Laid my hands on L-1!!! :)

[tao]

hey guys, before you decide on your purchase you should see the results this camera can produce. I tried the RD-1 in HK and found that it is good but the lack of AF was a bit limited. I'm a Canon user when I work so I did consider getting a 400D but bought the L-1 for my current trip because it was a lot more compact (compared to my 1D) and here are some shots from the last few days. I also have an LC-1 so I was looking forward to the L-1. I used the Dynamic B/W mode which also allows me to record in color in RAW which is a pretty useful feature. It also gives me a film-like look which means I don't have to do edits in PS. All shots are as shot except the ones with an A which were either cropped or have had some dust removed. No adjustments were made otherwise. http://www.vitalimages.com.sg/nyc/ All comments appreciated. Thank you.

Your images are stunning, the B/W tonality looks very good to me, considering that no much of postprocessing is needed. From your results, looks like it is a great camera for street photography but certainly you probably interacted very well with your subjects.

I agree with your comment, lots of silly comments I have seen are from people who have probably not tried the camera before. And, please don't compare the price of the L1 with those plastic wonders from N & C, it is totally in a different class and those plastic wonders don't come with an image stabilised F2.8 Leica lens.

 

[vernonleow]

Your images are stunning, the B/W tonality looks very good to me, considering that no much of postprocessing is needed. From your results, looks like it is a great camera for street photography but certainly you probably interacted very well with your subjects.

I agree with your comment, lots of silly comments I have seen are from people who have probably not tried the camera before. And, please don't compare the price of the L1 with those plastic wonders from N & C, it is totally in a different class and those plastic wonders don't come with an image stabilised F2.8 Leica lens.

Thanks for the compliments! Actually I did No post processing for almost all the shots which is something I cannot say for my 1D ll with L lenses. That's what I really like about the L-1. It makes me look like a casual tourist because it isn't intimidating and it doesn't attract unwanted attention (especially in a place like NYC!). I manage to take a lot of shots discreetly as a result and often these are the best ones – the "stolen moments". People don't take you too seriously when you use the live view mode which I must say i was very sceptical about but works really well when you need it. I was practically the first person to buy the L-1 and wondered if I would regret it. 3k is a strange amount of money. A lot to some (me) and nothing to consider for others. But having used it and seen the results it has given me right off the camera, I have few regrets. My only wish is that it was 2.8 throughout and go to 24mm equivalent. Also don't mind an even quieter shutter (now I'm being anal!). But we can't always win. In an ideal world, we'd all be walking around with an AF version of the M8.

 

[tomcat]

L1 is ... like a brick... bulky... thin cheap plastic ?
That's so not true ! :nono:
It has the most accurate auto white balance I have ever seen of all the Canon and Olympus DSLRs I have owned and used and the colours are truely outstanding. The images need very little if any post processing.
And... it can be had for <$3,000 nowadays. :thumbsup:

 

[vernonleow]

L1 is ... like a brick... bulky... thin cheap plastic ?
That's so not true ! :nono:
It has the most accurate auto white balance I have ever seen of all the Canon and Olympus DSLRs I have owned and used and the colours are truely outstanding. The images need very little if any post processing.
And... it can be had for <$3,000 nowadays. :thumbsup:

The only thing that feels cheap and plasticky is the lens hood. The rectangular format one on the LC-1 was much better!

For those who place a high importance on the "feel", go ahead and pay the extra for the Leica Digilux 3.

 

[VR Man]

I heard that the rebadged Leica version has "better" colors and a "little" extra. :dunno:

Other than paying for the brand, has anyone had the chance to verify?

I have a feeling when you pay a premium for certain things, it "looks & feels" better. :think:

 

[Hacker]

I heard that the rebadged Leica version has "better" colors and a "little" extra. :dunno:

Other than paying for the brand, has anyone had the chance to verify?

I have a feeling when you pay a premium for certain things, it "looks & feels" better. :think:

Am waiting to check out the Digilux version of the E-330. In Amazon, looks like 15 Nov is when stocks are available.

 

[vernonleow]

Am waiting to check out the Digilux version of the E-330. In Amazon, looks like 15 Nov is when stocks are available.

I heard that the rebadged Leica version has "better" colors and a "little" extra. :dunno:

Other than paying for the brand, has anyone had the chance to verify?

I have a feeling when you pay a premium for certain things, it "looks & feels" better. :think:

Am not sure about better colours but they are different cosmetically. Even for the lenses! The Leica one has a more Leica look to it like yellow coloured 14-50mm and the mega OIS is smaller (more subtle). But they are made in the same pana factory in Japan. Leica claims that they tweaked the software to their own specs. In fact, the Leica Menu is different from the L-1. I'm not sure how different the images will be when you shoot in RAW though. Leica also justifies their higher price by giving a 3 year warranty.

hacker, is there a Digilux version of the E330? Don't you mean the Digilux 3 which is the rebadged L-1? Do you know something we all don't?

