Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Hands-on Preview: Digital Photography Review

First impressions and summary

On first impressions the LX7 is a very attractive update to the LX5, and with its fast lens and expanded control set, rather more engaging to shoot with than its predecessor. The dedicated aperture ring means that it's probably best-suited to enthusiast photographers who want to shoot in aperture priority or manual exposure modes to make best use of the depth of field control offered by the lens. The addition of a physical control point for the ND filter also makes shooting at maximum aperture in bright light much more convenient - again helping you to exploit the camera's creative potential.

Our initial feeling is that the LX7 also seems rather faster and more responsive than the LX5 did. Focusing and continuous shooting are distinctly improved, as are file writing and buffering, meaning you can rattle off a number of shots in quick succession without the camera having to pause for thought. The zoom controls on the cameras we've used so far have been a little sluggish though.

Of course the big question (as always) is whether the image quality stands up to scrutiny, given the ambitiously-fast lens and brand new sensor. We're looking forward to putting the LX7 though our studio tests for a full review, but in the meantime can offer a snapshot of its capabilities with a preview samples gallery of real-world shots.

Preview Samples Gallery

There are 33 images in the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 preview samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 preview samples gallery

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 preview samples - Posted 18th July 2012

Comments

Total comments: 177

I wish a 1 inch sensor with that fast lens on next model. It would be better than sony RX1. Panasonic, please hear me. :)

2 upvotes

I have an LX3 that needs repairing and I could buy the LX7 for around £120 more than the cost of the repairs. I prefer the colours I get from my LX3 to the sample images here. Would people advise getting the LX3 repaired or buying a new LX7?

0 upvotes

Please don't fall for the LX-7....Get a good used LX-5, for half the price on Amazon and be happy! I am getting excellent mileage from my LX-5 and have no regrets! I have seen some for $250.00 used, in excellent condition....Save your money, give some needy family your LX-3 and get a good used LX-5. The factory hasn't even cooled off since finishing with the LX-5, and the cosmetics of the LX-7 are window dressing at best! If you can't stand to part with it, make a museum piece of it on the mantle, just for remembrance sake!

0 upvotes

I own one LX5. I love the camera + electronic viewfinder & adapter ring + filters that I bought. I was so happy to see the LX7 appear, then I disenchanted when I learned that other than the battery and the pixel count, they both had nothing else in common that could be shared. I'm talking about serious accessories such as the electronic viewfinder and the filter size adapters, which I firmly believe should be be standardized for the LX family.
I feel a bit frustrated, wouldn't you?

2 upvotes

Sure my friend! it's a shame that they can't share accesories between them! TOO BAD PANASONIC!

1 upvote

I almost went onto Apoplexy when I heard that there was an LX-7, and when I seen the write-up, I was glad that there were no real differences! It was like going from "Bacon and Eggs, to Eggs with Bacon"...C'mon Panasonic! Get your act together! At least make a cantilever rear finder screen and a APS or at least a 4/3rds sensor! ....Just remember, with every face lift, the face remains the same but only the same!

0 upvotes

Hope to have second preview sample gallery with more professional way, F8 need to be avoid...

Dpreview you are the most famous website among the rest...

Please take good care of all previews & reviews....

Just IMHO...

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Is it me, or do all of the sample images look dull?
Colors seem washed out, drab.

0 upvotes

Washed out? No, but they are likely OOC JPEGs with a flat default tone curve. I'm interested in this camera, so I downloaded tons of samples from the various reviews, and IQ is impressive. The lens and sensor give super crisp images and at base or low ISO, images are remarkably clean.

0 upvotes

I currently own a Panasonic GH2, after having owned in the past an Oly C7070 and Oly E-510.

Yes, Panasonic colors are flat compared to Olympus. However, don't let that stop you from buying this camera. I'm sure you will be able to get nice images out of it. It will be just be more work in many (not all) situations.

I read somewhere that Panasonic colors are more "realistic" than Olympus colors according to color charts, etc. Maybe so, but Olympus colors are nicer! If you can expose correctly with an Olympus camera, the colors and jpeg engine are a serious reason to buy. That's been my experience, anyway.

0 upvotes

Timmbits - most new cameras need a +1 in saturation/contrast/sharpness. I'm always curious why the 'default' settings for cameras are usually crap?! and yes weeks later i'm back to check out the LX7 because i was holding out for the XZ-2 prognosis. Good, not great. So now it's a toss up between this, Nikon P7700 and Fujifilm X whatever..i'll just call it the Austin Powers camera..

0 upvotes

Like most dpreview samples, the images were taken in bad light. They have a thing for "high noon."

0 upvotes

I Love the manual controls, looks, grip, and most everything about this camera, Except the image quality!!! Looking at the samples, there seems to be a striking dullness, and a blueish/green cast to nearly every image, or perhaps a lack of contrast...what is the deal with that...default settings for the jpegs? I wish Pany would learn from Olympus or copy the jpeg engine that Oly has developed for the PEN line. This could be a fantastic camera for a lot of enthuiasts if they could just get the software right!

0 upvotes

sounds nice, hopefully Oly´snew XZ series won´t be carbon paper copy of this ...

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

0 upvotes

I love the concept of this camera, keeping the pixel count low, the super fast lens, apparently great build quality and lots of manual control. However, the package only works if keeping the pixel count down really does deliver on image quality. A close look at the face of the guy in sample P1000409 seems to show a lot of noise for ISO160. Hope this is just a pre-production issue cos this could be my next camera if the full review looks good.

0 upvotes

I guess the MOS sensor was Pano's solution to the terrible vertical striping from the LX5's CCD (in Video mode). I had held out hope that a firmware update might fix the problem eventually. Guess that's a pipe dream now. Damn. Anyone heard different?

0 upvotes

Why can't just Panasonic -or for that matter other makers -make TRUE multi aspect sensor i.e words SQUARE ! After all we're just talking about extra 2mm (7,44x7,44) This would really allow to fully utilize the whole area of the sensor in 1:1 to 16:9 aspect. As a additional benefit You could switch to take photos in either landscape or portait mode without changing the physical position of the camera- just appropiate switch would do. This would be really something with which they could differentiate these types of cameras from DSLR where due to their use of pentaprism and the size of the sensor this kind of thing is impossible to do!

1 upvote

A square sensor would mean a large amount of unused sensor or much larger lenses. Draw it on paper and it becomes obvious why...

0 upvotes

So far reviews have tended to focus on the noise levels at the same ISO levels, but with this camera trading chip size for a faster max aperture it would be great to see comparisons showing the recent crop of enthusiast cameras simply doing their best in the same lighting conditions. It would make an intriguing group review to see how the various strategies compare! DPReview .. any chance of a low light shoot out between the following:

Panasonic LX7
Olympus XZ-1
Canon Powershot S100
FujiFilm X10
Sony Cybershot RX100

17 upvotes

THIS is an excellent point !

It is extremely rare to see a review where a same scene is shot under the same light by letting the camera chose the ISO, the aperture and the shutter speed. Or just by blocking the shutter speed to insure no blur at all, the other parameters being chosen to have a well balanced image.

It is the unique method to compare different cameras in real life.

OK, it seems to be too "point and shot" for an expert camera but in that case you can take and see the avantage of the F1.4.
If you can stay in ISO100-150 when you have to go to ISO400 with another camera, even if the second have better high ISO performance, can show some surprising results...

8 upvotes

We seem to be getting a few likes here. How about it Barney Britton ... could this be included? I think you are going to have a high end (raw shooting?) review in the autumn if I remember what I read in another thread.

Everyone please keep hitting "LIKE" if you would like to see DPReview to do a comparison of these cameras on the same lighting conditions.

11 upvotes

Indeed. Connected myseilf with one more positive vote.
This is what am I looking for.

1 upvote

It looks like "expertreviews" set the ball rolling with this comparison against the Sony Nex-F3 and the Panasonic GF5. With its wider aperture the LX7 shoots at ISO800 whilst the others are at ISO3200. The results speak for themselves.

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/gallery/reviews/1294294/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx7/173770

1 upvote

All I want is a compact I can use to shoot bands in low light where the lighting looks good and the people don't blur. I would love to see a review of this kind!

1 upvote

All for it. Include neon lights. The new sensors readily pick up reflected neon lights where the eye sees none.

JPEG's plenty for me.

