anyone going to upgrade from D-Lux 2 to 3?

[disconnekt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm really loving my D-Lux 2, which I've had since the day it came out. I only shoot RAW, obviously, since the JPEGs are horrendous. But the RAW lag is something of a bummer, and *having* to shoot RAW to get acceptible results is a bit annoying. However, I really love the camera regardless. I'm really wondering if it will be worthwhile to upgrade to the D-Lux 3. Any opinions?

[Advertisement]

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

[peterb]

According to a number of reports on the matter, the bump fin resolution rom 8MP to 10MP is negligible.

 

Also, those extra 2 million pixels are being crammed onto the same chip. That means smaller pixels, smaller surface area to capture light and increased noise.

 

Even shooting RAW you still have noise and image degradation trade-offs as you tweak the various controls.

 

Still the body is gorgeous....

 

P

[Guest stnami]

get one of these Σ

[rjans]

No matter how (very) much I like the looks of the black D-Lux 3 I'll keep using my D-Lux 2. I do not see any advantage in the increased pixel count, the 16:9 format screen and improved signal processing wich should result in less noise. Finally you end up with the same type of camera. So, no upgrade for me. I do have ordered the leather case (dimensions of DL2 and DL3 are the same).

Regards

[disconnekt]

I just read through the feature list for the DL3 and besides the increased resolution and wide screen, I can't really see what the other improvements are. Anyone?

[regista]

I personally don't find the D-LUX 3's attributes, as portrayed by both Leica and the press this far, to be compelling enough to make me forego my precious little D-LUX 2. The last thing I care for in a camera is its body color.

[gepetto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Alison the D-LUX 3 has support for SDHC plus Venus Engine III which improves image quality and power consumption. Some other features that are not so certain what they mean lifted from the technical data sheet are "Focus setting: Choice between autofocus (either entire focusing area or for macro), or manual with joystick, setting can be saved". What exactly setting can be saved means is not clear. Hopefully it means in manual focus if the camera goes into sleep mode when you bring it back up it goes back to were you last had the lens manually focused. The DL2/LX1 when waking from sleep the camera defaults to infinity every time.

 

The documentation is not saying a whole lot but it would also be nice if the display settings allow turning off the display without having to wait for the sleep mode. Also the ability to turn off the display gain so you see a live view. The last thing is the focus assist needs to be better implemented in manual operation without having to move the joystick to activate it.

[ECliffordSmith]

I personally have no issues with my D-LUX2, certainly none at least that appear to have been addressed in the D-LUX3. Until there is a major change (lens for example) I think I will stay with my D-LUX2. I love the camera!

 

Cheers,

 

Ed

[rob_x2004]

Mate, I need one of LCT's laying on my back LMFAO smileys.

[vic vic]

no, not really - the dlux3 doesnt seems to me a dramatic change.... the more pixels - i dont mind about it - it is a tiny camera i dont print from it big prints anyway - the quality is not enough, and u dont really "photograph" with it, u just make pictures :-)))))))) i do it for fun, or for concpets - nothing more...

if much better sensor would be inserted into it (even on the count of much less pixels) i would think about it. the lens itself is good enough anyway i think.

the main concidiration for me would be a far superior low-light (high iso) performance (by sonsor, not by software).

so, if one has to buy new, probably the new is better, but i have the dlux2, and dont see reasons for upgrade :-))

[sdommin]

Does anyone know if the RAW file sizes of the D-Lux 3 are any smaller than those of the D-Lux 2? 20mb for a RAW file is ridiculous.

[jpmay]

Is the lens actually any better ?

 

 

 

(Recall Leica make lenses -- you use lenses to make photos!)

 

Obviously the nonsense like 16:9:81 and 3D voice recognition, etc, is just gimmicks.

 

Does anyone know if the lens is actually better?

[smokysun]

the pan site has a fairly extensive description of the lx2.

 

DMC-LX2 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic

 

new features i found:

 

1. same sensor. 2 more megs.

2. probably same lens BUT the tele adjustments in optical longer with higher megs in different formats. can now get 6.2, but not at 10 megs.

3. sdhc card - but looks like it writes slower than 2gb and below.

