D-Lux 3 - any thoughts or comments?

[Iron Flatline]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all.

 

I'm thinking of adding the D-Lux 3 to my line-up. A compact camera that shoots RAW is just what I need.

 

Leica D-Lux 3

 

Any thoughts, comments, observations or recommendations?

[smokysun]

hi,

 

i used the d-lux 2 for a year. the 3 seems pretty much the same, but i just got the leica newsmagazine and they've dropped it from their lineup. probably you can find one, but they must have stopped making them.

 

go to wayne pease's Photo Galleries at pbase.com and scroll down to the bottom of the page. you'll see hundreds of experiments with the d-lux 2. the fuji f30 doesn't have raw but you can shoot at 1600. worth a thought.

 

wayne

[dogberry]

Have a look at this little minireview of the D-Lux 3 I posted on photo.net. I included a lot of sample images at different ISO settings so you can decide for yourself.

 

Part I of the minireview is here

Part II (which discusses noise and higher ISO settings) is here

 

I hope this is helpful

 

Best

 

Gordon

[sevendhappy]

I recently bought this camera. I like it a lot. It's no DSLR by any means, and I'm no professional photographer....but it is versatile in the sense that I can tweak and edit my pictures more so than any regular point and shoot camera. I bought the Leica instead of the Panasonic because of the warranty and the finish of the camera itself (I thought it looked a lot cleaner than the panasonic). Yeah, I'm one of those who cares about how the camera looks somewhat.

[Iron Flatline]

Wow, yes, the reviews were quite helpful.

 

Anyway, I will probably get one, though I will have to adjust my expectations somewhat. I have to say that I find some of the posted ISO 400 sample shots to be quite noisy, but seeing as I want it to shoot RAW I will deal with it in post-processing.

 

The other issue I will have to get reacquainted with is the shutter lag. We have an old P&S camera, and it always irks me that the camera takes entire seconds to decide how to execute the shot. By that time my kids have left the frame... grrr... I know it will be a little faster than the old Canon SD400. I wish it could shoot JUST RAW, because that might remove the need for the shutter lag, and eat up less file space - 43 images on a 1 gig card is NOT a lot. Fortunately B&H are offering a little package.

 

Composing on a monitor is also not how I want to do it, but I guess I have no choice. But heck, any bigger and it will defeat the goal of having a pocket camera.

 

Sheesh, I always forget how virulent some Leica-haters can get. Weird. Usually brands attract a bunch of Evangelists (just ask some people about Apple Computers) but you rarely see people be so actively involved in DISliking a brand. LOL.

 

Oh, and I will be buying the Leica D-Lux 3. I have the sneaking suspicion that it is the EXACT same camera as the Panasonic, but I like the red dot. Bite me if you don't like it, it's my money.

[Guest malland]

If you do a search here you'll find quite a few informative threads on the D-Lux 3. For some pictures with the camera you can look here:

 

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

 

—Mitch/Hong Kong

[Iron Flatline]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quite nice! Some of them look too sharp, which is the opposite of what some reviewers have complained about - but I have come to assume that it is my crap monitor, not over-sharpening.

[jjcha]

Looks like you're decided on the D-Lux 3 - well, welcome to it, and it does seem you've done your homework and know the limitations of this camera. It does have very meaningful limitations - there's enough noise even at ISO100 that I have Noise Ninja in my workflow at that level, while on my little Canon Digital Rebel XTi, I don't do that until ISO800. Also there is a bit of shutter lag, even if you've prefocused by using zone focusing or AF lock in advance. It can be frustrating to use this camera to capture the "decisive moment".

 

But I took a look at your gallery, and it's clear that you know how to, and take care in, post-processing your photos. And the little Leica does shoot in RAW so will allow you to use all the usual tools and techniques you already use. It's clear that this camera is capable of great shots for the photographer who knows and works within its limitations, and has a good hand at post processing. Jim Radcliffe has clearly shown some of what it is capable of:

 

Leicashots

 

The D-Lux 3 shoots reasonably sharp for a point and shoot, but it's not nearly anywhere as sharp as a DSLR with good glass or a M8. For a broader range of photos and idea of what the camera does, there's a pool on flickr specific to it that you can check out:

 

Flickr: The Leica D-LUX 3 Pool

 

I carry the camera around nearly 24/7 and enjoy it thoroughly, despite its limitations and mine as a beginner photographer. Honestly it is what it is (an overpriced Panasonic point and shoot camera), but there are those who find it enjoyable despite that. Hope you're one of them.

 

Best regards,

 

-Jason

[ECliffordSmith]

I have been using a D-Lux 2 for the best part of a year now and am very happy with the camera.

 

I have some very large JPEG files from the camera in the linked gallery if you are interested in seeing what the lens can produce.

 

Leica D-Lux 2 Photo Gallery by ecliffordsmith at pbase.com

 

I have found that the shutter lag is not actually too bad especially if you prefocus. I suspect the D-lux 3 is no slower that the D-Lux 2 in this regard.

