This is just my personal view, and I ask the moderator to delete this thread as soon as we get a real test.It looks ugly, metal and chrome randomly heaped into a disparate, disproportionate bunch. Overcoming the repulsive feelings, it felt good in my hands; it's not too small or too large--and with the ring around the lens barrel, you can hold it like an SLR (or M)!

The finder is a zoom finder à la P&S, with just two LEDs for flash and AF status; no exposure information, no brightlines, no parallax compensation, not even AF sensor area outlines. Ack.

Most digicam users are familiar with recessed rubber buttons measuring 1x1.5mm which you need to press for two seconds to make the camera do something (or not) another two seconds later. All the Digilux's controls are reasonably sized buttons and switches with clear tactile feedback and an instant response by the camera. And you needn't press two buttons simultaneously to access any function, or navigate through 13 menu levels!

The rear LCD is large and provides exposure information, and much more; nevertheless I really miss a finder that deserves that name.

A lot of fuss has been made about the LCD hood. It's an L-shaped plastic part that screws into the tripod socket. (Relax: it has a metal 1/4" nut inserted.) From the bottom part, a plastic frame reaches up and around to the LCD's edges. The hood resembles a waist-level finder, i.e. it folds down and doubles as an LCD protective cover. Quality--I'm glad this mother of all flimsy thingies isn't part of the camera.

Shutter lag is in the SLR range. This is none of my frequent typos; the Digilux 1 actually takes the exposure so fast any traditional digicam user would assume a grave and serious malfunction.

I know that some people think that digital can never, and will never, yadda yadda. Many of us may have considered a digital camera for some time, however. Do I like the Digilux 1? Yes. Despite its disadvantages, some features make it attractive, especially the short shutter lag.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 15, 2002

Answers

And the image quality? Hard to judge from the rear LCD--their laptop [not a Leica product ;-) ] had crashed, and the reps had no clue how to reboot it.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 15, 2002.

Hi Oliver,

Thanks for the review. I'm actually considering getting the Panasonic DMC-LC5 for my brother. (Essentially the same camera as the Leica, only that it has better styling in my opinion.)

Is the viewfinder optical or digital? Is it bright and clear? How speedy can exposure compensation be engaged?

Thanks.

Logos

-- Maestro Logos (maestro_logos@mac.com), April 15, 2002.

Groan...

Should digital discussions (even about Leica branded products) be discussed elswhere? Like maybe in a sub-forum. Tony, any thoughts in this idea?

-- Dan Brown (brpatent@swbell.net), April 15, 2002.

Dan: I've put it in the "Leica in a digital world" category.

Maestro Logos: the viewfinder is an optical one, bright and clear, but providing very little information. I didn't check how to dial in exposure compensation as I found moving to manual mode and then setting shutter speed and f-stop to be faster. Both are entered via a toggle switch near the right bottom corner of the rear LCD, in easy reach of the thumb, when you're in manual mode. Btw I, too, would rather get the DMC-LC 5 as it has the same lens and is sold for €150 less over here.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 15, 2002.

5MP is already available (Nikon CP5000) and 6MP is surely only months away (already here in consumer digital SLR's like the Fuji S2 and Canon D60). Just like the Leicaflex I (with non-TTL metering) the Digilux was obsolete before it hit the street.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), April 15, 2002.

All digital cameras are obsolete before they hit the street. They should be considered techno-trash. There won't be a used market for them. Just get one that suits your needs and stop reading about the new ones just about to be introduced.

-- Dennis Goldstein (dennis.goldstein@gsa.gov), April 15, 2002.

Hello Oliver, thanks for reproting on the camera. I was wondering if the camera has any kind of settings in the menue to shoot B&W or sepia pictures? I did not find any information on that in the official website. Can you give any impression on how fast TIF images are stored in highest resolution mode? Thanks a lot

Johannes

-- Johannes Fleischhauer (j.fleischhauer@vsao.ch), April 15, 2002.

"their laptop...had crashed, and the reps had no clue how to reboot it."

IMHO this about sums up Leica's electronic engineering skills (R3, R4, R4 motor, R8 motor, etc.)

Oliver - good initial report - no need to delete it; we'll just add on.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), April 15, 2002.

Johannes: I had the camera for just a short time, and I prefer to do conversions to b&w in Photoshop; I checked what's important for me in a camera. Wrt time for writing high resolution files to the SD card: I can't say precisely as I don't carry a watch, but it was about the same as with other current digicams. (Measuring shutter lag: I did so by photographing people walking through the store's door.)

Obsolescence: of course. But we know our computers don't get slower or lose RAM when a faster model with more memory hits the market; I agree with Dennis : "Just get one that suits your needs"... the more so as there seems to be a market for slightly obsolescent digicams. Or are they dumping the 4 Mp models on the European market right now? I see so many of them in the stores and in use.

-- Oliver Schrinner (piraya@hispavista.com), April 16, 2002.

Whilst I haven't had a chance to play with the new Leica Digilux yet, I have been able to use the Panasonic version (LC5). Same Camera, different body.

In answer to Johannes questions. 1. No sepia or B&W modes. With a digital camera it is generally better to shoot all colour and then change it to B&W using Photoshop - or something similiar. there is a great article on http://www.outbackphoto.com/ on how to do this with the greatest ammount of control. 2. As per all tif writes, it is a very long time. You would never use tif in the field, just because of the writing time - It took around 40 seconds to write a full size tif file. In that time the Yeti would have passed you.

Some things to think about. In Australia they have just released the LC5. No spare batteries as yet - they don't arrive until Mid may - which coincedently is the timme when the Leica is released. Also the only way to charge the batteries is in the camera - this is just painfull. Apparently Leica will have a charger that recharges 2 batteries and also uses 12V, 110V and 240V for the round the world travellers.

The LC5 comes with a 32M SD card - and apparently has a voucher to get another - bringin the total up to 64M - not enough for a whole days shooting however.

I have been doing a comparison with the Nikon 995 (already own) and the Canon G2. In image quality the LC5 wins hands down. The sharpness and resolving power are greater than either the 995 or the G2. Also the shutter lag and focussing times are way down. It is more like a point and click type shutter lag. This for me brings it into the lead by a long shot - every tried taking pics of friends goofing off using a 995? They have finished by the time you have got the camera started. The start up time on the LC5 is also greatly reduced.

These things have pushed me over the edge for the LC5 - the only downside is I need all new media now. I have Compact Flash cards - and the LC5 takes SD.

BTW virtually everything you buy is already obselete (with the exception of the M6 and possibly the M7) Don't use that as a reason to not try digital. It does improve your abilities as a photographer - instant feedback is wonderful!

-- Adrian Morgan (mourges@dingoblue.net.au), April 16, 2002.

TWIMC,

Before you buy a Panasonic/Leica digital anything, take a long and serious look at the discussions going on at http://dpreview.net (I'm sorry but I don't know how to add a link)

Go to Forums - Other digital cameras

Apparently, the pix from the Panasonic show a posterization effect which is really objectionable to most. The debate in these forums has been raging (and I mean raging) for some days now with little sign of letting up.

Enjoy,

Dan

-- Dan Roe (roedj@hotmail.com), April 22, 2002.

Maybe a little less serious review of the Digilux...

-- Dante Stella (dante@dantestella.com), April 22, 2002.

Thanks, Dante LOL

BTW which one will be considered a "classic" for what that's worth?

-- Mike Barber (hax@htc.net), April 23, 2002.

Which one a classic? Every car looks like a classic the year it comes out.

-- Dante Stella (dante@dantestella.com), April 23, 2002.