Gear Upgrade
The introduction of improvements to cameras has changed over the years. Like most modern technologies, it seems like the advent of computer technology has changed not only how cameras can be “improved” but also the rate at which new cameras are introduced. In the old days, one would see a new version of a camera every 5 years or so (I’m thinking the Nikon FM to the Nikon FM2). Face it, there wasn’t much to change given the image was being captured on film. Pretty much the only thing that could improve was the metering system and the flash-synchronization speed. A camera manufacturer might add something like a mechanical depth-of-field preview button, but those things were usually reserved to distinguish between the various levels of cameras, which meant you had to upgrade to the pro-level cameras get those types of extra features.
With the introduction of digital technology into the photography process, all that changed. First, given that much of the camera’s operation was now computer based, firmware updated became a possibility (Alhough camera manufacturers, other than Fujifilm, did firmware updates reluctantly because why not just make the consumer buy a new camera?). With firmware updates the manufacturer could add “new” or “improved” features (within limits) based upon computer processing improvements related to the hardware in an existing camera. With a new software update, one might find out the camera can now make a built-in panoramic image, focus stack images, or offer a new form of metering. Or better autofocusing. Or with Fujifilm, also a new film style replicated in the jpg image.
But as with computers, camera technology improvements seem to come at an exponential rate and “new” technologies become “old” very quickly. There is, of course, the sensor instead of film. And sensor improvements developed at an astonishing rate over the years - more megapixels, greater dynamic range, better low-light/high-ISO performance, the ability to record video as well as make still images, electronic shutters and, now, the introduction of AI into the image-making process itself. There have been equal improvements in the LDC screens both on the back of the camera and in the eyepiece (I won’t say the DSLR is dead, but the use of mirrors to see what you are pointing the camera at is now way behind mirrorless technology). The software now allows you to have the information you want on the screen (eyepiece or rear LCD), and to specific information on or off if you want to. All of that is run by better and faster computer chips and software. Then again, the menu system required to configure cameras just the way you want to is nearly impossible to comprehend given all of the options now possible, but that’s another topic altogether. With such rapid improvements to hardware components of cameras, new versions of cameras or new cameras altogether are appearing every 2-3 years (some more often than that) with a plethora of new hardware improvements. With my Fujifilm cameras I’ve gone from a 12 megapixel sensor to 16 mp to 24 mp to now 40 mp between 2011 and 2023. And I skipped an entire generation of sensors to keep using my X-Pro 2. Each measurably better (in one respect or another) than the previous model. And many camera manufacturers have multiple lines of similar cameras targeted to different audiences - if you’re a still photographer like me, get an X-T5, if you do a lot of video work and stills work, get an X-H2. Most of the core guts are the same, but the camera is configured to prioritize certain aspects of the creative process over others.
By the same token, some camera lines die. Not so much the companies, though that happens too, but certain models don’t keep up and are eventually discontinued. There’s still a strong fan base for Fujifilm’s X-E series of cameras, but only rumors about whether it will come back to life (as compared to Fuji insisting that the X-Pro line is not dead). It’s probably all economics, but it’s really frustrating when you find a camera that is “almost there” and just needs a minor upgrade to be spectacular, and the manufacturer basically leaves it to die on the shelf. Maybe they keep making it for a few years, but eventually they stop developing it and then stop selling it.
Well, go to the More>Our Gear>Dan [or] Ann’s Gear>Cameras pages of the website and you’ll see the Lumix LX 100II, which I refer to as our “point and shoot” cameras. The concept behind the camera was simple and quite appealing for someone like me. Make a point and shoot camera with as large a sensor as possible (significantly larger than any other pocketable point-and-shoot out there at the time), put some good optics on it, as well as more physical controls on the outside of the body than most serious digital cameras being produced. No diving into menus. With the Lumix LX 100II one has an aperture control ring, a physical slider on the body that allows you to adjust the aspect ratio of the image (4:3, 1:1, 16:9, 3:2), a physical slider for autofocus/autofocus macro/manual focus (with a ring on the lens for when you’re in manual focus), a manual shutter speed control dial and an exposure compensation dial. Everything a photographer who knows his stuff needs at his fingertips in a point-and-shoot camera. A camera that can be thrown into “camera, you do everything” mode as a true point-and-shoot when you hand the camera off to a non-photographer, or gives a photographer everything needed to make a serious image.
Oh yeah, and it made excellent images, which you can see throughout this post. Sure, micro 4/3 is smaller than our usual Fujifilm APSC sensors, but it’s good enough to produce decent sized prints (think 11x14) in many, if not most, photographic conditions.
The camera, however, was not without serious limitations. First, the original LX 100 came out in 2014. In technology terms, that’s eons ago. The LX 100II came out in 2018, I bought mine in 2019 after I got frustrated with having to menu-dive to use my Sony point-and-shoot which had a smaller 1” sensor (still bigger than the average) and produced decent images. But Sony has a menu system that will drive one insane. Lumix updated a few things in 2018 - a newer sensor and processor, video capability and a few odds and ends. At the time, state of the art. But 5 years is a long time, 9 if you look at the components that didn’t change with the LX 100II. Granted, as I said, I came to understand that the lens and sensor combination was incredible with this camera, and since I don’t do fast-action images with it, the fact that the sensor is older doesn’t bother me. However, the eyepiece and rear screen LCDs (which did not get upgraded in 2018) are, in a word, horrible. They are nearly unusable in bright or contrasty conditions. It’s so bad that one can’t really judge how the image will come out by looking at the LCD or, even worse, through the eyepiece.
