Digilux 3 and 4/3 - Hot potato or cold turkey?

[dogberry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just received my Leica "Loyal Customer" rebate offer in the post, to try and entice me to buy a Digilux 3 for $1800 instead of the usual $2500, so this seemed like an opportune time to find out what you all think about the Digilux 3 and the 4/3 system in general. I have a number of questions that I would like to throw out and perhaps some of you with the requisite knowledge and/or experience could provide some advice.

 

The 4/3 System:

As I understand it, the advantages of the 4/3 system (apart from it being an "Open Standard") are more compact SLRs and lenses and a sensor/lens configuration that is better "optimized" for digital capture.

 

1. Are these cameras and lenses really significantly smaller and/or lighter in general than conventional SLR gear. I know there's quite a continuum of sizes in conventional SLRs but is the 4/3 gear really a lot more portable in general?

 

2. Does the "optimization" of the sensor/lens configuration really translate into better digital images with the 4/3 system relative to using traditional "full frame" 35mm lenses on one of the existing conventional SLRs with APS-whatever or full-frame sensors (e.g is there really less vignetting/resolution fall-off in the corners etc. etc.)?

 

The Digilux 3:

3. How do the Leica 4/3 lenses compare in quality to the Leica R lenses?

 

4. Does the Digilux 3 (like the M8) also skip the low-pass filter in favor of correction in post-processing when it's needed? If so, are the images noticeably sharper as a result?

 

5. Does the autofocusing (and everything else) work when you use non-Leica 4/3 lenses on the Digilux 3?

 

6. Are there any surprises (good or bad) with this camera that you don't become aware of until after you purchased it?

 

Finally, I would love to see some Digilux 3 sample images. There don't seem to be too many around online, so maybe some could be posted here or somebody could point us to some galleries.

 

I know this is a lot of stuff to throw out, but I've been very curious about this system for some time and there still don't seem to be too many good reviews of the Digilux 3 out there.

 

Thanks

 

Gordon

[Advertisement]

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

[MJLogan]

I can address some of this:

 

1. Are these cameras and lenses really significantly smaller and/or lighter in general than conventional SLR gear. I know there's quite a continuum of sizes in conventional SLRs but is the 4/3 gear really a lot more portable in general?

 

Not really. Some of the long lenses are relatively compact, but Panasonic/Leica (at least) have focused more on stellar optocal quality than on size. One could argue that the D3's kit lens would be huge if it were made for a full-frame sensor, I suppose.

 

4. Does the Digilux 3 (like the M8) also skip the low-pass filter in favor of correction in post-processing when it's needed? If so, are the images noticeably sharper as a result?

 

No--there's a low-pass filter.

 

5. Does the autofocusing (and everything else) work when you use non-Leica 4/3 lenses on the Digilux 3?

 

Yes, as long as you're using other 4/3 lenses. The aperture will need to be set on the body rather than on the lens, though.

 

6. Are there any surprises (good or bad) with this camera that you don't become aware of until after you purchased it?

 

Some of the initial settings are not optimal. You'll want to turn sharpening up a notch or two, and set autofocus to the single center point. The camera will perform MUCH better.

 

Finally, I would love to see some Digilux 3 sample images. There don't seem to be too many around online, so maybe some could be posted here or somebody could point us to some galleries.

 

I know this is a lot of stuff to throw out, but I've been very curious about this system for some time and there still don't seem to be too many good reviews of the Digilux 3 out there.

 

Thanks

 

Gordon

[Riley]

The 4/3 System:

1. Are these cameras and lenses really significantly smaller and/or lighter in general than conventional SLR gear. I know there's quite a continuum of sizes in conventional SLRs but is the 4/3 gear really a lot more portable in general?

 

my take on it is, they never optimised for this and probably should have. The differences in size between bodies of D3/L1 snd E-410 is stark, and suggests they probably ought not go much smaller than 410 as it is tiny. As to lenses, when it comes to purely Olympus gear with lenses out in September, the 12-60 and the 50-200, thats 24mm to 400mm in just two lenses, while 12-60 (24-120mm in 35mmEFL) is an effective walkaround lens

 

2. Does the "optimization" of the sensor/lens configuration really translate into better digital images with the 4/3 system relative to using traditional "full frame" 35mm lenses on one of the existing conventional SLRs with APS-whatever or full-frame sensors (e.g is there really less vignetting/resolution fall-off in the corners etc. etc.)?

 

Absolutely, and particularly for UWA. Tele lenses have an amount of telecentricity built in, so its the WA-UWA we should be concerned with. I shoot UWA every working day, and FWIW i can shoot wide open and only suffer the usual lens softness, no softer edges, no fall-off, no vignetting. As it happens I mostly need more DoF and shoot F4-F5.6 mostly, both with flash, and even here, the low apertures assist in keeping flash power down for either faster recycling or use of a cheaper smaller flash. CA, Distortion, PF ? whats that

 

The Digilux 3:

3. How do the Leica 4/3 lenses compare in quality to the Leica R lenses?

 

If anything 4/3 lenses need to be good because of the 1.92x crop. Im not sure how to compare but anecdotally i think AF lenses are the way for me personally. There isnt a lot of Leica D kit to go on as yet. FF MF lenses are a bit hit and miss, zooms generally dont work out, usually have to stop down a few stops anyway. But there are a myriad of 4/3rds adapters for most systems except EOS (who needs em) Just buy lenses after seeing how they work out for others, or try out what you have already. There are usualy some surprises, the sharpest lens i have in MF is a Konica 40/1.8, and a wonderful tele, the absurd Rikenon 135/2.8.

