the next Leica Digilux ?

[Riley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

there is some news on the coming of the next Digilux 4/3rds camera

 

The Olympus E-3 Development Story - Part 1: Page 2 - Zone-10, Beyond the Light

 

here they are saying that

circa 2008/Leica Digilux xx/ manufactured by Leica/ Pro-grade/ Quite likely based on the E-3

[Advertisement]

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

[rsolomon]

Thanks for the info !

 

Im looking forward to seeing what is produced. I like the Digilux 3, but perhaps the Digilux 4 will offer more, i feel good in that my investment is in the lenses and im happy to upgrade the camera body as "needed". To me this point of view (on upgrading the body as needed) fits in properly with the digital / computerized photograpghy world. i beleive maufacutuers, including leica will be producing new models of camera bodies MUCH more often then in the past.

 

In the past leica might go 9 - 10 years or so between models, now i beleive it will be in the 21/2 - 3 year range. Lenses on the other hand last over the life span of MANY bodies.

 

To me leica is about lenses -- not cameras

[adan]

Interesting. I expect the R10, with its rumored-but-unspecified "larger than 24 x 36" sensor is gonna be pricey, and that the Digilux 4, if this approach is true, will be the relatively low-end option for R lenses (with the 2x crop + adapter + firmware that can deal with manual apertures), allowing some people to get their feet wet and then move up to the R10.

 

For me, the bad news is that I just don't get turned on by the 4/3rds...645...6x7 "ideal format" picture shape.

 

The good news is that the M8 will do me for quite a few years to come, so I can sit back and watch developments in digital SLRs with patience.

[dugby]

 

For me, the bad news is that I just don't get turned on by the 4/3rds...645...6x7 "ideal format" picture shape.

 

Interesting comment...Andy.

 

Funny thing is that for most of us who have those magnificent images from the D2 that also had the same picture shape....... we just ignore the image dimensions.... and admire the image.

[ptomsu]

Using both - the Digilux3 and the E-3, I must say that the E-3 is a total different beast in the whole 4/3 arena. It really brings this system into the Top Pro area, although this is not what Olympus claims for their camera. I also feel the price MORE than moderate for what that camera delivers - could have been easily priced around $2500.- at least. It outperforms bodies like D300 and 40D easily and even 5D is not really better.

 

I am not comparing single features like the often discussed high ISO performance, but the camera as a whole concept.

 

Yesterday I made prints from both M8 and E-3 and I must say that I actually was surprised from the E-3 results (with new standard lens 12-60SWD), astonishing sharpness and contrast even under low light, close to M8 (with 1,4/35ASPH) and actually looking even better sometimes.

 

So I would expect a new Digilux4, which hopefully takes a lot of the technology (or even improved by then) like Sensor, AF module, etc. to really outperfom even an E-3 and be damned close to R10 (except this would be another sensor size).

 

So I think my decision to jump on the 4/3 wagon again was right and I am pretty relaxed to see what is coming from this front - will be a tough competitor for C and N FF at least. Somewhere I found that 4/3 can go up to 28MP in a few years (I do not reacall where, but think it was Oly) - so what else would we need then? And why classic FF cameras (except for the improved DOF etc). :-))

[spylaw4]

Thanks for the link, Riley! Very interesting and about in line with my thoughts on the matter. If the mooted D4 is E-3 based the resultant Leica tweaks could make it an excellent camera! OTOH it could be based on the Panasonic equivalent :-( . This could change my personal 2008 road map somewhat.

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree, Brian.

 

It would be a big step for Leica to partner with someone other than Panasonic, though. After all, it could be argued that Panasonic are one of the parties that saved Leica from the brink a few years ago.

 

However, the Olympus E3 does look a very interesting camera and anything that encourages choice and diversity in the market should be encouraged.

 

If Leica were to partner with Panasonic and Olympus, giving them both the option of raising their game for the high end in this market, then everyone could benefit. Can't see it happening though.

