Digilux 3 not Leica?

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dunk, Leica were already in bed with Panasonic before 4/3 came along. The Digilux 1 was the first in the line (not a 4/3 camera) although I don't know how long the 4/3 concept was in development.

 

A good photographer can use pretty much any camera and get good results, and of course a D3 is capable of producing good results too, but the D3 was a flawed design. It was bulky, had a very limited range of lenses and offered no advantage over a DSLR with a larger sensor.

 

Leica pulled out of 4/3 and ended up pretty much giving D3's away at the end through various promotions or swapping them for broken D2's.

 

Micro 4/3 makes more sense - smaller sensor = smaller cameras/lenses.

 

4/3 format cameras and Micro 4/3 format cameras both have sensors with exactly the same surface areas. Micro 4/3 cameras are smaller than 4/3 because they are mirrorless.

 

dunk

[earleygallery]

4/3 format cameras and Micro 4/3 format cameras both have sensors with exactly the same surface areas. Micro 4/3 cameras are smaller than 4/3 because they are mirrorless.

 

dunk

 

Yes I do realise that! I meant that the mirror less cameras make more sense of the m4/3 format as they are much smaller. The D3 was larger than an APSC DSLR with a LARGER sensor! I didn't see the point of if!

[jaapv]

 

I wonder how many of you who are now so critical of the Digilux 3 have ever used or handled the camera? I know a number of very satisfied users of both the Digilux 3 and the L1; I have both the L1 and the E-330 and am pleased with each.

I am highly critical of the camera from Photokina 2006 onwards and still use one on a regular basis.

[Einst_Stein]

Yes I do realise that! I meant that the mirror less cameras make more sense of the m4/3 format as they are much smaller. The D3 was larger than an APSC DSLR with a LARGER sensor! I didn't see the point of if!

 

The advantage of 4/3 or M4/3 is the smaller lenses (with the same effective focal length), not the body. You can hardly beat them with larger sensor systems.

 

The advantage of 4/3 vs. M4/3 is the optical finder -- when the EVF dose not fit the need. This is a two-edged sword. Do you prefer the what-you-see-is-what-you-get-in-your-sensor (EVF) or what-you-see-is-what-you-get-in-your-brain (OVF)?

[earleygallery]

Simple. I prefer an APSC DSLR to any of them!

[plewislambert]

"There's two on ebay right now, and a Panasonic. Looking at 'sold' auctions they go for around £500 with lens, or £250 body only. That does seem high for a relatively old 4/3 camera "

 

Mine cost £410 last autumn and worked a whole lot better after I updated the firmware from the Leica website and fitted a faster SD card. It is as bulky as my Nikon D50 and long zoom (which feels definitely flimsy by comparison; I never use it). I use the Digilux 3 frequently because there is something of Kodachrome in its pictures. It's not as sharp as my M9 of course but it has a good zoom lens and I don't worry about my physical security when I carry it instead of the M9 oufit.

Philip

[PeterWerner]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jaap has ambivalent feelings about the Digilux 3 and I think I understand perfectly what he means.

 

Bought one in 2007 myself. Was delighted to be able to adapt my old R-lenses. The major drawbacks of the camera, ie the tiny, dark viewfinder and the fact that it is almost impossible to get down into the area of wide-angle lenses when adapting my R-lenses (28 mm being the widest I own), were also immediately apparent.

 

However, what I liked - and still like - about the Digilux 3 is the shutter speed wheel. Dismiss it as ‘retro design’ or not… My first digital camera had a wheel on which a flower symbol stood for the macro mode, a mountain for the landscape mode etc, whereas it took several steps through a number of menus in order to simply adjust the shutter speed. Terrible. After that, it was wonderful to hold a back to basics Digilux 3, with all its drawbacks, in my hands and like Philip, I still use it regularly.

 

Regards,

Peter.

[plewislambert]

I had noticed recently it made a few exposure mistakes but that might have been pilot error. At the time I was using a 50mm Vivitar macro lens on an OM to 4/3 adapter. When I concentrated on rather more than just getting the image focussed the results were better. Possibly not a camera to use with your brain switched off.

Even so, it's a pleasure to use.

Philip

[friedeye]

It's a lovely camera and a joy to use, especially with the Oly 25mm pancake - which makes it light and compact.

 

But the deal is: it, as a DSLR, has mirror slap - where the Digilux 2 was a mirrorless. Quiet, still, and with a better built in lens - albeit only 5 MP.

 

I still own and use my D3 - but not so much. 400 ISO is its limit. But it's a sturdy, light, truck and a nice piece of equipment. Just woefully out of date.

[Ron Kennett]

I was overwhelmed when my daughter bought me the Digilux3 for Christmas 2007 and I went on the purchase Luigi leather cases for the camera and its peripherals. It has given me onsiderable pride of ownership and I only wish it was possible to retrofit a bigger sensor. While I still enjoy stroking the camera, I have moved over to Fuji, firstly the X100, then the X20 and now the X-pro1 plus four of its magical lenses, all of which underlines how technology refuses to stand still. I am pleased to see how the Digilux 3 continues to fetch a good price, but sentiment prevents exercising release of that equity!