dugby Posted November 30, 2006 Share #1 Posted November 30, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well I got my L1 yesterday. Enclosed are a couple shots for A-B comparison of D2 and L1 All photos at ISO100, and no PC editing apart from resize for uploading to forum. All done as JPEGs with best quality (ie not much compression) a) D2 rose 22mm (ie 88mm for 35mm equivalent), f3.6 1/1600 L1 rose 50mm (ie 100 for 35mm equivalent), f3.5 1/1300 c) D2 house 15mm (ie 60mm) f5.7 1/800 d) L1 house 27mm (ie 54mm) f5.6 1/1300 Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/10389-l1-and-d2-sample-shots-here/?do=findComment&comment=107341'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 30, 2006 Posted November 30, 2006 Hi dugby, Take a look here L1 and D2 sample shots here . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adi sudarsono Posted November 30, 2006 Share #2 Posted November 30, 2006 Sorry, what are the differences? Maybe need some more challenging photos. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dugby Posted November 30, 2006 Author Share #3 Posted November 30, 2006 I too am wondering, why the L1 shots are too similar to the D2. I can see out-of-the box the L1 is not a giant leap forward, I may have to do some reading of settings, and more trigger play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted November 30, 2006 Share #4 Posted November 30, 2006 I see a fair difference in the rose shots. I presume the D2 is the upper shot which is implied in your text? The depth of field in the L1 seems to be less - compare the nearest leaf and the background, and the colours in the D2 shot are more saturated and generally darker. Conversely, the colours in the house shot seems to be a little more vibrant and possibly more saturated in the L1 shot- compare the stone cladding over the garage door for example. Interesting results. Too early to call for certain yet, but encouraging that there does not seem to be any diminution of quality - merely differences. More examples needed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted November 30, 2006 Share #5 Posted November 30, 2006 i think Brians' powers of observation pretty well nailed it i am surprised at how close they are though and as a real estate photographer, and for whom the qualities of D2 (LC-1) are very familiar to me, there is one less reason for me to update That said, and as you found out, you need to be right across the street to get an average home in full frame, which sometimes isnt possible. For those instances an ultra-wide view is required, and for this L1 can use (at some expence) the high quality 11-22mm zoom which provides a full 22mm (35mm equiv) view at a fast F2.8. And this with little introduced distortion. To do similar with D2/LC-1, you require the .82x wide converter accessory from Panasonic; then you have 23mm at a very fast F2. The only problem with this lens is its absolutely massive, and easily doubles the weight of the camera. It also adds rather more distortion, and perhaps predictably softens the image a tad. But overall the quality exceeds that of other wide converters by a good bit, impresses the hell out of your clients, as well as providing for free an upper arm workout Jane Fonda would be proud of , and this is doubly so if you went for the Metz 54 flash which is most necessary for interiors. Riley Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted November 30, 2006 Share #6 Posted November 30, 2006 Rob, you have nailed the very reason why I am seriously considering heading for the D3. The ability to have wider and longer focal length lenses is very tempting. Having said that I must consider the cost - L1 plus keep D2 or D3 and reluctantly sell my D2. The jury's out! Maybe I will be able to do D3 + D2 at the end of the day! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted November 30, 2006 Share #7 Posted November 30, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) heres my LC-1 weight lifting rig Riley Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/10389-l1-and-d2-sample-shots-here/?do=findComment&comment=107539'>More sharing options...
mikeadams Posted November 30, 2006 Share #8 Posted November 30, 2006 The D2 is such a good and dependable camera. I am saving my money for the M8! Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted November 30, 2006 Share #9 Posted November 30, 2006 yes i know the feeling, im equally confused ! having come from the Oly stable with a C7070, at first i was going to invest in E330, the flip LCD is great for what I do i am charmed by D3 and L1, but ...well just but for now lol i still think i may get a D2 for a backup, now that i have all the bits, major money investment then i saw what Guy could do with M8 sharpness i was stunned to be sure im just a commercial hack photographer really thats what happens when you spend your life messing about in the army but im pretty sure i could do well with an M8 and ultra wide for now its sit and wait Riley Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted November 30, 2006 Share #10 Posted November 30, 2006 The D2 is such a good and dependable camera. I am saving my money for the M8! Mike I would likely be dead and gone before I had enough saved for an M8 + even 1 decent lens! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted November 30, 2006 Share #11 Posted November 30, 2006 I would likely be dead and gone before I had enough saved for an M8 + even 1 decent lens! Many of us are in that situation- saving enough to buy an M8 PLUS leica lenses. Read the other threads about hacking non-leica lenses with Leica coding! Using gaffers tape and a sharpie marker, you can fool the M8 into thinking you have a Leica-brand coded lens. That will enable "the rest of us" to use our CV or Zeiss lenses! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest david_e Posted November 30, 2006 Share #12 Posted November 30, 2006 Where the difference between D2 and D3 becomes more obvious is at higher ISO - I don't have anything suitable to post as a pound-for-pound comparison, but I used the D3 alongside my D2 to shoot a wedding, mostly interior shots in the November gloom, and the D3's quality at 800 blows the D2 away at 200. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimF Posted November 30, 2006 Share #13 Posted November 30, 2006 I see a fair difference in the rose shots. I presume the D2 is the upper shot which is implied in your text? The depth of field in the L1 seems to be less - compare the nearest leaf and the background, and the colours in the D2 shot are more saturated and generally darker.Conversely, the colours in the house shot seems to be a little more vibrant and possibly more saturated in the L1 shot- compare the stone cladding over the garage door for example. Given the stated focal lengths for the rose shots (ie 22mm for the D2, 50mm for the L1) its hardly surprising that the former has greater depth of field. I think the D2 shots are definitely more contrasty than those from the L1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.