D-Lux 4

[hankg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There has been a lot of talk on several threads about the need for a more Leica like compact like the Ricoh GRD. I took a D-lux 3 and made it more of what a Leica compact should be.

 

An evolution of the D-lux 3. Fixed 35mm or 40mm equivalent f/2.5 or f/2.8 lens to get max quality at min size and cost. A really good small fixed optical finder (that will likely add $200 to the cost right there). Some simple chunky analogue controls. A little tilt and swing flash (for the real P&S types) with a simple fill flash mode that lets you add a bit of light to the ambient light. The electronic guts/sensor from a Lumix/D-lux.

 

There should be a mode for hyperfocal distance and the finder's parallax correction should be set to that distance. Sell it for around $800.

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!

[hankg]

Or maybe a Bi-Summarit 28 + 50 equivalent. Switch focal lengths by turning the viewfinder knurled ring.

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!

[sdai]

The major issue with the Lumix models is their substandard sensors IMO, Hank ... I'd be more than happy to see if this can be worked out ... as I've suggested in another similar thread, the sensor size needs to grow to achieve real performance gain. These 1/2.5" , 1/1.8" sensors have hit their physical limits already.

 

Great PS work BTW, looks really beautiful.

[hankg]

The major issue with the Lumix models is their substandard sensors IMO, Hank ... I'd be more than happy to see if this can be worked out ... as I've suggested in another similar thread, the sensor size needs to grow to achieve real performance gain. These 1/2.5" , 1/1.8" sensors have hit their physical limits already.

 

Great PS work BTW, looks really beautiful.

 

The small sensors are what they are and there are several photographers producing great work with small noisy sensors and embracing the small sensor aesthetic. It's like Tri-X in Rodinal for the digital age. It's not meant to be an alternative to the M8 image quality wise but an alternative to the 100's of point and shoots that all follow the same abysmal formula, an alternative along the lines of the GRD. It repackages existing tried and true readily available technology to make a small format reportage camera that would fit in your pocket and would not have to cost much more then other top of the line P&S digitals.

 

Moving up to APS-c sized sensors would require an expensive round of development and probably result in a camera that was to big and to expensive.

[sdai]

So we're basically looking at difference things ...

[hankg]

Yes, Leica is already commited to 4/3 with the D line so it's unlikely you will see another line under the M and R in that price point based on aps-c sensors.

 

Point and shoots are another matter. It's all well and good to pick up some revenue by rebaging Panasonics but Leica could do more here. I think a compact digicam with a real optical finder and analogue controls would do really well. It's an opportunity to make a small format Barnack camera for the digital age. As it is Ricoh is all alone in this segment.

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The LX2 and I assume the equivalent D-Lux 3 actually look pretty good when you crank them up to ISO 800 and convert to b&w. Sure they don't have the smoothness and lack of noise of an M8 or Canon 5D, but they are no worse than Tri-X pushed a stop.

[Maggie_O]

I take it y'all know about the Sigma DP-1?

 

Put some Leica glass in it and you've really got something.

[sdai]

I take it y'all know about the Sigma DP-1?

 

Put some Leica glass in it and you've really got something.

 

Then you should vote for my thread instead, Maggie.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/30661-what-if-leica-make-aps-c.html

[Guest stnami]

dream on........................ dreamon...

[hankg]

I take it y'all know about the Sigma DP-1?

 

Put some Leica glass in it and you've really got something.

 

It sounds and looks interesting but has been vapourware for almost a year. Must have run into a serious problem somewhere along the path to market.

[Guest malland]

...A really good small fixed optical finder (that will likely add $200 to the cost right there)...

That I think is a pipe dream: the Ricoh website has an interesting series of articles on how they developed the GR-D. On of the things they say is that they decided against a built-in optical veiwfinder after their experience with their film carmeras, the GR1 series, where they found that they they could build in only low quality optical viewfinders. Therefore, when they designed the GR-D, they gave people the choise of buying an add-on optical viewfinder that could be mounted on the hot shoe on top of the camera or using the LCD. Of course, for the GX100 they offered the option of the add-on electronic viewfinder, which some people like but others don't. These solutions are better than a built-in optical viewfinder like on the GR1, about which many people complained. Of course, while these people complained others, like Moriyama Daido, shot spectacular pictures with that camera.

 

Come to think of it, the Ricoh GX100 may be the D-Lux 4.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Mitch Alland's slideshow on Flickr

[sdommin]

A fixed focal length, non-interchangeable lens in this day & age? Doomed to fail. I know I wouldn't buy it.

[Guest malland]

Lucky for Ricoh that you didn't post this view a couple of years ago because, then, they would not have produced their GR-D camera, which has been successful despite it's 28mm-equivalent prine lens and 21mm add-on lens.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Mitch Alland's slideshow on Flickr

[hankg]

That I think is a pipe dream: the Ricoh website has an interesting series of articles on how they developed the GR-D. On of the things they say is that they decided against a built-in optical veiwfinder after their experience with their film carmeras, the GR1 series, where they found that they they could build in only low quality optical viewfinders. Therefore, when they designed the GR-D, they gave people the choise of buying an add-on optical viewfinder that could be mounted on the hot shoe on top of the camera or using the LCD.

