D-Lux 7 Vs Q2/Q3?

[GaryC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Morning!

 

New member.

 

I used to be a keen low-amateur photographer, nothing amazing, but a real interest. I had a succession of SLR & then DSLRs, mostly just low/mid range Canon. Nothing overly fancy.

 

Then I got lazy, stopped lugging around a large camera & just relied on my iPhone to take pictures of holidays, trips, families etc. mostly for digital use and the odd print & photobook, plus video footage. The results have been good, always the latest iPhone pro, even the more ‘arty’ close ups.

 

But a recent holiday to Florence made me hanker to get back to proper photography and impure thoughts of a Leica.  

 

I quick look around the Leica store in Florence made me nearly take advantage of tax-free saving and take the plunge there & then, but I resisted pending further investigation & analysis.

 

So, my question.

 

The D-Lux 7 looks a great cheap (comparatively) option, especially in oh so cool old school half chrome, but the Q2/Q3 is giving me lustful twinges.

 

Is the Q2/Q3 worth the extra for low amateur/returning newbie use? The lack of optical zoom concerns me, is the digital zoom with higher resolution really as good? Better?

 

Anyone had experience of both?

 

Any other tips?

 

Thanks in advance, I look forward to being a regular contributor!
 

Gary

[Advertisement]

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

[stuny]

The D-Lux 7 might be the better choice for you due to its price, optical zoom lens (which in jpeg recording you can double the tele- reach with a nearly lossless algorithm called iZoom), size, weight and probable resale value if you decide to move up.  Additionally, when you zoom with the D-Lux 7 you see in the viewfinder or screen exactly what your camera sees, much like all your experience with SLRs, DLSRs and even your iPhone.

However, I was surprised by how much I like the Q my wife gave me 6 1/2 years ago, in spite of my almost always using SLRs/DLSRs for over 50 years, and it has become my carry anywhere camera.

[nicci78]

Leica Q2 worths every pennies it costs. It is a real Leica : made in Germany with Leica ergonomics & menu system and DNG with Leica colour science. 
Its Summilux-Q 28mm f/1.7 lens is very special and will give your photos a unique look. Which will be way better than any smartphone. 
 

Whereas D-Lux 7 is just an over priced Panasonic compact camera. Sub micro 4/3 sensor which is 5x smaller than the Q. 
Its lens is ok but nothing to rave about. 
It is a real Panasonic with Leica design : made in China, Lumix ergonomics & menus and Panasonic RAW files & colour science. 
For me it does not worth it. Just buy the real deal. 
 

Q2 crops will be better than D-Lux zoom in 

Edited August 14, 2023 by nicci78

[Le Chef]

I have the DL-109, the DL-7’s predecessor and a Q2. If you compare output it’s easy to see what the full frame Q2 delivers over the DL.

I took the DL to DC this last week and was happy with the results. I shoot RAW only and so spent time in Lightroom when I returned. What is noticeable is a graininess to the images and some loss of shadow and highlight detail.

The issue really comes down to how you use your camera and what kind of output you are looking for. If you mostly share on screen and social media then the Q is probably overkill. But if you’re making A2 sized prints regularly the the Q is the way to go.

I’m still going to keep using the DL - it’s pocketable, light, easy to use from full automatic to fully manual and from jpg to RAW.

Given my time over again I would be still inclined to buy a DL.

[SrMi]

D-Lux 7 is an excellent small, pocketable camera. As mentioned, it is not a Leica in its core but a slightly redesigned Panasonic camera.

If you hanker for a small and inexpensive "real" Leica, you may consider a Leica CL. Unfortunately, CL has been discontinued, but you may find well-preserved used ones. 

If you are OK with using a fixed 28mm lens, a Q can deliver great results.

Edited August 14, 2023 by SrMi

[Miltz]

If you need to ask this question then I would go with the Lux 7. 

