Considering a V-Lux 1, or maybe not...

[Guest malland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mitch it depends on what you want it for. a E410 will beat it any day in picture quality and portability

Imants:

 

(I thought I'd start a new thread since we were quite off-topic in the FZ8 thread).

 

The E410 certainly does look interesting: I really like the Live Preview. But perhaps you know where I'm coming from, as I'm the guy who started a thread called, "When I hear IQ I reach for my gun." I really like the "35mm aesthetic" rather than the medium format film look that most are looking for in digital these days. That's the reason I'm currently using small sensor cameras, the Ricoh GR-D and the D-Lux 3. I know that I could use an M8 and intruduce grain with Alien Skin Exposure, but I like the more "direct" approach of using the grain the sensor produces, although I still do a lot of post-processing: contrast control and burning and dodging.

 

What attracts me to the V-Lux 1 (or the FZ50) is the idea of having a good quality zoom going all the way to 420mm-equivalent in such a small lens — also having a lens with the field of view of of a 420mm lens but the depth of field of a 90mm lens seems attractive, although I don't know how often I'd use the 420mm end of the zoom.

 

Imants, you know my photography — what do you think? BTW, I have two M6s and a whole range of lenses gathering dust. I haven't shot one frame of film since I got the GR-D last July. Maybe I'll sell the M6s and keep the lenses in case I ever get the M8. (The only use I would have for shooting film would be if I went on a three-week trek in New Guinea, but that may never happen.)

 

—Mitch/Johannesburg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Guest stnami]

Mitch

I would get a m8, keep one m6 and live with GRD etc. Thereis a lot that one can do with them8 files thery are robust, and a wide DOF is ok with your work so you can easily sit on high isos and f22 if need to and your 35mm film quality in b&W will be there. Why zoom, can't see the point as you need the almost eye contact range in your work. Not directed at you Mitch but photo bodies that use a zoom in the streets( War riots and possible death sorta excluded) have either lost their nerve or never had it so a V-Lux 1 is a no, well that's my advice

M8 eliability and colour........ well that's a bit iffy

 

I used the D2 at 200iso and what a fantasic B&W conversion from RAW, but despite a refit the camera has become fragile and it's life in my hands is limited( rough and tummble with equiptment, cars included rolled a fair few in my life

The one eye open gallery........ etrouko Imants Krumins ....is D2 B&W

 

I just bought a Bessa L, with a 25mm, first stop a heap of work with no VF and I will get the 15mm if all works well. A digital just won't do the job, the K100 and 21mm (31mm) does a great job at 1600 but I need as wide a DOF as possible. This bessa will give me film quality

[Guest malland]

Mitch

I would get a m8, keep one m6 and live with GRD etc. Thereis a lot that one can do with them8 files thery are robust, and a wide DOF is ok with your work so you can easily sit on high isos and f22 if need to and your 35mm film quality in b&W will be there. Why zoom, can't see the point as you need the almost eye contact range in your work. Not directed at you Mitch but photo bodies that use a zoom in the streets( War riots and possible death sorta excluded) have either lost their nerve or never had it so a V-Lux 1 is a no, well that's my advice

M8 eliability and colour........ well that's a bit iffy

Thanks for the thoughts, Imants.

 

My looking longingly at the 420mm of the V-Lux 1 is only techno-longing: being thrilled with the technology, particurly as I'm not into bird-watching. I've only once shot in the street with a 135mm lens, and it's not as good as being closer with a lens in the 21-50mm range. So you're certainly right in that.

 

What bothers me about the M8 is its (quirky?) reliability and the 0.68x viewfinder: I've convertred both of my M6s to a 0.85x viewfinder.

 

If I decide to wait out the current M8 dance, what would you recommend instead? Or just stick with the D-Lux 3 and GR-D for the time being?

