Jump to content

Do Digilux 2 photos have distinctive look?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Oops. That didn't work so well. How do you embed photos in a reply?

 

You either upload them to this site by clicking on the "manage attachments" button in the "additional options" window below the "Reply to Thread" window or you click on the "insert image" icon located immediately above the text window in which you type your response and enter the URL where the image is located in the pop-up box. (FYI, Facebook apparently does not allow hot-linking its images, as it asks you to sign-in before displaying the links you posted above.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have owned and used a D2 for several years after working through M2-6 and have never been disappointed. Yes, something faster than 400 ISO would be nice, but the Leica firmware does make a visible difference when comparing the Panasonic "equivalent."

 

However, I have noticed that I do not carry it with me as often as I used to because of the size. I have been considering a D-LUX 3 as a replacement that is easy to always have at hand, but this thread is causing some serious re-consideration!

 

I have not actually used a D-LUX 3-- perhaps some of you could build a case for the D2 over the D-LUX 3 based on image quality and similar factors rather than intangibles? After seven M rangefinders (and a Leicaflex) I am familiar with Leica "feel" and do think the D2 has some of that.

 

For grins I will attach some pics with the D2 from England.

 

Rich

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Audi. Here's my second attempt. These were taken without flash in low light at a recent art exhibition in Kuala Lumpur. I call the series "Pictures At An Exhibition", after Mussorgsky's opus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some more:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where the highlights are blown, that's where the high-intensity studio lighting were. It shows up the limitations of the camera's dynamic range, as well as the photographer's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
One from today.

 

Good God, Pete... you're going to have me convinced I can shoot with this thing trackside... and it'll probably end up as occupational suicide. LOL

 

You must have a good sense of the shutter lag.

 

Nice.

 

Glad I found this thread.

 

JT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have owned and used a D2 for several years after working through M2-6 and have never been disappointed. Yes, something faster than 400 ISO would be nice, but the Leica firmware does make a visible difference when comparing the Panasonic "equivalent."

 

However, I have noticed that I do not carry it with me as often as I used to because of the size. I have been considering a D-LUX 3 as a replacement that is easy to always have at hand, but this thread is causing some serious re-consideration!

 

I have not actually used a D-LUX 3-- perhaps some of you could build a case for the D2 over the D-LUX 3 based on image quality and similar factors rather than intangibles? After seven M rangefinders (and a Leicaflex) I am familiar with Leica "feel" and do think the D2 has some of that.

 

For grins I will attach some pics with the D2 from England.

 

Rich

 

I have a D-Lux 3 and recent a Digilux 2. Have compared RAW images at 400 ISO between both camera's. I could not find a significant difference. At 800 ISO the DL3 is already showing much noise.

The auto white balance of the DL3 has slightly better performance. I found the D2 images a little sharper than those of the DL3. Writing speed of the DL3 is better than the D2 but considering the images I take the slower writing speed of the D2 isn't a problem for me.

About the Leica "feel", I also think the D2 has some of that, certainly the analog feel (exept the viewfinder, but at least there is a viewfinder wich the DL3 lacks).

My preference goes to the D2, it feels like a real camera and the lens is superb. It also reminds me of my analog CM & CM Zoom, both still in use.

The DL3 has the advantage of being small but in my opinion does not have the Leica "feel". Perhaps the new D-Lux 4 with attached viewfinder is a good alternative but I have not yet been able to hold it in my hands or try it.

At this moment the D2 perfect fits my needs.

 

Best

 

Roger

Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the 400 iso look especially in low light.

 

D2 | ISO 400 | f2.4 | 1/20 | RAW via Lightroom

Cloakroom at the Barbican - London

 

 

D2 | ISO 400 | f2.8 | 1/80 | RAW via Lightroom

Michael Morpurgo at the Barbican - London

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bernd,

 

That's a nice shot and perspective.

 

I find that ISO-noise is only a problem if there's too little light. As the sensor is native 100 ISO that's what it can see. With less light, the higher ISO-settings has to figure out what's in the dark spots, hence the noise.

 

I've done lots of 200 ISO shots (often by error ;-) in daylight that looks great.

Link to post
Share on other sites

....

However, I have noticed that I do not carry it with me as often as I used to because of the size. I have been considering a D-LUX 3 as a replacement that is easy to always have at hand, but this thread is causing some serious re-consideration!

....

 

 

Well, don´t!

 

Last February, I did just that. I bought a D-lux 3 as a complement, not a replacement, for my trusty and well used Digilux 2, and it just doesn´t work the way I thought.