 

Good luck!

[Guest malland]

Looks like you're decided on the D-Lux 3 - well, welcome to it, and it does seem you've done your homework and know the limitations of this camera. It does have very meaningful limitations - there's enough noise even at ISO100 that I have Noise Ninja in my workflow at that level, while on my little Canon Digital Rebel XTi, I don't do that until ISO800. Also there is a bit of shutter lag, even if you've prefocused by using zone focusing or AF lock in advance. It can be frustrating to use this camera to capture the "decisive moment"...The D-Lux 3 shoots reasonably sharp for a point and shoot, but it's not nearly anywhere as sharp as a DSLR with good glass or a M8.

I don't really agree with much of what you write. The camera is sharp enough and I like the grain, the same way that I like film grain. I have not found shutter lag to be a problem. And, finally, I think it is a disserveice to a camera with the capability of the D-Lux 3 to call it a point and shoot: I would call it a small sensor camera.

 

Sean Reid has suggested that cameras like the D-Lux 3 and the Ricoh GR-D are a new format, characaterized by great depth of field and graininess at higher ISOs, the way 35mm was a new format when the Leica was first introduced.

 

In fact I use both of these small-format cameras specifically because I prefer the "35mm aesthetic" to the medium format film look, which is what the M8 has.

 

Oh, and I think that people are too obsessed with sharpness. I'm more interested in the overall look of a picture and what the photograph says. Have a look at this thread:

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/16946-when-i-hear-iq-i-reach.html?highlight=reach+for+my+gun

 

—Mitch/Tokyo

Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland

[AlanJW]

In the right hands (and yours seems right) the D-Lux 3 is a very good camera. I have one. It is the one that goes to the beach as opposed to the M8. There is noise above ISO 200 to be sure but it is fairly easily addressed by Noise Ninja (I assume other such programs would work as well) and what led me to it was the ability -- rare in a P&S -- to (i) shoot in RAW; (ii) go completely manual when you want to. The only real drawback to me is the lack of a viewfinder. While I've gotten used to composing on the screen (sort of) I am just a viewfinder kind of guy. The flash is also very weak and should be avoided. Oh, and I got the Leica as well. BTW, I had the prior version (panasonic brand) and my daughter now has it -- its perfectly fine when you want to run it in full auto.

[jjcha]

And, finally, I think it is a disserveice to a camera with the capability of the D-Lux 3 to call it a point and shoot: I would call it a small sensor camera.

 

Well, I think it's great you think the camera is so fantastic - I like it a lot too. If your point is that people are way over obsessed with "image quality" and groaning about noise or sharpness or whatnot, I certainly agree. People should just take photos - they may discover that whatever gear they're obsessing over is extraordinarily fun and rewarding.

 

So, I realize my post may have sounded obsessed with image quality, but it was really in response to the original poster's statement that he's buying this camera and is considering his expectations from it. I just wanted to relate my experiences with the camera on the issues he mentions and is concerned about - specifically, noise, shutter lag, whether the camera is sharp, not sharp, or too sharp. The man shoots with some absolutely top notch gear and I wanted to talk about adjusting to the D-Lux 3.

 

Still, on those three criteria - there's nothing that really distinguishes the D-Lux 3 from the rest of the well designed, higher-end consumer point and shoot cameras. I don't find it has better noise treatment, shutter lag or image sharpness than some of the other nice point and shoots out there. But I find that I'm constantly surprised with the great photos many of the nicer consumer-marketed cameras are capable of.

 

Are there characteristics that make the D-Lux 3 more attractive to a photographer accustomed to full manual control and RAW processing? Sure, absolutely. And in that regard, yes maybe it does distinguish itself from much of the competition, and I think I describe that in my post. But on the items that the original poster was concerned about, I think it is a disservice to somehow claim the D-Lux 3 does better than the others out there. It doesn't.

 

And yes, this has very little to do with the actual photos that the camera is capable of taking. I really like the results I've gotten from this camera as well, and think others have taken some great ones. But I think the original poster has already decided that it is capable of taking good photos, and he was talking about some of the adjustments he'd have to take from shooting with other gear.

 

Best regards,

 

-Jason

[Bill W]

hi,

 

i used the d-lux 2 for a year. the 3 seems pretty much the same, but i just got the leica newsmagazine and they've dropped it from their lineup. probably you can find one, but they must have stopped making them.

 

go to wayne pease's Photo Galleries at pbase.com and scroll down to the bottom of the page. you'll see hundreds of experiments with the d-lux 2. the fuji f30 doesn't have raw but you can shoot at 1600. worth a thought.

 

wayne

 

The D-Lux 3 is still shown at the Leica website so I doubt that it has been dropped but I could be wrong. I have been looking at getting one as well. Several on ebay that say how hard it is to get one and people paying over the $599 retail price but most on line retailers seem to have them in stock.

[Iron Flatline]

Yeah, everyone seems to have them in stock. There seems to have been a bottleneck around Hanukah (Christmas) but everything seems available now.