wwulfsohn Posted October 14, 2008 Share #1 Posted October 14, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am thinking about getting a D Lux 4 for a carry-around camera to fill in when I do not have my M8 with me. Can anyone who has purchased a D Lux 4 confirm that the quality of the pictures is solid? I don't expect the output to be as good as the M8. Still, I am hoping that the lens and raw image will give me a very high quality output to work with. Please share your experiences. $850 is a lot for a camera but would be worth it if the output is really good for the small package size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 14, 2008 Posted October 14, 2008 Hi wwulfsohn, Take a look here D Lux 4: Compare output to M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
mikenic Posted October 14, 2008 Share #2 Posted October 14, 2008 Hi wwulfsohn I am getting a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 delivered this week. This is the "other" version to the D Lux 4 and also quite a bit cheaper (half?). There are apparantly some firmware and software differences, but the hardware is pretty much the same AFAIK. There appears to be an issue with converting the raw format it uses, but the reports in the DPReview Panasonic forum are very good (check the recent B&W shots posted there....VG). Maybe worth your time visit there to check the chat etc if you haven't already. Cheers, Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 14, 2008 Share #3 Posted October 14, 2008 I just got mine yesterday, so have only taken a couple dozen shots. Also had to muddle through Capture One a bit, as I'm primarily an Aperture user. My impression thus far is that ISO 400 is quite good, ISO 800 is noisy but usable (very nice when converted to black and white), and ISO 1600 could only be used for black and white conversions. I haven't tried 3200, and likely won't. Auto focus does not seem particularly improved. I recently sold my D-Lux 3, so can't compare to that, but compared to my C-Lux 1, it seems slower (with both cameras set on high speed center focus). Burst mode is good for three frames only (at least when shooting RAW), and then there's a notable delay for writing out to the card. So the camera certainly has its limitations. Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thawley Posted October 14, 2008 Share #4 Posted October 14, 2008 I am thinking about getting a D Lux 4 for a carry-around camera to fill in when I do not have my M8 with me. Can anyone who has purchased a D Lux 4 confirm that the quality of the pictures is solid? I don't expect the output to be as good as the M8. Still, I am hoping that the lens and raw image will give me a very high quality output to work with. Please share your experiences. $850 is a lot for a camera but would be worth it if the output is really good for the small package size. I currently have a D-Lux 3 but most likely upgrade to the 4. As a working professional sports shooter and owner of lots of so-called "pro" point n' shoot cameras, my D-Lux 3 is BY FAR the best of the bunch. If you have reasonable expectations and recognize the limitations of the genre, this camera is spectacular. It's fun, it's easy and it will deliver wonderful images. I can only imagine the improvements in the 4. If it's slightly bigger I would be pleased, and I will definitely add the viewfinder. I recently took some quick shots of my office to post online. I used both my Digilux 3 and D-Lux 3. I have to tell you, the Digilux was a struggle... the D-Lux popped out the pictures (in Automatic setting) near-magazine ready. AND... the 16x9 aspect ratio was perfect for the job. It was one of those occasions where my thoughts were, "I don't want an assignment... I just need some nice quick photos." The D-Lux 3 delivered. I can't say enough... and like my Amex Platinum card, I don't leave home without it. Once last note regarding the view finder. Up until I got the D-Lux 3, I "thought" I needed a view finder, truth is, as you get accustomed to it, using the live view LCD actually is a more natural way to compose a shot. The proof is my six-year old. He grabs the camera, views the screen and shoots perfectly good compositions. When he picks up any of my other camera's with a view finder, he's all over the place with his aim. Seriously, lots of fun for $800 - and you won't have too many times when you're saying... "damn, I wish I would have brought one of my full size cameras." JT Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted October 14, 2008 Share #5 Posted October 14, 2008 I agree. The image quality in some of the shots with my D-lux 4 is really impressive--far more than I expected from a compact. And I find the 16:9 format really opens up some great creative possibilities. I won't start comparing the D-lux 4 with the M8. They're two different beasts altogether, and even in the week or so that I've had the D-lux 4, I've found occasions to shoot with both. Of course, the D-lux 4 shots tend to be just of the kid and the dogs and other convenient snapshot stuff, but as I become familiar with the boundaries of this camera's abilities, I suspect the D-lux will probably sneak its way into more than snapshot photography for me. I wish the case would get here soon, though. I'm told November on those in the U.S. Anyone know differently? