D-Lux 3 and G9: some observations

[rsmithor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The above comments are all true... the false mp bump on an already small sensor... but with a possible use of ISO of 80 again would be nice... The G9's mini grip combined with the added stability of holding the camera eye piece to your head to frame shots and hold the camera steady in all lighting conditions... that is a plus... I'm just a bit anoied using the D-Lux3 arms out camera holding method to frame photos... it can be hit and miss in bad light be it bright or dark... (it lowers the point and shoot fun... but a forum user did help with the D-Lux3 point and shoot aspect by setting the camera to manual/f5.6... that did free things up a bit, and I got some great shots just winging it this way) Maybe it's time for a real camera (not the G9)... it's Christmas time... hmm a nice 46" LCD 1080 TV... or a new camera....? I did enjoy my old analog 35m rangefinder...

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

A Leica 'Super-G9' open at f/2, with faster raw and wider FoV is exactly what i miss to replace my good old Digilux 1. But no more smearing 'Venus' or whatever 'engine' please.

[stunsworth]

The question is why manufacturers like Canon, who surely know better, continue to up the megapixel count in newer models, even though the end result is not more detailed

 

It's an arms race. If the competition has brought out say a 6 mp camera, you have to trunp that with a 7, and on it goes.

[Pygoscelis]

A couple of extra observations: I took the G9 with me yesterday for a walk on the beach with the wife and the dog. Glorious day - bright sunlight, clear blue skies, whitish sand, lots of surf. In other words, while it was splendid for us, it was always going to be tricky for any digital camera.

 

I dialled in -0.7 stop exposure compensation, when with the reflectance off the surf and sand one might normally have been prepared to correct for underexposure not exacerbate it. While the resulting shots needed brightening with PP, I was amazed at the amount of details retained in the white surf...which I had expected the small sensor to clip entirely.

 

But the real revelations were these:

1. It was way too bright to use the LCD screen effectively, but I found I could use the OVF quite well to frame and take shots of a reasonably fast moving wife and a rapidly moving dog (something that would have been impossible with the D-Lux 3 in those conditions).

 

2. Even though I was shooting ISO 80, I was quite surprized at the amount of noise in the big clear blue skies (not that it would be a real problem with printing; just that I was surprized to see it so obviously there). I've been waiting on Aperture (my raw converter of choice) to support the G9, so haven't been processing the raw files much. However, I used the included raw converter (I think it goes by the rather dull name: Raw Image Task...a sort of sub-program of ImageBrowser) and, remembering something I had read in the PopPhoto review tried the Adaptive Noise Control slider: and it worked wonders just as PopPhoto said it did. The noise in the sky was all but eliminated with a negligible hit on detail. Now, if the interface wasn't so clunky and it wasn't as slow as molasses, I'd be more inclined to use it. But it's nice to know it is there as an option.

 

I still like the D-Lux 3 for its wide angle and 16:9 perspective...but I hope when the D-Lux 4 comes along it will have either an OVF or a hotshoe allowing use of an external one.

 

Lloyd