LX7 - does its IQ compete with e.g. Sony RX100?

Started Apr 6, 2013 | Discussions thread
Chris62
Regular MemberPosts: 232Gear list
Like?
Re: LX7 - does its IQ compete with e.g. Sony RX100?
In reply to Mikedigi, Apr 8, 2013

Mikedigi wrote:

Nevada Landscapes wrote:

I have the RX100 and the LX7, and most of the time I use the Rx100 as it seems to have better picture IQ (at least for my samples).  I also prefer the small size of the Rx100 in its fitted case or without the case in my cargo pocket.  I do miss the wider lens on the LX7 over the Sony.  I also think the video on the LX7 may be a tad better too.  They are both great cameras, so just use the one you have.  When I want the best quality picture, I use my full-frame Nikon.  The rest of the time, I don't want to carry it around, and the IQ of either camera is good enough for casual shooting.

Thanks, an interesting contribution.

A lot of this thread is about lens brightness but I am more interested in IQ.

Mostly, big landscape is my problem with IQ. My FZ200 has f2.8 constant out to 600 mm EFL, but that does not help me with a big landscape at 100 ISO and say 35 mm EFL .

It would be good if someone with the LX7 and RX100 took a tripod to a big landscape with a mixture of bright and drab areas and did a careful tripod shoot with both cameras, using all the sensible precautions, like identical EFL/framing, perfectly steady light, no wind, IS off, 10 sec timer, shaded camera, identical exposures, no earthquakes, settings optimized in previous tests, hamster detection switched off, etc, etc.

I don't mean "Do that for me" . . . If I were going to spend that much money on two enthusiast cameras, I would be unable to resist the temptation . . . 

Mike

Your way of thinkong can be wrong.

Camera is not only sensor size and pixel count you know?

Some egzamples:

Belo picture tha I could not take by RX100.

Why? because I couldn't go back ang RX100's 28 mm is not enough to take the tree in whole:

Look that LX7 has multiaspect so for 16:9 proportion it is 21 mm egv.  !!!!

http://cdn3.asteroid.pl/c14/a.garnek.pl/025/232/25232633_800.0.jpg

Second example is for perspective:

Using 21 mm wide we can get impression of distance much better than drom 28 mm:

http://cdn4.asteroid.pl/c18/a.garnek.pl/025/232/25232637_800.0.jpg

For comparison of resolution I did test on such scene:

http://cdn1.asteroid.pl/c4/a.garnek.pl/025/232/25232643_800.0.jpg

Tis is from LX7.

Believe me or not It is better than I achieved from  my APS_C camera NX10 + the best panacake in system 30mm/F2 with aperture F4 and F5.6.

In the center the  pictures are comparable but out of the center LX7 is sharper!!!

( I used F2,8)

The noise is not any issue in such conditions.

Focus on sharp lens ACROSS THE FRAMhE, sensor dynamic range - the rest depends on you!

About comparisons you can also read this:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_LX7/

Lokk that LX7 can use filters cobnvereters, flashes.

RX100 is closed design.

Take also into the cosideration that in RX100's price you can buy Samsung NX1000 APS_C camera 20 MP with sensor as good as 16 MP from Sony with great  panacakes.

And one remark - when we need big DOF fast and reliable AF speed and macro function - LX7 wins in every aspect.

Everybody shuold thin for himself not listen to marketing.

The photographer knows what is better for him - amateur propably not.

So befor buying the camera it is good to recognise what is better for own purposes.

LX7 is good for many. For portraits notthe best  but RX100 either not as seen in Camera Labs review.

I prefer LX7 + APS-C camera for portraits to operate by DOF.

Have a good choise.

 Chris62's gear list:Chris62's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Samsung NX10 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OIS Samsung NX 50-200mm F4-5.6 OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow