onceuponatime Posted October 22, 2015 Share #1 Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Digilux 3 146 x 87 x 77 mm Leica SL 147 x 104 x 39 mm Digilux 3 was a nice size. SL half the width, same length, just 17mm taller with that stunning EVF I don't get why some people on dpreview are saying SL is huge : some of the comments are humorous made me laugh as they are sharp. Edited October 22, 2015 by onceuponatime Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 Hi onceuponatime, Take a look here Digilux 3 vs SL : size. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted October 22, 2015 Share #2 Posted October 22, 2015 The Digilux 3 was a flop and made Leica decide to quit the 4/3 camera segment. They ended up giving them away. it was as big as a proper DSLR but with a much smaller sensor, and inferior viewfinder, so what was the point? I don't see how one can compare the FF SL with the Digilux 3. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onceuponatime Posted October 22, 2015 Author Share #3 Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) Youve missed the point. The point is Not spec, rather size. The title of this thread and my post is clear on that. As a few here and quite a few elsewhere have commented on SL being too big, huge Without even handling SL A comparison with Digilux 3 which many have handled is a pointer Edited October 22, 2015 by onceuponatime Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TW528 Posted October 23, 2015 Share #4 Posted October 23, 2015 Note that Leica is apparently not including the grip in its measurements. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.