Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Pana....Leica?

  1. #1
    Member Photon-hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canary Islands
    Posts
    126
    Post Thanks / Like

    Pana....Leica?

    As sold as I thought I was regarding the GX-100 I made the mistake of handling a LX-2 in the store...I really liked it. Love the thing, and must say that the 16:9 stuff is very appealing. Making a decission was allready hard enough as to include the Leica in the equation...

    Having seen/handled both (D-Lux 3 and LX-2) I must say I prefer the Panasonic. Don´t ask me why, It simple feels beter in my hand.Go figure. I would like to know if anybody could coment on the "real world" differences between this two cameras. If we leave aside the bundled software and the extra year of warranty of the Leica are there really great diferences? Much has been said about the differences in the JPEG results, but, shooting RAW, would there be any differences in the files fom this little machines? Are the JPEG´s from the Leica really superior?

    Just an extra question: Is the Silkypìx software provided with the Panasonic a full version or is it a "crippled" bunble version?

    Thanks in advance for all your kindness and patience..

    Erik.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Forney, TX
    Posts
    133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    I wouldn't try to give an opinion on that other forum for fear of being flamed, but I will here. These, of course, are just my opinions, and what I found by doing a lot of research prior to purchasing the LX2.

    Quote Originally Posted by Photon-hunter View Post
    As sold as I thought I was regarding the GX-100 I made the mistake of handling a LX-2 in the store...I really liked it. Love the thing, and must say that the 16:9 stuff is very appealing. Making a decission was allready hard enough as to include the Leica in the equation...
    The 16:9 aspect ratio was a strong determining factor for me as well.

    Having seen/handled both (D-Lux 3 and LX-2) I must say I prefer the Panasonic. Don´t ask me why, It simple feels beter in my hand.Go figure. I would like to know if anybody could coment on the "real world" differences between this two cameras. If we leave aside the bundled software and the extra year of warranty of the Leica are there really great diferences? Much has been said about the differences in the JPEG results, but, shooting RAW, would there be any differences in the files fom this little machines? Are the JPEG´s from the Leica really superior?
    I really researched this to try to determine if there were real differences, or just claims that there were. From all I could gather, if there are any differences they are so slight that it would be very difficult to spot them in any print made from similar shots from both cameras. If there are any, I couldn't see them. I don't think that I would be able to pick out prints from either camera with any consistency. I think anyone that says they could might be a bit prejudiced, perhaps due to the cost differences involved. To me, I couldn't justify paying almost double the price to have the Leica. Being on a fixed income now has a lot to do with that.

    Just an extra question: Is the Silkypìx software provided with the Panasonic a full version or is it a "crippled" bunble version?
    As far as I know, the software isn't crippled so much as it's limited specifically to the Panasonic, but I haven't used it yet.

    Thanks in advance for all your kindness and patience..

    Erik.
    I'm sure you will get different opinions to the ones I've presented. Good luck with your decision. I don't think either choice would be a mistake. I really like my LX2, but am looking forward to Sean's review of the DP1 as it would be another that I'm interested in for different reasons.

    Hope this helps, and good shooting,
    Otto...

  3. #3
    Member Photon-hunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canary Islands
    Posts
    126
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    I wouldn't try to give an opinion on that other forum for fear of being flamed, but I will here.
    Well I´m glad you´re on THIS place and not on THAT one, and thanks you for your quick response.


    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    The 16:9 aspect ratio was a strong determining factor for me as well.
    I must say the 1:1 is also quite interesting...


    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    I really researched this to try to determine if there were real differences, or just claims that there were. From all I could gather, if there are any differences they are so slight that it would be very difficult to spot them in any print made from similar shots from both cameras. If there are any, I couldn't see them. I don't think that I would be able to pick out prints from either camera with any consistency. I think anyone that says they could might be a bit prejudiced, perhaps due to the cost differences involved. To me, I couldn't justify paying almost double the price to have the Leica. Being on a fixed income now has a lot to do with that.
    To be honest that is what I was wanting to hear, I want to limit my camera-expenses right now, and I also don´t see any benefit in paying the extra bit of cash if all I´m getting is a pretty Leica badge..



