Advice wanted: D-Lux 3

[Half-Handed]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, I'm a proud Leica CM owner - I love it and don't plan to be parted from it, it takes lovely pictures.

 

I'm looking to buy a digital camera and since they don't do a digital CM I'm drawn to the D-Lux 3, I can't afford the Digilux 3 which is too damn big anyway. Some of the reviews of the D-Lux 3 are really good but a lot of reviews I've seen suggest that the noise is a bit of a killer. What are people's views? Would I be better off buying a different compact? Saving up a bit more and buying the V-Lux? Finding a good condition Digilux 2? Waiting for the Sigma DP-1 to be released one day?

 

Any feedback gratefully received.

[miami91]

I trust you're quite familiar with the cons of all compact digicams, regardless of brand (small sensor gives incredibly large depth of field, somewhat slow lenses, almost complete absence of optical viewfinders, etc.). As for the D-Lux 3 and noise, it does seem noisier at ISO 400+ than some of its competition, but this is somewhat mitigated by the built in image stabilization. Also, there was a thread recently with some very interesting ideas about "pushing" the D-Lux 3 by setting EV compensation at -2 stops, and then raising the exposure back up in RAW conversion. Thus, you could shoot at ISO 400 but get the practical results (in terms of a higher shutter speed) of ISO 1600. I haven't had a chance to do experimentation with this myself, but the results others got with this method are quite impressive. Here's the thread: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-forum/29129-d-lux-3-iso-800-pushing.html . As a side note, check out the DL3 pictures taken by Mitch Alland --- shows you what a talented photographer can do with any tool, no matter how "limited".

 

Anyway, I quite like the D-Lux 3 for what it is. I like the sharpness and color fidelity, I like the ergonomics, and I like the build quality. But alas, there are few times I choose to carry it over the Digilux 3 or an M7, mostly because I don't like taking pictures at arms length and the inability to achieve narrow depth of field.

 

Jeff.

[Half-Handed]

Yes, I know noise is an issue with all compacts to some degree. It must be nice to have to choose between a D-Lux 3, a Digilux 3 and an M7...

[miami91]

Be even nicer to choose an M8!! I know I'll get one at some point, but for now don't have the cash or the desire to deal with the problems that so many others have been so patient about. So I may be in the market for an M9 next year, or M8.5, or whatever the next generation is called.

 

Yes, I really like the Digilux 3, but you're right, it's large. And the additional lenses I've bought for it (Olympus Zuiko 7-14mm and Olympus Zuiko 50-200 mm) are even larger! So size and weight are a definite consideration. Thus I still shoot a lot of film with my M7.

 

Jeff.

[Half-Handed]

Well, if Leica produced a DCM (as everyone on this forum seems to want them to) my decision would be a no-brainer. Hence my speculating about whether I should be holding out for the Sigma DP-1 which is meant to be the closest thing to it. But there's been no news on the DP-1 for most of this year and I'm wondering whether I should bite the bullet and buy the D-Lux 3 or hold out.

 

I know this is incredibly shallow but one factor swaying me is that the D-Lux 3 is so attractive.

[lemalk]

The D-Lux 3 is available now. That's one plus. Think of all the images you'll be missing out on if you don't have a camera handy....

 

On the more serious side, if you leave the camera on automatic mode in low-light situations, chances are you may be disappointed. You have to manually set it - although some of the preset "modes" sometimes come in handy.

In low-light it does require some thought - in daylight, the camera more than holds its own against pretty much all other compact P&S cameras.

 

It's a beautiful camera, the 16:9 mode is really great, you'll get used to composing in the LCD and it's really fun to shoot with and carry with you.

 

My 2 cents.

[gareth_c]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a panasonic version of the D-Lux2 and have to say it has produced some great images. I got a D3 for my partner and it is a slight improvment, but not much.

 

I only tend to use mine in daylight so the noise isn't a problem but I am certain that there are better compact cameras out there if noise is an issue for you.

[Maggie_O]

The images the D-Lux 3 produces are, IMO, superior to most DSLRs with kit lenses. Noise is present above ISO400, but to my eye it renders more like film grain than digital scruff. I've found that the sweet spots for the D-Lux 3 are ISO 100 and ISO 400. If you want more sensitivity, "pushing" the ISO 400 yields pretty good results, especially for b&w conversions.

 

The Sigma is interesting, but as of today, it's still vaporware. It looks hella interesting, tho'. But then I think- Sigma glass vs. Leica glass? I loves me some Leica glass, and the D-Lux 3 has some pretty sweet glass.

