D-Lux 109 natural upgrade path from Digilux 2 ?

[mija1789]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Don't get me wrong ! I have no plan whatsoever to part company with my beloved Digilux 2. 

However, there are a number of situations where the lack of high ISO capability simply prevents me from taking pictures (i.e. kids or pets inside with typical Belgian weather outside. Those of you living in the UK will understand what I mean by typical weather)

 

To overcome this, Im looking at buying a D-Lux 109 for the following reasons:

- viewfinder (for me, the natural way to photograph)

- zoom (I do not feel comfortable with a fixed lens)

- higher ISO capability

- fast lens

- easier travel companion

 

So, if you have (or had) both, what's your opinion in terms of ease of use (excellent with the Digilux 2) and IQ (compared to the Digilux 2) ?

 

Thanks for your feedback

 

 

[dhsimmonds]

I have the LX100 alternative to the D-Lux109 and I believe that it is an excellent alternative to the D2.  You won't be disappointed at the excellent image quality and the higher Iso is certainly useful at times.  It is also more convenient in my opinion being both smaller and lighter with a faster lens and that all important 4/3 lens with selectable formats.  Virtually any m4/3 flashgun can be used to supplement the already very useful little flash gun that comes with the camera.  I use it as my "go anywhere" camera" and for family occasions.  Mine was used extensively over the Christmas and New Year family gatherings where the little flashgun was also used.   I used to own a D2 and whilst it is still a very fine camera, it is now obsolete and technology of sensors, flashguns have long since passed it by.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[williamgm]

I still have and still use my Digilux 2 and will never part with it. Last year, I added a used, mint condition Leica X-Vario (with the extra viewfinder - I too need a viewfinder on a camera) and in many ways I feel this is the more modern version of the Digilux. The lens is excellent and covers approx. the range of the older camera. If Leica ever updated the Vario, I just wish they would leave out the little flash unit and use the space for a built-in EVF.

[mija1789]

@williamgm

What is the reference of the viewfinder ? Is it an OVF or an EVF ?

[williamgm]

The viewfinder I use is an EVF (actually, an Olympus VF-2 which is essentially the same as the Leica EVF-2). Many use the Olympus viewfinder as a less-expensive alternative to the Leica-branded one on e.g. X-Vario, M240 etc.

The Olympus one is only available as a used item now, but they are quite easy to find.

 

Regards,

Geoff

[farnz]

I've had 2 Digilux 2's for many years and owned the D-Lux 109 for a about 8 months months.  The D-Lux is an excellent camera in its own right but in my humble opinion it's certainly not a natural successor to the D2.  The major reason for this is the ergonomic ease which the D2 has in spades but which the DL109 lacks - again this is my subjective view and I doubt that everyone will agree with me.  I found the DL109 an unreasonably difficult camera to learn, which means that it's just not naturally intuitive to me.  Eventually I never warmed to the camera so I used it very rarely and it got moved on.  I know others who have felt the same way and done the same.  I was disappointed because I wanted so much to like the DL109 and for it to be the natural successor to the D2 but for my money it just wasn't.

 

Despite this, the DL109 performs very well in low light and certainly better than the D2's ageing maximum ISO 640.  The DL109's EVF is (understandably) incomparably better than the D2's EVF and one of the camera's strong points.

 

If I were to suggest a natural successor to the D2 then it would most likely be the Q.

[ropo54]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had 2 Digilux 2's for many years and owned the D-Lux 109 for a about 8 months months.  The D-Lux is an excellent camera in its own right but in my humble opinion it's certainly not a natural successor to the D2.  The major reason for this is the ergonomic ease which the D2 has in spades but which the DL109 lacks - again this is my subjective view and I doubt that everyone will agree with me.  I found the DL109 an unreasonably difficult camera to learn, which means that it's just not naturally intuitive to me.  Eventually I never warmed to the camera so I used it very rarely and it got moved on.  I know others who have felt the same way and done the same.  I was disappointed because I wanted so much to like the DL109 and for it to be the natural successor to the D2 but for my money it just wasn't.

 

Despite this, the DL109 performs very well in low light and certainly better than the D2's ageing maximum ISO 640.  The DL109's EVF is (understandably) incomparably better than the D2's EVF and one of the camera's strong points.

 

If I were to suggest a natural successor to the D2 then it would most likely be the Q.

 

Agree with you!  The menu system was such a pain in the butt.

[lct]

Never liked the Digilux 2 so for me the LX100 was the natural upgrade path from my beloved Digilux 1. The menu is indeed painful but i prefer too many options to too few of them as with some more expensive but less ergonomic camera bodies.

[ECohen]

i like the DLux very easy camera to use and its got a Macro Zoom nice IQ even at high ISO

 

I know we're on the Leica site but save yourself some money and get the Panasonic

I have the Leica my niece has the Panasonic no noticeable difference except cosmetic

It's the go to camera I always recommend to people asking me which camera to buy