0 upvotes

I bought my LX-5 last year. I was initially going for the Canon S-100 on account of the F2 aperture, but I'm a guy with small brains and big hands, and I need an exterior flash mount for my studio shots. I don't shoot under extreme weather conditions and I don't shoot sports. Most of my work is corporate, baby pictures & model's portfolios.
Now, if a guy like Charlie Waite feels at home with the LX-5 (see his youtube videos with LX-5) Imagine....me.
I'd like to take a look at the new LX-7.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

Producing only a crop of an already small 1/1.7, I feel disappointed, that in an age when we are making sensors larger, tehy are getting closer to the cheap 1/2 size than to some format small format sensors.
For this reason, Samsung's EX2F has an "equivalent" F range that is better on the wide end and almost comparable on the tele end.
But the king here is Sony's RX100.

2 upvotes

Judging a camera on its sensor size is like judging a car on its engine displacement.

0 upvotes

I agree with MDGColorado. Until you shoot with the RX100, you might want to hold off on calling it king. Personally, I loved the RX100 for video. For photography, the slow max aperture at the telephoto end, the lack of a grip, and viewfinder made it not as nice to shoot with as the Ricoh GRD, Fuji X10, and Oly XZ1.

The LX7 has caught my eye for sure. Raw IQ looks fantastic, the lens seems extremely sharp and starts at 24mm, and for video, it has 1080p60, and some ever higher frame rates at 720p.

2 upvotes

Guys this is a Preview not a full review, so lets give it some time and wait for the complete review to make any true conclusions.

0 upvotes

I did not see any noticeable noise in the samples provided in this article.

0 upvotes

Even #24, at ISO 6400? Come on... you don't even have to zoom in, it is visible in the 800x600 or so screenshot. But still better than I expected for the tiny (part of the) sensor.

0 upvotes

i want to see image-distorsion graph.
In my LX3 the image-distorsion at 24mm is very high.

0 upvotes

think people are already doing their best.

these non-interchangeable-lens mirrorless cameras have a good advantage over ILCs and DSLRs in that more optimal design can be used because the lens-sensor are hard wired and considered as a whole.

if you don't like it, you can either choose narrower zoom range one or you can use software to correct it.

1 upvote

@yabokkie: forgive me for disagreeing, but it seems evident that these models are designed to not cannibalize their higher-profit models, which is becoming a major design criteria.
As long as they do this, people will be compaining.
Why? Perhaps because some people are not buying a micro 4/3 and waiting for something in this format, but with better features. Sony doesn't have anything in the viscinity of the size of a u4/3, so they can offer a camera this size with a 1" sensor (RX100).
Panasonic & Olympus just don't get it do they?
Many see the u4/3 just about as bulky as a small DSLR and don't see the point of paying $1k for an interchangeable lens camera with a smaller-than-dslr sensor.
Offer customer choice = gain market share.
Restrict choice and customers WILL go tot he competition.
It's time for manufacturers to stop acting like they are the only game in town.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting

2 upvotes

Maybe you confuse lens distortion with perspective distortion?
The LX3 is quite good at 24mm as long as you do not tilt the camera.
Tilting will distort the image of any lens - it is an optical law that can only be corrected in post-processing or prevented with a tilt-shift lens.

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Thumbwheel:

I hope they have improved it. I have had mine replaced 2 times. Probably not well sealed against dirt. Eventually it stops responding to turning. Extended warranty well worth it.

I have also had some issues about inadvertently pressing it while turning it.

0 upvotes

CONVERSION LENS ADAPTER.
I chose the LX-5 last year for the lens and the adapter, because I think a polirizer is a must in so many cases. I hope the new LX-7 has this option also, without obstructing the aperture ring.
I used this camera exclusively in Peru and the adapter also served me well to protect the lens also - yes it makes the camera seem slightly larger, but the ring does not extend beyond the limit of the lens anyway. I love this feature, so please tell me it remains...

0 upvotes

Panasonic Global shows an adapter & some 37mm filters:
http://www.panasonic.net/avc/lumix/compact/lx7/optional_accessories.html

0 upvotes

Brace up for bad news: Yes, they have those items for the the LX7, and the electronic viewfinder too. Both items NOT compatible with the LX5.
I also own a LX5.
I believe that they should be standardized for the LX family.

0 upvotes

If I missed them please tell me, where are the shots with the ND filters? And the ones of the nano coating to stop flair? Thanks

0 upvotes

quite clean and good looking samples for a 1/1.63" CMOS... However, my 7-yr old A620 (7Mp, 1/1.7" CCD, 300gr. w/ 4xAAs) seems actually cleaner at base ISO.

