dpreview test: Leica Digilux 2 blows away Canon G5

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ThomasH, May 12, 2004.

  1. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.

    Of course probably only a narrow spectrum of users will be
    willing to pay $1800 for such camera, but I am sure that
    Leica aficionados are not disappointed! You are really
    getting some value for the money!

    The most surprising fact to me is that this color fidelity
    and low noise have been achieved with the same tiny 2/3"
    sensor! Somehow I though that this sensor is bigger...
    Leicas announcement was "The 2/3-inch image sensor is
    extremely large". Hm... whatever they mean by that,
    considering its properties, it is sure not the commonly
    used Sony sensor...

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, May 12, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. ThomasH

    BG250 Guest

    It is a very good camera indeed. I too was impressed with the low noise and
    almost no CA. There was some expense of resolution at higher speeds to
    smooth out the noise but IMO, it was better than having the noise. Low
    amount of artifacts in the image was very good as well for such a small
    sensor.

    It is no match for a dSLR sensor. It is a big step in the right direction.
    For the price, it had better be.

    I thought the built in flash with bounce mode was pretty cool.
    bg

    "ThomasH" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    >
    > Of course probably only a narrow spectrum of users will be
    > willing to pay $1800 for such camera, but I am sure that
    > Leica aficionados are not disappointed! You are really
    > getting some value for the money!
    >
    > The most surprising fact to me is that this color fidelity
    > and low noise have been achieved with the same tiny 2/3"
    > sensor! Somehow I though that this sensor is bigger...
    > Leicas announcement was "The 2/3-inch image sensor is
    > extremely large". Hm... whatever they mean by that,
    > considering its properties, it is sure not the commonly
    > used Sony sensor...
    >
    > Thomas
     
    BG250, May 12, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ThomasH

    Bowzre Guest

    I always thought the G5 was very noisy, and didn't produce as smooth or nice
    an image as the G3.

    "ThomasH" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    >
    > Of course probably only a narrow spectrum of users will be
    > willing to pay $1800 for such camera, but I am sure that
    > Leica aficionados are not disappointed! You are really
    > getting some value for the money!
    >
    > The most surprising fact to me is that this color fidelity
    > and low noise have been achieved with the same tiny 2/3"
    > sensor! Somehow I though that this sensor is bigger...
    > Leicas announcement was "The 2/3-inch image sensor is
    > extremely large". Hm... whatever they mean by that,
    > considering its properties, it is sure not the commonly
    > used Sony sensor...
    >
    > Thomas
     
    Bowzre, May 12, 2004
    #3
  4. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    BG250 wrote:
    >
    > It is a very good camera indeed. I too was impressed with the low noise and
    > almost no CA. There was some expense of resolution at higher speeds to
    > smooth out the noise but IMO, it was better than having the noise. Low
    > amount of artifacts in the image was very good as well for such a small
    > sensor.
    >
    > It is no match for a dSLR sensor. It is a big step in the right direction.
    > For the price, it had better be.
    >
    > I thought the built in flash with bounce mode was pretty cool.


    Absolutely, it is a simple measure, cheap to make actually.
    I wonder why such feature is not present in *all* prosumer
    cameras. They are all quite expensive actually, why not to
    add a few parts to provide such indirect flash projection...

    Thomas


    > bg
    >
    > "ThomasH" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    > >
    > > Of course probably only a narrow spectrum of users will be
    > > willing to pay $1800 for such camera, but I am sure that
    > > Leica aficionados are not disappointed! You are really
    > > getting some value for the money!
    > >
    > > The most surprising fact to me is that this color fidelity
    > > and low noise have been achieved with the same tiny 2/3"
    > > sensor! Somehow I though that this sensor is bigger...
    > > Leicas announcement was "The 2/3-inch image sensor is
    > > extremely large". Hm... whatever they mean by that,
    > > considering its properties, it is sure not the commonly
    > > used Sony sensor...
    > >
    > > Thomas
     
    ThomasH, May 13, 2004
    #4
  5. ThomasH

    Mats Weber Guest

    In article <>, ThomasH <>
    wrote:

    >Absolutely, it is a simple measure, cheap to make actually.
    >I wonder why such feature is not present in *all* prosumer
    >cameras. They are all quite expensive actually, why not to
    >add a few parts to provide such indirect flash projection...


