Compact v DSLR

Actually you can pick up an M8 body these days for about £800 to £1,100, and you could add a nice Voigtlander lens to that. Bingo! You could even add in a Leitz metal lens cap for about £30.

You beat me to it Kevin. The Elmarit 90 is about £500 and the body can be had for £800 S/H.

I wasn't really thinking on price when posting the wildlife shots though - but it is surprising that the £1200 budget would nearly stretch to it!

G

Agreed G. Some of those Elmarits are real bargains. Alainbil talketh out of his bum methinks.

Aaaannnyyway...

It has to be simple to use, robust and light. For the most part I simply rotate the dial to either “P” or “Scene – mountain”, then point and shoot !

LX-7

See

http://lindsaydobsonphotograph...-nature-photography/

for comments by a Pro on the use of a mirror-less versus a DSLR

At present the brain says LX-7, the heart says D-Lux 6 (Brand loyalty) and the inquiring mind wonders wherther a D7100 + 28-200mm lens is really going to deliver 2 to 4 times the benefits of either of the first two.

Not an unusual dilema on this forum...........LX7.............maybe.............or.......?

At present the brain says LX-7, the heart says D-Lux 6 (Brand loyalty)

Good choice

You know that brand loyalty comes at a price....D-Lux 6 is £529, LX-7 is £289 tops on high street in UK (surprised it's that much actually, I paid far less than that last year). £240 difference buys you the (very good) evf if you want it, a couple of spare batteries, case and some fast SD cards. Just saying.

These are from LX-7, it is quite good for a teeny sensor camera

Aren't you even slightly tempted to check out the size/ handling/ functionality of the soon to be released LX100 which will have a much larger sensor and, presumably, much greater opportunity for cropping photos without apparent loss of definition?

Lovely shots Jamie - great colours.

The LX7 is a cracking little camera and a steal at it's present price. Adding a viewfinder and a new sensor means the LX100 should be a very worthy successor (although pricey but give it a few months). I must admit i do prefer the slightly muted styling of the Leica versions but not the price !

When I boght the D-Lux 4, I was told that the algorithms that generate the picture quality/colouring were set slightly diffenrtly in the Panasonic and Leica versions of the two cameras.

• Is this true ?
• Is it significant ?
• can they be easily altered during post-shot production for either screen or print ?

I was told the same thing a few years ago when I was thinking of getting a Leica compact (forget which D-Lux it was). I think it is just a feeble attempt to justify the higher price.

Don - if there are any changes then it would be in the JPEG engine. If you process RAW files then it's going to be the same and you can tailor the files to how you want them to look. I can understand the lure of the high end Leica cameras for those who want that sort of thing, but i don't really understand the appeal of the re-badged models. Ok they look better, you get a longer warranty and lightroom thrown in but for quite a price difference.

Introductory price for the new LX100 and the Leica equivalent (109 ?) seems quite close though. 

Yep a grand total of £26 difference in the UK!

As above though, Pana will drop their price. And then raise it again. And then drop it again, the way they do. Leica won't. But then the Leica resale will likely remain higher. Lightroom is included with Leicas, if the buyer doesn't already have it, then it's a good deal. And a 3 yr warranty. Don't think that's all worth £200 + on an LX-7 but for £26 extra, that's all quite good.

And the performance difference between an LX7 and the new LX100 is .......?

I will google few websites, but a few wise words on this forum are usually worth a thousand elsewhere !

Ah, now we are unearthing other aspects of life.

I still work. Five days a week normally. Leave home about 07:00 get back about 20:00. On my days off, I have a garden to tend, a day out with Mrs D and................no real time to play about with post-production photography, much as I might like to.

So, although I have a few thousand RAW files from the D-Lux 4 and (presumably) Lightroom on the Leica-supplied disc, I have never used them. I have simply used the default setting associated with the JPEG files and Picture Manager (I think) that came as part of Microsoft's Windows or Office. Yes, I know, I don't deserve all this advice given that I am little more that a Kodak Instamatic Fiend, but...........one day.

Still, its nice to be reminded that RAW files are the same in Leica and Lumix. Many thanks james.

Don

I don't think there are any objective lab tests available yet to demonstrate differences between LX100 and anything else. It's a bit of a shame that because of formatting, Panasonic have chopped some of the sensor resulting in 12mp instead of the 16mp sensor used!

Generally though, with larger sensors, the pixels are physically larger and capable of holding greater detail/ resolution hence you can zoom in/ crop portions of a photo from a large sensor camera and still have a decent quality looking image.  They also tend to perform better in low light levels and I suspect the new camera will have a more up to date and effective processing 'engine'.

Possible down sides may be the physical size of the camera - it may just not be as 'pocketable' as you would prefer and one other point I just noticed - the LX100 does not appear to have an inbuilt flash ie you would need to use the hot shoe and carry a separate flash if you like to use fill in flash. I'm surprised they didn't design that in - must have run out of physical space in the chasis. Could be quite an important omission for a lot of folks.

Peter

Don

You probably know this already, but just in case...  the level of highlight/ shadow detail recoverable from RAW files can be quite amazing without much work in Aperture or Lightroom, compared to jpeg files.  I wouldn't bother with every shot however, well worth spending a few minutes for your favourite snaps to see what improvements can be had.  Appreciate your time constraints but oh so worth it!

Peter

+1, said the LX-5 owner.

I bet that the Volkswagen Phaeton suffers from the same identity crisis (relative to its D1 stablemates, the Bentley Continental GT and the Flying Spur).

LX-100/D-Lux Type 109 (109...Dontcha just love the idea of carrying a 109 around with you..?) has switchable aspect, which just like the LX-7 adjusts the area of sensor used. It is bigger than LX-7. LX-7 and D-Lux will both come with a (small) flash to fit the hotshoe. Bigger sensor, wider aperture and higher ISO may reduce the frequency with which you would need flash though.

Everything you describe Don, says LX-7 will be sufficient, I think.

Yeah, I wouldn't go for the Beetle either.

Don, have you decided yet?

Jamie (and others) you are an angel. Problem solved..

However, you'll probably never be able to guess how or why.............but without your advice, I would still be without camera and wondering what to do !

I'll post details later.

What's the betting it's the Leica? 

An M8 with 40mm Summicron...

G

Nah, Monochrom with one of 35mm Summilux's