LX3 is here!!??

[Hypnohare]

Not that I would ever get this camera (because I don't like the UI while in manual mode, assuming it works the same as the LX-2). But, if they make a "Leica" branded version, I would hope that they also make one of those brown leather cases (like the Leica D-Lux 3). That old style case is really a thing of beauty!!

Levent

www.flickr.com/photos/16699882@N07/

 

[nei1]

On another forum there was a brilliant suggestion to panasonic,to put half a red dot on the camera:clap:

 

[Tim]

Panasonic LX2 and Leica DLux 3 had identical hardware -- same sensor, same lens, same body, same flash, same buttons ....

As I recall, the distinctions were:

(i) in-camera jpeg processing was 'tuned' differently;

(ii) different photo-editing software came in the box;

(iii) different and appreciably longer warranty w/ the Leica; and

(iv) a very different price, which finally settled at about $200 more (in the US) for the Leica (approx $599 vs $399 or even a bit less for the Panasonic).

Have no idea whether Leica will introduce a 'cousin' to the LX3, and if so, whether and in what ways it will differ ... other than in price, of course.

Thanks for the synopsis here Michael, much appreciated, I thought this was the case but sometimes the info on the net gets clouded.

Best

Tim

 

[Martin S]

Hi

Summicron in Leica terminology merely implies a maximum f stop of 2.0. Unfortunately, it does not imply anything about the quality of the lens (although Summicrons in the M mount are excellent performers).

None the less, I will be looking carefuly at this camera.

Martin

 

[Streetshooter]

The brown leather case for the Leica is a beauty. I prefer the black one that comes with the extra battery for $49.00.
It slides on a belt and is very easy to use with the magnetic cover.

Shooter

PS...no red dot on the case..

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Hmm, to be honest, these samples don't look much different than the Gx100 to me. It still looks like there is noise, color fringing and softness that betray the size of its sensor. Ergonomically, the GX100/200/GRD still look better to me. I do like the idea of the lens, but to be fair, it is only a half stop faster at the wide end than the GX100 (2.0 versus 2.4), while the GX100 goes to 72mm versus 60mm. It is noticeably faster at the long end. It will be interesting to see how it compares in resolution and distortion.

Anyway, I don't mean to put down this camera -- it still looks good. I just think we need to put it in perspective. It is still a slow, noisy compact camera just like every digital compact ever made (including the DP1, which while it may have a larger sensor, is astoundingly slow in operation). I am still waiting for an equivalent of something like the Contax T series, Nikon 35ti, or Leica CM. When there is a full frame sensor (even 6-10mp) in a compact body, things will be much more interesting.

 

[SimonL]

If the Sigma DP-2 comes out with a 40mm lens which is faster than f/4 as well as a 'lessons learned' series of modifications I think it'll be awfully tempting

 

[nei1]

You and me both Simon,fingers crossed.

 

[Lili]

If the Sigma DP-2 comes out with a 40mm lens which is faster than f/4 as well as a 'lessons learned' series of modifications I think it'll be awfully tempting

Ohhhhhh yessssss, that would do it, totally.
Of course a GRD40 would too
one can but Dream......

 

[Oxide Blu]

If the Sigma DP-2 comes out with a 40mm lens which is faster than f/4 as well as a 'lessons learned' series of modifications I think it'll be awfully tempting

I was travelling through Asia today. I picked up a copy of the International Herald Tribune, a subsidiary of the New York Times, a general, global news publication for travelers. Back on page-20 or so they had a ½-page write up on the failure of the Sigma DP-1. They talked about everything that “should” be in a small sensor camera, and detailed how the DP-1 failed to meet that criteria in many ways. It seemed an article by someone that actually knows something about digital photography.

At the bottom of the page was a minor, minimal mentioning if the new Panny camera but nothing specific, just that it will be available in August 2008.

Here’s the online link to the article: http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/24/technology/24pogue.php



"So kudos to Sigma. It has done what was once considered impossible: it has built a big sensor into a tiny camera.

But did it have to be such a lame camera? No zoom, no stabilizer, no focus lamp, no optical viewfinder, no live histogram; weak flash, washed-out screen, quarter-size movies, infinite shutter lag, loose lens cap. Hello, Sigma? 1998 called. It wants its camera back.

This is not to take anything away from Sigma's astounding technical breakthrough. It is, however, a call to Sigma to hurry up with the DP2 — or to its rivals to pick up from where Sigma left off."

