Saturday, January 12, 2013

Still using the Leica D-Lux 4, but changing the name of the blog?

I know it's an older camera, but I'm still using the Leica D-Lux 4. Why? Because it's the only Leica I have left, and I love the lens on this camera. The sensor is much smaller than the other cameras I'm currently using, but this is my only real (sort-of) compact camera left and I am hesitant to give it up. I love my iPhone 4, but the shots don't come anywhere close to the Leica D-Lux 4. Anyway, I am debating about selling this as I've recently purchased a Fuji X-E1 which has an APS-C sensor, (sweet spot). The camera is much bigger than the Leica D-Lux though and I am debating about keeping it. I love compacts and love the lens on this camera. I can't express that enough. For some oddball reason, it's just the perfect wide angle, plus it has all the cool  features. 

I may change this to my Leica & Fuji Blog though. Yeah, I know. But even with the Fuji AF drag, this camera blows away my Leica M8.2 in low light shooting. Yes, blows it away. Plus, the Fuji, in my prediction, will be a Leica KILLER. Well, at least a Leica WOUND-ER. LOL! Why? Because the ooc Jpegs are fabulous and the lenses are all wonderful. They aren't built like the Leica lenses, no doubt, but the Fuji cameras and lenses produce beautiful results. The Fuji lenses deliver the goods, even if they aren't built like little tanks. Plus, there is an M mount for the Fuji, so I can use Leica glass if I want. Not that I'd want to, as the cost between this camera and lenses between a Leica M9 or M is HUGE! I'm not a pro, and I'm not into blowing that kind of cash on Leica anymore. I think it's all a bunch of bullshit. The Leica lenses are the thing, and I am not rich or a pro photographer, so what's the point? I like the rangefinder experience, but HATE the prices of Leica. Most people would not be able to justify the cost. And with so many digital cameras that can rival the Leica, and yes they can, why bother? Fuji is one of those companies. they hit the nail on the head. Sony is another one. But Fuji is even better than Sony when it comes to ooc JPEGS. Yeah, I know there is the new Sony RX100 full frame camera with fixed lens and NO OVF/EVF. It costs too much and without any OVF or EVF, it is a deal killer for me. Maybe some day I can review one, but with the optional (read: purchased) OVF. 

Meanwhile, I still shoot with my Leica D-Lux 4, and a Fuji X-E1. 

All of the above were taken with a Leica D-Lux 4 camera. Now, below, these were all taken with a Fuji X-E1. So take a good look at them. Pretty good huh? And you wonder why I want to add the Fuji name to my blog. These are all JPEGS. A few things the Fuji isn't, it's not a rangefinder. It's a mirror-less camera with that retro look. Looks like an Olympus 35-SP or Leica CL camera or similar. It simulates Fuji film types. It has a beautiful B&W filter with choices of red, green or yellow filters. You can choose 1:1, 16:9 or 4:3 ration. No 3:2 ratio though. The lenses are lovely from what I've read. The 18-55mm kit lens is what I chose for a general, all-purpose lens. My next choice, if I keep this camera, will be the 35mm lens and an 18mm or wider lens. Fuji is coming out with more lenses. I'm sure they will be a lot quicker than Sony was in producing them. They will certainly be sharper than them. So, the Fuji is not a Leica in that it doesn't cost nearly as much money, the lens work wonderfully though they aren't as tank-built, but they produce great results as does the Fuji cameras; both the Fuji X-Pro1 and X-E1. Now, you can keep buying into the Leica, or learn from me and save yourself a lot of cash. Unless you're into name brands that give you the illusion of status. Now, if you're still into film, you can pick up an M6 or any M with Leica lenses, and I totally dig that as it's a wonderful system. Hell, a Nikon FM2 with fast primes is lovely too. Save your money and start checking out the new digital systems. An Olympus OM-D, Sony RX100 (smaller sensor) or even Sony RX1(full frame), Fuji X-E1, X Pro 1, are all good choices. (Yeah, I know the Olympus has the smaller 4/3rd sensor, but it is a great working system with lovely lenses, though not as nice as Fuji when it comes to enlargements. Sorry, sensor sizes do matter. 


  1. I think both sets of images look great. I have my preference, but that is not really the point. Whomever is interested in photography does so for their own reasons (money, fame, artistic muse, love of their children/pets, etc) and should get he camera that makes them happy. I have a Leica Dlux4 as well and I love it. I have an Panasonic Lumix GF-1 which is kind of it's bigger brother. I also have an M8 and a bunch of other stuff. I love them all,but they don't all work the same or excel at everything.

    I assume at one point the Leicas fed your passion, but it seems like it has waned and been replaced by the Fuji. I think you have the ability to take great pictures with both, so if you are feeling the Fuji, and it costs less to boot, then it's a no-brainer! as we move along our photographic journey, our tastes evolve and our gear evolves with it. I am glad you have found a new camera that you are passionate about and makes you wish to take pictures. After all, you have taken one subject and have given a lot of amazing different looks with either camera, so it's not about the camera so much anyway, but the eye behind it. You should use the gear that you feel comfortable with, that doesn't stand in your way creatively, and that doesn't take you to the brink of financial ruin. :)

    It's cool you have found a good thing and wish to share it with others. I like your pictures even more. I agree with much of what you say about camera comparisons, but in the end if the camera that speeds your journey is the expensive one, sometimes you have to bite the bullet and open your wallet. If you are lucky though, you traveling companion will be relatively inexpensive. Seems like you hit a run of luck!

    (great pics , buy the way!)

  2. Hi Kev,

    Thanks for the comments. I loved the M8.2, but hated it in low light, It was terrible in low light. Loved the Leica lenses, but I just couldn't justify keeping so much expensive gear. Now if I were a wealthy person, I may have kept the M6 with lenses. But I needed the cash, so being that I don't shoot a lot of film, I just couldn't justify keeping such expensive gear.

    My only complaints about the Leica D-Lux 4 is the lack of low light ability compared to today's sensors, and I do need it, and the Small sensor size. Other wise it's a keeper. I love it. Now, that doesn't mean I wouldn't love a Sony RX100, as the sensor is bigger and that produces some beautiful results as well.

    I am glad I tried all of this gear. When I retired from my last job, I wanted to get a Leica M9 so badly, but ended up with an M8.2 which is just as well, because I didn't care for the Leica Digital system as much as the film system. The little D-Lux 4 was much more fun to use and not so bloody expensive. It is about money for me now, as my budget is limited. I try to get the most bang for the buck these days. I love what Fuji is doing, but again, each camera has its pluses and minuses.

    I know it's not about the camera in regards to my picture taking abilities, but sometimes certain cameras are so aggravating to use that they interrupt the flow of my artist's mindset. The Leica Digital M was one of those cameras. The M6 wasn't. But its' also about finding the fit. I wanted Leica to be it for me, and it was just too much money and a pain. Love the rangefinder experience in the M6, and I have no problems using it. It's very easy to me now. But, film is slowly fading, and I don't want to be stuck with all this expensive gear. So, I sold all of it and bought a cheap Nikon Fm2. I know if film were to be too expensive to buy and develop, I won't lose much in the way of money for the gear. LOL!

    Love the Leica glass though.