Digilux

[Scott Brady]

As I prepare for our expeditions this year and next, which will include Barranca del Cobre in March and six months in South and Central America in November, I am looking to fill a few camera requirements. For HDV, we are trying to swing a Red One with it's 35mm cinema sensor, but for digital still capture, these are our thoughts:

1. DSLR- 12mp EOS 5D, with my series of L glass. (will purchase in the next few weeks)
2. D-Lux 3- 10mp, back-up camera, or when we want to appear more discrete or like a "tourist" (already own and use)
3. DIGILUX 3- This would be Stephanie's camera for the trips.

The DIGILUX 3 has several traits that will make for a good camera for Stephanie, including a very film camera feel. She was educated in traditional photography, with dials, manual exposures and darkroom development. Using the features of the DIGILUX will be familiar to her. The DIGILUX is also relatively compact and light, and favors the "run and gun" style of people and environment photography Steph prefers.

Do any of you use this camera, or are familiar with/tested it?

1. Has the body and lens proven durable and trouble-free?
2. Have you fitted any other 4/3 spec. lenses, like the 25mm 1.4?
3. Overall image and color quality in RAW (I am aware of the cameras .jpg limitations).
4. Would you buy the camera again if given the choice? If not, what other model would you consider (like the Canon G9, etc.)?

Thanks for any insight

 

[Lost Canadian]

I can't offer anything to this thread other than muddy the waters perhaps and bring up the Panasonic DMC-L1? From what I've read the Digilux 3 and DMC-L1 are essentially the same camera if shooting RAW, if true, to me the Leica seems to be prohibitively expensive?

 

[jeffryscott]

try one before you commit. The viewfinder is horrendous and dark from what I've seen (I've looked at the Panasonic twin) and although I love the concept of it (I have used, owned and loved many Leica M rangefinders) this isn't anything like it.

 

[Scott Brady]

although I love the concept of it (I have used, owned and loved many Leica M rangefinders) this isn't anything like it.

I was a bit afraid of that... Starts making the G9 look like a serious bargain.

 

[bigreen505]

I have considered one as well. I have heard good things about them. Everyone loves them and I know several people who use them alongside a M8. Also give the Ricoh a serious look, that is probably a better tool for street photography.

 

[jeffryscott]

Scott, quick question. If you buy another SLR, do you really want it to be non-Canon as you'd then have two systems to support?

Also, as an aside, since you are looking at the 4/3's system of the Leica, for just a bit more than the cost of the G9, you can get an Olympus e-510 two lens kit (or for a hundred or so less an e-410) Both are nice little cameras (the 510 has in-body IS) and the kit lenses are pretty darn good. Olympus has the best dust-busting system of them all (in over two years of using an E1, no dust on the sensor, whereas it takes about 30 seconds to get it on my Canon's).

All that said, you won't go wrong with the G9.

 

[nwoods]

Scott, give Ho at buzz at EE, he uses a digital Leica, might give you some good realworld feedback.

 

[Spenser]

Scott-I am new G9 owner and Canon convert. The one thing not to overlook, other than the cool factor and heft, is that the G9 can be used as an unobtrusive camera. It has that Leica M feel to it, and doesnt look like a DSLR or large camera if you lose the neck strap and put in on a wrist strap. There was a mention of that unobtrusiveness to the M's in the recent Leica article in the New Yorker, that I think was linked or posted here or on EE. I too went down the Leica path before I got the G9, with gentle "nudges" from others on the board and there isnt too much that it cant do as a daily camera.