[GaryC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, stuny said:

The D-Lux 7 might be the better choice for you due to its price, optical zoom lens (which in jpeg recording you can double the tele- reach with a nearly lossless algorithm called iZoom), size, weight and probable resale value if you decide to move up.  Additionally, when you zoom with the D-Lux 7 you see in the viewfinder or screen exactly what your camera sees, much like all your experience with SLRs, DLSRs and even your iPhone.

However, I was surprised by how much I like the Q my wife gave me 6 1/2 years ago, in spite of my almost always using SLRs/DLSRs for over 50 years, and it has become my carry anywhere camera.

Thanks Stu - apologies if you see/get this reply twice, I replied but can't see it - not sure if it is just awaiting moderation.

Sounds like the D-Lux might be the more sensible option. 

Is the Q2 zoom/crop function not viewable on the camera itself? Viewfinder or screen - is it just take at 28mm and crop post photo (PC/Phone?)

Thanks - sorry for all the questions.

[LarsOtium]

5 hours ago, GaryC said:

Morning!

 

New member.

 

I used to be a keen low-amateur photographer, nothing amazing, but a real interest. I had a succession of SLR & then DSLRs, mostly just low/mid range Canon. Nothing overly fancy.

 

Then I got lazy, stopped lugging around a large camera & just relied on my iPhone to take pictures of holidays, trips, families etc. mostly for digital use and the odd print & photobook, plus video footage. The results have been good, always the latest iPhone pro, even the more ‘arty’ close ups.

 

But a recent holiday to Florence made me hanker to get back to proper photography and impure thoughts of a Leica.  

 

I quick look around the Leica store in Florence made me nearly take advantage of tax-free saving and take the plunge there & then, but I resisted pending further investigation & analysis.

 

So, my question.

 

The D-Lux 7 looks a great cheap (comparatively) option, especially in oh so cool old school half chrome, but the Q2/Q3 is giving me lustful twinges.

 

Is the Q2/Q3 worth the extra for low amateur/returning newbie use? The lack of optical zoom concerns me, is the digital zoom with higher resolution really as good? Better?

 

Anyone had experience of both?

 

Any other tips?

 

Thanks in advance, I look forward to being a regular contributor!
 

Gary

Q3 brought me back to Leica. And it has me excited about photography again. So I figure it’s worth the expense.

Edited August 14, 2023 by LarsOtium

[GaryC]

3 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Leica Q2 worths every pennies it costs. It is a real Leica : made in Germany with Leica ergonomics & menu system and DNG with Leica colour science. 
Its Summilux-Q 28mm f/1.7 lens is very special and will give your photos a unique look. Which will be way better than any smartphone. 
 

Whereas D-Lux 7 is just an over priced Panasonic compact camera. Sub micro 4/3 sensor which is 5x smaller than the Q. 
Its lens is ok but nothing to rave about. 
It is a real Panasonic with Leica design : made in China, Lumix ergonomics & menus and Panasonic RAW files & colour science. 
For me it does not worth it. Just buy the real deal. 
 

Q2 crops will be better than D-Lux zoom in 

I didn't know that....is that automatically a bad thing? I do want to learn and grow with the camera. I'm happy to spend the extra on a Q, but is the D-Lux really a sub-prime option?

[GaryC]

1 hour ago, Le Chef said:

I have the DL-109, the DL-7’s predecessor and a Q2. If you compare output it’s easy to see what the full frame Q2 delivers over the DL.

I took the DL to DC this last week and was happy with the results. I shoot RAW only and so spent time in Lightroom when I returned. What is noticeable is a graininess to the images and some loss of shadow and highlight detail.

The issue really comes down to how you use your camera and what kind of output you are looking for. If you mostly share on screen and social media then the Q is probably overkill. But if you’re making A2 sized prints regularly the the Q is the way to go.

I’m still going to keep using the DL - it’s pocketable, light, easy to use from full automatic to fully manual and from jpg to RAW.

Given my time over again I would be still inclined to buy a DL.

Thats really useful. I'm exceptionally unlikely to be blowing up to A2, it will be mostly digital sharing plus some smaller printing (phonebooks etc). 