 

I've been shooting exclusively with my D-Lux 3 for the last month and a half- have a look as some of my stuff: Flickr: Photos from Maggie Osterberg

 

Be sure to look at Mitch's photos, too: Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland

[rgeorge911]

I really like my Pana LX2 (very similar to D-Lux 3). I find it great for street photos. I usually set it to iso400, manual focus, f5.6-8, aperture priority or manual mode. Use zone focusing (using the built-in dof indicator in manual focus mode). It's very quick to respond. Write times to the card for raw files are a bit long, but otherwise it's wonderful. I also set the color effect to B&W, as this give B&W jpegs but color raws. Here's an example:

 

This is totally unedited.

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!

[Maggie_O]

I really like my Pana LX2 (very similar to D-Lux 3). I find it great for street photos. I usually set it to iso400, manual focus, f5.6-8, aperture priority or manual mode. Use zone focusing (using the built-in dof indicator in manual focus mode). It's very quick to respond. .

 

I've used my D-Lux 3 in this way, at ISO 100, with the shutter sound off and in burst mode to shoot photos at my niece's track meets and it performs like a champ. Action shots and crowd studies came out better than I'd hoped, even.

 

The tip for shooting RAW but having the camera in B&W mode is brilliant! Reminds me of my old pre-visualization filters from Zone VI. Great idea!

[XD7]

A wonderful portfolio, Maggie.

 

The Landmark Center photograph reminded me of Xanadu in Citizen Kane, a kind of foreboding and eerie atmosphere. A marvellous shot and it just goes to show what the

D-LUX 3 is capable of producing in the right hands. I notice that the details of this shot are not given. Are they a trade secret?

 

Also a belated thanks for the tips you provided a few weeks back on simulating various types of B&W film and "pushing" the D-LUX 3. Much appreciated.

 

I have had the D-LUX 3 for about the same length of time as you and your prolific output rather puts me to shame. I must stop spending so much time reading these forums and get out more.

[Guest malland]

The D-Lux 3 is a vey good camera. Of course the V-Lux is much larger and should only be of interest if you want the huge zoom, going to 420mm-equivalent. The 16:9 format of the D-Lux is attractive to many people.

 

The other camera that you should consider is the Ricoh GX100, which has a zoom that goes up in discrete stops at 24, 28, 35, 50 and 72mm, which to me is a very good feature. Apparently, the higher ISO files are better than the D-Lux 3, but I have not used this camera, but have a Ricoh GR-D, which is very good indeed. Here are a couple of D-Lux 3 pictures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[stunsworth]

Of course the V-Lux is much larger and should only be of interest if you want the huge zoom, going to 420mm-equivalent.

 

Not really. In my case I have the Panasonic original the LX2. I detest with a vengance having to squint at the screen on the back. I'd much prefer a 'real' viewfinder which would mean that I didn't have to put on my reading glasses whenever I wanted to take a photograph.

[Guest malland]

Not really. In my case I have the Panasonic original the LX2. I detest with a vengance having to squint at the screen on the back. I'd much prefer a 'real' viewfinder which would mean that I didn't have to put on my reading glasses whenever I wanted to take a photograph.

Now, my approach is completely different: I also use reading glasses but don't use them at all for shooting with the D-Lux 3 because I only use the LCD for framing, for establishing the edge of the picture — when I press the shutter I look at the scene, not at the LCD. To me that is a better way to photograph that is particularly good for street photography because it leads to a looser and more fluid shooting style. A year ago I bought a Ricoh GR-D which, unlike the D-Lux 3, has a flash shoe in which you can fix an external viewfinder. Indeed, I thought that I would use my VC28 and Leica 21 viewfinders — the Gr-D has an excellent 21mm-equivalent add-on lens — but the few days I put one of the external viewfinders on the camera I found that I liked shooting by framing with the LCD much better. Here are a few street shots framed using the LCD, the first two shot with the D-Lux 3 and the third with the GR-D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—Mitch/Potomac,MD

[dhsimmonds]

Mitch - I have followed your D-Lux-3 images with some awe, and quite understand your reasons for taking this little camera with you on your travels.

 

Since my LC-1 has gone in for the dreaded sensor replacement, I am really missing a small camera to take with me as an everyday walk around tool. So I have read as much as I can about the Ricoh Caplio GX100 and comparing it with the D-Lux-3. So your GR-D image on the same page as the D-Lux-3 is very useful!

