Pana LX3 - Canon G9 work together

[Liz]

Some of you may remember I had to sell my Tokina 11-16mm lens due to the weight - I can't carry around heavier lenses anymore. I decided to compromise and purchased the Panasonic LX3 with a 24mm, 2.0 fast lens. The IQ is excellent - great in low light. It's less noisy than most p&s cameras today - it gets great results at ISO400. It also has a "dynamic b&w" mode that puts out some really fine b&w images. The only drawback is the zoom only goes to 60mm.

My main camera is my XTi, but I only have 2 lenses now - 28mm/f1.8 and 50mm/f1.4. I had been looking for a light weight longer zoom, but couldn't find one I liked. I had used the G9 to compensate as the lens goes to 210mm. However, I sold the G9 for a wider lens. We all make mistakes!

It occurred to me that if I hadn't sold the G9, it would have worked okay. So I bought another one for exactly the same price I sold mine for so I didn't lose any money. The G9 cameras new are selling for $600 now if you can find one! A p&s never takes you where a dslr will with the IQ, etc., but for me it has to work.

I enjoy using the LX3 and G9 - until I use the XTi. Then I begin longing for those beautiful "L" lenses I used to have!

Here are 2 test "snapshots" I got this afternoon with the LX3 - and one last shot from the G9

All are straight out of camera - no pp.

Liz

24mm



60mm



G9 at 75mm

[Abiciriderback]

Those are great quality images glad that is working out for you. I love the Tokina 11-16 takes a little to get use to but super sharp images couldn't be happier.
Thanks again Liz

Ray Still

[another view]

Ha! Excellent choice, I bought an LX3 about a month ago. I really loved my Coolpix 5000 and there hadn't been a lot of compacts since I bought it ('02) that really seemed that interesting to me. Spending more time with it over the summer made me realize just how far digital cameras had come in the past six years (in terms of image quality), and at the same time as I was coming to that conclusion the LX3 started to ship. This one doesn't have a small fisheye lens attachment or swivel LCD screen like the Coolpix, but does have that 24mm f2.0 Leica lens and can shoot in 16:9 format. It's just cool. Both of these I see as "shooter's" cameras. Probably not for the masses, but they are good tools for serious photographers.

Like you I've decided a compact can't always give you the same results as a DSLR, but the difference between them is getting a lot closer. And any camera you have with you is always better than one you don't use!

[Liz]

Those are great quality images glad that is working out for you. I love the Tokina 11-16 takes a little to get use to but super sharp images couldn't be happier.
Thanks again Liz

Ray Still

Thanks Ray!

I'm glad you're happy with the Tokina. I found this lens to be one of my favorites - right up there with the Canon "L" lenses. The color blew me away. I have to agree about taking awhile to get used to it. Just shooting with an ultra wide angle was a learning curve for me.

BTW - just in case anyone hasn't figured it out yet - Ray bought my Tokina 11-16 lens. See, the classifieds here do work!

Liz

[Photo-John]

Nice samples, Liz - especially those two cameras are the same resolution. I wish you had samples of the exact same scene, taken with the same settings, on a tripod. The Canon image is noticeably lighter - especially in the highlights. There's no way for me to know whether it's a dynamic range issue or if it's just the exposure. To my eye, the Panasonic images look much better. But like I said, it could just be that they're a bit darker and have more highlight details.

Looking forward to your LX3 review!

[Canuck935]

I've been drooling over the LX3 since it was announced. I've been torn between that and the G10. I've seen some LX3 reviews already that are quite favorable, but haven't seen and G10 reviews yet. Plus I don't know if I want to put my DSLR out of some work. I mean I spent so much money on the DSLR it would be a shame to not use it all the time. Anyways, it's nice to see these examples and read about peoples experiences and satisfaction with the LX3. Thanks for sharing!

[Liz]

Nice samples, Liz - especially those two cameras are the same resolution. I wish you had samples of the exact same scene, taken with the same settings, on a tripod. The Canon image is noticeably lighter - especially in the highlights. There's no way for me to know whether it's a dynamic range issue or if it's just the exposure. To my eye, the Panasonic images look much better. But like I said, it could just be that they're a bit darker and have more highlight details.

Looking forward to your LX3 review!

John,

From my personal experience with the G9 previously and having tried the G10, and checking out LOTS of images from these two camera, it's my opinion that both of these cameras have a problem (if you wish to call it that) with over-exposing. I had to be very careful with the "old" G9 when shooting in higher contrast situations, or when the sun was shining. The copy of the G10 I purchased over-exposed every shot. I've seen many user reviews that state you "have" to lower the exposure on most shots. However, the G10 has other issues - many reviewers say there is way too much noise in images shot over ISO80. The G10 has a great new feature - an EC dial so you don't have to go into the menu to change the exposure. I do wonder if that's why they put it there because the G9 and G10 has a tendency to over-expose. Everyone seems to love that feature!