Thanks

[GaryC]

54 minutes ago, SrMi said:

D-Lux 7 is an excellent small, pocketable camera. As mentioned, it is not a Leica in its core but a slightly redesigned Panasonic camera.

If you hanker for a small and inexpensive "real" Leica, you may consider a Leica CL. Unfortunately, CL has been discontinued, but you may find well-preserved used ones. 

If you are OK with using a fixed 28mm lens, a Q can deliver great results.

Thanks - used CLs seem a rare commodity, and from what I understand, they are a separate body/lens set-up? 

I guess my question centres around how easy is it to live with a fixed 28mm lens?

Edited August 14, 2023 by GaryC

[GaryC]

44 minutes ago, Miltz said:

If you need to ask this question then I would go with the Lux 7. 

Thanks. I am however of the opinion that without asking about things we don't understand, we never learn and grow. Everyone was a beginner once.

[GaryC]

16 minutes ago, LarsOtium said:

Q3 brought me back from a story similar to yours.

Thanks Lars....and you're happy with the choice?

[bobtodrick]

I have the Q...previously had the DL109.

Because I do a lot of exhibitions...and the kind of stuff I photograph suits a wide angle the Q suits my style perfectly.

But I do really miss the D-Lux and wish I had kept it.  Though my 'serious' photography doesn't require tele...for general day to day stuff the D-Lux's zoom was great.

And don't let the naysayers tell you it can't produce quality results...I have displayed 16x20" prints in exhibitions from the D-Lux not issue.

[Miltz]

53 minutes ago, GaryC said:

Thanks. I am however of the opinion that without asking about things we don't understand, we never learn and grow. Everyone was a beginner once.

If you’re a newbie, my honest recommendation would be a entry level mirrorless camera you can play with and figure out exactly what you like and don’t. You need a camera that you can change lenses on. The Q series is very deliberate and no the crop modes aren’t like zooming. You’re still composing with 28mm. I don’t think the Lux 7 is a good option either. Go with a Fuji or Canon mirrorless both entry so you can change lenses and see what works best for you. Once you’ve outgrown that you can move on to a more deliberate camera and lens system which might or might not be the Leica Q3. 

[Le Chef]

I would add that's worth looking at the images in the DL forum and seeing if any of those work for you.

[LarsOtium]

1 hour ago, GaryC said:

Thanks Lars....and you're happy with the choice?

I finally get mine tomorrow after ordering early morning on announcement date.

The way I have assessed the Q3, against my needs, is that it will either prove to be a phenomenal one lens camera that I can push my creativity with or it will end up being the World's best point and shoot.

 

I am good with either outcome. If the former… well, yippee. If the latter… still, yippee, but I will need to add an interchangeable body into the mix.

[bobtodrick]

1 hour ago, LarsOtium said:

 

I am good with either outcome. If the former… well, yippee. If the latter… still, yippee, but I will need to add an interchangeable body into the mix.

A true optimist…the world needs more like this.  And I’m being completely serious 😀

Edited August 14, 2023 by bobtodrick

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[LarsOtium]

3 minutes ago, bobtodrick said:

A true optimist…the world needs more like this.  And I’m being complacent serious 😀

It is only money… and a bigger camera bag, I guess, if I’m wrong! 😎

[GaryC]

3 hours ago, Miltz said:

If you’re a newbie, my honest recommendation would be a entry level mirrorless camera you can play with and figure out exactly what you like and don’t. You need a camera that you can change lenses on. The Q series is very deliberate and no the crop modes aren’t like zooming. You’re still composing with 28mm. I don’t think the Lux 7 is a good option either. Go with a Fuji or Canon mirrorless both entry so you can change lenses and see what works best for you. Once you’ve outgrown that you can move on to a more deliberate camera and lens system which might or might not be the Leica Q3. 

Newbie with Leica, but as mentioned above, I've had a good trench of experience with DSLR and SLR prior to that, such is my age. 

A mirrorless Canon or similar could be an option, but getting away from a multi-lens option is part of the driver. Learning something new is an another. The attraction of a Leica is yet another 😉