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Thawley Posted October 15, 2008 Share #6 Posted October 15, 2008 I agree. The image quality in some of the shots with my D-lux 4 is really impressive--far more than I expected from a compact. And I find the 16:9 format really opens up some great creative possibilities. I love the 16x9.... it's such a great look. I just have to remember to quickly flip to 2:x3 though for portrait shots. I'll download and see those 16x9 verticals and wonder what the heck was I thinking..... I guess I wasn't. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted October 15, 2008 Share #7 Posted October 15, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) I just have to remember to quickly flip to 2:x3 though for portrait shots. I'll download and see those 16x9 verticals and wonder what the heck was I thinking..... I guess I wasn't. LOL Well, I think the sensor itself is 16:9, so a crop should get you the same effect (and resolution) as the switch. At least that's what I tell myself when I make the same mistake Some great D-lux 4 shots starting to pop up on flickr. None from me (yet)... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted October 16, 2008 Share #8 Posted October 16, 2008 I'm still intrigued that Leica has chosen to call the D-Lux 4 "son of M8". Could anyone who has both cameras take shots of the same scene so that we can see just how similar they are image-wise? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronaldh Posted October 16, 2008 Share #9 Posted October 16, 2008 I'm still intrigued that Leica has chosen to call the D-Lux 4 "son of M8". Could anyone who has both cameras take shots of the same scene so that we can see just how similar they are image-wise? I'm off to climb Kilimanjaro on Sunday and taking both the M8 and D-Lux 4 with me. Wondering whether the extra weight of the M is necessary! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 16, 2008 Share #10 Posted October 16, 2008 I'm still intrigued that Leica has chosen to call the D-Lux 4 "son of M8". Could anyone who has both cameras take shots of the same scene so that we can see just how similar they are image-wise? I think this is an example of marketing hyperbole. I would not assume that Leica is actually suggesting that the image quality is comparable. This really couldn't be --- the sensor is quite a bit smaller than the M8, and the lens, even if quite good for a compact P&S, can't compare to M lenses. When you're paying $850.00 USD for an entire camera with an f2.0 lens, and an f2.0 Summicron M alone is $2000.00 to $4000.00 USD depending on focal length, they really shouldn't produce similar results. Having said that, if you look at the changes from version 3 (D-Lux 3) to version 4, they have moved it in a direction that is familiar and comfortable to an M shooter. Faster lens, wider angle, accessory viewfinders --- these are all things that are appealing to me as an M user (I don't own an M8, but have two M7s). Couple this to better high ISO performance, and it really is a decent low light shooter for a small sensor camera. By the way, I occasionally view and post to the DP Review Leica forum, and there have been some very funny questions surrounding the external viewfinder option. As rangefinder users, these are intimately familiar to us --- I must have 5 or 6 sitting around at home, mostly due to bundling with CV lenses. But to people who are only digicam users, whether SLR or P&S, these are rather mysterious items. Lots of folks openly asking "what do these do and why would I want one?". Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted October 16, 2008 Share #11 Posted October 16, 2008 Jeff, no doubt it's the work of the marketing department, but still, the gravity of applying that label couldn't have escaped them and been taken lightly. It's the first time Leica has made a direct reference between a digital compact camera and the M system, after all. So this must be a very special camera in their view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 16, 2008 Share #12 Posted October 16, 2008 Jeff, no doubt it's the work of the marketing department, but still, the gravity of applying that label couldn't have escaped them and been taken lightly. It's the first time Leica has made a direct reference between a digital compact camera and the M system, after all. So this must be a very special camera in their view. Yes, I agree. Hopefully it wasn't a cavalier decision to apply that label! I have the D-Lux 4, and although I've had nary a chance to use it, I do think it's an improvement on previous models and looks to be a very capable camera given it's small size and modest price (modest when compared to an M, that is). And as a rangefinder user, the extra stops of speed on the lens, 24mm width, hotshoe, and handgrip accessory are all very meaningful additions. Maybe "young and slightly immature son of M8" would be a better label, but that doesn't quite have the same ring to it, does it? Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted October 16, 2008 Share #13 Posted October 16, 2008 I would have thought that a 'real' son of M8 would have at least a 4/3 sensor in it... Have you seen the alternative LX-3 Silver image that's currently making the rounds online? It has a leather wraparound like the recently announced Olympus micro-4/3 model. Gorgeous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
denise Posted October 16, 2008 Share #14 Posted October 16, 2008 In my household we call the DLUX4 the "son" and the M8 the "daddy". DLUX4 is a great, sharp, handy little camera. It performs well in low light, an area that the DLUX3 had issues. The best part of the DLUX series is the camera case! (Hearing that the Leica DLUX4 viewfinder costs more and made of plastic whereas the Panny LX3 viewfinder is cheaper and made of aluminum..) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 16, 2008 Share #15 Posted October 16, 2008 (Hearing that the Leica DLUX4 viewfinder costs more and made of plastic whereas the Panny LX3 viewfinder is cheaper and made of aluminum..) It is made of aluminum. (see http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/lx3/optional_accessories.html). However, I would doubt it's the same viewfinder. I've seen several sources say that the Leica D-Lux 4 viewfinder is optically identical to the new viewfinder introduced alongside the Summilux M 24mm lens --- it's different only in that it's plastic and made in Japan, where the Summilux version is brass and made in Germany. Assuming this is true, I think it's a safe bet that the Panasonic version doesn't contain Leica glass. But who knows? Maybe it does. Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
denise Posted October 17, 2008 Share #16 Posted October 17, 2008 Thanks Jeff.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
streetshooter Posted October 17, 2008 Share #17 Posted October 17, 2008 I have the Lumix....and sold the D-Lux 3...almost right away.... but....if ya put the CV21mm finder on top...use the inside of the white frameline...it's almost 100% dead on to the lcd screen........certainly closer than any of my M's..... the built on grip on the LX3 is great and very comfortable...... My bud has the D-Lux 4...and I can't see any difference in IQ...once ACR is updated to do the new cameras...well...then it'll all be the same.... shooter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 17, 2008 Share #18 Posted October 17, 2008 once ACR is updated to do the new cameras...well...then it'll all be the same....shooter Looks like this will require an upgrade to CS4 though. Adobe just released an ACR update, supposedly the last one compatible with CS3, and it did *not* include support for the LX3 or D-Lux 4. I can deal with Capture One --- it gives great results, I just don't particularly like it. I'm waiting anxiously for Aperture support. Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted October 17, 2008 Share #19 Posted October 17, 2008 ... Adobe just released an ACR update, supposedly the last one compatible with CS3, ... Jeff, I've looked for such a statement on Adobe's website but come up empty - is this stated elsewhere or your own supposition? Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miami91 Posted October 17, 2008 Share #20 Posted October 17, 2008 Jeff, I've looked for such a statement on Adobe's website but come up empty - is this stated elsewhere or your own supposition? Pete. Not my supposition Pete, but not necessarily accurate either. There was a thread on the DP Review forum which suggested that the support was coming in ACR 5, and that Adobe has stated that ACR 5 will require CS4. You'll need to read back/forward a comment or two, but here's the link: Re: Just got off the phone with Adobe...: Panasonic Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review I'm not naive enough to believe everything I read in a forum, of course, but this would certainly be consistent with past Adobe practices. Can't remember if it was CS1 to CS2, or CS2 to CS3, but I remember upgrading Photoshop only to be able to run the most recent ACR, because only the most recent ACR handled some particular Leica RAW file (Digilux 3 maybe?). Speaking for myself, now that I'm firmly entrenched in Aperture, and since I have Capture One 4.5 to process D-Lux 4 RAW files until Apple implements support, I doubt I'd be tempted to upgrade Photoshop, at least not for ACR alone. Jeff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.