Regarding the LX3, user and other reviews comparing the LX3 to the G10 mostly agree that the DR is better on the LX3 - and that the IQ is slightly better on the G10 at ISO80 - but anything over ISO80, the LX3 wins (less noise and cleaner image with more detail due to less NR).

I love the LX3. The 24mm lens with a fast aperture is awesome.

Also - I don't do RAW. Reviews have said that you have to use PT lens or other software because of "extreme" distortion (barreling) at 24mm. However, it is also stated that whatever in-camera edit that Panasonic does, there is very little distortion problem with jpeg. You can see that in the 24mm image above.

Also - the LX3 has the option of 16:9 format - which was used in both the above LX3 shots.

[another view]

I've been torn between that and the G10.

I'm surprised by all the comparisons between the LX3 and the G10, which is a totally different camera. Not picking on you; I've seen it a bunch of places. The G10 seems to me to be a good all-around camera; maybe something a serious photographer would have either instead of a DSLR or as something for a pro to bring on vacation while taking a break from carrying the DSLR and a bunch of lenses. The LX3 is more of a specialty camera; fairly close in concept to a rangefinder. The 60mm long end of the zoom I thought would be a negative for a lot of people, but the 24mm f2 means a lot more to me than any more focal length on the long end.

RAW works really well, but SilkyPix is a quirky little program. I bought the e-book but haven't spent a whole lot of time reading it. At 24mm, there is a fair amount of barrel distortion but it's easily corrected in SP. The main complaint I have is that the free version of SP is so limited that there's no browser. I review the images on the LCD in the camera, then pick the file to open on the Laptop. This version of SP doesn't even work with jpegs from another camera. It is a "special edition" of SP 3.0 and I guess a 4.0 is in beta testing. I would imagine before long that LX3 files will be recognized by Photoshop, etc.

[Canuck935]

You have a good point, but they do overlap in many area's, which is one reason they are often compared. For me, they both offer wide angle lenses, manual control, and raw. Right now the LX3 is more appealing because it's lens is wider and faster, it has a physically larger sensor, and fewer pixels on that sensor. The 14mp on the G10 seriously worries me, though if it produces decent enough results, it may be worth it to sacrifice the wider and faster lens for the G10 which covers a greater focal range.

[Sebastian]

From the front page: http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm

[Liz]

From the front page: http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm

Thanks Seb

I had read this review previously. I think it's a good review, except for one aspect that all the other reviews I've read disagree. It's regarding the noise in higher ISO settings. He indicates all 3 cameras (and moreso the LX3 if I read it correctly) have problems with high noise at anything over ISO80. The other reviews state that the LX3 is probably the best p&s for less noise in higher ISO's - up to and including 400. This is one of the aspects that the LX3 is noted for - the clean images at higher ISO's. This is partly due to the fact that they also use less NR.

At any rate, it's the real life image that is the bottom line.

Liz

[Sebastian]

Liz,

When you look at all the other P&S, yes the LX3 is better in that it's less bad. It only takes downloading some of the samples to see that what DSLR users are used to when it comes to "clean" is something completely different than what P&S users call "clean." The LX3 is relatively good, but it's still, ultimately pretty bad in high ISOs. Most reviews call anything above 400 useless. Still, I'm not knocking the camera. To the contrary, I'm buying one as soon as I can afford it. But I won't dilute myself regarding its capabilities, I'm buying it for the lens, the AF consistency and the fact that I really want to reward Panasonic for bucking the megapixel trend. They took a risk and did the right thing, they made a compact for photographers.

[Liz]

Liz,

When you look at all othe P&S, yes the LX3 is better in that it's less bad. It only takes downloading some of the samples to see that what DSLR users are used to when it comes to "clean" is something completely different than what P&S users call "clean." The LX3 is relatively good, but it's still, ultimately pretty bad in high ISOs. Most reviews call anything above 400 useless. Still, I'm not knocking the camera. To the contrary, I'm buying one as soon as I can afford it. But I won't dilute myself regarding its capabilities, I'm buying it for the lens, the AF consistency and the fact that I really want to reward Panasonic for bucking the megapixel trend. They took a risk and did the right thing, they made a compact for photographers.

Well stated. And I agree 100% - I'm perfectly happy with the LX3 and even the G9 until I use my XTi - WOW! No comparison even with a less expensive 50mm lens. It always boggles my mind when I read where some photographers can compare their G10 and/or LX3 to a 5D or any dslr for that matter and say the p&s gets better IQ. I don't know how any photographer that knows anything could even begin to compare the IQ.

Thanks again for your input and comments.

Liz

[Sebastian]

Thanks again for your input and comments.

Liz

My pleasure. :thumbsup:

[Photo-John]

I really want to reward Panasonic for bucking the megapixel trend. They took a risk and did the right thing, they made a compact for photographers.

Very good. I agree 100%. I thought the resolution and image quality balance on the Canon SD950 IS and G10 were both excellent and saw no reason for an increase in pixel count. I wish Canon had left the resolution alone on the G10 and put applied their efforts towards DSLR-level speed and reduced noise. More resolution really wasn't necessary. At least I don't think it was.