Digilux 2 - First classic digital camera

[rjans]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still own my Digilux 2 and like it. It's digital but feels like shooting analog. Found this recent article on AP: https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/second-hand/leica-digilux-2-the-first-classic-digital-camera-145188 Second hand prices vary but one of the last I've seen from a store was approx 600€.

Best

Edited January 28, 2021 by rjans
seen from a store

[Advertisement]

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

[ChrisRL]

And of course this camera has the distinction of having an active thread here that's run pretty much every day from then until now. That'll be 14 years on the 28th of March. 

Of course the actual Digilux 2 5MP camera was introduced around 4 years before the start of that thread, in 2003,  so the camera's design is actually 17-18 years old.

But Leica's first entry into digital was the S1, only in 1997, some 22 years after the first digital cameras (by Kodak, with Fairchild sensors), and the Digilux 2 was only Leica's 5th try at digital cameras (the first 3 made by Fuji, and the Digilux 1 and 2 made in conjunction with Panasonic).

This is a VERY long time when thinking about digital cameras, which change models at least every two years. And of course, with the latest Fujis coming out at over 100MP now... a 5MP seems like a dinosaur, right? A Panasonic GH2? Ancient.

But, for the purposes of that great online thread - Do Digilux 2 photos have a distinctive look? Well, it has a Vario Summicron, for goodness' sake. Okay, a tiny 2/3" CCD sensor, but still. 

And then, Leica upgraded with the interchangeable lens Digilux 3.. which didn't look the same any more. Cos the upgrades made, IMHO, the D3 look pretty much the same as all the other interchangeable, disposable digital cameras. What I like to call "the Ikea look" myself.

And yes, I do still shoot actively, mostly Nikon and Fuji, both film and 24MP+ digital and yes, pretty much every day (at least once a week) and yes, I still shoot my 5MP D2 because yes, I still believe it has a distinctive look.

There. Now  you know everything.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2021 by ChrisRL

[stuny]

I bought my D2 in March of 2004, a month after trying it out at Tamarkin Camera in Manhattan. I used it daily and took it with me to the jungles of Belize in April along with my R8.  Later that year in Madagascar a beautiful primatologist (specializing in lemurs) tried to convince me to trade it for her D1 plus cash.   Circa 2008 the sensor began to fail and Leica replaced the sensor for free. In early 2009 in Uganda or Rwanda the door to the battery and memory card would not stay closed, preventing me from actuating the shutter.  I made a temporary repair by keeping it closed with a Band-Aid (plaster) from our small first aid kit, but when we got back home I took it to Leica USA.  It was not repairable, but they did sell me a refurbished one at a very attractive price.  Early in the morning in the fall of 2012 while walking through Greenwich Village I marveled at there being so many early 1960s cars parked about for several blocks, all looking used, so they were not there for an auto show.  As it turned out I had wandered onto the location set of Inside Llewyn Davis,  a Coen Brothers film.  A production assistant stopped me just west of Washington Square Park so they could finish a take, and remarked to me about how much he admired Leica cameras, and thought my D2 was an early M.  He was surprised to see images on the screen.

My D2 and I eventually parted ways to both help fund a newer Leica purchase, and, as I rationalized, I had become used to "faster" cameras with better EVFs.   I think if I didn't need the cash to upgrade I'd still have it today, with the frightening caveat that the sensor might fail at any time, and no replacement parts have been available for years.

I would rate the camera as a classic, partly for the ease of use of its analog controls, partly for its looks, and most assuredly for its "punching well beyond its weight class."  It was a most happy combination of a wonderful lens mated to exceptionally well engineered everything else.  I still miss it some, but I probably would seldom take it off the shelf if I still had it.

[rjans]

5 hours ago, ChrisRL said:

And of course this camera has the distinction of having an active thread here that's run pretty much every day from then until now. That'll be 14 years on the 28th of March. 

Of course the actual Digilux 2 5MP camera was introduced around 4 years before the start of that thread, in 2003,  so the camera's design is actually 17-18 years old.

But Leica's first entry into digital was the S1, only in 1997, some 22 years after the first digital cameras (by Kodak, with Fairchild sensors), and the Digilux 2 was only Leica's 5th try at digital cameras (the first 3 made by Fuji, and the Digilux 1 and 2 made in conjunction with Panasonic).

This is a VERY long time when thinking about digital cameras, which change models at least every two years. And of course, with the latest Fujis coming out at over 100MP now... a 5MP seems like a dinosaur, right? A Panasonic GH2? Ancient.

But, for the purposes of that great online thread - Do Digilux 2 photos have a distinctive look? Well, it has a Vario Summicron, for goodness' sake. Okay, a tiny 2/3" CCD sensor, but still. 

And then, Leica upgraded with the interchangeable lens Digilux 3.. which didn't look the same any more. Cos the upgrades made, IMHO, the D3 look pretty much the same as all the other interchangeable, disposable digital cameras. What I like to call "the Ikea look" myself.

And yes, I do still shoot actively, mostly Nikon and Fuji, both film and 24MP+ digital and yes, pretty much every day (at least once a week) and yes, I still shoot my 5MP D2 because yes, I still believe it has a distinctive look.

There. Now  you know everything.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, yes I know the thread. Always have a look (also in the German part of the forum) into it but it has been a very long time since I posted a picture in the thread. Have to confess that I don't use the D2 very much anymore but I also believe it has a distinctive look. Back in 2006 I had a chance to shoot with the D3 at the local dealer when the M8 was launched and presented. I did not like the D3, the comparable Olympus E-330 was way cheaper. Two years later I acquired my M8 with a rebate. In 2013 I got the X Vario + the C Typ 112. I use the latter the most now, although I am thinking about a D-Lux7 to replace the X Vario.

Best

[Einst_Stein]

Digilux 4.3 may be your alternative. I'd say Digilux 4.3 is the best kept secrete. It's image and color rendering is far better than Digilux 1. Surprisingly it only has about 2MP. 

TRy search for Digilux 4.3 image. I just posted one recently. 

 

[jhluxton]

I bought my Digilux 2 in 2004. Really liked the camera - handled well compared to predecessor the Fuji rebranded Digilux Zoom and the later Digilux 1. 

I was really happy with it and when the Digilux 3 appeared around 2006 I thought about it then decided not to bother. 

Unfortunately my Digilux 2 suffered sensor failure in October 2007. I sent if off to Leica UK for repair and they offered me choice of a free repair or a Digilux 3 at half price. 

Oh dear the Digilux 3 nearly put me of Leicas, fortunately I had also recently acquired a V-Lux which helped me keep the faith! 

I found the D3 a dreadfully unbalanced, bulky and awkward camera - so many of my images seemed to slanting horizons.

A problem I had never experienced in photography before, exposure on the D3 was also hit and miss.  

Yes I do miss the Digilux 2. I did own an X-Vario which was its close successor and that was a nice camera except for the lack of built in eye level finder and the low max aperture. 

Today I now use a couple of Ms, A V-lux 3 and an X1. - But if a new version of Digilux 2 appeared with eyelevel finder similar zoom lens and a 35mm sensor I could well be tempted. 

John