Can't blame Panasonic for not reading Sony's roadmap :-)... IMHO building a smaller sensor than 10-yr old P&S's and Nokia's phone --to make the lens feel faster? (since bokeh is minimal)-- into a premium camera seems wrong. In the age of RX100 and NEX, or 179E APS-C mirrorless (NX100), LX7 will likely be blip quickly replaced by a worthier LX9.

Premium P&S should distinguish themselves from the crowd, from phones, and also size/price-wise compete well against the smaller mirrorless. Unclear for LX7.

0 upvotes

I've had all off the LX cameras, love them, but this time I'm going to go with a larger sensor small camera where I can have some DOF control.

1 upvote

"enthusiast photographers who want to shoot in aperture priority or manual exposure modes to make best use of the depth of field control offered by the lens." ... yet the spec which show the equivalent 35 mm f/stops vis a vis depth of field, show that one won't have much control of DOF. And the sample photos show NO sample taken wide and close, Wide Open to disprove this. Also there is not portrait at the very longest end of the lens, wide open to show us fall off with that combination ...

0 upvotes

The LX3 is the best small camera -film or digital - that I have ever owned and that includes comparing it to a Leica IIIg, so I will be reluctant to go with an LX7...but that Summicron lens will probably piush me over the edge. There may not seem to be a big difference between 28mm equiv. and 24mm but for my shooting there is. Add to that neutral density filters and the speed of the lens - well, I guess I'm going to give it a try. For my money, lenses primarily make Panasonic the choice for digital work.

0 upvotes

definetly Pana know more about cameras and lenses than Leica but they are just another Japanese maker.

with a cheap Leica Summicron mark I hope the price will drop quickly.

0 upvotes

I´m not impressed with the samples. My old Canon S95 can do better. I´m concerned about the fact that most companies are trading image quality in their photocameras for more speed and FullHD video recording. I don´t care if the new sensor can shoot 11fps continuosly or FullHD video, I want to take good photos, not muddy CMOS pics. I would pick up a RAW-capable compact with slow CCD sensor that only shoots 1-2fps and basic video every time about these new cameras with speeeeedy sensors. For FullHD video I still take my camcorder which has external mic option and batteries with more power for longer scene takes, not only a small photocamera battery that will run out of power after around 20 minutes of video.

5 upvotes

Shot 40 minutes of concert video the other day with an lx5, which used half the battery. Would have been asked to stop if I had a camcorder.

0 upvotes

I have the LX-5. I can't tell from the above whether the LX-7 has a built in lens cap or not, but the LX-5 infuriates me!! I am fed up with having to remove cap and press any button. Can't put a lens protecting filter on due to protruding lens. Yeah, I know there's a spring loaded thingy but not in my town.

I like the pictures, but I'll never buy another one. Bad one, Panasonic.

0 upvotes

Huh ... you can just order one of those spring lens caps?! What's the big deal. The deal is thought that you can't use it with the filter adapter tube ... which I often leave on as a lens shade ... to which you can add a real 52 mm shade if needed

0 upvotes

Exactly! Yes, I know about the spring cap, that's what I just said, but it's still a nuisance. Canon does an auto retract lens cover with the G9 series, why can't Panasonic think of something clever?

OR, give us a thread on the inside edge around the lens and a screw-in tube, to which I can thread a filter. I would rather have a thicker camera than that stupid dangling lens cap.

OK, I've just solved it myself - I've got an old tube which I can attach with strong double sided tape (carefully!). I'll give it a try.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Have a look at this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj9zisOPxxc

0 upvotes

£449 ?
The webmaster may be wrong on typing.??

Very expensive... I hope the price will come down soon.

0 upvotes

Looking at the fork/knife/spoon picture, I must say I'm not that impressed at all. The image looks very noise and the ISO is only 400. It doesn't look like it retained a lot of detail either. The blue flower shot (ISO 3200) looks real bad as well. But, that's my opinion.

1 upvote

Having an LX5 to complement my Nikon D300 "brick" I wish Panasonic had used this opportunity to add:

Remote control
Bulb setting

Otherwise, seems a reasonable upgrade. I use my LX5 almost exclusively in 'A' mode, shooting RAW so never use the "gimmicks".

3 upvotes

Agree, having neither IR nor wired remote option is pretty lame.

0 upvotes

Why is Panasonic going in the wrong direction with sensor size? They should be building larger sensors into their high end compact cameras, not smaller ones.

3 upvotes

For me it is the right direction looking at the equivalent apertures they did a great job.
I hope the new MOS sensor holds up!

1 upvote

Sensor size is irrelevant unless you consider it as a part of optical system as whole. Camera's performance ultimately boils down to how much light it can gather. For the size of this particular camera I'd say it does pretty well in that regard. There's no guarantee that increasing the sensor size would result in better overall light gathering for the package of same size.

3 upvotes

Remember its not the size that matters :)

0 upvotes

Sensor size and construction of the sensor , affects the image quality when in JPEG and sometimes RAW. Thus ive seen so far that the LX7 is exibiting lots of JPEG artifacts and noise even in low ISO compared to its little brother the LX5. But this is just the start im sure there will be fixtures. Compare the LX7 to the FZ150 images at ISO 100 through 800 the FZ150 takes it!!!

0 upvotes

The purpose of camera image samples is to show the quality of the sensor and the lens. It is not for showing off the photographer's zany artistic skills. Most of these samples are not very useful.

2 upvotes

You must like to photograph test charts.

0 upvotes

Well, that's the first time I (or probably anyone) has been called 'zany' since the early 90s, but this gallery is actually pretty conventional, in intent at least.

Portraits, landscapes, low-contrast, high-contrast, wide-open, stopped down, macro/infinity focus...

1 upvote

I completely agree with maxnimo! I have to search hard to find one or two photos which would be more "typical" samples, showing me content which reflects the camera's capabilities. No two photographers have the same style, so don't try to have a style with sample photos. A reviewer should also be aware that for every one constructive criticism, ten more were unsaid.

0 upvotes

In fact, the perfect reviewer of an artistic tool would be an android that can time travel from the future in order to write said review of unreleased product.

0 upvotes

Barney, those shots are no good. They are awful. The ones with the ships, the flat looking building, even the scalpless portrait was no good. They would end up at the bottom half of a photo challenge.

You need to up your game.

0 upvotes

I am entitled to better pictures.

0 upvotes

As long as you're all having fun, that's the important thing.

2 upvotes

Ha ha -- well played, Barney. :)

0 upvotes

Uuurgh - you get used to it. Almost a decade of writing and putting pictures on the internet, there's nothing (and no-one) new under the sun.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Lol, I'm amused that anyone would consider any of these photos "zany" and somehow find them upsetting. Goes to show you why 99.9% of the photos out there are banal to the extreme. Actually, I was impressed with the quality of many of these. A definite step above the usual samples gallery. Frankly, I'm much more inclined to buy a camera when I see the magic a talented photographer can create with it. If you're just interested in pixel peeping wait for the studio shots.

1 upvote

Panasonic Lumix did well on this camera, and the choice of 10 megapixels is good and enough, even the interchangeable lens Nikon one system as 10 megapixels

This way dynamic range and noise performance will be better and the difference in resolution from 10 to 12 megapixels is not significant

Well done Panasonic Lumix

4 upvotes

I've been waiting a year for this camera, but I'm a little dissapointed. 10 MP is not enough for me. Pictures seems good, not great. I think I'll wait to see the Olympus XZ-2.

0 upvotes

10MP is ok for this size of the sensor, higher resolution would be useless imho. The pictures are little noisy already.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

Exactly. Actually it could go with 8 mpix fine. Its still A4 print and most ppl really dont print at all. And viewed on regular screen? Full HD is 2 mpix. :D It will take ages until ppl will have 4K screens..

0 upvotes

I can't wait for 8K4K screens and projectors, plus universally available 36MP sensors. Then I can enjoy slide shows the way I did in 1960.

Seriously, hi-rez sensors prepare the way for large-screen displays. It's not all about prints or cropping.

And let's not go defeatist and gripe about time. The goal is worth a wait, if not a crusade.

3 upvotes

The sample images really won me over. I'm not in the market for this type of camera, but its exactly the type of camera I would recommend to friends who want better pictures and more control while talking them out of a dslr they don't need (shooting pictures of their kids and such). The problem with so many people that I know that buy into DSLR's and mirrorless is that although they like the images, they never have it with them. Even MFT cameras are a little big to carry around, this would be perfect for the casual shooter who wants more but less.

1 upvote

After viewing the sample images, I can see that the lens is very good. No chromatics and only a slight loss of sharpness near the edges. Seems to retain sharpness at wider apertures and at telezoom. As I recall, the LX5 lost sharpness when zoomed.

OTOH, shadow noise is higher than expected in available light shots at ISO 200 or less. To be honest, I don't mind some "grain". In fact I prefer them letting it show rather than trying to smudge the detail with aggressive noise reduction. It is a small sensor camera, so don't expect miracles.

Hopefully the street price is reasonable. This is another enthusiast compact in a crowded market and others are trying larger sensors.

0 upvotes

B&H has it for perorder for 499$.
I expect to pay 499€ in Europe but that would be ok for me as I expect to be able to use it for a couple of years.

0 upvotes

Panasonic will lose the opportunity to be at the forefront of compact and features an LX7 which is more like the LX5, are worrying about video and forget that picture is photo and video is video, think it's cool to shoot well, but expected more, pixel the range of 24 to 120mm zoom, 16MP least, a larger sensor "(13.2x8.8) ... suggestion ... I'll wait for LX9 ... hopefully not too long.

0 upvotes

in the age where sony rx100 exist along with phone cams with 1/1.2 sensors....
i am afraid...this lx7 along with other small sized sensors are just born to die..

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

I would not agree. it could be born to be cheap, or for a deep dive in price. we've seen too many Pana and Oly cameras of this kind.

the Leica brand makes it look really cheap. everyone knows those branded with Leica are fake ones.

0 upvotes

fake here means funny cameras with better quality than genuine. no one should buy a Leica or Zeiss as long as it's not a fake one.

0 upvotes

Looking forward to seeing Leica's price for their rebadged version, sure to follow soon, Photokina? And then having a little laugh...

4 upvotes

Leica provides top quality cameras because they are designed and made by Japanese manufacturers.

0 upvotes

Andrew Higgins:

A big reason the Leica versions are more expensive is that they come with really serious raw extraction software in Adobe Lightroom. Whereas Panasonic ships with the garbage Silkypix.

yabokkie:

Neither the S2 nor the M9 are made by Japanese manufacturers--though Fuji may supply the processor chip for both.

People buy Leica (or even the Leicaed Panasonics) for the really high quality lenses. The Canon G and S series lenses simply don't come close.

2 upvotes

> Neither the S2 nor the M9 are made by Japanese manufacturers

probably that's why they cannot deliver good quality.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

You have no idea what you're writing about asserting the the M9 and S2 are not made well.

That's besides the extraordinary lenses.

2 upvotes

whatever they simply mean garbage.

0 upvotes

yabokkie:

Nope, the M9 and its lenses and the S2 and its lenses are extraordinarily well made and beyond that the lenses are unmatched for optical quality.

So you still have no idea what you're writing about.

2 upvotes

Ah, another obvious troll. :D Let him troll, it wont change fact that in optical design Leica doesnt have competition. And camera doesnt need to have clean ISO 10.000 to be good (tho actually Leica M-M does have ISO 10.000 and its usable.. if you dont mind BW image :D).

I would rather have M9 and one of their 35mm f1.4 ASPH lens than any other camera.. (with exception of S2 ofc).

1 upvote

Mescalamba:

Right, but wanted to see y's attempt at a supported claim.

None to see.

0 upvotes

In the pilot boat shot ( P1000353 ) it looks to me that the light sources are in a state of orbs !!! " in the water, at the entrance door and on the ship in the background "

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

LX7 with a smaller sensor than LX5? Is this an upgrade? Not for me, thanks.
I expected a bigger sensor that provide better image with more resolution

5 upvotes

It is cmos, and next gen. Will be much better. Certainly so for video (no more sensor blooming).

0 upvotes

better do not judge on the sensor size but the lens-sensor system, the effective/equivalent f-number as listed in dpr's preview above. RX100 is the brightest, EX2F the second, and LX7 the third on the list. the sensor technology may make some difference and it's possible that LX7 will beat EX2F that we do not know yet.

0 upvotes

my calc is f/7.0-11.5 for LX-7, btw (a factor of 5 for f-number).

0 upvotes

Why in the world would you want to calculate equivalent F-number? Are they not constant?

0 upvotes

to compare depth of field or specificly the lack of it, that are sought after e.g. in portraits.