But I learned to trust the camera. Trust the histogram, trust what you see with your eyes and the rough framing you can do with the poor quality LCDs and make sure the green focus box is where you want it to focus. The components that matter - the lens and sensor - are pretty damn good and thus the images could be great. The shooting experience, at times much less so. But, wow, can it produce images under the right conditions.
Over the years I’ve increasingly lamented the fact that the LX100 line is effectively dead. Face it, no upgrade in 6 years is a coffin in the technology world. But the camera is so good that Ann gave up on the hand-me-down Sony point and shoot a couple of years ago and got an LX 100II for herself. She too appreciates the images it can make. On our photo trips we even would occasionally engage in a “if you could improve the camera, what would you do to it” discussion, knowing that it was never to be.
I left out one little detail about the LX 100II. The lens is designed by Leica and has the Leica name on it (that helps explain, in part, the quality of the images). And Leica had its own version of the LX 100II, the D-LUX 7. But since it cost several hundred dollars more for essentially the same camera, we opted for the Panasonic-Lumix model. The red dot was not worth hundreds of dollars, sorry Leica.
This is the first of the D-LUX 8 images.
So imagine my surprise several months ago when Leica Rumors reported they’d heard whispers about a D-LUX 8. I scoured the web and . . . nothing about Lumix (aka Panasonic) working on an upgrade. A few weeks later, more information came out. Yes, the rumors are true. No, there will be be no Lumix equivalent, Panasonic had no interest in continuing the line so Leica decided to go on its own, building upon the existing LX 100II/D-LUX 7 platform (with some rumors saying Leica purchased all of the manufacturing equipment from Panasonic) to refine the line instead of coming out with a whole new camera. They didn’t see any need to reinvent the wheel.
Did you see the frog?
As bits and pieces of the details for the D-LUX 8 started filtering out, it sounded just like the conversations Ann and I had about the camera. A new LCD screen, a new OLED viewfinder screen, a software menu system taken from the Leica Q, SL and M series cameras (considered the second best menu system after Hasselblad’s), a re-design of the outside body to mimic the Leica Q ergonomics (while still retaining the same functionality and main camera controls on the body). All the meanwhile, the components we knew were excellent - the lens and sensor combination - remain the same. About the only thing that isn’t on the D-LUX 8 that we’d said would be nice is a flip up rear screen. You can’t have everything!
It wasn’t long after the formal announcement about the D-LUX 8, after we could verify some of the key specs and the fact that, indeed, Lumix was taking a pass on making their version of this upgrade (hey, a few hundred bucks is a few hundred bucks), that we placed our orders.
The official release date was July 2. They called it a “ship date.” I think it meant ship to their sellers, because ours arrived from Cameranu about a week later. Unfortunately, the timing was such that all the lovely mornings we were having suddenly changed to overcast and/or rainy skies, so our morning walks didn’t provide us the opportunity to immediately test the camera as we’d hoped.
Instead, a few days later I had an unexpected off-work day, so we decided to go visit a botanical garden not too far from here. It was a partly cloudy day (perfect temperature) with intermittent periods of intense sunlight and cloud shadow. It gave us an opportunity to see how the camera operates in a variety of conditions. To make a long story short, the usability of the camera has been enhanced 1,000 times (regardless of whether it’s looking through the eyepiece or on the rear LCD) and the image quality is as it was before - superb. Even diving into the menu system the one time I had to was straight-forward. Thank you, Leica.
The real reviews of the camera (as opposed to the “I got to play with this for a day” pre-production reviews) are starting to come out and I’m not surprised that they are of mixed opinion. Those that want a modern, do-everything-under-every-condition (What do you mean it doesn’t zoom to 500mm equivalent? Cameras these days should shoot 25 frames per second in burst mode!) camera have bemoaned the 6-year old technology and are disappointed with its limitations. Those that realize that most decent cameras are getting ginormous (because they have to do everything), and are too heavy for just toting around, and who want a pocketable camera that gives you significantly better than the surprising good quality you can get from a phone camera these days (but still not quite good enough) are impressed with the camera and with the controls it offers a photographer that knows what they’re doing. Many of them wind up apologizing for not having paid as much attention as they should have to the LX 100II back in the day. Those latter reviewers understand the reasoning behind this camera. (Ok, I’ll admit the thought has crossed my mind that the D-LUX 8 will be the gateway camera to the Q series, which has become the gateway camera to the very-serious M and SL lines of cameras, but I am generally not a conspiracy theorist and will stick with Leica realizing there is an untapped market that they can take advantage of by making a very good point and shoot camera.).
Sometimes companies do get it right and improve something that’s already pretty darned good without force-feeding you a bunch of stuff you don’t want or need (and definitely do not want to pay for). Leica has eliminated almost all of the things that detracted from the usability of the LX 100II that occasionally left me wondering after I’d made a photograph whether the camera had, in fact, created the image I was hoping for. I now know that going “light” with the Q2MR and now the D-LUX 8 doesn’t mean I’m taking a risk at not being able to make an excellent image and to be confident I’ll be able to tell whether I’m doing so at the time I’m making the image.
Because, face it, you don’t always want to go around toting 20 pounds of camera gear (not to mention the tripod), just to check out whether an area is worth photographing. Then again, you don’t want to get out there, only to find an image and not be able to make it either.
Thanks Leica for making this part of our photo excursions a lot easier - you kept the image quality and improved the usability of the camera. That’s a good thing!