Digilux 3 - Panasonic L 1 differences.....

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We've had discussions here in the past regarding the differences in the two cameras.

 

For purposes of this thread I'll state that it is for IMAGES only and not the other differences that have been discussed before,

 

I now have access to a L1 and started comparing them today and I must say there are definite differences in the photos INCLUDING RAW.

 

I now have to figure out how to post RAW images so you can see for yourself.

Anybody have any ideas?

The JPEG part is easy and I'll do that in a couple of days.

 

The way I handled the RAW was to take identical pictures using factory default automatic settings first. Same subject, same lighting, from same tripod.

I then opened them in Adobe CS2 using ACR.

 

Side by side there is a definite difference to not only my eyes but an impartial second person as well.

 

I'll continue these comparisons over the next few days and try to post the pictures so you all can see them.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

I can host them for you, just email me the raw files and I will post them for you. then you can post a link to the folder with the files.

[jdlaing]

Thank you Bo.

 

I will compile some different RAW files in pairs and send them to you.

The JPEGs I can put up with the Exif info on my Pbase site.

 

In fiddling with them this afternoon (while I was supposed to be working) I noticed they meter differently. I must look into this..........

[dugby]

 

The way I handled the RAW was to take identical pictures using factory default automatic settings first. Same subject, same lighting, from same tripod.

I then opened them in Adobe CS2 using ACR.

 

Good work James.

 

Just one more consideration.....for completeness, for each of the photos, please report the camera recording settings... (eg normal, dynamic, sharpness values etc, as well as the usual f-stop, speed, ISO etc)

 

Can you also attempt some A-B shots with optimised settings, as this is more real world for the serious user's interest.

[m3chrome]

Is this subject still a debate? Very curious. I used to shoot a Panasonic LC1 and found it's images to too close to the Digilux 2 I also had. Personally, my eyes cannot distinguish any differences. I know we are discussing a different model, but seems like it is just rebranding of the same camera.

[J Mitchum]

Thank you Bo.

 

I will compile some different RAW files in pairs and send them to you.

The JPEGs I can put up with the Exif info on my Pbase site.

 

In fiddling with them this afternoon (while I was supposed to be working) I noticed they meter differently. I must look into this..........

 

Even if you were to test two D3 side by side you would probably see some differences. There can be slight variances among the same model. Having the metering exactly the same is next to impossible.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

John--

You're right, of course, there are always sample variations.

 

But almost every camera or lens review is based on a single sample. Sean R's verification of exposure on Canon cameras and on M8 led him to compare a couple bodies before deciding that the cameras are set to higher sensitivity than the indicated ISO.

 

In other words: Often a manufacturer will make sure that all his bodies meter and expose the same way.

 

I think James's observations are interesting so far and look forward to hearing/seeing more. After all, in all the Leica/Panasonic models except the D-Lux 2, Leica has said their image processing is different from Panasonic's; and with the Digilux 2, we know that Panasonic went through a couple firmware revisions to their version because some purchasers found that the Leica version made pictures more to their liking.

 

So I say to James: Bring it on!

 

--HC

[jdlaing]

While I am getting the photos ready for sometime late today or tomorrow I would like to add a couple more differences I found in the bodies themselves.

 

The switches are different on the two bodies with the Digilux 3 having slightly larger ones.

There is a on/off light on the Panasonic to tell you the camera is powered up.

The knurled selection knob on the Digilux 3 is different and has a tighter crisper spring tension that feels deliberate.

The black body gets really warm in the sunlight and the silver body remains cooler. More on this later on in discussions about noise.

[FastFashnReloaded]

We've had discussions here in the past regarding the differences in the two cameras.

 

For purposes of this thread I'll state that it is for IMAGES only and not the other differences that have been discussed before,

 

I now have access to a L1 and started comparing them today and I must say there are definite differences in the photos INCLUDING RAW...

 

You really should compare to an E-330 as well...

[jdlaing]

You really should compare to an E-330 as well...

 

Hmmmm

 

I have that camera too.

I use it as a general everyday "beater" at work.

Maybe I'll include it.

[FastFashnReloaded]

Hmmmm

 

I have that camera too.

I use it as a general everyday "beater" at work.

Maybe I'll include it.

 

 

I like Live Mode A. In any case, since you can now get a dual lens kit E-330 for less than half the price of an L1 (let alone a D3), you really should include it in your test.

[jdlaing]

Well.....................I'm done with a few.

 

I did several same shots with same settings and same everything.

 

If I could figure out how to post RAW files I would.

 

Bo...........I sent a PM.

 

There is definitely differences in both RAW and JPEG rendering.

I opened all the files in Adobe CS2 and without post processing anything you can see a difference in the results.

 

One thing has me a little baffled is that the different pictures looked differently focused in different areas and I shot them all from the same tripod setup. The FOF should have been pretty darn close as should the DOF.

 

The metering is different too but that was replied to earlier.

 

I'll post the JPEG pics on Pbase. The JPEG was rendered by each camera and not Adobe.

 

Leica Photo Gallery by Jim at pbase.com

[dugby]

James, Thankyou for posting those images.

 

It's great to compare the 64Million shades of yellow.

 

Could you shoot some people, and outdoors daylight shots, of peple, buildings and greenery ?

[jdlaing]

James, Thankyou for posting those images.

 

It's great to compare the 64Million shades of yellow.

 

Could you shoot some people, and outdoors daylight shots, of peple, buildings and greenery ?

 

LOL

 

I certainly will. My intention was to show the focusing and different shadow and highlight detail.

 

The handheld stuff comes next.

[bpanther]

HELLO EVBODY....

My Digilux3 bought a few months ago seemed to give me very soft results.... almost off-focus and I took it to the cust.service at Solms and they replaced it for me in a week !!! Absolutely free.... even a new lens. Both different serial nos. They said it was a focusing fault in both. Also my LC1 sensor went kaput after 3 years and on searching on the net I discovered that some models had a sensor defect and that Panasonic Japan was replacing them free for the models bought in Japan. Mine was from Hongkong. They made a fuss at first (a dealer in Tokyo) but finally replaced the sensor in 3 weeks and now its really crisp and much better than before. Maybe because of the Venus Engine lll

Just wanted evone to know my experiences with both. Thanks.

[jdlaing]

Well...........

 

I have pecked away for a week now in a whole lot of different scenarios and conditions and taken quite a few images.

 

The RAW files are most definitely different.

 

The Leica RAW shows greater shadow detail.

The Leica RAW is softer than the Panansonic.

The metering is at least one full stop different with the Panasonic being the brighter image.

 

When you go to fully manual settings the Leica looks like a Leica image. (The previous Leica owners will know what I mean) I cannot fully explain this to those who have not owned a Leica camera before.

 

The focus speed in low light is so close it isn't worth timing.

The metering in low light goes to Leica with an image that requires less post processing to bring it up to a usable nice image. In other words it is an image that when converted to a JPEG without fiddling with it is usable from the camera.

 

The shadow detail was unexpected for me. The way I spotted it was a piece of concrete that was in a shadow showed more of the concrete texture in the Leica image than the Panasonic. In the Panasonic you had to zoom in one step farther than the Leica to see the same pattern.

 

Black and white images from the Leica just look so much different from the Leica to the Panasonic that at first glance it is no mistake that they are shot from two different cameras.

 

More to follow............