sdai Posted October 10, 2006 Share #1 Posted October 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Perhaps I'm wrong, but I can't recall any camera dpreview has ever worked on receiving such a low rating ... "Recommended (with Reservations)" - that almost sounds like "Don't Buy It!" Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 Review: 17. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review What a shame on Leica ... what are they gaining from the "co-operation" with Panasonic? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 10, 2006 Posted October 10, 2006 Hi sdai, Take a look here A DP review Leica should read seriously.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gareth_c Posted October 10, 2006 Share #2 Posted October 10, 2006 I think your understanding of Recommended (with reservations) is different to mine. Having read the review they praise a lot of points about the camera and point out valid criicisms elsewhere. As for their collaboration...well I don't think Leica are in a position to release cameras at they rate they do off their own back. They need a collaborator...ie someone to actually build the thing. Leica has been in a slump but at the end of the day the Digilux 2 and D2 saw demand outsripping supply...so we can only assume there was some profit made there, something which Leica has lacked for some time now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted October 10, 2006 Share #3 Posted October 10, 2006 Yawn... and you expect me to sing the praises of the Cannonauts? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted October 10, 2006 Share #4 Posted October 10, 2006 I take the review seriously. I have a Nikon DSLR and soon an M8; but I would love to have a real pocketable camera with RAW, manual controls, and a short collapsible zoom. I don't worry much about noise, but jeez, at the present state of the art, you have to have a relatively clean 400-800; if somebody says that 200 is a bit noisy, that you have to make sure that you have NR turned off or you get watercolors, then you've got a problem with your chip. There are some good, clean 7-8mp chips out there. If they'd put one of those in this camera, they wouldn't be able to keep it in stock. That would be a happy situation to be in; I bet Phil's review will knock sales down by 50 percent. JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted October 10, 2006 Share #5 Posted October 10, 2006 Yawn... and you expect me to sing the praises of the Cannonauts? You are blinded by your hatred. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted October 10, 2006 Share #6 Posted October 10, 2006 Perhaps I'm wrong, but I can't recall any camera dpreview has ever worked on receiving such a low rating ... "Recommended (with Reservations)" - that almost sounds like "Don't Buy It!" Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 Review: 17. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review What a shame on Leica ... what are they gaining from the "co-operation" with Panasonic? Yet another camera that's only usable at ISO 100. What else is new? Until they stop using microscopic sensors this is never going to change. I believe they gave the Ricoh GR-D the same rating. At least Ricoh doesn't use so much NR that it obliterates every last detail. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
salvatore Posted October 10, 2006 Share #7 Posted October 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) All these noise issues have a simple solution... go the sigma DP1 road, put an APS or 4/3 sensor and a moderate number of Mp (6-8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 10, 2006 Share #8 Posted October 10, 2006 Yet another camera that's only usable at ISO 100. What else is new? Until they stop using microscopic sensors this is never going to change. I believe they gave the Ricoh GR-D the same rating. At least Ricoh doesn't use so much NR that it obliterates every last detail. I tested the Ricoh GR and it does fairly well (for its format) at high ISO levels. It's very slow in RAW, however. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommycrown Posted October 10, 2006 Share #9 Posted October 10, 2006 Perhaps I'm wrong, but I can't recall any camera dpreview has ever worked on receiving such a low rating ... "Recommended (with Reservations)" - that almost sounds like "Don't Buy It!" Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2 Review: 17. Conclusion: Digital Photography Review What a shame on Leica ... what are they gaining from the "co-operation" with Panasonic? For DPReviewers, I wouldn't look into what they say about Leica so much. I don't know if you have realized that they are more Canon-Freaks just like we are Leica-Freaks in here. Although they do Leica forum (I believe the forum is formed this year), Leica users constantly have to fight against Canon-users there to defend their brand! And, again, IMHO this argument of what we gain or lose from Panaleica will never end. But, if Leica needed Panny to survive from its financial obstacle, Panny just got lucky~~~ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb Posted October 10, 2006 Share #10 Posted October 10, 2006 Why is everyone so surprised by the conclusion of the review? First of all, 2 million additional pixels were packed onto the same sized sensor. Therefore it has 10 million SMALLER pixels than were previously on the D Lux 2. With all those smaller more densely packed pixels, less surface area per pixel is available to capture light. Plus with a more densely packed sensor, noise between adjacent pixels increases. A LOT. An unfortunate reality of the digital age. Add to it, the Panasonic solution to suppress all that horrid noise with their new processing engine which sacrifices detail for image smoothing. THAT effectively neuters anyones' prime reason for buying the cameras, namely the Leitz lenses. (On the other hand with the Venus III engine, any lens of lesser quality would be far worse!) The result? A tepid reccommendation. And, unfortunately, having a 16:9 LCD and cool black cosmetics can't overcome that no matter which variant of the camera you choose. Perhaps RAW may be better. But again, the bump up in resolution isn't all that significant so my guess is folks are better off with the D Lux 2. P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 10, 2006 Share #11 Posted October 10, 2006 Yet another camera that's only usable at ISO 100. What else is new? Until they stop using microscopic sensors this is never going to change. I believe they gave the Ricoh GR-D the same rating. At least Ricoh doesn't use so much NR that it obliterates every last detail. Thanks for that heads-up. I must have been travelling this summer when DPReview published the GR review. Just read it and was glad to know about it. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 10, 2006 Share #12 Posted October 10, 2006 I really need to test this little camera because I'm not convinced yet that the files are not better than those of the D-Lux 2. Geppetto posted some interesting comparisons between the two cameras (from RAW) in this thread that I think are worth looking at: http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/6929-next-d-lux-xy-what-ever.html Until I actually get to work with the RAW files from this camera, my mind is open. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted October 10, 2006 Share #13 Posted October 10, 2006 Until I actually get to work with the RAW files from this camera, my mind is open. Sure if you get OK RAW images, but decent jpegs are vital,most here want a small pocketable P&S that takes good images at the 400-800 iso mark so they can have a camera that they can hand to any family member to take a photo. People don't want to raw process pictures of a picnic in the park Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted October 11, 2006 Share #14 Posted October 11, 2006 And I just spoke to a dealer when I ordered my mother one of these who advised that these little cameras were selling very well. He had just sold 9 the othe day alone and had to order another batch from Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 11, 2006 Share #15 Posted October 11, 2006 Sure if you get OK RAW images, but decent jpegs are vital,most here want a small pocketable P&S that takes good images at the 400-800 iso mark so they can have a camera that they can hand to any family member to take a photo. People don't want to raw process pictures of a picnic in the park Hi Imants, I process pictures of picnics from RAW <G>. It's tough for any small sensor camera to produce good JPEGs at high ISO levels because it means the camera has to apply some kind of noise processing that will please a wide range of people. That's a tall order and the best in-camera NR I've seen from a small sensor camera is in the Ricoh GR. It filters the chrominance noise fairly well but tends to leave the luminance noise as is (to preserve detail). That pleases me but may not please Uncle Bob or Aunt Betty. Otherwise, NR tends to be not much more than a smear filter. Ideally, the sensor/engine itself would produce such a clean signal that it would be able to be amplified without much noise being introduced but I haven't seen that yet from any small sensor camera save for something like the older Canon G2 (which also performs about a stop higher than it's nominal ISO rating). So, until and unless a small sensor is created that truly has a high S/N ratio, I'd prefer a camera work quickly in RAW and then let the photographer decide how to filter from there. Uncle Bob or Aunt Betty just tend to turn the flash on when light is low. We don't usually see them searching for ISO settings. <G> Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted October 11, 2006 Share #16 Posted October 11, 2006 In the washup the DP review is fair Perfect for: advanced users (particularly landscape photographers) prepared to do raw processing, who rarely if ever need to go over ISO 200 Not ideal for: Casual 'snap shot' photographers, anyone who takes most of their pictures in low light (particularly if you always leave your camera on 'auto everything'). So for snapshots not a great buy I will stick with my ancient swivel Nikon coolpix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddawn Posted October 11, 2006 Share #17 Posted October 11, 2006 For DPReviewers, I wouldn't look into what they say about Leica so much. I don't know if you have realized that they are more Canon-Freaks just like we are Leica-Freaks in here. Although they do Leica forum (I believe the forum is formed this year), Leica users constantly have to fight against Canon-users there to defend their brand! And, again, IMHO this argument of what we gain or lose from Panaleica will never end. But, if Leica needed Panny to survive from its financial obstacle, Panny just got lucky~~~ Did u actually read the review or visited the link or u're just shooting at random here? Sure there are more Canon users in the forums (how not to if the product is good and everyone loves it?), but the link is, and the originally poster alluded to, a REVIEW of the PANASONIC LX2, not by forumers of dpreview, but by their founder / writer. This has nothing to do with the forums there. When the reviews praised the Nikon D2x to the skies, they were slammed for being biased. I guess u can't please everyone! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddawn Posted October 11, 2006 Share #18 Posted October 11, 2006 Sure if you get OK RAW images, but decent jpegs are vital,most here want a small pocketable P&S that takes good images at the 400-800 iso mark so they can have a camera that they can hand to any family member to take a photo. People don't want to raw process pictures of a picnic in the park unfortunately, small pocketable P&S with good ISO 400-800 output without flash do not exist...... not even in RAW.... ..that is, until the Fuji F10 / F30 series of digicams Check out the reviews of those at dpreview. I've used the F30 (borrowed) briefly. It ain't no Canon DSLR clean, but good enough for the happy snaps in dim restaurant interiors! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted October 11, 2006 Share #19 Posted October 11, 2006 So, until and unless a small sensor is created that truly has a high S/N ratio, I'd prefer a camera work quickly in RAW and then let the photographer decide how to filter from there. I take it you will be reviewing the Sigma DP1 when it's released next year? It should set a new precedent for compact point and shoots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 11, 2006 Share #20 Posted October 11, 2006 I take it you will be reviewing the Sigma DP1 when it's released next year? It should set a new precedent for compact point and shoots. Yes, I definitely will be. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.