LUMIX LX100 (Is it a superb camera?)

fireblade said:
I can understand why, the files are excellent.
Adding the hand grip makes it a perfect camera, beautifully built.
Click to expand...

I'm like my LX100 a lot. It has pretty much replaced D700+24-70 combo for most things. But I wouldn't use it when shooting portraits :) Other then that, it's my only digital that gets tons of use these days. Actually my D700 is at the end of its road (over 300 000 shots and by quit a lot, cosmetically it's also quite worn). After it's dead, LX100 will be my only digital camera. I made decision to go back to film for everything and only use digital as a preview. My nikkor lenses will continue their lives on my F5 and FG, and LX100 will be in my bag at all times (like it already is).

The file quality is top notch! I'm in awe every time I look at the files. It's every bit as good as my D700 but with less shallow DOF due to smaller sensor .


Iceland Landscape by Santtu Määttänen, on Flickr
 
Santtu Määttänen said:
I'm like my LX100 a lot. It has pretty much replaced D700+24-70 combo for most things. But I wouldn't use it when shooting portraits :) Other then that, it's my only digital that gets tons of use these days. Actually my D700 is at the end of its road (over 300 000 shots and by quit a lot, cosmetically it's also quite worn). After it's dead, LX100 will be my only digital camera. I made decision to go back to film for everything and only use digital as a preview. My nikkor lenses will continue their lives on my F5 and FG, and LX100 will be in my bag at all times (like it already is).

The file quality is top notch! I'm in awe every time I look at the files. It's every bit as good as my D700 but with less shallow DOF due to smaller sensor .


Iceland Landscape by Santtu Määttänen, on Flickr
Click to expand...
My direction as well. Film rules and LX100 for digital.
 
Is there ANY difference in image quality between the LX100 and the Leica type 109? It is supposed to be the same camera (internally) but yet I've noticed that many of the images from the Leica, particularly in black and white look smoother and richer. Is this a matter of processing?


Many thanks
 
darya151 said:
Is there ANY difference in image quality between the LX100 and the Leica type 109? It is supposed to be the same camera (internally) but yet I've noticed that many of the images from the Leica, particularly in black and white look smoother and richer. Is this a matter of processing?


Many thanks
Click to expand...

There shouldn't be any difference in raw files, in jpg there can be significant changes due to Leica using its own firmware.

For me LX100 works nicely. I tried handling Leica d-109 but Panasonic handled better for me (nice grip build in, even better with leather half case).

But which ever you get, it's one hell of a camera. For the price it's hard to beat.
 
Santtu Määttänen said:
I'm like my LX100 a lot. It has pretty much replaced D700+24-70 combo for most things. But I wouldn't use it when shooting portraits :) Other then that, it's my only digital that gets tons of use these days. Actually my D700 is at the end of its road (over 300 000 shots and by quit a lot, cosmetically it's also quite worn). After it's dead, LX100 will be my only digital camera. I made decision to go back to film for everything and only use digital as a preview. My nikkor lenses will continue their lives on my F5 and FG, and LX100 will be in my bag at all times (like it already is).

The file quality is top notch! I'm in awe every time I look at the files. It's every bit as good as my D700 but with less shallow DOF due to smaller sensor .


Iceland Landscape by Santtu Määttänen, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Wonderful.
 
darya151 said:
Is there ANY difference in image quality between the LX100 and the Leica type 109? It is supposed to be the same camera (internally) but yet I've noticed that many of the images from the Leica, particularly in black and white look smoother and richer. Is this a matter of processing?
Click to expand...

I agree - I have the LX100, and like it very much, but I have noticed the same thing. I find it difficult to pin down precisely what the difference is, but for me it does seem to be there. I did make an attempt at imitating the "look" through processing, but failed.

Maybe there really IS such a thing as a Leica look.;) Or maybe my post-processing skills are lacking...:)
 
Two more, one with colour :) For me this smallish compact was a revelation in digital photography. Mainly due to the fact that something as small as this can provide me with quality I expect from a full size dSLR. File size is non-issue since I only print A2 at the largest and I've had good experiences printing 12Mp files from D700. All my huge prints have been done from several files as composites. Or from film scans.


Icelandic Landscape by Santtu Määttänen, on Flickr


Vik by Santtu Määttänen, on Flickr
 
tbhv55 said:
I agree - I have the LX100, and like it very much, but I have noticed the same thing. I find it difficult to pin down precisely what the difference is, but for me it does seem to be there. I did make an attempt at imitating the "look" through processing, but failed.

Maybe there really IS such a thing as a Leica look.;) Or maybe my post-processing skills are lacking...:)
Click to expand...

Difference?
There is no Leica look. It's all in the head of the Leica owner. Emotion.
Frank
 
Merlijn53 said:
Difference?
There is no Leica look. It's all in the head of the Leica owner. Emotion.
Frank
Click to expand...

I have to admit that when I'm shooting one of my Leica Ms, I think I try a bit harder and am more on-point. I can't blame the camera and there's a legacy to hold up.

So, maybe the red dot is a placebo, but the placebo effect is real.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top