 

 

All true and yes it is a pipe dream. Just a bit of idle speculation (or as stnami said dreaming) on the forum.

 

However just to engage in a little more unfounded speculation. I think Leica has more pricing flexibility then Ricoh. Perhaps enough to bear the cost of a quality optical finder. Those that would prefer a zoom and framing by live view could just buy a rebadged Panasonic or one of a 1000 digicams out there geared to that way of shooting.

 

Having an integrated fixed optical finder opens the possibility of zooming crop lines that would move with focus and other electronic info down the road. Although I don't think that is needed as this sort of camera's forte is as a discreet hyperfocal point and click camera and simple is better (and cheaper). So I think there is room in the digicam space for something completely different from Leica. That it will be more expensive then every other digicam is a given being a Leica but at least you would be paying a premium for more them a red dot on your Panasonic.

 

Maybe these designs are not it but Leica needs to come up with the small sensor 'cult' camera to really carry the brand into the digital space.

[jrc]

I used a D-Lux 3 extensively on a trip last month to Vienna and Israel, and I found that it's good for what it's good for, that is, travel snapshots. I don't doubt that some people can make nice photographs with them, but the same people could probably make nicer photographs with an M8 or a K10.

 

I agree that the lack of a zoom lens would probably cripple the camera sales. Some photo purists would go for a fixed lens, but most people doing photo-art would want a bigger, cleaner sensor than this camera provides, and people doing snapshops while traveling would want the zoom. Besides, the quality of the present zoom is excellent; why get rid of it?

 

A clip-on, or possibly built-in, viewfinder of some kind would be my first priority. Firing up the LCD at dusk means that you become very obvious when street-shooting, and not only that, you lose some of your night vision every time you frame a shot. During the day, with the sun coming over your shoulder, the LCD is hard to see -- and sometimes, impossible. I also find that I'm a lot shakier framing with an LCD than with a OVF, because I'm not braced as well. It'd be handier if you could have a really nice big hot-shoe mounted bright-line viewfinder with about three sets of lines on it. With an hour of practice, you'd be able to estimate framing pretty accurately.

 

JC

[Guest malland]

...Maybe these designs are not it but Leica needs to come up with the small sensor 'cult' camera to really carry the brand into the digital space.

Now, I agree on the desirability of that, but have no idea about the effectiveness in terms of marketing strategy, particularly in the light of how people are drooling over the medium format look of the Leica M8 pictures. While not deprecating the latter view what I want is a small-sensor camera that produces the look of 400 ISO film -- and that's why I the Ricoh GR-D and the D-Lux 3.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

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

[Guest malland]

...I don't doubt that some people can make nice photographs with them, but the same people could probably make nicer photographs with an M8 or a K10...

Depends what you mean by "nice" and "nicer". As stated in my previous posting I don't want a medium-format look, which, according to Sean Reid, is what you get with the M8. So, to me, for what I'm now doing, the pictures would not be nicer; which doesn't mean, by the way, that in the future I might not want a medium-format look. (NIce double negative there!)

 

I would have to shoot an M8 at 1250 or 2500 ISO to get the look I want, which is awfully fast for a place with bright light like Bangkok where I live. There are a good number of people that would like to have the look of B&W ISO400 film, but clearly this is not the mass market, but the neither was that the case for the M6.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

[hankg]

I don't doubt that some people can make nice photographs with them, but the same people could probably make nicer photographs with an M8 or a K10.

 

I agree that the lack of a zoom lens would probably cripple the camera sales. Some photo purists would go for a fixed lens, but most people doing photo-art would want a bigger, cleaner sensor than this camera provides, and people doing snapshops while traveling would want the zoom. Besides, the quality of the present zoom is excellent; why get rid of it?

 

I am sure this is exactly the thinking at camera companies and they are completely missing the boat for a segment of the market. Why is Tri-X still so popular even when fine grained, higher resolving emulsions are now available? Why do photographers choose to use obsolete mechanical rangefinder cameras to shoot their Tri-X when modern electronic auto everything camera's with zooms are available. A noiseless sensor and 8x10 film quality is not everyones ultimate dream.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hankg]

One wonders now with the focus on complete lack of noise and resolution whether anyone used 35mm when they where shooting film. After all there were compact medium format cameras available like the Rollei TLR and Mamiya 7 that produced much higher resolution, smoother tonality and much less noise. Now that all those 35mm shooters have gone digital nothing short of large format image quality will do?

 

I did shoot medium format rangefinders so I'm happy with the M8 and look forward to ever increasing IQ. But I'd like a small format alternative for those times when I'd like the grit and aesthetic of 35mm and the reportorial freedom of those original tiny Leicas. I must say I have been inspired by the look of Mitch's, inmants and others stuff to get back to my roots (shooting an M4 with TriX back in the 70's) only I'd rather do it with digital.