0 upvotes

Just to be a really annoying person...
There´s no such thing as "lack of depth of field" (I think maybe that phenomenon occurs when nothing is in focus, so it has the opposite meaning than what I think you wanted to say), it's just that these cameras produce a bigger/deeper one.
Anyway, i read that the lx7 can produce a depth of field similar to a mft with kit lens. Not that these are the best cameras in that sense, but still...Appart from that, there is really no point trying to compare a compact camera in terms of depth of field control or subject isolation, the important point is the brightness of the lens; big aperture = faster shutter speed & lower iso needed

0 upvotes

Oh, I see where your coming from...

But I agree with NGC, I think it's pointless comparing DOF on a compact camera, if you want shallow DOF for portrait wouldn't you normally go with a DSLR? I just don't see much logic in using "relative" F number to calculate DOF, as writing something like... f/7.0-11.5 for LX-7 while it says f/1.4-2.3 on the LX7 as it will confuse the crap out of many people (me included).

0 upvotes

for everything, every photographic result you get from an f-number, you can compare at level ground using the equivalent f-number.

the original f-number is pretty useless when the sensor sizes are different.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

But with equivalent f-numbers you would only be comparing the depth of field for cameras with different sensor sizes. You would still set the aperture and shutter speed according to the f-number on the lens, as with the iso speed and everything else, doesn't that make the equivalent f-number useless instead? Not to mention confusing.

I just don't get it ~.~

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

> only be comparing the depth of field

if you can calculate yourself, or you can compare photos from different cameras, you should be able to find out that "all the photographic output controlled by f-number are the same at the same equivalent f-number" , with no exception.

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I've owned the LX3 since its debut in 2008. I liked its ability to retain equivalent FOW irrespective of image ratio. LX series remain even now the only cameras to do this.

I missed out the LX5 as not being sufficiently improved for my personal needs. Despite the advances in the LX7, and I like the manual aperture ring in particular, and the much improved high ISO performance, love that 3200 ISO shot of the plate, I still don't see a major reason to upgrade, if that is the correct word to use.

Is the LX7 better? Of course it is. But sufficiently so to warrant my buying it? Probably not. Compared to its current peers, will it be worth your consideration? Definitely.

2 upvotes

there is no way to retain the same angle of view for different aspect ratios, only people are trying to make best approximations based on one thing or the other, for themselves only.

0 upvotes

I passed on the LX3 as it had a too-short zoom range, not that I need a long range. I've been stunned by the images from my LX5, using the lens tube with polarized filter or UV making a huge difference, and garnering some unsolicited "Wows" I'll probably skip the LX7 and wait for a higher MP count on the new MOS sensor for even greater detail.
The lens is what really makes the LX5 a stand-out IMO. I've seen images from others' comparables, SLRs and compacts and the LX5 for landscape and macro is clearly excelling, in MY experience.
If you don't have the LX3 or LX5, the LX7 is a good portable, again IMO, that produces surprising indoor and outdoor images for a reasonable price - especially when well discounted! (Keep your eye on Amazon - I snapped mine up when they did the $100 off for one day in 2011 - financed the lens tube and B&W filters). Enjoy!

1 upvote

The spec list that accompanies the preview appears to be a do-over of one for the LX3 or some other camera. It says the LX7 shoots video in AVCHD Lite, which was a 1280x720 60p format. It also indicates no time lapse function, whereas the preview narrative suggests that the LX7 offers that feature. If there is a time lapse, it will be curious to know whether it captures as video, or as a series of still shots, and whether the shutter time can be set to 30 seconds or longer for purposes of night time lapse.

0 upvotes

Preview says the LX7 can also record in mp4.

0 upvotes

I own LX5 but I have 0 interest in this
not counting RX100 because of $650 price

The best camera of these type now is Olympus XZ-1

0 upvotes

Why would the XZ-1 be better than the LX7?

0 upvotes

The sensor size that's stated in the review and in the database are inconsistent. In the table it says that the LX7's sensor is 6.7x5.1mm, which is consistent with the focal length specified on the lens. However, that's not a 1/1.7" type sensor (which is 7.4x5.6mm, like the Samsung and the Canon).

The database also says the LX7 sensor is 7.4x5.6mm, which would be a 1/1.7"type, but again, the lens suggests otherwise.

Also, the Olympus XZ-1 has, like the LX5, a 1/1.63" type sensor of 8.04x5.56mm, not a 1/1.7" type like suggested in the table in this preview.

0 upvotes

The problem is the same in both case (XZ-1 and LX7) - they dont' ever use the full area of the sensor. As such, although the sensor in the LX7 is a 1/1.7" and the one in the XZ-1 is a 1/1.63", the actually used area (and hence relationship between actual focal length and effective focal length) is not quite the one you'd expect.

Our database can't currently cope with such subtleties but the preview does its best to explain this.

6 upvotes

So if I understand you correctly, the sensor's overall size is not quite 7.4x5.6mm, but somewhat wider and lower, although the diagonal is equal to that of a 7.4x5.6mm sensor? Comparing the maximum horizontal resolution (3968) to the maximum vertical resolution ((2736) gives an overall sensor aspect ratio of 1.45/1.

0 upvotes

Too bad they didn't put a small optical viewfinder in the popup flash's support stand. Looks like there's enough space!

1 upvote

Is a small optical or electronic viewfinder really useful? How would it peer through the levers below the pop-up flash?

1 upvote

There's no mention in this review of whether Panasonic have fixed the problems that plagued the LX5. Whilst the image quality, lens, build and macro capabilities of the LX5 were absolutely superb, the camera was loaded with useless gimmicks such as scene selections, face recognition etc. The result was that the LX5 had too many controls for such a small body. In particular, the thumbwheel was a complete nightmare as it was too easy to accidentally press the wheel whilst rotating it, resulting in an unwanted selection.
For their 'enthusiast compacts' Panasonic really need to get down to the basics of what photography is about rather than producing techno toys. I hope that they've done that with the LX7 but somehow doubt it.
In their reviews, DPReview should mark down cameras that are laden with useless features.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

1 upvote

having used the LX5 for a year, I find it very easy to completely skip the gimmick features. I never notice them. I bet these features are dictated by marketing - to the dismay of the engineering dpt.
I have not been able to press the thumbwheel into an unwanted selection.

4 upvotes

Used LX5 for over 2 years, and have yet to inadvertently press the thumbwheel. As for useless gimmicks, I shoot A, S or M so, yes, the other features are redundant as far as I'm concerned - but there's no way I'd think of them as getting in the way.

2 upvotes

The LX5 was a great camera in many ways but a classic example of 'less would have been more'.

Engineering v. Marketing - one of Dilbert's pet themes. Couldn't agree more.

1 upvote

Face recognition is not a bad thing to have in a scene with complex lighting and the faces aren't in neat symmetry. Time lapse is not a "useless gimmick" to add to the LX7.

A cynic could claim that all digital cameras are "techno toys," and that purists should be working with pinholes, daguerrotypes, and develop their own prints with home-brewed chemicals.

1 upvote

Of course, as soon as you leave any of those "features" off some folks will wail and bark at the moon about how the camera doesn't have this, that, or the other thing. I never use scene modes, but try marketing a camera that doesn't have those kinds of features.

0 upvotes

"I never use scene modes, but try marketing a camera that doesn't have those kinds of features"

Fuji X100 :)

0 upvotes

face recognition is one of the best new features of 1DX & D4.

these cameras are way better than previous models in accurate AF tracking, better exposure, and better white balance thanks to image recognition using the new imaging AE sensor.

0 upvotes

What about the price?

0 upvotes

499$

0 upvotes

This is a very well written preview. Great job Dpreview!

10 upvotes

you mean dPREVIEW?

0 upvotes

we're reviewing cameras at a rate of almost one per week so far in 2012.

6 upvotes

@Barney: that´s admirable and most of us appreciate this (although some would not be satisfied even if you made one review a day).

2 upvotes

I want to see all those who had the knee jerk reaction on reading the Q sensor size thinking it would do worse than an LX5 bigger sensor, say the same thing about the LX7 sensor (both are wrong).

0 upvotes

Is there an underwater housing for this camera?

1 upvote

LX7 seems did not have a bulb mode also…… the other spec other then the F-Stop did not have any excited news….. Oh…

Actually I'm waiting for a compact camera with Bulb mode…… Sony's RX100 excited me that it had a Bulb mode , but lack of remote shutter (either by line and radio..) limited a lot……

so……forget it… hope Sony could provide a remote shutter solution....even a IR remote are better then none.... i want shutter release cord >M<"""

4 upvotes

Well if that's your main criteria, the XZ-1 has Bulb mode with the remote cable accessory.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 177