Leica D-Lux 2 and OSX

Do you have one? You could upload a RAW file and see. I assume you're talking about RAW compatibility because if you're just talking about JPEG then it is obviously compatible.

EDIT: Why do you want this camera? Just so you can say you have a Leica? Because this camera is expensive and not good for the price.

I think the leica is supported

Dr.Gargoyle said:

Ok, since I already bought the thing it might be a bit late...
Anyhow, are there anyone here that has any experience how well Leica D-Lux 2 (or Panasonic DMC-LX1 for that matter) works with OSX? I can't find any explicit information about compability on Leicas own site , so thought I should ask you guys.

Click to expand...

The delux 2 is listed on the Aperture web site. The raw conversion is actually done my Mac OS X.

Wost case is that you do raw conversion outside of iPhoto and then import the JPG files. TYhis may be best in any case as iPhoto raw conversion is rather basic

ChrisA said:

The delux 2 is listed on the Aperture web site. The raw conversion is actually done my Mac OS X.

Wost case is that you do raw conversion outside of iPhoto and then import the JPG files. TYhis may be best in any case as iPhoto raw conversion is rather basic

Click to expand...

Thats weird on OSX's list of supported cameras there isn't even a section for Panasonic.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

To say I have a Leica???... I would like to think I am passed that stage in my life. I am an old school photografer so I did some research on photo.net before I went for this camera. I find the whining about noise in high ISO strange. Noise is expected in higher ISO, it is basic physics. Besides the noise is manageble if you shoot RAW.
The main reason i bought the camera was the optics. I could have saved some money if I instead would have chosen Panasonic DMC-LX1. But honestly, I didn't like the look of the camera. Since I didn't mind paying the extra premium getting a more appealing casing...
Moreover, since I live in Sweden I guess we get better deals on both Leica and Hasselblad than you do in US. Nikons and Canons are not cheap over here.
Besides, if I wanted to flash, don't you think a Hasselblad 503 CWD or a Leica R9 with a digital back would do that better than a simple point and shoot Leica?

Click to expand...

While the price difference may be true, I doubt that the Leica D-Lux 2 over there is as cheap as say the Canon 300D or 10D something like that, which is a much better camera you would be saving so much money you could invest in even better optics than the Leica camera. I went looking at the dpreview review of it, just not impressed.

For my $1500 (froogle.com) I'd take a 20D or D50 or something with a nice lens AND save some money. But maybe the pricing differences are all backwards over there.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

Isn't that that DigiLux 2 and not D-Lux 2?

Click to expand...

Ah ha, see I knew I must be missing something. I thought it was just an abbreviation. Sorry for the trouble.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

Ok, since I already bought the thing it might be a bit late...
Anyhow, are there anyone here that has any experience how well Leica D-Lux 2 (or Panasonic DMC-LX1 for that matter) works with OSX? I can't find any explicit information about compability on Leicas own site , so thought I should ask you guys.

Click to expand...

Well right now it is not supported by OSX, however Photoshop CS2 opens the RAW files just fine, as does PS Elements that comes with it.

I am extremely happy with the camera and have not found any noise problems, as anyone who actually owns one will tell you.

I own a 20D and a 5D Canon which I love but wanted a smaller camera to take around all the time. I got it for the optics as well as the native 16:9 format which I love. The 30 fps wide movie mode is outstanding. Yes you could save $200 bucks with the Panasonic but the aluminum housing and better software (PS Elements) included.

Enjoy

Dr.Gargoyle said:

I have noticed that most of the complaints seem to stem from people that doesn't own the camera. I had no idea the red label stirred up that much emotions in US...strange
It is just a camera

Click to expand...

Not all of us, and it's probably more of an "age" thing than anything else. Let us know how it goes, I think you will be very happy with it.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

To say I have a Leica???... I would like to think I am passed that stage in my life. I am an old school photografer so I did some research on photo.net before I went for this camera. I find the whining about noise in high ISO strange. Noise is expected in higher ISO, it is basic physics. Besides the noise is manageble if you shoot RAW.
The main reason i bought the camera was the optics. I could have saved some money if I instead would have chosen Panasonic DMC-LX1. But honestly, I didn't like the look of the camera. Since I didn't mind paying the extra premium getting a more appealing casing...
Moreover, since I live in Sweden I guess we get better deals on both Leica and Hasselblad than you do in US. Nikons and Canons are not cheap over here.
Besides, if I wanted to flash, don't you think a Hasselblad 503 CWD or a Leica R9 with a digital back would do that better than a simple point and shoot Leica?

Click to expand...

Sad to see one have to defend ones self like you did. The current $255 price difference between the Panasonic LX-1 and the D-Lux 2 provides two distinct advantages for most customers. The first is a two year warranty that is goes beyond most others basic warranty. The other is that Adobe Elements 3.0 is is included, over the dismal Panasonic RAW software.

I bought the LX-1, though my shop sells the D-Lux 2, because I did not need the software that Leica offered; and the extra warranty was not a concern for me. For myself, I preferred the look of the black LX-1 over the D-Lux 2. Glad that you and I had choices. Hate to say it, but looks do drive the buying choice for many of my customers.

I based my purchase on the DPR review. I printed out a high ISO image to 13x19, and saw that it beat my experiences in ISO400+ film. And using something like Noise Ninja improved the results modestly.

