Per,
I wonder if you could give me the benefit of your experience. I have a Panasonic Lumix LC1 and am thinking of getting a Leica D-lux 4 or some other compact digital for frequent carry. I'm waiting on the Olympus announcement, of course, but thinking about it over and over still.
I'm also thinking about film, though I have no darkroom, and am experimenting again with an Olympus XA and an AF Hexar.
I'm an amateur, still learning, but have been taking pictures for 30 years. (Let's see: Ansel said that 12 good images a year was good output, so 30 x 12 should amount to 360 good photos, hummm.....)
I like to have something competent with me because I tend to respond to the light rather than making something happen. I'm also on a pension and wouldn't expect to be making any money with the camera.
The LC1 is good (I'm told the RAW is about the same as that in your Digilux 2 — do you think so?) and has beautiful color but it's a bit bulky and is salso noisy over 400. I usually keep it at 100 (though I'd like to have 1600 lots of times!). The lens is 28-90 as opposed to 24-60 but that's okay and, though I'd prefer a little more reach for portraits, my best picture was made with a Nikon 20mm, so I could live with the 24.
So, my question is, since the LC1 sensor is bigger, but older technology and with less resolution, do you think the image quality of the Dlux4 would bwe significantly better?
If not, then the only advantage of the Dlux4 would be portability and OIS, so do you think it'd be worth it? If not, what would you suggest would be better?
Thanks for your help!
Irenaeus
I wonder if you could give me the benefit of your experience. I have a Panasonic Lumix LC1 and am thinking of getting a Leica D-lux 4 or some other compact digital for frequent carry. I'm waiting on the Olympus announcement, of course, but thinking about it over and over still.
I'm also thinking about film, though I have no darkroom, and am experimenting again with an Olympus XA and an AF Hexar.
I'm an amateur, still learning, but have been taking pictures for 30 years. (Let's see: Ansel said that 12 good images a year was good output, so 30 x 12 should amount to 360 good photos, hummm.....)
I like to have something competent with me because I tend to respond to the light rather than making something happen. I'm also on a pension and wouldn't expect to be making any money with the camera.
The LC1 is good (I'm told the RAW is about the same as that in your Digilux 2 — do you think so?) and has beautiful color but it's a bit bulky and is salso noisy over 400. I usually keep it at 100 (though I'd like to have 1600 lots of times!). The lens is 28-90 as opposed to 24-60 but that's okay and, though I'd prefer a little more reach for portraits, my best picture was made with a Nikon 20mm, so I could live with the 24.
So, my question is, since the LC1 sensor is bigger, but older technology and with less resolution, do you think the image quality of the Dlux4 would bwe significantly better?
If not, then the only advantage of the Dlux4 would be portability and OIS, so do you think it'd be worth it? If not, what would you suggest would be better?
Thanks for your help!
Irenaeus