Steve Huffs review of D-Lux 5 is up

[MPJMP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just looked at the LX3 and LX5 images at ISO 400, 800 and 1600 here Digital Cameras, Digital Camera Reviews - The Imaging Resource! using their comparator and what I see is that while the LX5 appears to have less noise it is at the expense of losing all of the detail and sharpness. The resulting images are soft and smeared. The LX3 images preserve the detail and look much sharper despite having more visible noise.

 

Here's another comparison of the LX3 and LX5. In this one, it looks like the 5 is the clear winner, although they did not compare detail at 100%.

[brucek]

I just downloaded the D-Lux 5 brochures from the Leica web site and can find no mention of the warranty. I wonder if this model will be like the D-Lux 4 which, IIRC, only had a 2-year warranty here in the States...

[Shootist]

I just downloaded the D-Lux 5 brochures from the Leica web site and can find no mention of the warranty. I wonder if this model will be like the D-Lux 4 which, IIRC, only had a 2-year warranty here in the States...

 

I certainly hope not. When I get the one I have Pre-ordered the first thing I will do is check the warranty. If it is not 3 years I will return it and buy the Panasonic and the upgrade to LR3 saving $200.

From all reports it is the same camera.

[marknorton]

For the price, the new Nikon P7000 would be my first choice. A bit bigger and heavier but much more of a photographer's camera and, here in the UK, something like £200 less. Each to his own, of course.

[carlosecpf]

judging by his review, in my opinion, I think the D-lux 5 is the better buy compared to the X1... What do you guys think?

 

I've played with my friend's LX5 last friday and it beats my X1 hands-down on the AF department. Her LX5 took 0.7 seconds to focus a subject indoor while my X1 took 1.7 seconds... I tested it several times and the results didn't varied significantly.

 

HOWEVER, the X1 smoked the LX5 in the IQ department (high ISO). I did not test this Extensively because the panny battery drained by that time. From ISO800 and on, there was no comparison. The files produced by the X1 were MUCH clear and retained WAY more detail. I was not prepared for such difference in IQ, specially after reading steve's review last tuesday. I did not test ISO below 800, however. My friend was so impressed that she wanted to return her LX5 and buy an X1! however, the price difference made her give up on that idea quite quickly.

[Shootist]

I've played with my friend's LX5 last friday and it beats my X1 hands-down on the AF department. Her LX5 took 0.7 seconds to focus a subject indoor while my X1 took 1.7 seconds... I tested it several times and the results didn't varied significantly.

 

HOWEVER, the X1 smoked the LX5 in the IQ department (high ISO). I did not test this Extensively because the panny battery drained by that time. From ISO800 and on, there was no comparison. The files produced by the X1 were MUCH clear and retained WAY more detail. I was not prepared for such difference in IQ, specially after reading steve's review last tuesday. I did not test ISO below 800, however. My friend was so impressed that she wanted to return her LX5 and buy an X1! however, the price difference made her give up on that idea quite quickly.

 

Although the X1 may be a very nice camera, IQ handling whatever, I myself just can't see $2000 for a one lens, fixed FL, camera. What does the high ISO buy you when you can't get close enough or far enough away from the subject to get the shot you want.

I am glad Leica is doing well with the X1 but just think if it had interchangeable lenses or the ability to zoom/go wide.

I would have one.

[carlosecpf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Although the X1 may be a very nice camera, IQ handling whatever, I myself just can't see $2000 for a one lens, fixed FL, camera. What does the high ISO buy you when you can't get close enough or far enough away from the subject to get the shot you want.

I am glad Leica is doing well with the X1 but just think if it had interchangeable lenses or the ability to zoom/go wide.

I would have one.

 

Yeah, I know what you mean. Different people have different needs though. I wanted the best IQ possible througout the ISO range and manual controls on a compact form factor. I've looked at all the options and the X1 was the only one to fit my needs. AF speed and fixed lens were secundary to ME. Nonetheless, the lack of speed in the AF department is a little frustrating... But if there is will, there is a way: I am practicing Hyperfocal distance focusing and, somehow, I am feeling better about my photography skills and the X1 became almost all I hoped for in a camera.

 

But if you are not picky re IQ and manual controls, the LX5 might fit you well and leave some money on the bank, which is always nice.

[jankap]

I've played with my friend's LX5 last friday and it beats my X1 hands-down on the AF department. Her LX5 took 0.7 seconds to focus a subject indoor while my X1 took 1.7 seconds... I tested it several times and the results didn't varied significantly.

Didn't you compare apples with pears?

Please do have a look at the DOF of the LX5 and that of the X1 at the same f/stop.

The technicians are working on the problem, I think. The contrast method isn't a very fast one, it isn't a rangefinder (a measuring method).

Jan

PS

By the way, AF is there since 1980 (?). There were nice pictures of fast-moving objects before 1980.

[jsrockit]

I wanted the best IQ possible througout the ISO range and manual controls on a compact form factor. I've looked at all the options and the X1 was the only one to fit my needs. AF speed and fixed lens were secundary to ME. Nonetheless, the lack of speed in the AF department is a little frustrating... But if there is will, there is a way: I am practicing Hyperfocal distance focusing and, somehow, I am feeling better about my photography skills and the X1 became almost all I hoped for in a camera.

 

I agree completely.

[soelin]

I got a DL5 recently and I am loving the JPEG image quality I am getting from the camera. Results I am getting from ISO 1600 are quite amazing for such a small sensor compact. I have used/owned LX3 and DL4--and I can comfortably say the DL5 is better.

 

There's still no DL5 RAW support in Lightroom or Photoshop, so far and I am not willing to "hack" the exif to show the raw file as LX5. I can wait.

 

Here's a link to the straight out of camera (resized) JPEGs.

Leica D-Lux 5 - a set on Flickr

[Shootist]

I got a DL5 recently and I am loving the JPEG image quality I am getting from the camera. Results I am getting from ISO 1600 are quite amazing for such a small sensor compact. I have used/owned LX3 and DL4--and I can comfortably say the DL5 is better.

 

There's still no DL5 RAW support in Lightroom or Photoshop, so far and I am not willing to "hack" the exif to show the raw file as LX5. I can wait.

 

Here's a link to the straight out of camera (resized) JPEGs.

Leica D-Lux 5 - a set on Flickr

 

Yes there is support for the DL5 in Lightroom and I would suspect PS CS5 with the latest ACR version. Lightroom COMES WITH the DL5. That would be funny if the supplied RAW software didn't support the camera it came with.

Check your versions of both LR and PS. Will Adobe give support to LR2 and PS CS4, NO. But since the DL5 is bundled with a license for LR3.X (All versions until LR 4 comes out) it's a no brainer to edit RAW files.