    Because a guide number of 11 to 15 m is just not enough for bounce flash
    in most cases.
     
    Mats Weber, May 13, 2004
    #5
  6. ThomasH

    Bob Salomon Guest

    In article <>,
    Mats Weber <> wrote:

    > In article <>, ThomasH <>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >Absolutely, it is a simple measure, cheap to make actually.
    > >I wonder why such feature is not present in *all* prosumer
    > >cameras. They are all quite expensive actually, why not to
    > >add a few parts to provide such indirect flash projection...

    >
    > Because a guide number of 11 to 15 m is just not enough for bounce flash
    > in most cases.


    A GN of 50 in feet (15 in meters) is enough to do some bounce flash work
    in smaller rooms or at closer distances.

    --
    To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
     
    Bob Salomon, May 13, 2004
    #6
  7. ThomasH

    ArtKramr Guest

    >Subject: Re: dpreview test: Leica Digilux 2 blows away Canon G5
    >From: Bob Salomon
    >Date: 5/13/04 6:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time
    >Message-id: <>
    >
    >In article <>,
    > Mats Weber <> wrote:
    >
    >> In article <>, ThomasH <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Absolutely, it is a simple measure, cheap to make actually.
    >> >I wonder why such feature is not present in *all* prosumer
    >> >cameras. They are all quite expensive actually, why not to
    >> >add a few parts to provide such indirect flash projection...

    >>
    >> Because a guide number of 11 to 15 m is just not enough for bounce flash
    >> in most cases.

    >
    >A GN of 50 in feet (15 in meters) is enough to do some bounce flash work
    >in smaller rooms or at closer distances.
    >
    >--
    >To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.



    Hi Bob,

    I put a small strip of foil at a 45 degree angle in front of the flash on my
    6490. Viola ! Bouce flash. Good for fairly close work or in small spaces..

    Regards,

    Arthur
    Arthur Kramer
    344th BG 494th BS
    England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
    Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
    http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
     
    ArtKramr, May 13, 2004
    #7
  8. ThomasH

    Bob Salomon Guest

    In article <>,
    (ArtKramr) wrote:

    > >Subject: Re: dpreview test: Leica Digilux 2 blows away Canon G5
    > >From: Bob Salomon
    > >Date: 5/13/04 6:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time
    > >Message-id: <>
    > >
    > >In article <>,
    > > Mats Weber <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> In article <>, ThomasH <>
    > >> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Absolutely, it is a simple measure, cheap to make actually.
    > >> >I wonder why such feature is not present in *all* prosumer
    > >> >cameras. They are all quite expensive actually, why not to
    > >> >add a few parts to provide such indirect flash projection...
    > >>
    > >> Because a guide number of 11 to 15 m is just not enough for bounce flash
    > >> in most cases.

    > >
    > >A GN of 50 in feet (15 in meters) is enough to do some bounce flash work
    > >in smaller rooms or at closer distances.
    > >
    > >--
    > >To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.

    >
    >
    > Hi Bob,
    >
    > I put a small strip of foil at a 45 degree angle in front of the flash on my
    > 6490. Viola ! Bouce flash. Good for fairly close work or in small spaces..
    >
    > Regards,
    >
    > Arthur
    > Arthur Kramer
    > 344th BG 494th BS
    > England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
    > Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
    > http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


    Art,

    If it is aluminum foil you should to a white balance as aluminum foil
    can reflect blue.

    --
    To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.
     
    Bob Salomon, May 13, 2004
    #8
  9. ThomasH

    Thad Guest

    ThomasH wrote:

    > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    >



    "In some crops the Digilux 2 is looking slightly sharper, in others the
    G5 has the edge but overall there's very little difference between these
    two cameras. Perhaps the only noticeable difference is the color
    response with the Digilux 2 producing better reds and blues, the G5
    better greens." -Phil Askey


    Sounds close enough to me, considering the enormous price difference.

    --

    -Thad L.
     
    Thad, May 13, 2004
    #9

  10. > Art,
    >
    > If it is aluminum foil you should to a white balance as aluminum foil
    > can reflect blue.
    >


    Aluminum foil will reflect only as much blue light as was originally in
    the flash itself. The reflected light from aluminum is not
    significantly bluer than the source light.