 

—Mitch/Johannesburg

Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland

[Giulio Zanni]

I have the M8, the FZ50 and the GR-D. I love them all but they are all in different leagues. Of course the M8 is my first pick. The FZ50 comes in as a back-up, when I need easy shooting where image quality is not a priority (jpeg) and when I need a long lens. The FZ50 is a great portable camera, with fast auto-focus and excellent image quality. However, above 200 iso it becomes too noisy for my taste and raw shooting is very slow. The GR-D is a point-and-shot, which I carry around in my pocket just in case....So, if you can, get the M8, otherwise the FZ50 is a good a camera. The GR-D doesn't even come close to the other two.

 

Giulio

[Guest stnami]

what would you recommend instead? Or just stick with the D-Lux 3 and GR-D for the time being?

other than Oly the cupboard is bare

 

waiting out the M8 dance

* Leica Digilux 2

* Ricoh GRD

* Bessa L

* Olympus XA sorta

* Pentax K100 plus 21mm(31mm) lens... a 28mm (42mm ak XA)

 

I have a job in Damascus later in the year so for that If I do deceide to do it too many projects at home, I would get a E-410 for colour work the best rendition other than the D2 (the old Minolta 5D? was great) ...........................if the D2 dies or is too fragile

[Guest stnami]

........waiting out the M8 dance

all ideas would be appreciated

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The GR-D doesn't even come close to the other two.

Giulio, yea but that is the type of image that Mitch is chasing, So we are really looking for something that has the same film like characteristics and is small... got me stumped

[Guest malland]

Giulio, yea but that is the type of image that Mitch is chasing, So we are really looking for something that has the same film like characteristics and is small... got me stumped

Imants, that's precisely the point and has me stumped too.

 

—Mitch/Johannesburg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Guest stnami]

ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, ideas, please

[ksargent]

Mitch,

 

Given that you could pick up FZ50 for $500 US, what's the risk (compared to 10 times as much for an M8)? My FZ30 was my first digital camera and I never missed carrying my F3 and lenses. The controls are great and if you are going to shoot RAW, the Venus engine is a non-factor. The only remaining argument is "image quality" and given your results with the D-Lux 3, I think you know what to expect.

 

Ken

[Guest malland]

Hmm, I'll be in Hong Kong in about ten days. I see the Tin Ceung Camera shows a FZ50 price of US$486 and a V-Lux 1 0f US$912. That's an awfully high premium for the red dot and perhaps a tweak to the JPG processing that I wouldn't use as I shoot RAW. Perhaps it's just reflects the Hong Kong Leica craze, but still...

 

With a price of US$486 on the internet, one can probably negotiate a price of $420-450 in other shops as a walk-in buyer.

 

—Mitch/Lubumbashi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Letsrock]

Price for V-lux 1 is $780- $912.

Tin Cheung is actually on the higher side.

 

Go to Stanley Street in Hong Kong and you will find it around 780.

[Riley]

seen on a panasonic forum fz50

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!

[andit]

Hi Mitch,

 

Nice to see that you're in SA aswell. For a "carry anywhere" camera it takes incredibly good images. I know that the "Get It" magazines use the V-Lux 1 as standard issue for there photographers (albeit the Panasonic Equivalent, don't know what the current model number is). Plus it has an enourmous zoom range which does in come in handy at times.

 

If you're looking at spending more though, how does the Digilux 3/L1 sound. According to posts in this forum, that produces a film like grain image especially at ISO's higher than 400. I know that there were postings of images taken at 1600 which looked very much like standard film to me.

 

Well, just an idea...

 

Andreas

[ksargent]

Mitch,

 

One other difference: the Leica warranty is better. But given the fact that 1. you are going to shoot RAW and 2. you could nearly replace the FZ50 for the difference in price, the warranty and JPG processing are moot. For what it's worth, I read reviews/opinions indicating that the differences between the FZ50 and the V-Lux 1 are even less significant that the differences between the the D-Lux 3 and the LX2. The red dot is a temptation to be sure.

