Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Clive wrote: > This is not knocking Leica's approach to the D2 (or was it > Panasonic's?). Building a digital camera that handles like a film > camera is not a bad idea. Exactly. It's a great idea. Mark Rabiner and Gene say they love knobs. Me too. Separate, discrete control knobs for each function are a very good thing ergonomically. And this is much of what we mean when we say "handles like a film camera." Multi-level menus and slow-responding unidirectional push-button carousel menus are a nightmare in any fast-moving situation. I suspect that one of the reasons why we like our Leicas is that we form an almost physical bond with the camera. Each control does one thing. They respond instantly. We *feel* what each controls does, right under our fingertips. This feeling is missing from most digicams. They operate more like VCRs from the 1980s. Ideally, controls should do one thing, maybe two things with a convenient toggle. If a control does more than that, what it does should be far enough apart operationally that it's not likely we will confuse them. Menus should be reserved for things you usually don't do on the fly, and they shouldn't be more than two levels deep. The Digilux 1 / LC5 design took all this into consideration. And they were the only digicams I *truly* enjoyed holding and operating. If PanaLeica keeps those good things and fixes the image quality and noise issues, the D2 could be a very nice camera. Sensor size: No digicam can top slow film and Leica glass. But consider the Sony F-717. It has a 2/3 sensor, and it was long regarded as having the highest image quality of any digicam this side of a DSLR . The Olympus E-10 and E-20 also use 2/3 sensors, and B.D.'s E-20 shots show that it ain't chopped liver, either. The 2/3 size may not be that much bigger than the 1/1.8 sensor used in most digicams, but the difference in overall quality seems significant. I would probably buy a D2 if I could adjust to the viewfinder, and if the price were realistic. But it isn't. With new Leica MP or ASPH lens, you're buying Leica mechanics and glass, built by hand to tolerances nobody else can quite match. A PanaLeica digicam is Japanese mechanics and glass. For the extra money, you're buying the red dot, some undefined Leica input into the design, and perhaps some tighter QC. Let's hope the Panasonic version is significantly more affordable. I doubt that the Digilux 1's software *code* was very different than the LC5's (if at all) and I suspect it will be the same thing with the D1 vs. the LC1. What was different was the range over which sharpness, contrast and saturation could be adjusted. The Panasonic's low-medium-high was, in arbitrary units, 2-3-4. The Digilux 1 was 1-2-3. So the aggressive image processing could be turned down a bit more in the Digilux. I read in a recent Leica Fotographie International that the design of the CM was heavily influenced by the concept of "branding." What makes the Leica brand unique in the public mind? The feeling of quality and luxury. Certain shapes like the rounded edges. And the red dot. - --Peter Klein Seattle - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html