 

4. Does the Digilux 3 (like the M8) also skip the low-pass filter in favor of correction in post-processing when it's needed? If so, are the images noticeably sharper as a result?

 

No, it has an AA and deeper IR, sharpness isnt an issue, check out attached image from the lowly E-300 with 11-22 Olympus, sun at right angles near the end of a winters day. DOF goes all the way, stonework is sharp as a razor.

 

5. Does the autofocusing (and everything else) work when you use non-Leica 4/3 lenses on the Digilux 3?

 

No, but what you do have (and how i wish i had this) is focus confirmation, a LED in the OVF that tells you when you are in focus during MF operation.

 

I know this is a lot of stuff to throw out, but I've been very curious about this system for some time and there still don't seem to be too many good reviews of the Digilux 3 out there.

 

yes reviews are short, and there needs to be some dependence on L1 reviews, which is not entirely fair.

 

attached 'money shot' E-300 EXIF in tact, 13mm F8, 1/200th iso100

interior E-300 EXIF in tact, 11mm F2.8, 1/30th, iso200

 

particularly difficult interior because of wooden ceiling (cant bounce flash) Metz 54 with Stofen on low power, mostly ambient light hand held, just a tad OOF in the left foreground, but as you can see the other 3 corners are sharp and this is wide open. On newer models including D3, i could have shot at iso400/800 and recovered the stop i needed. Certainly E-410/510 will shoot iso800 ambient light with no issue and probably look cleaner than this file.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[spylaw4]

I think Riley has coverd most of the points I would have made - and in probably more detail!

Have look through the photo forums - I've posted a number of shots taken with the L1 & 14-50 lens although not for a couple of months - more will appear in the next week or so.

There have also been quite few shots in the Digital forum some time back - so a search on Digilux 3?

[marknorton]

They're pushing the D3 like mad - offers to upgrade from a D2, Leica customer "loyalty" discount, nature observation bundles.

 

With the functionally equivalent (if not identically performing) L1 under-cutting the D3 by a substantial margin, all this can surely mean only one thing: the D3 is proving to be a slow seller.

[stunsworth]

Mark, that was my thought too when I received the email offering a 30% discount.

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I there still don't seem to be too many good reviews of the Digilux 3 out there.

 

Thanks

 

Gordon

 

I did an extensive review of the Digilux 3.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[dogberry]

I did an extensive review of the Digilux 3.

 

Yes, thanks Sean, I do subscribe to your excellent website and I read and enjoyed your review. I guess I am also trying to gauge how people feel about the future of the 4/3 system in general. Given that most people seem to be indicating that there isn't really much of a portability advantage over conventional SLRs and that the images are possibly a tad noisier at higher ISOs (presumably because of the smaller sensors), I'm having a hard time seeing what niche the 4/3 system is trying to fill and whether or not it can survive the competition from the vast range of body/lens options that the conventional SLR manufacturers offer.

[cnguyen]

Gordon - I bought the Pan L1 instead of the Digilux 3 because the price was low. the half-frame chip is good but I don't think it has good dynamic range as the DMR. I'm sitting on the fence on this one. I still have all my R lenses plus R8 and waiting for an R10 next year ? The built quality of the L1 is way better that the Olympus bodies. You don't have to pay a lot of money to get in 4/3rds so try it and see if you like it. I recently added an Olympus kit lens 40-150mm ED and it's amazed me.

[FastFashnReloaded]

Gordon - I bought the Pan L1 instead of the Digilux 3 because the price was low. the half-frame chip is good but I don't think it has good dynamic range as the DMR. I'm sitting on the fence on this one. I still have all my R lenses plus R8 and waiting for an R10 next year ? The built quality of the L1 is way better that the Olympus bodies. You don't have to pay a lot of money to get in 4/3rds so try it and see if you like it. I recently added an Olympus kit lens 40-150mm ED and it's amazed me.

 

"The built quality of the L1 is way better that the Olympus bodies."

 

Hmmm... My E-500 and E-330 are pretty solid... Better, maybe. Way better?

[FastFashnReloaded]

I did an extensive review of the Digilux 3.

 

Yes, thanks Sean, I do subscribe to your excellent website and I read and enjoyed your review. I guess I am also trying to gauge how people feel about the future of the 4/3 system in general. Given that most people seem to be indicating that there isn't really much of a portability advantage over conventional SLRs and that the images are possibly a tad noisier at higher ISOs (presumably because of the smaller sensors), I'm having a hard time seeing what niche the 4/3 system is trying to fill and whether or not it can survive the competition from the vast range of body/lens options that the conventional SLR manufacturers offer.

 

GM, Ford and Chrysler offer a huge range of bodies, but there is still room for Porsche.