    Joe
     
    Joseph Miller, May 14, 2004
    #10
  11. ThomasH

    ThomasH Guest

    Thad wrote:
    >
    > ThomasH wrote:
    >
    > > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    > >

    >
    > "In some crops the Digilux 2 is looking slightly sharper, in others the
    > G5 has the edge but overall there's very little difference between these
    > two cameras. Perhaps the only noticeable difference is the color
    > response with the Digilux 2 producing better reds and blues, the G5
    > better greens." -Phil Askey
    >
    > Sounds close enough to me, considering the enormous price difference.


    I would suggest to look at the images and measures and draw
    your own conclusion. Mine is that this Leica wins high, very
    high. Thus I clearly disagree with Phils conclusion.

    Of course the old argument with price difference does not
    count if it comes to a Leica. They have their specific
    type of customers and as long the optics and everything
    else will be impeccable, they will attract high level
    professionals and people of high society. Than the
    "enormous price" is suddenly worth just one night in a
    hotel of a "proper class." Or a new blouse or a pair of
    shoes on Rodeo Drive.

    Frankly, even for me $1800 appears as a bargain! I know
    of a resale value of a Leica and I see that they did it
    again: Regardless what the cost is they achieve impeccable
    result compared to competition, which must target lower
    price range.

    Thomas.

    >
    > --
    >
    > -Thad L.
     
    ThomasH, May 14, 2004
    #11
  12. In article <>, ThomasH <>
    wrote:

    > I just saw the recent test of the Digilux 2 (alias Panasonic
    > DMC LC-1...) of dpreview. I think that the optical results
    > show clearly how much can be improved in the "point and
    > shot" digital cameras! Even the acclaimed Powershot G5 is
    > not a match to the Leica/Panasonic.
    >
    > Of course probably only a narrow spectrum of users will be
    > willing to pay $1800 for such camera, but I am sure that
    > Leica aficionados are not disappointed! You are really
    > getting some value for the money!
    >
    > The most surprising fact to me is that this color fidelity
    > and low noise have been achieved with the same tiny 2/3"
    > sensor! Somehow I though that this sensor is bigger...
    > Leicas announcement was "The 2/3-inch image sensor is
    > extremely large". Hm... whatever they mean by that,
    > considering its properties, it is sure not the commonly
    > used Sony sensor...
    >
    > Thomas


    Leica will probably sell 300 of them.

    Digicams are advancing rapidly so obsolescence has to be taken into
    account. While the pictures are generally very good, it does have noise
    suppression distortion under some conditions. There's nothing truely
    advanced about this camera to justify the $1800 USD price. The Digilux
    2's status as a top-quality compact camera won't last even four months.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, May 14, 2004
    #12
  13. Thad <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > "In some crops the Digilux 2 is looking slightly sharper, in others the
    > G5 has the edge but overall there's very little difference between these
    > two cameras. Perhaps the only noticeable difference is the color
    > response with the Digilux 2 producing better reds and blues, the G5
    > better greens." -Phil Askey
    >
    > Sounds close enough to me, considering the enormous price difference.


    Inconclusive. Phil has to pander to his big money. He is smart
    enough to put his business before his readership. Reading "pro"
    review sites and magazinzes is really totally useless, I'm sorry to
    point out. They are all about hard selling, not about reviewing.
    Guess who sponsors/funds them? The manufacturers themselves.

    If these "pros" had to adhere to an actual set of "pro"fessional
    ethics standards, none would survive the first 30 seconds of an audit.
     
    George Preddy, May 15, 2004
    #13
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Guest

    test test test test test test test

    Guest, Jul 2, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    966
    halfalifer
    Jul 2, 2003
  2. AES/newspost

    Giveaway: Damaged Leica Digilux Zoom

    AES/newspost, Nov 27, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    388
    AES/newspost
    Nov 27, 2003
  3. Jimmy Smith

    Let's talk about more about the new Leica Digilux 2

    Jimmy Smith, Dec 5, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    362
    David J. Littleboy
    Dec 5, 2003
  4. Jimmy Smith

    Noise and Leica Digilux 2

    Jimmy Smith, Dec 21, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    368
    Jimmy Smith
    Dec 21, 2003
  5. canon G5 or Leica digilux 1

    , Feb 28, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    521
    Tim Boniwell
    Apr 1, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page