posted by wparsonsgisnet

Yes, the trick in using the D2 for action shots is NOT to use the evf or viewing screen.

In my case, I use zone focus and a viewfinder, following the action with the external viewfinder. For this kind of photog, the trick is to learn the delay in the shutter and accomodate it in your own head. You CANNOT use the evf, because what you see will be gone when the shutter is actuated.

Maybe I got a special one, because I always use the EVF, I set the shutter speed and usually (although not always) pre-focus, I'd say that my hit rate is at least as good as with previous manual film cameras. I've never owned an "electronic" film camera, so I don't know if they are better. Perhaps it's just practice?

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by stuny

My only disagreement is that I've had very satisfying results in low light, as shown below...

Hmm. Perhaps I overstated things a bit with regard to the D2's low-light performance, as this two-seconds-at-f5.6 @ ISO100 exposure shot today while fooling around in the parking garage at work during lunch is not all that noisy. Obviously, things would have looked a whole lot differently if the camera hadn't been sitting on a tripod, which made a longish exposure time possible, but so long as you can keep the sensitivity at ISO100, the D2's low-light performance isn't guaranteed to be awful in every instance...

[jrethorst]

Originally Posted by wparsonsgisnet

In my case, I use zone focus and a viewfinder, following the action with the external viewfinder. For this kind of photog, the trick is to learn the delay in the shutter and accomodate it in your own head. You CANNOT use the evf, because what you see will be gone when the shutter is actuated.

Which external viewfinder do you use? I'd like to find one with a 28mm (35mm equiv.) FOV, and lines for a 90mm FOV, that will slide on the hot shoe. I haven't seen one yet.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Originally Posted by jrethorst

Which external viewfinder do you use? I'd like to find one with a 28mm (35mm equiv.) FOV, and lines for a 90mm FOV, that will slide on the hot shoe. I haven't seen one yet.

I got a Voigtlander 28mm, probably from Popflash. Nice guys.

[audidudi]

Originally Posted by wparsonsgisnet

I got a Voigtlander 28mm, probably from Popflash. Nice guys.

Just a reminder that the Voigtlander finders are 3:2 format whereas the D2/LC1 is a 4:3 format camera. The only 4:3 format finders I'm aware of are Ricoh's GV-1, which is setup for both 21mm and 28mm effective focal lengths, and GV-2, which is more compact in size (similar to Voigtlander's mini-finders) and for 28mm only.

That said, because framing with an external finder is approximate in any event, the Voigtlander finders work fairly well on these cameras. I have a 28mm one that I bought for use with my Sigma DP-1 and have used it a few times with my LC1/D2 without any problems other than the expected one due to the format mismatch.

[Bostontom]

Just to add two cents: I recently bought a D2 from popflash.com (refurbished, new sensor 1 yr. Leica warranty) for 675 USD; they still have some when I checked. (I think they take D2s that Leica has taken in w. bad sensors that they have managed to persuade their owners to part with as a partial trade-in on a D3 -- but don't quote me on that).

I'm a weekend photographer, truly an amateur, and not a particularly skilled one at that.

Taking that as the caveat for any advice to follow: I love the D2; it produces wonderful images; the lens is just a honey to use, and while I have much to learn about the camera, it has two qualities that make it irreplaceable for me.

1. It is light, quiet and relatively unobtrusive (not a minox, of course, or even a Canon digital Elph, but still, not an incredible hulk either). That means it is with me a lot -- and the camera that is on the shelf is not taking pictures.

2. It makes me a better photographer than I "really" am because it makes me pay attention. Its film-like controls and feel work for me; I find it easy to use, and I find myself trying more different approaches to a shot than I do with my NIkon dSLR, for example.

So, fwiw, I'd say buy the camera and enjoy it. You can't have mine.

[krabat]

Regarding shooting with the DL2 at night, I tried it too, and the results are not that bad, as you may see here:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...nd-berlin.html
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...nd-london.html
I use ISO 100 also for night shots, tripod or another kind of mechanical stabilisation, like leaning on a wall or a balustrade or a handrail, and white balance setting "sunshine" in most cases, and I underexposure in most cases in order to keep the dark parts of the image dark.

Best regards, Peter.

[J Mitchum]

I hope Leica is reading this. I too will not give up my Digilux 2. Many had hoped the Digilux 3 would have been a direct successor with modest improvements such as a cleaner sensor and faster write times. Instead they went overboard and gave us a completely different type of camera in disguise.