ayewing Posted October 31, 2014 Share #1 Posted October 31, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) There is a new review of the V-Lux by Jono Slack. He likes it. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2014/10/leica-v-lux-review-by-jonathan-slack/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 31, 2014 Posted October 31, 2014 Hi ayewing, Take a look here Jono Slack has reviewed the new V-Lux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
NB23 Posted October 31, 2014 Share #2 Posted October 31, 2014 There is a new review of the V-Lux by Jono Slack. He likes it.http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2014/10/leica-v-lux-review-by-jonathan-slack/ Is there anything-Leica that he doesn't "like"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timde Posted October 31, 2014 Share #3 Posted October 31, 2014 hmph, I can never make sense of the disclaimer but you can ask Herr Huff what happens if you give Leica bad reviews ;-) In any case, the reviews by Mr Slack are nice and short, hit the key points and ... have by far the best photos! What I wonder is if there is any difference between the photos on the Leica and those from the Panasonic variant. Is it the case that Leica use a different JPEG tuning? But otherwise the RAW image is the same? I tired one of the Panasonic's in the local Mediamarkt and it was pretty impressive. The only negative was that the lens zoom seemed to move fairly slowly but there might be a setting that effects that. ... definitely great photos, much better than the DPReview. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsv Posted October 31, 2014 Share #4 Posted October 31, 2014 Is there anything-Leica that he doesn't "like"? Is there anything Leica you like? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShawnK Posted November 1, 2014 Share #5 Posted November 1, 2014 I got the new V-Lux 114 just a couple of days back. But the said review of V-Lux seems to me rather abridged. There is SO.....O much more to that camera than that review alludes. I would say that this is much more than just a bridge camera. I have been using Nikons for long time & for past 1.5 yr NikonD800e. I always shoot RAW & manual exposure(old habits), while V-Lux Firmware picked that up very well, so my workflow of RAW & Manual IS much better & faster in V-Lux 114 than Nikon D800e. The results on LCD looks what 20MP should look like even @ 4x zoom on LCD, can't imagine the quality to be any less than LCD. Used only as still camera, too much drizzle here & this is not weatherproof camera, so may be by Monday I'll post images. But his quality can be expected in general. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erudolph Posted November 2, 2014 Share #6 Posted November 2, 2014 On flickr, there is an impressive album of 50 photos from a preproduction Type 114. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ynp Posted November 2, 2014 Share #7 Posted November 2, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Nice review and great photography. Thanks to Jono. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 2, 2014 Share #8 Posted November 2, 2014 >>>>>> and jono Slack has reviewed also the new D-LUX (Typ 109) <<<<<< http://www.slack.co.uk/2014 regards, klaus-michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Chen Posted November 4, 2014 Share #9 Posted November 4, 2014 On flickr, there is an impressive album of 50 photos from a preproduction Type 114. Thanks a lot for the information. I downloaded both photos for V-type 114 and D-type 109. Those of 114 after post processing look really impressive. However, the color rendering of OOC jpeg photos from 109, in my humble opinion, does not surpass D-Lux 5, not to mention D-Lux 4 based on the observation by the Dell Ultra Sharp 2711 monitor (2560x1440 pixels). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted November 4, 2014 Share #10 Posted November 4, 2014 Concerning the 109 it`s a nice review, but the photographs do not look convincing at all. Particularly skin looks as digital and plasticized as it possibly can get, both in B&W and color. Among the worst I remember having seen for some time. Maybe all shots were taken as jpegs with NR on? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.