 

[Hacker]

hacker, is there a Digilux version of the E330? Don't you mean the Digilux 3 which is the rebadged L-1? Do you know something we all don't?

Yes, referring to the Digilux 3.

 

[Tetrode]

L1 is ... like a brick... bulky... thin cheap plastic ?
That's so not true ! :nono:
:thumbsup:

Have you actually tried the camera out and compared it to the say the likes of a D200 or RD1s before making this statement? I have.

Compare the build quality and feel of the Epson RD1s and L1 side by side before making this statement.

 

[tomcat]

Have you actually tried the camera out and compared it to the say the likes of a D200 or RD1s before making this statement? I have.

Compare the build quality and feel of the Epson RD1s and L1 side by side before making this statement.

I have D60, 10D and 20D ... all made of metal and solidly built. The L1 is defintely not bulky or felt like thin cheap plastic compared to them. Have you actually used a L1 side by side with any other cameras before making this statement? :dunno:

 

[Tetrode]

I have D60, 10D and 20D ... all made of metal and solidly built. The L1 is defintely not bulky or felt like thin cheap plastic compared to them. Have you actually used a L1 side by side with any other cameras before making this statement? :dunno:

Yes I have actually (if you had read my post carefully I mentioned that I tried it side by side with the Epson RD1)and I will still hold to my opinion that the build quality of the L1 is not commensurate with it's price tag. I am not talking about optical quality but build quality. The L1 is light is weight and with the lens mounted feels unbalanced IMO.

 

[tomcat]

You are entitled to your opinion and I to mine. I prefer to compare it to other cameras in its class instead of higher end cameras or even totally different category of cameras (eg expensive rangefinders). Other reviewers also seem to come to the same conclusion eg. Camera Labs Digital Camera's indepth review of the L1 ... 'The L1&#8217;s rubber coated magnesium alloy body also feels very solid and built to a high standard, roughly equivalent to higher-end DSLRs like the Canon EOS 30D.'

The L1 body and Leica lens kit can be gotten for <$3,000 so I don't deem this camera kit as being excessively expensive, not especially when the Epson RD-1s body alone already cost $3,888. It would be truely unforegiveable if the build quality of the twice-as-expensive RD-1s was not better than that of the L1. :dunno:

 

[Tetrode]

You are entitled to your opinion and I to mine. I prefer to compare it to other cameras in its class instead of higher end cameras or even totally different category of cameras (eg expensive rangefinders). Other reviewers also seem to come to the same conclusion eg. Camera Labs Digital Camera's indepth review of the L1 ... 'The L1&#8217;s rubber coated magnesium alloy body also feels very solid and built to a high standard, roughly equivalent to higher-end DSLRs like the Canon EOS 30D.'

The L1 body and Leica lens kit can be gotten for <$3,000 so I don't deem this camera kit as being excessively expensive, not especially when the Epson RD-1s body alone already cost $3,888. It would be truely unforegiveable if the build quality of the twice-as-expensive RD-1s was not better than that of the L1. :dunno:

I have also compared the build quality to that of the Nikon D200 (as you have with your Canons) and too have found it wanting for a camera of that price category.

I have also previously used an EOS 20D (the predecessor of the 30D) and found the L1's build quality to be lower than it.

 

[Hacker]

That is the reason I'm holding back on the camera. I'm waiting for the Digilux 3 before deciding anything.

 

[tomcat]

I have also compared the build quality to that of the Nikon D200 (as you have with your Canons) and too have found it wanting for a camera of that price category.

I have also previously used an EOS 20D (the predecessor of the 30D) and found the L1's build quality to be lower than it.

Nikon D200 is usually compared to Canon 5D and is in a different class from the L1. It also comes with body only at what kind of price... $2,600? The L1 body on its own would not cost more than $2,000. I do agree that D200 has gained a reputation for great build though.

The 20D like the 10D and D60 before it, is solid, heavy and chunky. If that's your defination of build quality, then definitely the L1 is not like that. The L1 is solid but light and the moveable components are as refined and well made as those of the Canon's are crude. I'm passed the stage where I would like to carry a heavy brick of a camera around for photo shoots and the solid lightness of the L1 is much more appealing to me.

Also, people buy the L1 not just for it's build which is not at all lacking in the first place inspite of some exagerrated comments from disinterested parties. The retro analog features in an AF DSLR put the L1 (and the Digilux 3 for the more well-heeled) in a class all on its own and if these are important considerations, then there are just no comparison.