To be honest I own more gear than anyone person should own. And my favorite 35mm film gear is my Leica M6's. Leica does know how to do optics. And they do appear to actually design the lenses used by Panasonic, as opposed to SOME other premium names that appear on some cameras (just look at the Schneider lenses offered on some of the new Samsung DSLR's; they have the same exact look as their Pentax cousins. And if you look closely enough, they are cousins to the Tamron lenses.

Pricing differences do play a part. In the end you and I made a great choice. I took my LX-1 and a D50 with a 18-200VR on my first European vacation in late February. Guess what? I was happiest in carrying around the LX-1!

It is causing me to look at my demands for the "best" capabilities vs. being free from a camera bag.

Here are a few of the favorites from my first European trip.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

I have noticed that most of the complaints seem to stem from people that doesn't own the camera. I had no idea the red label stirred up that much emotions in US...strange
It is just a camera

Click to expand...

I know what you mean. Many here in the US will mortgage their children's college fund to buy a Hummer or Expedition SUV, yet they will chastise those of us that want to have sharp pictures that mean some to us.

They don't realize that the LX-1 and the D-Lux 2 offer three different formats also. The 16:9 (wide screen, which I love), the 35mm standard of 3:2, and the more common 4:3.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

Nice pics... Thanks for sharing. I hope you find your way over here again soon. There are a lot of interesting aspects of europe a bit off the beaten track.

Click to expand...

I so want to do Europe again! Or should I say more of Europe? My Reykjavik and London trip was the first out of the US since my parents brought me back from Germany at the age of 2 1/2.

The problem is that the US$ is so in the tank, it is hard for those that are being passed by the "great economic boom" that many talk of here in the US. In other threads I have joked about anything in Iceland costing a minimum of 200kr (about $3US), and in London the minimum being 1BP (about $1.75US).

I so enjoyed my trip that I am looking at cutting back on some of my US travel, in order to return to some part of Europe. "Self-catering" was my friend in my recent travels. Rolls, yogurt, and fruits were my friends - in order for me to enjoy some more pricier meals in the evening.

My stay in Iceland has given me a greater desire to spend sometime in the Nordic regions of Europe. The loving and welcoming nature of the people I met in Reykjavik, showed me much about myself.

More than once I was confused as not being "American" by the Icelanders I met. I did ask one fellow why he asked, since my accent should have been a dead give away. He said that he thought I was an ex-pat that was on holiday from the UK. I asked why he felt that way. He said it was that it was that I was understanding of the current events of the EU; and that I never made it seem that the world revolved around the US alone.

In many ways that hurt. As anyone, I am proud to be a citizen of my country. And as much as I like in knowing about the world around me, I don't think of myself as being "well read". I like to think that I can hold my own on most topics being discussed. It made me think of how my country, and its people, are truly looked upon.

Given the reverence that Icelanders place on "The Settlement" back around 1000AD; it gave me pause that we in the US (at least with my "formal" education in US history that ended in the 80's) look to the settlement of Plymouth, MA or Jamestown, VA as points of reference. Only passing reference was made to Lief Ericson. And only now are we looking at those that inhabited the US in our early history.

There was an editorial cartoon in the Washington Post today (wish I could find an image to post) that took many of the current comments about immigrants being voiced today, and turning it back to the time when European settlers came these shores.

Sorry for the rant and ramble. Your post just struck a nerve that my recent travels has caused me to question on how we should look at things here in the US.

Dr.Gargoyle said:

I find it particulary odd to encounter lack of understanding against people who "think differently" in a mac community. A true paradox indeed...

Click to expand...

Oh quit people, did you even read my posts? I thought you were getting a different camera than you are.

I stand by my statement that anyone willing to pay for this camera http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Leica/leica_digilux2.asp is only doing so for name and looks.

The camera he is getting is so ridiculously close in name that some marketing department needs to be shot. They should have named it the Digilux 35 or something.

I just printed off a couple of images from my D-Lux 2 clone at 13x19, and they look stunning IMO.

I use Adobe Lightroom, still in beta..for Raw Conversion on my MAC.

Its free, it runs on OSX, and its exceptionally "intuitive"

D LUX 2 said:

I use Adobe Lightroom, still in beta..for Raw Conversion on my MAC.

Its free, it runs on OSX, and its exceptionally "intuitive"

Click to expand...

I use it for my LX-1 RAWs, and like the interface too.

It is a free beta test program for now. Towards the end of the year we will have to pay to continue using it. Read deep in the Lightroom announcement page, that it could be as high as $499, lets hope that it comes well under $300.

BTW, a great shot.

Chip NoVaMac said:

I use it for my LX-1 RAWs, and like the interface too.

It is a free beta test program for now. Towards the end of the year we will have to pay to continue using it. Read deep in the Lightroom announcement page, that it could be as high as $499, lets hope that it comes well under $300.

BTW, a great shot.

Click to expand...

Thanks

i'm looking forward to the rest of the features.

the only drawback ive found is a rather arcane one in that if you instruct it to "turn the lights out" and switch to photoshp real rapidly it can take a few minutes get reagin control of your computer for some as yet undetermined reason

D LUX 2 said:

Thanks

i'm looking forward to the rest of the features.

the only drawback ive found is a rather arcane one in that if you instruct it to "turn the lights out" and switch to photoshp real rapidly it can take a few minutes get reagin control of your computer for some as yet undetermined reason

Click to expand...

Can you explain this further? Not sure what you mean about this.