Leica D-Lux 5?

[soleforeal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This seems to be some clue to what's next.

 

Panasonic Leica D-Lux 5 | SLAMXHYPE

[elgenper]

This seems to be some clue to what's next.

 

....

 

Probably not. These very images popped up long before the first micro-4/3 camera (Panasonic G1) was presented. It was dead wrong then.

 

Now, it seems it surfaced again. Probably just as dead wrong this time.....

[brucek]

Looks to me like an early artist's rendering of what is now the GF1.

[mjh]

This is old news. It was a an artist’s rendition of what a Panasonic Micro-FourThirds camera might look like. Funny how the same fake images make the rounds again and again (which goes to show how short the attention span of the average internet user is).

[viramati]

may be totally wrong as to design but my dealer told me that the dlux -5 is on its way

[daveleo]

"Hope springs eternal in the human breast. . . "

.

 

.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Any reason why Panasonic can't slap a micro 4/3 sensor in the LX4/DL5 and keep it the same size?

[mjh]

Any reason why Panasonic can't slap a micro 4/3 sensor in the LX4/DL5 and keep it the same size?

Because the lens would grow proportionally. And of course they couldn’t keep the case the same size either (the GF1 should give you a good idea of the dimensions).

[wmtupas]

Posted today at Leica Rumors. To be released May 9th. US$744 according to engadget.

 

[mjh]

Yeah, we know; that’s the V-Lux 20, Leica’s version of the Panasonic TZ10. It is not a D-Lux 5 (i.e. a successor of the D-Lux 4).

[stunsworth]

D-Lux 5 = GF1?

[mjh]

D-Lux 5 = GF1?

D-Lux 5 = LX4 (or LX5 if Panasonic should choose to avoid the fateful 4) I suppose, but there is no LX4 (or LX5) just yet.

[jsrockit]

Because the lens would grow proportionally. And of course they couldn’t keep the case the same size either (the GF1 should give you a good idea of the dimensions).

 

I'm not an engineer, but many small, high-quality 35mm cameras (rollei 35, ricoh gr1, etc) have small lenses...not to mentions the tons of low-end ones that are small as well. Film is larger than these APS-C sensors. Why would the lens have to be larger for this sensor over 35mm film? I always assumed the GF1's lens size was due to the mount size and trying to make better quality lenses. The X1 does not have a large lens. Perhaps the FX4/DL5 shouldn't have a zoom>?

[mjh]

I'm not an engineer, but many small, high-quality 35mm cameras (rollei 35, ricoh gr1, etc) have small lenses...not to mentions the tons of low-end ones that are small as well.

I thought you wanted a 24–60 mm equivalent lens like the D-Lux 4 has? Also a sensor is much bigger than film, and the electronics, LCD, and battery take up space, too. But if you don’t need a zoom and APS-C is OK, the X1 demonstrates what is possible. Its height and depth closely resembles the Rollei 35; it is 27 mm wider but not as heavy (the Rollei 35 was 370 g without film, the X1 weighs 286 g without battery). And it has an autofocus lens which the Rollei had not.

[jsrockit]

But if you don’t need a zoom and APS-C is OK, the X1 demonstrates what is possible. Its height and depth closely resembles the Rollei 35; it is 27 mm wider but not as heavy (the Rollei 35 was 370 g without film, the X1 weighs 286 g without battery). And it has an autofocus lens which the Rollei had not.

 

No, I hate zooms. I use an X1 already... which is why I can't see P&S cameras having miniscule sensors much longer. It doesn't have to APS-C, but maybe u4/3...