 

Every time I do take the D-l 3 instead of my D 2, I regret it, and that feeling is further aggravated when looking at the pictures.

 

There are times when I just plain CANNOT carry even a small camera bag, and that´s when I have to dust off the D-l 3 and carry it in a belt holster. But not when I can avoid it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernd,

 

That's a nice shot and perspective.

 

I find that ISO-noise is only a problem if there's too little light. As the sensor is native 100 ISO that's what it can see. With less light, the higher ISO-settings has to figure out what's in the dark spots, hence the noise.

 

I've done lots of 200 ISO shots (often by error ;-) in daylight that looks great.

 

I think that is a situation that is "global" to many cameras. When I would shoot night racing I would try to "sneak" up on the higher ISO settings in-as-much as I did not want to "go there." As a result, I'd be shooting slightly under exposed. I would blame the resulting noise on high ISO. Lately, though, I realized I needed to just go for it, set the ISO high and go for it... and expose the image properly. Suprisingly, my images now have less noise at 1600 than they used to at 800 ISO. And, I see the benefits at all high ISOs when I make sure there is enough "headroom" to expose the image properly.

 

Once you get into the high ISO you've got to be sure and have a solid exposure. The minute you try to save it in post processing, you'll simply amplify the noise exponentially.

 

I find 400 ISO on the Digilux 2 very workable in RAW.

 

JT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, don´t!

 

Last February, I did just that. I bought a D-lux 3 as a complement, not a replacement, for my trusty and well used Digilux 2, and it just doesn´t work the way I thought.

 

Every time I do take the D-l 3 instead of my D 2, I regret it, and that feeling is further aggravated when looking at the pictures.

 

There are times when I just plain CANNOT carry even a small camera bag, and that´s when I have to dust off the D-l 3 and carry it in a belt holster. But not when I can avoid it...

 

 

I feel the same way. I do enjoy owning the Digilux 3.... but it is a "step child" when it comes to being useful. Every time I take it out, I keep thinking that I could be doing the same thing with my Canon equipment only faster, more efficiently and with just as good and usually better results. Granted, they're not as cool looking....

 

The Digilux 2 just feels great. It responds to you.... and delivers wonderful images with a look of their own.

 

My Digilux 3 is on eBay as we speak.

 

JT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rich, I have both the D-lux 4 and the Digilux 2. I think they serve very different purposes considering their size. The Dlux 4 is the best p&s one can carry everywhere. The Digilux 2 is much more of real camera that needs a bag. I have the Dlux4 with me all the time. When I am intentional of going shooting, then I take the d2. If your budget allows, I would say keep both!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the same way. I do enjoy owning the Digilux 3.... but it is a "step child" when it comes to being useful. Every time I take it out, I keep thinking that I could be doing the same thing with my Canon equipment only faster, more efficiently and with just as good and usually better results. Granted, they're not as cool looking....

 

The Digilux 2 just feels great. It responds to you.... and delivers wonderful images with a look of their own.

 

My Digilux 3 is on eBay as we speak.

 

JT

That's a shame you are selling your D3. I have D2 D3 And a Nikon out fit.

When I first got the D3, I like you used to wish I had taken out the nikon stuff But as the time has gone by and I have used the D3 more I find it is the other way round. I find the D3 gives good reliable results , and its really enjoyable to use and it sort of fits in my hands very nicely where as as much as I equally enjoy the D2 I find it a little less easy. And the Nikon is just easy to use but seems not to give as pleasing results ( probably pilot error) .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good God, Pete... you're going to have me convinced I can shoot with this thing trackside... and it'll probably end up as occupational suicide. LOL

 

You must have a good sense of the shutter lag.

 

Nice.

 

Glad I found this thread.

 

JT

 

wrt shutter lag- there is none! Manually pre-focus, set the shutter speed, point where you "expect" the car to be and half-press the shutter to set the aperture ....... result zero lag!

 

The brief for this series of shots was to provide some action but have the "Oulton Park" banner readable for their brochure. Normally I'd pan with a slower shutter and lose the background, here 1/500 produced some sense of movement which 1/2000 would have killed.

 

lets have some more D2 photos folks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's one shot at ISO 200 from jpeg with some "pushing" from the LC1:

 

And here's another at 100:

 

And one more from this weekend at 200:

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few of my recent shots with the Digilux 2

Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck ... here are a few recent ones taken with mine.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...