How is it compared with the lEICA-d-lux 5 ?
1542147
I have both, and they both take excellent pictures. The d-Lux is an older camera ( I think ), and doesn't have the same resolution. Unless you're making large prints, you will not likely notice much difference. You're also paying about double for the Leica red dot as Leica produces the optics for boh cameras, and if I'm not mistaken Panasonic produces the electronics for both.
1964185
It is much slower than using a DSLR. I have a K-5 and still occasionally use my K100D Super, and the X-5 has a considerable delay with respect to those. But for applications such as close-ups of wild flowers, landscapes, pictures of family, etc., it's a lot lighter both in terms of the camera body and you have just one lens, and the result is decent. And you don't have to worry about having a lot of high cost gear with you. So, like everything, there are trade-offs.
440162
I agree completely. We have a G-9 and LX-2. I love the interface of the Canon but the images of the Leicasonic are often a little cleaner. The G-10 is not as good as the G-9 IMHO and the LX-3 is a smarter upgrade (they tried for improved images, not pixel count). The paid reviewers generally agree that the LX-3 is better, but things could change in the next iteration. Someone (Steve's?) said that they'd wished Canon had used a sensor like Panasonic did. That would be close to an ideal pocket camera for me.
1674903
I have been more than pleased with the image quality of the LF1. I have not seen the images you are evaluating. Check out Gordon Liam & Camera Labs for his review and serious sample photos.
2150141
IMO this is a great street camera between the f1.8 lens, the tilt viewfinder for shooting from the waist and it's small size compared to a DLSR. There is a little noise at 1600 but the fast lens make pushing your ISO past that rarely needed. While the camera is solid the lens is what makes it great.
1003770
Without any hesitation but with some more money on the table, my pick is the Leica. Colors are way superior and more pleasing than the Canon.
346743
I have the 15mm leica m43 lens and the 35-100 f2.8 lumix as well as the 25 mm leica f1.4 and it is the sharpest lens I own with extremely good color rendition. I have not used the 20mm panasonic lens, but if you can afford it, I think you will be happier with the leica though with the 25mm lens the camera I use becomes larger than a pocket camera. I use my lenses on a Lumix GX7.
2024050
I have both. Very little difference. Both are excellent for a point and shoot!
808895
I think most of the listings for the D-Lux 5 are just obsolete Internet links. But I agree with the others that the D-Lux 5 is a superb, reliable camera that delivers really exceptional results.
1000208
The FZ is definitely sharper, has better color saturation and better contrast than most Point and Shoot cameras that I have encountered. Its very difficult to go wrong with a Leica lens. Additionally, this takes pictures in RAW format too, so my suggestion would be to shoot RAW and tweak the level (as one would generally do with SLR). Remember you can shoot pretty flat in SLR and then do the necessary corrections in the SW at home
1673296
I am also comparing the two and cannot make a decision. Help, please. I am not that interested in video, but most concerned with qulaity of photo (true colors & sharpness) and the use in low light (indoor). I have concerns about the flash and what I have read is not too promising. Is one of these cameras better than the other in low light situation....without the use of 'flash'?
808899
D-Lux 6 is a CMOS sensor. CCD is much more lifelike, and more treasured among Leica crowd.
274978
Not much. I think feature-wise it's closer to the T5i though I have not compared them closely. One thing it does not have that some others do is the articulated rear LCD. I replaced a 60D with the SL1 and have not missed any of the 60D features. Either the SL1 has all of the features or I did not use them or did not know about them. One feature I really like is the "silent shooting" mode. Most reviews don't mention that. It's quieter than my 5DIII in quiet/silent mode.
660620
The difference for me was the group focus feature, it seemed to lock in focus quicker and track subjects better. Low light is just awesome I have always hesitated cranking up the ISO too high because of the noise potential. It is simply amazing how you can take clean shots in low light situations like bars, parties, sports arenas. If most of your shooting involve low light venues you will see a difference. Wether this is enough to drive an upgrade is up to you. Regarding general picture quality I can't say there is a significant difference other than low light situation I mentioned. I own a d800 as well and use it when picture quality is absolutely critical. These are the 2 cameras in my bag and handles every situation I am faced with. If pic quality is what you seek you can grab a used d800 for under 2k. You will not be disappointed. Just my opinion.
1099029
Yes, I am very happy with this camera. I use a Leica M9, how ever it is not suitable for all circumstances, this camera fills in the gaps.
1078011
The G5 does surprisingly well in low light! I am a bit amazed at the pictures I can take with street lights as the only illumination. There is sensor noise; somewhat more than with my Nikon D600, about the same as my Nikon D7000. Noise elimination post-processing cleans it up fairly nicely. On the other hand, consider that most Micro 4/3 lenses are fairly slow. So unless you get one of the fast lenses, you'll be using the "low-light" capabilities more than you would if you had a camera with an fast lens. The lens based anti-shake system works OK, but it's not as effective as some costlier systems, so a tripod is a must for "available dark" shooting.
2101037
This is my fave macro camera. My other cameras are Leica's and I prefer this one for macro shots. I get fab bokeh with it.