 

I agree with Andreas that the Digilux 3/L1 would be nice - but how much are you going to pay for the glass to equal the FZ50/VL1? Stabilized? Might as well go ahead and get the M8.

 

Ken

[R.Julian-Huxley]

Mitch

Go to Phil Douglis's Photo Galleries at pbase.com

This man has superb visual perception and literacy. We constantly talk to each other about the concepts of equipment . He has used FZ30, FZ50 and now Leica V-lux.1

and he would agree with the comments I made earlier. I am coming up 65 and the days are over for carrying around unnecessary heavy chunks of SLR equipment. I think Phil Douglis shows this to the extreme. By the way he is 73 and is very active! Read his site and photos, you'll find it an inspirational wealth of highly intelligent input. By the way I never use the viewfinder on the V-lux.1, I always use the swivel screen mostly at 90 degrees. This produces superb view points and fools the public in to thinking the camera is just at rest. Phil also uses the identical techniques and goes into great depths to explain this on his site. Hope this is of further use. Bye for now, RJH.

[R.Julian-Huxley]

Mitch Here are the differences: I own the FZ50. It is ok, but the image is overprocessed and smeary. Bought the Leica V-Lux 1 after speaking to my Leica Rep. It is a very different camera and I am impressed with the performance. Cosmetically better finish and right hand side moulded differently. Flash box has flatter smoother lines. Controls appear to be tighter specification. Leica's software gives far better noise control, sharper and colour more agfa like. The performance of this camera is quite remarkable considering size of censor etc. If this were an SLR, and associated lenses I would have been a patient at the osteopath. Recommend this camera highly. With good post-production technique it delivers superb A4 prints. RJ-H

[Guest stnami]

Guys, Mitch shoots raw with grain for B&W processing , jpegs are not what he wants, nor a big camera. The V-Lux is a possibility that he saw.

...............are there other cameras out there to fit his criteria other than the GRD

 

Phil Douglis is essentially a colour travel photo guy.........

[Guest malland]

Maybe the D-Lux 3 and the GR-D are the only cameras that fit the criteria I set out earlier in this thread. Looks like Imants and I have to get together to design, or at least to define the ideal camera...

 

I shot a bit the D-Lux 3 today at maximum zoom, which is what, about 120mm-equivalent -- and I must say that I'm much more comfortable at 21-50mm-equivalent. BTW, there is a problem photographing in the DR Congo because there is a 30-year old law from the Mobutu era forbidding photography, and things can get nasty. I spoke toa doctor with Medecins sans frontieres who told me she was arrested for photographing a Marie in a god-forsaken town in North Katanga that can only be reached by small aircraft.

 

If I were shooting game in East Africa, I wouldn't hesitate to try a V-Lux 1/FZ50, but, as I'm not into birding I probably would be hard-pressed to use such a strong telephoto — but as I stated earlier I'm dazzled by the technology of a 420mm lens that is so small and has the DOF of a 90mm lens.

 

—Mitch/Lubumbashi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest malland]

Of course the reference above should be "mairie" (town hall), not Marie. While I'm not trying artficial resuscitation on this thread, which has reached it's natural extinction, I still keep on thinking about the V-Lux 1/FZ50 because, I suppose, there are things about its design that attract me, such as, for example, the manual zoom and focusing rings on the lens barrel.

 

But I still cannot rationalize the need for a telephoto range up to 420mm, given the type of photography that I do — a lot of it depending on seeing the relationships, or patterns, of figures and forms in a scene. To feel that type of thing one must really be in the center of it; one cannot grasp it by looking far away or viewing it through a viewfinder, as Imants suggested earlier.

 

I've started thinking about doing a series of B&W pictures of individual trees, bushes or plants to bring out patterns and tones — not particularly original — and that is something for which a wide angle lens is not suitable: but neither is a powerful telephoto I would think. So, still no conclusion or answer.

 

—Mitch/Lubumbashi

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/