Question for LX1 users

[neils]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK I'm embarrased to say when it came time to title this I forgot what Leica calls their version of the DMC LX1. Sorry about that. But in any case...........

 

I'm interested in the new version. The only new new Panasonic 10meg review out ther now is for the FZ50. JPGs look pretty bad at even ISO 400 with way to much "smearing" from the NR built in. So far it can't be turned off but maybe in the Leica version it can.

 

So the question for the users of the Leica version of the DMC LX1, SNAP it just came to me the D-Lux 2 right?, do the JPGs from the DL2 look like those samples from the DL3? Are DL2 jpgs any good and do you use them.

 

Most of you are likely shooting RAW so I wonder how those clean up with 3rd party NR at 400 or higher ISO's, or do they just have a nice film like look and you do no clean up or NR at all.

 

I rarely shoot anything but RAW in the DSLR so I don't mind the workflow but I am curious about the end result of DL2 RAW files.

 

Thanks

 

Neil

[smokysun]

hi neil,

 

i tried to generate some interest in this awhile back. check out this thread:

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/5484-lx1-lx2-comparison-shots.html

 

a number of sample comparisons very interesting. i'm seriously comtemplating the d-lux 3 (for the extra hundred leica service, 2 year warranty, and a much more beautiful design than the lx2.) also check out the petition being circulated. leica may listen to it to get the extra customers a change in firmware would make - and so easily.

 

let us know if you run across any more comparison sites.

 

thanks,

wayne

[neils]

I think I saw that petition on photo.net but it seemed to have been taken down almost as soon as it went up. Where is it now?

 

BTW, Tony Rose (POPFLASH.COM - Cameras & Photographic Equipment) has the DL3 on his site for $599. USA or grey? Has to be grey like those on eBay. I hit the buy it button and followed it till I'd have to throw down the plastic and I never was told "coming soon" so I guess he has grey market DL3's.

 

I didn't buy it. Wonder if it is as complete as what I think the USA version will be.

 

Well I'm about to do something I haven't done in a year. Develope some Kodak TMZ film!!

Looking forward to it.

[neils]

So I'll add a question to my own question. Do we know that the NR is always on? Even in a RAW file? Does the DL2 also do this or do we even know. This is something DL2 owners can tell us, maybe.

 

The other thing of course is we are looking at a screen. I'd be printing with an Epson 2200, MIS UT7 ink set or with BO (black Ink only) which may just cover or or enhance what the NR does. BO printing works well with digital images as it makes it more film like IMO. UT7 B&W prints can be too smooth looking, kind like PlusX in Microdal. Extremely boring to me.

 

On the other hand scanned TX or TMZ looks great with UT7 and also great with BO. BO kind of adds a Rodinal look it if follow me.

 

I look forward to more contributions to this thread. Maybe some answers to the "what does a grey DL3 include" It is only $100 more than USA LX2 at B&H.

 

Hey I could ask Pop Flash! What an idea!

[ChipNovaMac]

I have the LX-1 (the D-Lux 2 clone). I decided to go with the LX1 after seeing and printing this image from DPR (http://img2.dpreview.com/gallery/panasoniclx1_samples/originals/p1020342.jpg) to 13x19 in both color and B&W. In color I preferred the image that was run through Noise Ninja. For B&W i liked the Tri-X feel of the noise.

 

For myself, I don't think that digital images need to be noise free at higher ISO's. Would I like a noise/grain free 400, 800, or 1600 ISO image - heck yeah. But we are not there yet. We accepted grain with higher ISO films, why not with with digital? The color image run through Noise Ninja at 13x19, at least for me looked better than most ISO 400 films.

 

I know that I will be waiting for DPR's review of the LX2 and hopefully a separate review of the D-Lux 3 (since Leica is claiming tweaks) to decide on an upgrade. Who knows, maybe I will be better off keeping the LX1.

 

Hope some of this helps.

 

Chip

[neils]

You just grabbed this image of the DPR site and printed it? I didn't know yo could do that.

 

DC Resource has a test of the LX2 up now with images in the gallery they say you can print from also.

 

Would I save these to the desktop and then print with CS2? Would that work?

 

Neil

[neils]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I did ask Tony Rose about his DL3s. I got an answer from him already !! It is 10pm EST USA. They are USA with 2 yr warranty. $599 and he didn't say they weren't in stock either.

 

Neil

[ChipNovaMac]

You just grabbed this image of the DPR site and printed it? I didn't know yo could do that.

 

DC Resource has a test of the LX2 up now with images in the gallery they say you can print from also.

 

Would I save these to the desktop and then print with CS2? Would that work?

 

Neil

 

I like DPR for the gallery examples - most can be downloaded full res. The link I provided was from the gallery itself. Just look for the full res link in the EXIF data below the smaller preview.

 

Never looked at DCR much other than for comments. DPR has images taken in real world situations IMO.

 

I generally bring them in to CS2, do a minor sharpening. If noisy, then I bring them into Noise Ninja for cleaning.

 

I always print out test images at 13x19 (using CS2 to up res if needed) to see what I call real world results. Too many I think are just sitting behind their computer screens, not looking how it will look on the wall in the end. "Pixel Peepers" is what I call those that will only look at what is on the screen as opposed as to what might be in the final print.

 

Regards,

 

Chip

[simon_hughes]

If you look at the link to the details for the camera itself on the Popflash site, it says " WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE UNTIL MID OCTOBER".

[neils]

Not till October. Oh well I missed that little bit of info. By then more test will be out there but I think the conclusion will be the same. Too much NR and too much noise. And it seems ugly noise.

 

Thing is if this camera will be nearly always with me won't I be using it in poor or low light? Yes I will.

 

It seems a shame all reviews are so positive about the camera, yet the week link is the image. That makes no sense. OK this is LX2 reviews but how different could the DL3 be?

 

Maybe the Fuji F30 will win out for me if for nothing else than high ISO images.

[reddawn]

Not till October. Oh well I missed that little bit of info. By then more test will be out there but I think the conclusion will be the same. Too much NR and too much noise. And it seems ugly noise.

 

Thing is if this camera will be nearly always with me won't I be using it in poor or low light? Yes I will.

 

It seems a shame all reviews are so positive about the camera, yet the week link is the image. That makes no sense. OK this is LX2 reviews but how different could the DL3 be?

 

Maybe the Fuji F30 will win out for me if for nothing else than high ISO images.

 

the LX1 and in general Panny images come out ok in print, but they still retain that coarse noisy look at bigger prints. I'm not sure what kind of processing is going on in those cameras but the results are like watercolour painting for some of the not so good high ISO samples.

 

i've seen output from the Fuji F10/20 (?) (the earlier cameras before the F30) and they are incredible noise free / reduced images at high ISOs of 800 / 1600. If u shoot a lot in lowlight with a digital compact, i don't think u will be happy with any Panny....

 

having said that however, u might want to wait to check out upcoming reviews of that Sigma Dp1 with the APC-sensor insde before committing.