 

[Stuart Richardson]

Not that I disagree with him, but I am pretty astounded that such poor writing could be in an international newspaper.

 

[Michael S]

... astounded that such poor writing could be in an international newspaper. ...

He's an electronics/gadgets guy with an interest in photography and digital cameras. His "NY Times" column reads more like a blog in many ways -- casual, speaking style.

And he also blogs, and the blog reads ... also like a blog.:grin:

 

[Oxide Blu]

... I am pretty astounded that such poor writing could be in an international newspaper.

If you really want to see poor writing skills, hang out on internet forums.

 

[Stuart Richardson]

I am sorry. I know I come off as a grouch, but I think it is depressing. This is a column in a newspaper that is available in almost every country on Earth. I don't mind a conversational tone per se, but this was particularly awful -- even the colloquialisms are out of date. When was the last time you heard someone say, "Hey ____! _____ called they want their _____ back"? Just because it is "bloglike" does not mean the writing should be poor. Mike Johnston at the Online Photographer has a casual tone, but he still writes well. Anyway, forgive the grumpiness, it just struck me as surprising and unworthy of the Times.

 

[sizifo]

I am sorry. I know I come off as a grouch, but I think it is depressing. This is a column in a newspaper that is available in almost every country on Earth. I don't mind a conversational tone per se, but this was particularly awful -- even the colloquialisms are out of date. When was the last time you heard someone say, "Hey ____! _____ called they want their _____ back"? Just because it is "bloglike" does not mean the writing should be poor. Mike Johnston at the Online Photographer has a casual tone, but he still writes well. Anyway, forgive the grumpiness, it just struck me as surprising and unworthy of the Times.

I came away from it thinking it was well written, although casual. But more important than the style, I thought it was so much more informative than any technical photo article in major paper I can remember reading. Not that I spend too much time reading major papers.

 

[Oxide Blu]

I came away from it thinking it was well written, although casual. But more important than the style, I thought it was so much more informative than any technical photo article in major paper I can remember reading. Not that I spend too much time reading major papers.

That was the way I saw it, too. The 'style' of writing was initially lost on me, was caught up in the content. I was impressed the article went into detail that I would not have expected to see in a newspaper. And it was 1/2 of a page ... a big, unfolded newspaper page, dedicated to the Sigma DP-1 with a big picture of the camera. But Stuart also has a valid point about the choice of writing style.

What got me a little hopeful was the last line in the article about a potential DP2, not that the author necessarily knows if there will be one, but one can hope.

Also, if the New York Times, a major 'news' (?) publication is distributing a 1/2-page critique of the Sigma camera and making mention of the need for larger sensors, less pixels, etc, I suspect the manfrs are hearing about it.

 

[Joan]

A few more samples here:

http://www.dcfever.com/news/readnews.php?id=2280

I believe I am going to be first in line for this one ... B&H has it listed "with accessory kit" price TBA. If that means with the OVF and adapter, etc., I CAN'T wait!

 

[Lili]

A few more samples here:

http://www.dcfever.com/news/readnews.php?id=2280

I believe I am going to be first in line for this one ... B&H has it listed "with accessory kit" price TBA. If that means with the OVF and adapter, etc., I CAN'T wait!

Joan,
Does B&H mention the color ofthe camera?
Really want the black one in half case....*swoon*
This sample
http://www.dcfever.com/articles/news/2008/07/080725_panasonic_43l.jpg
from the link you posted make me feel much better about this camera!
No smearing!

Edit; I see B&H does have the black body one, w00t!

 

[Joan]

Yes! That was the one that tipped me over the edge, iso 400! I want the black one with that nifty case, too, and the OVF will make all the difference for me.
Really excited about this cam, Panasonic seems to have read my wish list.

 

[les]

Not that I disagree with him, but I am pretty astounded that such poor writing could be in an international newspaper.

As I read this, I thought it has to be David Pogue, and so it was. He's the Tech Writer for the New York Times, also has a TV programme reviewing all kinds of electronic gadgets. He's been writing stuff on Apple products for years.

While he is much better informed than most reviewers/analysts, it comes with an annoying, irritating delivery style. He's not as funny as he thinks and shares that distinction with Scott Kelby who is one of the many Photoshop gurus.

It's a pity we can't have informed comment together with genuine wit and humour. But anything is better than the affable ramblings of someone whose knowledge on the subject is clearly the square root of nowt. Just my h.o.