 

Put one on next year's list

[Riley]

not entirely how I read it Andy, there is also another pany that is based on E3, so perhaps its more a variant of that, although they do say pro for the Leica and prosumer for the coming pany. The other thing to be excited about is the other bodies in-bound, you would have to be stuffing nutz not to offer a pocket 4/3rds sensor camera with that many bodies. 2008 might be more exciting than 2007 was

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!

[farnz]

... If Leica were to partner with Panasonic and Olympus, ...

Would this be a 'Pana-leica-pus' perhaps ...

[ptomsu]

Here 2 shots I took today

 

Both were taken RAW/DNG, converted to JPEG in LR and I only adjusted the WB to 5100 before conversion. Both at ISO 160.

 

First shot is with E-3 (12-60), second shot with M8 (1.4/35ASPH) both at F4. I choose the focal length with the E-3 accordingly to the M8 with 1,3 Crop.

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!

[ptomsu]

And here the crops of both shots - again first E-3, second M8

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!

[marknorton]

Peter, the two full frame images look too alike and don't match the crops - look at the (silver birch?) tree - the same in the full frame, different in the crops.

 

Not sure what you're trying to prove here - that an Olympus E3 and 12-60 is a match for an M8 and 35/1.4? A more telling test would be in lower light and higher ISO and 100% crops - it's impossible to draw any conclusions at these magnification levels.

 

I accept that Olympus are the finest proponents of the 4/3 "art" but it's a technology with nowhere to go. A sensor with 1/4 of the area of FF is bound to be limited and no amount of undemanding comparison shots is going to prove otherwise. The 4/3 sensor standard might have seemed a neat idea at some point, but then so did the 640k memory limit in the first PCs. This laptop has 3000 times as much.

[Riley]

all these are from E3, all these are jpeg NF OFF

800iso EXIF in tact, virtually full auto, somewhat tricky tungsten lights, its night time in a hall

straight into full sun, pretty good DR considering

bad tungsten lit hall 800iso

100% crop of same, in my experience this is as bad as noise gets at 800iso

now i may be wrong but i considered that M8, somewhat tops out at 640iso, and doesnt shoot jpeg nearly as well. RAWS will make the difference in both cases

[ptomsu]

The only thing i wanted to prove is that the E-3 produces very close results to the M8 with an absolute top lens from Leica. Of course there is no way to really compare the M8 and a 4/3 DSLR, this was by no means what I wanted to show.

 

But:

 

1) Already today 4/3 is at a similar level as the digital M system, which undoubtedly is a premium system if handled and operated right.

2) The colors produced by the E-3 with Oly glass are excellent, if at same WB very like what comes out of the M8

3) I see a big potential for 4/3 in the future, maybe this is the area where we have most divergent opinions. And yes I knw all the arguments against 4/3 and pro larger sensors.

4) If all the above is somehow true then we can expect a great future for the Leica D System - right?

 

So my conclusions: for me Oly and their 4/3 is very similar from the look and feel to Leica digital solutions. This is the most important argument for me, may be different for others of course.

 

But honestly - end of the day I like and prefer the look of M8 pictures more than the E-3 ones, issue is that the M8 is not replacing a DSLR everywhere - as we all know. As status is today the other DSLR systems from C and N are not coming close to this for me.

 

Merry Christmas and enjoy whatever system you prefer.

[adan]

Dugby - As an early D2 adopter, I know what you mean. When it was the sole option as a roughly M-sized digital with uncompromising manual/analog controls, I shot with it and worked within the format.

 

Once other "manual/digital" options became available, I went back to 2:3 as quickly as I could - just my main preference for the shape of my canvas. Although I also like square and 16:9 HDTV as occasional changeups.

 

When I look at Riley's first two shots above, I immediately start looking for "cropping Ls" to reshape the pictures and take out what would be - for me - excessive amounts of wall or grass. No knock on Riley's compositions - just the way I see personally.