    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    As far as I know, the software isn't crippled so much as it's limited specifically to the Panasonic, but I haven't used it yet.
    So I must assume I will only be able to use the provided Silkypix with the LX-2..?


    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    I'm sure you will get different opinions to the ones I've presented. Good luck with your decision. I don't think either choice would be a mistake. I really like my LX2, but am looking forward to Sean's review of the DP1 as it would be another that I'm interested in for different reasons.
    If only the DP1 wasn´t a fixed lens (and f 4, at that)...

    Quote Originally Posted by Otto View Post
    Hope this helps, and good shooting,
    Otto...
    Absolutely great info and hope to be posting some pictures soon..


    Best, Erik.

  4. #4
    Senior Member nostatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,037
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    I bought the D-Lux3, but if I had it to do over again I likely would have gone for the LX-2. As far as I can tell, difference in iq are slight at best. Mostly you're paying for the longer warranty and the red badge. Just depends how important that is to you. My experience with digital cameras is that if they are going to break, they do so rather quickly. Of course now I've just jinxed it...

    The little nub on the front of the LX-2 felt good to me in the store as well. I've already dropped my DL3, in part because the thing is pretty slippery. I've finally settled on a way to hold the camera and I'm not sure if the nub would help or get in the way. But you can adapt to nearly anything. Framing 16x9 is quite eye-opening, especially portrait...at least that's been me experience. At $360 for the LX-2, I think it is a great buy for a unique tool.

  5. #5
    Not Available
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Rochester, NY, USA
    Posts
    115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    ummm check the for sale... I like my LX2 but don't use it much

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    It's certainly safer around here than the 'other place'

    I don't know about the LX/dlux comparison - with the Vlux, it was pretty much acknowledged that the Leica was 1 step gentler in:
    contrast
    saturation
    sharpening
    i.e. 0 on the Panasonic was 1 on the Leica - so it had a setting 'below' the panasonic on the jpg files at least, and some suspicion that there was less smeary noise reduction inherent on the raw files (but never, I think, confirmed).
    There was a feeling that the leica processing was a little more european (and thus a little less 'in your face').
    Angels and the heads of pins comes to mind. But I've never seen anyone do a direct comparison with the LX and dLux.
    Helpful? probably not - I'm sure that whichever is more comfortable to use is the best.

    Just this guy you know

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Maggie O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Standards Are Down All Over
    Posts
    3,064
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    I originally got my D-Lux 3 because I loved the "Leica Colors" of the JPEGs and it seemed like the lowest NR setting on the Leica was lower than the Panasonic.

    And you know, I always wanted a Leica and I have to say that having one kind of made me step my game up a bit, you know, trying to live up to that red dot.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Forney, TX
    Posts
    133
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pana....Leica?

    Quote Originally Posted by Photon-hunter View Post
    Well I´m glad you´re on THIS place and not on THAT one, and thanks you for your quick response.

    I must say the 1:1 is also quite interesting...
    Thanks, I agree with the 1:1 ratio too.

    To be honest that is what I was wanting to hear, I want to limit my camera-expenses right now, and I also don´t see any benefit in paying the extra bit of cash if all I´m getting is a pretty Leica badge..
    You do get the extra warranty, and the software is PhotoShop Elements instead of SilkyPix, so that explains some of the price difference.

    So I must assume I will only be able to use the provided Silkypix with the LX-2..?
    I don't know the answer to that as I don't know how SilkyPix works. I would guess you could use it for most any image. It might just limit the RAW conversion but, again, I don't know.

    If only the DP1 wasn´t a fixed lens (and f 4, at that)...
    In a way I don't mind the fixed lens. Being a fixed f/4 might not be that bad if the lens is sharp at that aperture. Most lenses need to be stopped down a bit to get the best from them, even some f/2's or better. I guess time will tell. I hope it proves to be a good one, and that other manufacturer's will follow.

    Absolutely great info and hope to be posting some pictures soon..

    Best, Erik.
    Looking forward to it. If my weather would straighten up, and I wasn't spending most of my free time restoring a car, I could get out and start learning my LX2 better as well.

    Good shooting,
    Otto...

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •