Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Panasonic / Leica dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 21, 2006, 11:42 AM   #71
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8
Default



i like the look,but i wish they had used the second sensor as in the E330.

there is no way I would pay 1000 usd,for the lense.the E330 body has better

features imho.I do like the look and build,but no i will not buy.

i'm bumed out at the price.
charli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 12:35 PM   #72
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

zygh,

Just want to clear up your mis-information on the LC1:

It wasn't until the Sony R1 that the LC1 had the best image quality of any digicam even though it was using Sony's very noisy 1st generation 5MP 2/3 CCD.

I don't think that they went out of their way to make the LC1 a mass seller. If you've used one then I'm sure that you would know how good the cam still is and hence even on e-bay second hand Lc1's are still selling for 600-800GBP.

Here's some reviews to check out on the LC1:

http://luminous-landscape.com/review...x2-part1.shtml
http://luminous-landscape.com/review...x2-part2.shtml

"Overall, the converted RAW file quality is very impressive. The fast F/2.0 2.4, 28 90 mm lens is outstanding; the best I've yet seen on a small sensor camera. In fact it seems better than many lenses designed for 35mm cameras."

"Overall, the Leica holds its own very well at ISO 100 and it's 28-90 zoom easily matches the quality of the 35mm f/2.0 prime lens mounted on the 10D"

http://photo.net/equipment/leica/digilux2/

"On the flip side, at ISO 100 the Digilux 2 produces jpeg images at the rate of 1 per second-and-a-half even in single-shot mode that are not just very, very good - they are astonishing. And when the final pictures are this clear and detailed, the fact that the viewfinder image is grainy becomes a minor issue."

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_...s/lc1_pg5.html

"Image quality is excellent. The AF system and lens combine to produce images that are sharp from edge to edge. Exposure metering is accurate and consistent, producing well-exposed, well-balanced images."

"I found a lot to like about the LUMIX LC1. I enjoyed using its traditional camera controls, and appreciated its high-quality construction. I especially liked the flexibility of its internal flash, producing soft lighting for portraits in its bounce position. But there's also a question of value, and at a MSRP of $1,599 for a 5-megapixel, fixed-lens camera, I doubt that many hobbyists will be able to justify its purchase. The LC1 will appeal most to the traditional film photographer who is as concerned with the build quality of his instrument as he is with the image quality it's able to produce."

So if they could produce such a cam with a crap 5MP CCD then I'm pretty sure with a larger sensor and same quality lens they can do even better. If they can't well there's other cameras to choose from. I think its wise to wait and see what the reviews from Steve, Phil at dpreview, David at Imaging Resource, etc make of the camera. it may be initially overpriced but it may then again very well suprise everyone with the IQ that it can produce.

if you still want to behave in a childish manner with petty little remarks than thats cool by me but if you want to be taken seriously and add something thats more constructive to the discussion.

Cheers

HarjTT


:|






HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 12:40 PM   #73
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

Harj, thank you for your fatherly advice.

I didn't say that the LC1 was a bad camera, I just said it was a commercial disaster... just like the L1 will be.

:blah:
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 1:46 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 267
Default

zygh wrote:
Quote:

I didn't say that the LC1 was a bad camera, I just said it was a commercial disaster... just like the L1 will be.

:blah:
Considering other posts from you on the L1 the implication is there.

So the conclusion to drawn is if itisn't a commercial disaster then you will be ready for the rubber room given yourabove comments regarding the L1.


Andrew Waters is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 2:09 PM   #75
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Greg Chappell wrote:
Quote:
True, Leica glass is not cheap, but to me this is as much "Leica" as those "Zeiss" lenses are Sony puts on their cameras and "Voigtlander" lenses Cosina's trying to pass off on their rangefinders. The only part of Germany that lens touched was, maybe, a visitingtechnitians hand to inspect it.It's "Leica" in name only- hardly a selling point to anyone that would/should know better. If the camera is priced right as a "body only" it looks like it might be a good thing for someone like myself who already owns a set of Olympus E-lenses, but good lord, that lens is way overpriced for what it REALLY is......a Panasonic lens.
I often wondered if it was real Leica that Panasonic has been pushing when I had my FZ30. Over in the Panasonic 3CCD camcorder forum, it was no secret that they weren't really using Leica lenses for their camcorders, but just a licensed product. In fact one variatuion of a camcorder model had a non-Leica lens and there was no noticable image between it and the one using theLeica. I was hoping the same wasn't true for their digicams.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 5:34 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

Andrew, I'm having trouble decifering your post. Please be more precise in your statements.

meanstreak, it's a sad thing, isn't it? and what is even sadder is that some people think that the L1 with the "Leica" lens is worth the 2 grand. Branding, nowadays, means so little, for it is so easy, if you have the big dough, to buy a brand or the rights to use a certain brand. It is all down to the results, dependabilty and price of a product (and maybe even tradition in a field of work). That is, at least my opinion. Ofcourse, you'll feel safer buying a 30D/D200 rather than an L1. What strikes me isthat a company that has launched itself into a new market that is so demanding, sticks to pricing itsproduct so high.In my opinion, it would be a safer and more intelligent strategy (if that company is planning on staying in this market for many years to come) to start off withvery good products with a price that blows away the competition. That is, at least, I reckon, what Sony has in mind. It wouldn't be a surprise to me if in 10 years or so Sony has becomea top player indSLR world.I, for one, salute Sony's intentions in this field for that means more affordable great products for the rest of us mortals that don't have 2 grand at our disposal at one time to blow away on lenses, bodies and whatnot.