 

I too am taken with the "natural" zoom breaks of the GX100 lens, very similar to the D2's vario Summicron. Also the option of a viewfinder that can also be used as a "waist" finder; great for discreet street photography I would have thought. I would prefer for the zoom to go out to 90mm, but you can't have everything. The manual control available on this camera also makes it particularly attractive and probably the nearest thing yet to a D2?

 

It was always only a matter of time before some thing else filled the void left by the demise of the D2/LC-1 in my opinion.

[Maggie_O]

A wonderful portfolio, Maggie.

 

Thanks, Calvin! Much appreciated!

 

The Landmark Center photograph reminded me of Xanadu in Citizen Kane, a kind of foreboding and eerie atmosphere. A marvellous shot and it just goes to show what the

D-LUX 3 is capable of producing in the right hands. I notice that the details of this shot are not given. Are they a trade secret?

 

I'm not much for secrets, sooo....

 

I originally shot an auto-bracketed trio of shots, with a mind towards making an HDR composite. I ran the three JPEGs through Photomatix and the best result still left me underwhelmed. So, I popped the tone-mapped image into Photoshop and started messing around with the Channel Mixer, looking for a B&W solution. I tried pretty much the range of film tone responses, but the one that really jumped out at me was the B&W Infrared preset. I added a wee bit of the film grain filter (the original exposures were noise-free ISO 100) and then imported it into iPhoto.

 

It still didn't look quite right to my eye, so I boosted the black levels and added an edge blur, both in iPhoto (which, BTW, will flatten your Photoshop file, so work on a duplicate if you want your layers intact). I used to shoot a lot of B&W IR film, so I just kept tweaking until I had an image that looked familiar.

 

Also a belated thanks for the tips you provided a few weeks back on simulating various types of B&W film and "pushing" the D-LUX 3. Much appreciated.

 

I have had the D-LUX 3 for about the same length of time as you and your prolific output rather puts me to shame. I must stop spending so much time reading these forums and get out more.

 

Well, get out there!!!

 

That reminds me, here's a graphic with channel mixer settings for various B&W film responses:

 

 

I'm ashamed to say I can't remember where I got that chart.

[XD7]

Thanks for the insight into the Landmark Center photograph, Maggie.

 

One of my eternal regrets is that I never learned to process films. I used to rely on a very capable darkroom assistant by the name of Pauline. The number of times she worked her magic on shots taken with HP5, pushed to 1600 to cope with fading light on a wintry afternoon back in Britain to get them fit for publication, are legion.

 

I am now trying to come to terms with the digital darkroom. I upgraded to CS3 this week and ditched the Photoshop Elements that came with the D-LUX 3, it was just too slow on a Mac Pro. Again, I have never really mastered Photoshop. For the past nine months it has lain dormant on my old G4 but I have quickly realised that CS3 is a totally different beast to CS and the versions prior to that.

 

If you have any tips on how to get me up and running on CS3, particularly Adobe Bridge, or can recommend any useful books, I would be most grateful.

 

Regards,

 

Calvin.

[Maggie_O]

Calvin, I can't really recommend any books on Photoshop, because I haven't read any!

 

My advice, just dive in and mess around. Oh, and use adjustment layers instead of directly messing with the image- that way you can try all sorts of variations and layer configurations and still have your original image there to reference.

 

There's always interesting stuff at the usual websites- luminous landscape, etc... and flickr has some decent photoshop groups (tho' there's a lot of humbug being spread, too).

 

Is there a post-processing thread here? We could continue this conversation there.

[richsimp1]

Hi Calvin,

 

I've found this book to be very good: The Photoshop CS2 Book for Digital Photographers by Scott Kelby. I bought mine from Amazon. Very well set out, clear & easy to follow.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[XD7]

Thanks for the advice, Maggie.

 

I have been diving in and messing around and ending up with a mess.

 

I will certainly check out the adjustment layers.

 

I tried following one of tutorials from the Adobe site last night dealing with highlights. I got one layer but couldn't get the second layer in order to adjust the shadows and then combine the two layers. I was bit concerned, and annoyed, when it said, "Click OK" and there was no "OK" button to be seen. I think that might have been a little too advanced for my current state of knowledge.

 

As a newcomer here, I am not sure if there are any post-processing threads.

 

 

I will look out for that book, Richard. Thanks for the recommendation. I also believe there is a book due out in October that deals with Camera Raw and Photoshop CS3.

 

Sometimes, I wonder if life is too short to ever get to grips with Photoshop. I will keep persevering.