4. photoshop elements 4 with raw

5. black now possible (and gorgeous)

6. lcd 2.8 inches at16:9 plus overhead angle view, or turn the camera upside down and shoot from the waist.

7. faster engine. does this means it writes raw faster despite the two extra megs (and are the files even bigger!)?

8. now has a flash wb setting.

9. new scene modes including ariel photo and 'high sensitivity' (what does this last one mean?)

10. and speaking of iso, to 1600. check out the comparisons listed in this thread:

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/dig...son-shots.html

 

11. 2 compositional patterns vs 1

 

lx2 vs d-lux 3:

 

1. can't push iso to 3200 on d-lux 2? (is this the high sensitivity mode?)

2. looks like the tripod hole plastic in the lx2?

3. leica service and 2 year warranty (vs 1) worth a lot

4. grip on the lx2. (i think it messes up the design, but might be a lot more usable one-handed)

 

okay, a question? has anyone found a better designed and more useful compact at photokina? after a lot of looking, i'll probably upgrade to the d-lux 3 and have a back-up as well. (and i do mean a compact, not something larger like the g7, etc.)

 

wayne

[ChipNovaMac]

Some of the new features would be nice. But the quality differences that I have commented on in other threads - I am going to stay with my LX1 for the time being.

[firoze]

I have done some informal tests with the D-Lux 3 vs the D-Lux 2 at Photokina, jpeg only. From what I can see, the D-L3 is definitely superior to the D-L2. Sorry I can't post the images here but I am fairly certain that when more formal tests are done, the DL3 will prove to be superior.

 

Aside from the image quality, the larger screen is quite useful and there are several other improvements that make upgrading worthwhile, for me at least.

 

I would urge members not to form an opinion until they have actually used the DL3. Remember what happened in the case of the DL2 - the camera was written off as useless by some even without actually using it. It was only when others started using it that they realised how good it was. So give the DL3 a chance to prove its worth....

 

Regards.

[albertwang]

Looks like the D-Lux 3 is worth all those changes. The image processing seems to be much better. Ah.

[mhoutman]

 

okay, a question? has anyone found a better designed and more useful compact at photokina? after a lot of looking, i'll probably upgrade to the d-lux 3 and have a back-up as well. (and i do mean a compact, not something larger like the g7, etc.)

 

wayne

 

it is definitely not my brand but I saw some nice and neat Samsung digicams at the Photokina. Their design - as with their mobile phones - becomes more and more attractive.

 

I have a IXUS 500 always in my pocket; the D-Lux 3 might be my next one...(in silver)

[smokysun]

hi michiel,

 

thanks for the tip. i just looked at the photokina designs. looking an awful lot like the d-lux 2 or m8. the very few user reviews at dp review mixed so far, but they all say the these cameras built like a tank. most compacts come with a disposable feeling these days. and by the way, i have three samsung lcd's, after a lot of looking. i love them.

 

wayne

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Enrique Santa]

I own a dlux 2 since November last year.As an amateur I´m enjoing with this little cam. I always shoot in raw mode and the results are explendid.

I have one question, important to upgrade. I understand that in raw mode there is no procesing of the image by the cam. What we have is just the light in the sensor.

my doubt is : the sensor , with the same size, has been increased in two megas . Is it posible that we have more noise at hight iso levels?. I have seen the test and I don´t see too much difference in noise reduction in raw mode.

Any case for me dlux 2 is a perfect cam to carry every day with me, so since we have something compact, like D2, whit a bigger sensor , I´m going to upgrade de dlux 3 (yes with leather case)....Black one is irresistible for me¡¡¡¡¡¡.

[odklizec]

my doubt is : the sensor , with the same size, has been increased in two megas . Is it posible that we have more noise at hight iso levels?. I have seen the test and I don´t see too much difference in noise reduction in raw mode.

I would suggest you to see this discussion..

ACR: LX2 Sensor Less Noisy Than LX1?: Panasonic Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

The LX2 RAW noise seems to be less visible and obtrusive than in LX1 RAW shots (D-Lux3/D-Lux2 equivalents).

 

But then check also this discussion..

Re: LX2 Strange ACR Artefacts at ISO 100?: Panasonic Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

There is something "stinky" in case of LX2 RAW..less noise but also less visible details in shadows..that's strange, isn't it?