 

[microcosm]

I normally start making my decision on "build quality" by doing the "squeeze test"... which is, to squeeze the body and see if it flexes too much... tomcat...what is your opinion?

And also, I don't think Canons and Nikons should not be taken into the comparison with 4/3 systems because the lenses that goes with the 4/3 system are much lighter and that adds to the weight of the bag. And that is why the E-400 was designed for. Lightweight but still able to produce a decent picture.

The L1 is the "mid range" camera system in my opinion because of the kit glass that comes with it, which is a superb lens. In a way, it is in a class of its own really.

Good or bad is subjective. If you take a Volvo as a benchmark, then Japanese cars in general are made of cooking foil and a BMW from Coke can, only armored vehicles are made stronger. LOL.

Chill guys... next time we organise an outing and tomcat can bring his camera out for us to do a squeeze test... we have to bring our own alcohol wipes.... because of the drooling. LOL. :sweat:

 

[drakon09]

I have also compared the build quality to that of the Nikon D200 (as you have with your Canons) and too have found it wanting for a camera of that price category.

I have also previously used an EOS 20D (the predecessor of the 30D) and found the L1's build quality to be lower than it.

Remind me not to do a build quality test of the L-1 side by side to my E-1 then.

It makes everything feel plasticky, apart from the 1D or D2 series of cams.

But since neither the D200, 20D nor the L-1 is weatherproofed, then what speaks the loudest are the images out of the cam no? :bsmilie:

 

[drakon09]

I normally start making my decision on "build quality" by doing the "squeeze test"... which is, to squeeze the body and see if it flexes too much... tomcat...what is your opinion?

And also, I don't think Canons and Nikons should not be taken into the comparison with 4/3 systems because the lenses that goes with the 4/3 system are much lighter and that adds to the weight of the bag. And that is why the E-400 was designed for. Lightweight but still able to produce a decent picture.

The L1 is the "mid range" camera system in my opinion because of the kit glass that comes with it, which is a superb lens. In a way, it is in a class of its own really.

Good or bad is subjective. If you take a Volvo as a benchmark, then Japanese cars in general are made of cooking foil and a BMW from Coke can, only armored vehicles are made stronger. LOL.

Chill guys... next time we organise an outing and tomcat can bring his camera out for us to do a squeeze test... we have to bring our own alcohol wipes.... because of the drooling. LOL. :sweat:

Well, I used to tell my bro all the time that given the weight of the 70-200/2.8L IS, the IS is quite necessary after a couple of hours of shooting.

Meow meow's pics posted in dpreview has caused quite a stir. Yeah meow can say the lighting is good blah blah and all those excuses blah blah.

Stunning pics means stunning pics, no need for excuses. :bsmilie:

The only complaint I have about the L-1 is that it has a NON-ARTICULATED LCD SCREEN! To me, the designers made a big boo-boo on that, since the E-330 was released first and proved the value of the movable LCD screen.

 

[Tetrode]

Nikon D200 is usually compared to Canon 5D and is in a different class from the L1. It also comes with body only at what kind of price... $2,600? The L1 body on its own would not cost more than $2,000. I do agree that D200 has gained a reputation for great build though.

The 20D like the 10D and D60 before it, is solid, heavy and chunky. If that's your defination of build quality, then definitely the L1 is not like that. The L1 is solid but light and the moveable components are as refined and well made as those of the Canon's are crude. I'm passed the stage where I would like to carry a heavy brick of a camera around for photo shoots and the solid lightness of the L1 is much more appealing to me.

Also, people buy the L1 not just for it's build which is not at all lacking in the first place inspite of some exagerrated comments from disinterested parties. The retro analog features in an AF DSLR put the L1 (and the Digilux 3 for the more well-heeled) in a class all on its own and if these are important considerations, then there are just no comparison.

Actually if you look back at my posts a few months ago just as the L1 was announced, I was one of the first to applaud the L1's use of analog controls.

But after checking it out and looking at the sticker price, I'd say that Panasonic botched on the build quality. It's more like an expensive prosumer camera build wise. Sorry, but that is my assessment of it.


microcosm,

It fails the squeeze test. It flexes quite a bit.

 

[Tetrode]

Remind me not to do a build quality test of the L-1 side by side to my E-1 then.

It makes everything feel plasticky, apart from the 1D or D2 series of cams.

But since neither the D200, 20D nor the L-1 is weatherproofed, then what speaks the loudest are the images out of the cam no? :bsmilie:

yes but at what price?
Can you get the same quality from a cheaper product?