Vlux 1 and D Lux 3

[Paul Gruyters]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own the V Lux 1 but am impressed by the shots of the D Lux 3 that I see. From what I can gather they are similar in many ways.

 

I know that with the V Lux once you change from 4/3 your 10mp drops. Is that a difference or is that a complete irrelevance.

 

Would I be right in thinking that both cameras are on a par in general quality output?

 

Thanks,

Paul.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest malland]

I own the V Lux 1 but am impressed by the shots of the D Lux 3 that I see. From what I can gather they are similar in many ways.

 

I know that with the V Lux once you change from 4/3 your 10mp drops. Is that a difference or is that a complete irrelevance.

 

Would I be right in thinking that both cameras are on a par in general quality output?

I haven't tested the V-Lux 1 extensively but I find its ISO 1600 RAW files are beter than those of the D-LUX, as the latter seem to have some in-camera processing that smoothens them with an unattractive, almost unusable, smear. I don't why the D-Lux 3 does that to RAW 1600 files. Actually, the ISO 1600 files of the V-Lux 1 are quite for such a small-sensor camera.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

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

[tommycrown]

I have a Dlux3 and YES it is true the resolution drops when not used in 16:9 ratio.

For 3:2 ratio, max. res. is 8.5mp.

And for 4:3, max res. is 7.5mp.

 

You can only get the full 10mp res. on 16:9 ratio.

 

Most people find this more useful since that is what Dlux 3 attracts them in the beginning.

 

Another thing why i switched using from DMC-FZ50(Leica Vlux) to Dlux 3 is that I can have full time 28mm wide lens.

 

When I realized Vlux 1 only support 35mm and requires extra attachment that costs about 150USD, I wanted Dlux 3.

 

BUT BUT BUT... I still do miss Vlux 1(DMC FZ50) for that LONG and LONG zoom range~

 

If I had money, I would have both of them.

 

Good luck

 

Tommy

[Paul Gruyters]

Thanks for that . The V Lux is 10 mp at 4:3, 8.5 at 3:2 and 7 at 16:9.

 

I like 4:3 because I often print out in 8/10 inch.

 

I also don't do much landscape but do need a good zoom as I photograph a lot at the track, (horses).

 

So for me the V Lux 1 is still the right camera for my budget.

 

Oh yeah and I cant get my head around the no viewfinder thing with the D Lux 3.

 

Regards,

Paul.

[rob_x2004]

Saw sopme of your stuff earlier on in the year. Nice. I cant think you would be able to achieve what you did with the DLux2/3 Lx1/2. Different cameras to use. DLux, LX might be a good top pocket happy snapper for your people shot though. It does deliver good files.

[d-sr]

I have a Dlux3 and YES it is true the resolution drops when not used in 16:9 ratio.

For 3:2 ratio, max. res. is 8.5mp.

And for 4:3, max res. is 7.5mp.

 

You can only get the full 10mp res. on 16:9 ratio.

 

Most people find this more useful since that is what Dlux 3 attracts them in the beginning.

 

Another thing why i switched using from DMC-FZ50(Leica Vlux) to Dlux 3 is that I can have full time 28mm wide lens.

 

When I realized Vlux 1 only support 35mm and requires extra attachment that costs about 150USD, I wanted Dlux 3.

 

BUT BUT BUT... I still do miss Vlux 1(DMC FZ50) for that LONG and LONG zoom range~

 

If I had money, I would have both of them.

 

Good luck

 

Tommy

 

Tommy,

 

I have the V-LUX1 and use a 55mm Raynox 6600 Pro WA lens with no adaptor. I'm told that takes my Vlux to 24mm and It works great for me. Go to Zoto 3.0 - Photo Sharing and check out the Texas Wildflower or Cars & Trucks albums. I use the combination on all the cars and trucks and a lot of the wildflowers.

 

DonR

[Guest malland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Since this thread has come to life again here are two V-Lux 1 photographs, only for the reasons that they are neither or birds, which is what one sees the most in pictures taken with this camera: I've nothing against bird pcitures, but here is someting else.

 

 

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[Guest malland]

And here's one more shot ar 420mm equivalent. It's very grainy because it was shot shortly after sunrise in a very flat fog and I pushed the contrast a lot.

 

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD