tigen: I think the review doesn't spend enough time looking at image quality. It's mostly limited to a couple of paragraphs. Actual images compared to its peers don't seem to hold up as much as the review indicates.
Yes I agree with sjogro, low light pictures look awful. Even ISO 1600 in pushing it. A GM1 with a Pana 20mm 1.7 can give you super clear and sharp pictures at1.7, the LX100 does not.
I returned this inferior camera. The EVF wheel was stuck not giving adjustment until I rocked it by force. The jpegs are pathetic, not in focus. I took 400 pictures and less than 5 were sharp. And I have not one complain of my other 40 cameras including RX100, RX100III, Fuji X100, D700, D7000, D40, Coolpix A, GR, E-PL7, PL5, PM2, Stylus 1, GM1, etc., not 1 complain. I have heard of a bad batch in the forums, but I just never saw a more pathetic camera.
OK I am not a pro, but I have taken 90,000 pictures and only the LX100 was OOF jpegs OOC. Many have also complained.
Can't you at least make the flash bounce with the finger? Does one have to blind all?
Some call it a phablet, or too large. Here is the real truth:
1) IF the phone is OFF, then it IS too large. Painfully large.
2) If the iPhone 6+ is ON, then it is simply gorgeous. Amazing screen changes into a Retina iPad Air quality (much better than the Retina Mini). Everybody that sees a picture or a movie gasps with a wow!
3) After using the 6+ a few hours, the 5S looks like a toy for a 4 year old. The 6 looks balanced, but by then you are aware that losing the + is making you lose the whole point of the product.
Bottom line: if you play with it 2 hours in the Apple Store, you will buy it or suffer the depression of compromising with the 6.
goblover: Is it just me, or the Canon G7x sample was motion blurred? And the LX100? If you see the top left and bottom right, the red water colour paint, and colour circle on the bottom left, the letters are blurred. The circle also not a full circle, a bit distorted. I'm not the expert, maybe DP Reviewers can help clarify why is that?
Yeah looks like recent cameras are on a moving tripod
Flashback: Not sure what is going on here?
The in-focus hair is very sharp. Impressive for iso 1600, but the out of focus hair is very mushy.
Looks like confused selective sharpening or maybe JPG compression artefacts.
But overall, bodes well for indoor photography without flash.
I think these fast zoom lenses are touchy when open
Skin tones like dead chicken
tkbslc: I honestly don't get why everyone is so disappointed. I think you all either had absolutely unrealistic expectations or you just like to complain. Well it's probably both, isn't it?
You put a Panasonic 20mm 1.7 on an Olympus PM2 and you get clean ISO 1100 with IOS, Oly jpeg quality, great colors. That 20mm has perfect optical quality. Perfect, like a $ 7000 Leica lens. Less money, same size. Just saying, sometimes the older cameras are even better.
photo perzon: For the same money and weight and size, the APS-C Fuji X-A1 and the perfect 27mm pancake produce immaculate samples.
GR does come to mind its jpg reds are orangebut the Nikon A is now $ 600 with perfect jpegsand the nikon has a tiny hot shoe bouncerthe X-A1 is the same size as LX100 and you can later don some glass on it like a 35mm 1.4 with optical perfectionX-A1 unlike X-M1 has perfect RAWS and perfect skin tonesLX100 jpeg for skin tones still not there
Let me put it this way. The X-A1 and the 27mm, if you walk into a Leica store and ask for the same IQ, it is $ 14,000. The LX100 IQ would be laughted out of the store. The LX100 is an excellent Swiss Army knife, does it all, so does the Sony RX100iii at half the weight.
For the same money and weight and size, the APS-C Fuji X-A1 and the perfect 27mm pancake produce immaculate samples.
More Panasonic jpeg skin colors?
The Panasonic LX100 is gonna have to fight the Fujis in order to play at the same IQ. Fuji colors, skin tones, are immaculate. So far Pana jpegs have been at best "not as bad as before."
So which is the smallest flash I can put on the LX100
Plenty of time to change the G7X to bounce that flash like Sony and Panasonic and Fuji do. To not doing shows a disconnected leadership.
Here Sony presents 3 different cameras, including the svelte, 15% thinner, 20% less weight RX100, the customizable with external hi def EVF and external bounce flash ii, and the incredible built in EVF bright lensed iii, and because of a quiet knob they are all grouped as wanting. Enter the Canon with no EVF, no bounce, the heaviest fo all the girls, a battery straight from 1985 with 200 pictures, and wow what a miracle.
Now Panasonic needs a small bounce flash, like Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Fuji have. The Panasonic bouncers are almost as large as the camera.
photo nuts: Was all excited about the LX100 until I read this little blip:
"The original version of this article stated that the LX100 has a touchscreen, which is not the case. We are very sorry for any confusion caused." - http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100
So, out of the 3 competing cameras, Sony RX100 III vs Panasonic LX100 vs Canon G7X, only the G7X has a touchscreen which is very important for changing AF in a small format camera.
I've seen some bad G7X samples around
Sony RX100 has EVF. It has bounce flash. Canon has neither.