h00ligan Posted December 21, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm curious - as a beginner - how you think the newer tech of the dl4 fares against something like a rebel XT. They certainly have a very different look to photos they take. Obviously the rebel is old tech, one of the first mainstream entry level dslr - and has a kit lens. Just looking for other thoughts, sorry it's such an abstract question - but have good bridge cams now surpassed old entry level dslr's in your opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 21, 2009 Posted December 21, 2009 Hi h00ligan, Take a look here How do you think dl4 IQ stacks up against an old DSLR. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AlbertoDeRoma Posted December 21, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 21, 2009 I'm curious - as a beginner - how you think the newer tech of the dl4 fares against something like a rebel XT. They certainly have a very different look to photos they take. Obviously the rebel is old tech, one of the first mainstream entry level dslr - and has a kit lens. Just looking for other thoughts, sorry it's such an abstract question - but have good bridge cams now surpassed old entry level dslr's in your opinion. I don't know about the Rebel XT, but I have a D-Lux 4 and what would qualify as an old DSLR (i.e. Nikon D100) and the DL4 pictures look better (richer, more vivid and more compelling) -- to me. Alberto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted December 21, 2009 I would agree that the colour from the dl4 is richer than the rebel xt - although maybe the cam is not as sharp as the xt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
regedit Posted December 21, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 21, 2009 d-lux4 beats by far my old pentax istdl with 18-55 but when I use 50 f1.4 even the old pentax turn into a beast. it's not only about body and sensor, it's also about glass. kit glass it's crappy one but with good objective even old dslr produce good quality pictures. d-lux always win when comes to size and all around features. leica recipt for d-lux4 it's incredible good one: put a larger than average p&s sensor, add full hd video, get wide and fast lens, focus faster than any other p&s and take good care on jpeg processing engine. and all of that in a small form factor. for me, was everything I need to drop my dslr and embrace leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted December 21, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 21, 2009 I would imagine a Rebel XT, in RAW mode, with a great Canon lens and its APS-C size sensor would kill the DL4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted December 21, 2009 A great lens on the canon would probably push it past. agreed. But i would argue that with a non IS old kit lens on a 6yo dslr - the dlux 4 wins out of the box Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 21, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) So now you HAVE to upgrade to an X1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 21, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted December 21, 2009 stop instigating! I don't have the money for an X1! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delnerdo Posted December 22, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 22, 2009 So now you HAVE to upgrade to an X1 Or M9. Used M8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #10 Posted December 22, 2009 I'm far too useless at photography to justify any of the above! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
regedit Posted December 22, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 22, 2009 You can get them for passion rather professionalism. Especially for Leica brand. I saw a lot of young guys hanging a heavy as possible DSLR around their neck and don't have a clue about some basic principles of photography like what is Aperture and how does it work or affect process of taking a picture. Leica is a brand of passion and if you exploit wisely, in time you can get great pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted December 22, 2009 thanks for the encouragement reg! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlbertoDeRoma Posted December 22, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 22, 2009 You can get them for passion rather professionalism. Especially for Leica brand. I saw a lot of young guys hanging a heavy as possible DSLR around their neck and don't have a clue about some basic principles of photography like what is Aperture and how does it work or affect process of taking a picture. Leica is a brand of passion and if you exploit wisely, in time you can get great pictures. Very well said! Alberto Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeuszen Posted December 22, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 22, 2009 I would imagine a Rebel XT, in RAW mode, with a great Canon lens and its APS-C size sensor would kill the DL4. Absolutely. The DL4's sensor is smaller and, therefore, produces considerably noisier images. But the OP only asked for the difference in IQ. I own several DSLRs, but actually end up taking more very good and interesting images with the little DL4 than with them. When I approach the world with a DSLR, I see one thing. Through the DL4, I see another. This, to me, is the critical difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalina Posted December 22, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 22, 2009 I do love my D-Lux 4, but my old Nikon D40 produced images way better than my D-Lux 4. But to compare the two is like comparing apples and oranges. I can fit my D-Lux 4 in my pocket. I can use it as a spy camera. The D40 can do or be neither. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delnerdo Posted December 23, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 23, 2009 Have you ever sat in an audience during a musical performance (classical or acoustic, not in an amplified ear-bleeding scene) next to someone shooting with a DSLR? It will make you love the subtlety of the red dot. Or give you ideas for the carry strap on the DSLR camera... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 23, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted December 23, 2009 Or give you ideas for the carry strap on the DSLR camera... lmao Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted December 23, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 23, 2009 If you're looking at jpegs on a monitor its possible that you might prefer the look of a Dlux image to the DSLR which will be down to the colour/contrast/sharpness settings I suspect. The DSLR although of lower MP has a much larger sensor, that should give significantly better quality/lower noise levels especially if you print images. The DSLR will show shallower DoF and of course you can fit Leica R lenses to it for the ultimate optical quality. As Kalina has said they are really different cameras for different purposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted December 23, 2009 Author Share #19 Posted December 23, 2009 Well I think ran into one thing with the dlux 4 yesterday that surprised me. I shot a landscape after a rain and was surprised how low the overall detail was of the trees in the distance at 100% view - seemingly a weak point compared to my older dslr (7mp). overall I was happy with how the pictures turned out - but also surprised at the massive difference in contrast between shots very close together timewise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted December 23, 2009 Share #20 Posted December 23, 2009 Well I think ran into one thing with the dlux 4 yesterday that surprised me. I shot a landscape after a rain and was surprised how low the overall detail was of the trees in the distance at 100% view - seemingly a weak point compared to my older dslr (7mp). overall I was happy with how the pictures turned out - but also surprised at the massive difference in contrast between shots very close together timewise. This is a meaningless comparison unless the two machines were set EXACTLY the same and the resultant images processed and viewed identically, surely? Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.