That is the reason why products such as the L1 shouldn't be cut any slack. I don't want the days when only pros that made a living out of photography and people with loads of money in general had the oportunity to use dSLRs. Those days are dead or dying and that means that morefolks get a chance attaking exceptionalsnapshots and maybe even photographs.


Don't take it personal, Andrew, Harj. Stop defendingproducts just because you're a fan of the brand that produces them. I think that if people had little or no loyality towards a brand and would decide on buying a product only because of it's results, price etc. then that would mean that companies would really have to go out of their way to make you into a customer. And, in the end, maybe that would work much better for us consumers.
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 5:37 PM   #77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,521
Default

Meanstreak,

Everything I've seen aboutthese "Leica" lenses sold on Panasonic cameras is Leica designs them andPanasonic makes them, which makes them "Leica" lenses in the most liberal terms possible.

Click on Jim's link in the earlier messageand look at those prices at B&H, then go to the rangefinder lenssection and check out Leica's prices- those prices arewhat you have to pay for LEICA lenses today. If the lenses on Panasonic's digicams and these soon to be introduced DSLR lenses were real Leica lenses, and by that I mean both designed and built by Leica in one of their factories, Panasonic digicams would be aniche productbecause the lens part would be so expensive 95% of the Panasonic owners today wouldn't havebeen able to afford the camera they are now using.

Anyone can design a lens. A Panasonic engineer could sit down at a computer and, with the proper software, design any of thelenses they now use. Panasonic doesn't NEED Leica for lens designs. The NEED Leica for the name, something Panasonic did not have in this industry prior to the digital age because they hadnever made stillcameras, just like Sony with their "Zeiss" lenses today. Given the choice, would you rather have a lens with the name "Panasonic" on it, or "Leica"?

Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 7:04 PM   #78
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Zygh

No offense taken mate - now if you left the last response then I could have left a very short reply indeed. I still disagree with you on the LC1 being a commercial disaster - may be not a runaway success that they may have wished but certainly no disaster infact its become a bit of a collectors item. Whether the L1 succeds or not is another matter.

Panasonic clearly stated that the L1 wasn't aimed at the entry DSLR level market but at the semi-pro so its no suprise of the price. Actually, some people were even suggesting that the L1 would have been a $3000USD camera simply becuase of the quality of the lens. You also have to take into account the cost and quality of that lens - the equivalent CZ lens for the alpha is priced at $700USD and I'm sure that the Leica D is of equal quality and in the same price range. Now if they had said that this is an entry level cam and then introduced it at Canon 30D/Nikon D200 prices then I'd say they were foolish indeed.

I am disappointed that they did not introduce certain features to the L1 such as a tilt swivel LCD to the L1 - there was plenty of time since PMA2006 for them to have fitted one and I'm sure that they would have recieved this and other feature requests which could have been implented before launching the cam. Such features would have added to the value of the L1 and differentiated it from Canon/SOny/Nikon/Pentax/Samsung's offerings. I do have another concern and that is whether Panasonic would produce firmware updates for the L1 to either fix issues or introduce new features.

Finally, like I said in previous posts its too early to say whether the L1 is a failure - its nto shipping, nobody has actually tested the cam or taken pictures and performed a comparison between it and the 30D/200d/E330 and Sony's A100. Until then I'm more than happy to wait. Regards brand loyalty I think theres nothing wrong with it as long as you are not blinkered to what else is out there. I for one will be very open with my decision especially since I went from nearly purchasing a Nikon 8800 but instead ended up with a digicam from a TV/Hi-fi/Videocam manufacturer, Panasonic based on the reviews that their cam, the FZ10 recieved from Steve's, Dcresource and Megapixel.net. A decision that I have not regretted since.

Cheers

HarjTT

:O






HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 21, 2006, 9:45 PM   #79
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

Having owned a FZ20, I know that Panasonic builds a good solid camera. But, I think this camera will have limited appeal because of price and the competition. It will find a home with some folks who are looking for what it offers. I doubt you'll see many as you walk around town though:arrow:
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 22, 2006, 12:30 AM   #80
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 267
Default



If there is an EOS 30Downer in the house and you didn't buy the cheaper 18-55 lens with the initial purchase, what did the total package cost you with the camera; assuming the 30D body was $1,400dollars a few weeks ago? Looks like we only have $600 dollars to go before we hit thetwo grand mark. Boy that's really expensive isn't it...comparatively speaking of course. :roll: And no Zygh, I didn't say it wasn't expensive, just comparatively so.

Zyghsaid: ''I think that if people had little or no loyality towards a brand and would decide on buying a product only because of it's results, price etc...."

Do you buy a productthat goes against your statement? I don't. So this makes me a ''fan'' of your comment. But wait! I was a fan of Panasonic VCRs at one time. My first and only VCR lasted nearly18 years before givingup the ghosta year and a half ago. Doe this really make me a fan of a product. Hardly. But it does mean one satisfied consumer, which is what youwere driving at in your sentence. In essence, once quality has been determined plus the price (to some) then if one becomes a so-called fan then what is unsettling about this.

Do I want to pay $2,000 dollars for a camera? If I bought the 30D with one of their expensive lenses then it would cost me that price. That said, as mentioned before, I really like the looks of the L1 but this doesn't translate into a rush to be one of the first on the block. Not at my age kiddo. I read reviews before I part with my cash. And I do mean reviews; not one or two but whatever it takes to make me a satisfied customer.




Andrew Waters is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:46 PM.