Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Now, that makes more sense. Of course, the D Lux 3 also allows the use of raw, which, when faced with an ISO 800 situation may be the better way to shoot. If I recall correctly, I very seldom used anything faster than ISO 200 in my point and shoot cameras during the film days. 400 with good OIS is perfectly fine for this sort sort of camera. I took a few snapshots of the Flatiron mountains yesterday walking to lunch. The lens on the little D Lux 3 consistently amazes me with how good it is. Leica/Panasonic have made the decision to emphasize image parameters that result in a far more detailed image, to my eyes, than the much smoother - and yes slightly less noisy - look typically found in, say, Canon PS cameras. And even their DSLRs. Still very happy with the D Lux 3, and the V Lux. Will von Dauster ...Who wishes there were a 10+ MP (dust and magenta-tinge free) Digilux 3 available. On Nov 18, 2006, at 10:22 PM, Jerry Justianto wrote: > I am sorry what i mean is D-Lux3, i dont know about Digilux 3. > > JSJ > > On 11/19/06, Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au> wrote: >> Way to opinionated: it is unacceptable to you and probably many >> others, but its likely to be around the noise of the E-500 and I find >> that usable in situations where I would otherwise not get an image. >> Here for example at 800: noise yes, useless and unacceptable is up to >> the observer. >> >> On 19/11/2006, at 13:35, Jerry Justianto wrote: >> >> > The ISO above 400 is unacceptable. >> > >> > JSJ