 

IF - and we are talking pretty big "IFs" here - Leica does build a pro 4/3rds camera, I wouldn't put it past them to include a way to crop the viewfinder to Barnack's Format if preferred. Black slidey things top and bottom, or LCD blackout panels, or even just an optional focus screen. With an appropriate menu option to deliver a cropped 2:3 set of pixels (a la V-Lux). Not all that far-fetched - I've heard buzz that the R10 may allow cropping of an "oversized" ideal-format sensor and viewfinder to 2:3 or other formats as desired.

 

In which case - IF the viewfinder is boosted in size so that it is not like looking through binoculars the wrong 'way around and has a split-image focus aid - a Digilux 4 might be just the SLR for me. As a secondary camera for closeups and telephoto work, I'd be fine with a 2:3-cropped 4/3rds sensor mounting a 250 Telyt or 180 Elmarit.

[Black Dot]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Four-Thirds or 4/3 format gets its name from the size of the sensor not the aspect ratio even though it happens to also be a 4:3 ratio. It's twice as big as a 2/3 sensor which is also 4:3. Most consumer cameras be they 2/3, 1/1.7 or 1/2.5 also have a 4:3 ratio while professional APS or FF cameras are typically 3:2.

[Bob Ross]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Four-Thirds or 4/3 format gets its name from the size of the sensor not the aspect ratio even though it happens to also be a 4:3 ratio. It's twice as big as a 2/3 sensor which is also 4:3. Most consumer cameras be they 2/3, 1/1.7 or 1/2.5 also have a 4:3 ratio while professional APS or FF cameras are typically 3:2.

The patent on the 4/3rds system standards does list the aspect ratio as 4:3. BTW, it takes four 2/3" sensor to equal the area of the 4/3rds sensor. The 4/3rds sensor is approximately half the area of the 1.33 sensor in the M8.

Bob

[Bob Ross]

It would be a big step for Leica to partner with someone other than Panasonic, though. After all, it could be argued that Panasonic are one of the parties that saved Leica from the brink a few years ago.

 

In a way, Leica is already partnered with the other members of the 4/3rds system group. There are Oly designed components in the current Digilux, as there are in the Panasonic version. The 4/3rds group members are Oly, Kodak, Panasonic, Fuji, Sanyo, Sigma and Leica.

Bob

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Bob Ross]

I accept that Olympus are the finest proponents of the 4/3 "art" but it's a technology with nowhere to go. A sensor with 1/4 of the area of FF is bound to be limited and no amount of undemanding comparison shots is going to prove otherwise. The 4/3 sensor standard might have seemed a neat idea at some point, but then so did the 640k memory limit in the first PCs. This laptop has 3000 times as much.

Hi Mark,

"nowhere to go", but where are we going? When you can produce prints up to 16" X 20" that are hard to tell apart by brand from today's double digit MP cameras, just where do you want to go from there, that the 4/3rds sensor can't go? There are, of course, situations where any system or format will reach its limits....huge prints from high ISO files captured in the dark, come to mind.....

Bob

[Bob Ross]

Yesterday I made prints from both M8 and E-3 and I must say that I actually was surprised from the E-3 results (with new standard lens 12-60SWD), astonishing sharpness and contrast even under low light, close to M8 (with 1,4/35ASPH) and actually looking even better sometimes.

 

Hi Peter,

I did the same thing, but found that I was comparing lenses rather than sensor/data files. I was also amazed that the images were so close, especially with one having an AA filter and one not. If you can get a hold of a ZD50mm or even a ZD35mm and run comparisons, it gets even more interesting. Where I saw a clear M8 advantage was comparing the 28 Elmarit-Ashp against the ZD11-22mm on a complex landscape. The ZD11-22mm is a very good lens, but it was a classic prime vrs. zoom comparison.

The E-3 holds its own ground and like the M8 did, has raw developer catch up problems. It is a good compliment to the M8 for macro, tele and zoom situations.

Bob