From CL to D-Lux 8

[Jackalope]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bear with me. For several years, my kit was an SL2 with two APO lenses plus the CL with the 11-23, 18, and 18-56 (and a GR III as a carry-around). I’ve used the CL mostly for long distance walks (strapped to my day pack with a capture clip) and was extremely happy. I’ve used the SL2 for travel when I have a car, but mostly around town and on day trips.

In the spring I decided to take the CL and the two zooms on a two week trip to southern Spain. And, to my surprise, I wasn’t happy with its low light performance, less because of the sensor than because of the slow lenses. Even at high ISO’s, a dimly lit space like the Mezquita de Cordoba defeated the CL.

So I sprang for a Q3 and that has been a uniformly great experience. My idea was that I’d take the Q3 plus the GR III for travel (as an example, GR III at night in Palermo). But I found the transition from the wonderfully clear Leica controls to the, um, less than perspicuous Ricoh controls to be extremely annoying. 

So yes, I know all thee drawbacks of the D-Lux 8, but, in my experience, it’s a great little camera: tiny, light but solid, with a very sharp zoom lens and pleasing colors. I use it mostly for photos for my travel blog, and the micro 4/3 sensor is plenty for the web. The big selling point, though, was the ability to set it up just like the Q3 and move seamlessly back and forth. 

When I bought the D-Lux 8, I knew that I would sell the Ricoh. But now I have to ask myself: what is the use scenario for the CL? I’m returning to the Southwest Coast Path in England in the spring, and I think the D-Lux 8 and its 24-70 equivalent zoom will work just fine. 

I’m sentimentally attached to the lovely CL, but I think reason will prevail and MPB will be its final destination.

[Einst_Stein]

DL8 is a nice camera, lovely, but CL has a higher ceiling in IQ. The size difference? it's up to your personal preference and priority. If the lens aperture is so much important to you that you cannot be satisfied by rasing ISO in CL, then you should keep DL8.

[DenverSteve]

I would like to see a couple of images that you say defeated the CL.  I have used the CL since soon after its release along with the M11, Q3/43, Q2 and others and have never found a situation where the CL didn't shine.  Here are a couple taken over the past 2 years.  All are low-light or after sunset.  

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!

[TL3]

Funny you mention low light in Spain, I literally bought a TL 23 mm f2 on a layover on the way to Spain a couple years back for the very reason you mention.  I do think the CL will struggle in those low light conditions with its slow zooms; it did much better with the 23 mm f2 as well as the 35 mm f1.4.

Here are a couple of the low light shots in the Mezquita-Catedral de Cordoba, both on the 23mm f2 I bought on the way.  The 35mm f1.4 fared even better as expected.  For this reason exactly (darker interior shots) I always bring the 23mm f2 on trips instead of the 18mm f2.8.

I've only used the D-Lux 8 in store, but I can't imagine its low light performance would be better than the CL (with faster lenses).  I enjoy the CL for travel because of the flexibility in changing lenses to suit the conditions, and the small size.

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!

[Jackalope]

19 hours ago, TL3 said:

Funny you mention low light in Spain, I literally bought a TL 23 mm f2 on a layover on the way to Spain a couple years back for the very reason you mention.  I do think the CL will struggle in those low light conditions with its slow zooms; it did much better with the 23 mm f2 as well as the 35 mm f1.4.

Here are a couple of the low light shots in the Mezquita-Catedral de Cordoba, both on the 23mm f2 I bought on the way.  The 35mm f1.4 fared even better as expected.  For this reason exactly (darker interior shots) I always bring the 23mm f2 on trips instead of the 18mm f2.8.

I've only used the D-Lux 8 in store, but I can't imagine its low light performance would be better than the CL (with faster lenses).  I enjoy the CL for travel because of the flexibility in changing lenses to suit the conditions, and the small size.

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!

Those are lovely images. Clearly, my mistake was taking the zooms rather than the two primes (which I never owned). I don't regret purchasing the Q3, however; it has proven to be a great travel camera, and the D-Lux 8 is a very handy complimentary device.

[KitW]

I just played with a second hand Panasonic G7 with optical image stabilisation that I bought my niece, and I have to say I could see the use for it.

That said, I've also used my CL in Cordoba and Seville and been quite happy with it. 

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!

 

Last holiday in Seville, the night shots that didn't work out were all of a street festival and the performers were blurred through motion. Stabilisation wouldn't have helped with that (unless to enable more motion blur). I won't be changing to the d-lux from my CL but I can certainly see the appeal.