LX3 - An AMAZING tool!! Bargain for the performance.

I'm travelling overseas right now and am blown away by the LX3's capabilities. My camera is basically a serious tool rather than something I use for fun as I do documentary of our trips where our team speak to lots of people indoors. No flash. (Yes, one can do serious work and have fun at the same time but that's not my focus.)

Puttering around at home, I did some preliminary test on the wide angle lens (18mm) and was sufficiently impressed to leave my Canon DSLR and Canon wide angle lens. (cropped body, not full frame.) The Canon lens alone cost more than the LX3 ($345 shipped) and wide angle lens with tube ($205 shipped) at around $700. Yes, this was an educated risk taking step as I did not put the LX3 through its paces in actual field use.

My initial results were good enough for me to take the risk and just left the DLSR behind as I have to carry MANY other pieces of equipment including audio/video/computer/mics etc. Any bit of reduction in weight is a boon.

Well, I read through the entire manual during the extended flight. Blown away by the customization options. Highly recommended even though I seldom read through manuals.

I've been using this camera for two days now doing real work and can say unequivocally that it is an absolutely amazing tool.

In short, I would have GLADLY paid $1K for this Panasonic rig and still consider that price a good buy for our work now that I have tested it out in the field.

For the extreme wide angle, this is every bit as good or better than the Canon DSLR. The f2.0 lens wide open and image stabilization allows for lower ISO (100,200 most the time, but never over 400) which matches up well with Canon's ISO 1600 and wide open lens. More detailed most the time.

However, the LX3 has NUMEROUS advantages surpassing the DSLR for us. It's not an exhaustive list but I share in case this may help someone else.

1. WAY smaller, lighter, cheaper. less obtrusive. This is a huge boon for traveling. Can easiily put this on my belt and not worry about the weight. Can't do that with a DSLR.

2. I turn all the beeps and shutter sound off. It's DEAD SILENT, way better than a DSLR.

3. The lens 18-60mm is quickly accessed as I can unscrew the wide angle in seconds, hold it in my hand, take a shot, and then put it back on. Very fast.

With a DSLR, my native lens is 16-35mm equivalent. Swapping lens for that extra reach to 60mm is a lot more work.

4. Instantly switchable aspect ratio. This is a huge advantage. At the 16:9 aspect, it's actually as wide as a DSLR's 16mm horizontally. This is what we need.

5. HUGE advantage: electronically programmable shots including:"

a. Ability to take 3 shots in 3 aspect ratios in one press of the shutter.

b. Ability to take 3 shots in 3 film modes in one press of the shutter. I'm doing standard color, black and white, and some other 3rd option. This really opens up the look without having to do a ton of post processing.

c. Ability to take 3 shots in 3 exposures without having to hear the shutter go clack, clack, clack like a machine gun which is very distracting to people when shooting stealth.

6. Distortion - seem to be at least as good or better than the DSLR lens. It's just a great lens. (Warning - I tested two copies of the LX3 and the other one was very soft and low resolution so not all LX3 works well with the wide angle.)

7. Video in a pinch. Granted this is not like the dedicated HD camcorders that we carry with wireless sound rig etc. BUT none of those can take relatively low distortion 18mm wide angle shots at the press of a button. I've already used this for some quick and rough documentary. Not publishable but good enough for documenting some basic work. That wide angle is something else!!

Oh, and did I also mention small, light, fast, cheap, silent....?

In short, I am faster, more unobtrusive, and produce better results with this LX3 than wth a DSLR. i also produce more TYPE of results that I can't do with the DSLR (i.e. B/W shots without post processing, super wide angle video etc)

(Of course, it would be different if I had a full frame Nikon D700 or Canon 5DMkII with the famed Nikon 12-24mm lens but that's out of the question due to weight and cost for now. That's a $4500 rig.)

This is so good that if the Leica version comes out and they get a better handle on the misalignment between the Panasonic's sensor and lens plane, I'll be all over the Leica - caveat is that the Leica can use the wide angle lens.

OK, over an out - just a quick stream of consciousness typing which I hope is helpful. I'm sure there are other things that I have left out.

MTMT

Thanks for the contribution MT. I bought the LX2 when it came out and was very impressed by the performance. It was able to produce images good enough for stock photography. I only used it when I could not carry one of my DSLRs. I missed the wide angle option and purchased an LX3 when the price dropped to £300 here in UK. Like MT I am impressed by the performance of this little thing. I now use both when needing to travel light. I mostly shoot at ISO100 as these small sensors do not perform too well when ISO is ratched up.

Thanks for the tips re taking several images in one go. I must have a look at the instruction book again.

I wish someon would teach Silkypix English. It is a nightmare trying to work out what the various expressions used actually mean. Whereas I recognise that Silkypix is a formidable program I used PS/ACR to convert LX2 RAWs. I am just waiting now for Adobe to include LX3 in a future ACR update to make my life easier.

You're welcome.

I knew that I forgot some stuff.

I don't remember reading these in the manual but there were somethings that I wished that the LX3 had in terms of operation. Then playing around, lo and behold, they are there.

2 examples: When I enlarge a playback to 4X, 8X or 16X, I wish I could just jump back to 1X. It's there although I do not remember the documentation. Hit the center button and it jumps back.

Then i wished that i could enlarge a scene in reviewing, and then go to the next picture so that I can compare sharpness back and forth. And it was there too using the joystick.

It's little things like this that makes the whole thing very snappy and quick. Just wonderfully responsive once the operation is mastered intuitively. Took me a day so it's not too difficult for someone technically inclined.

MTMT

MT said:

3. The lens 18-60mm is quickly accessed as I can unscrew the wide
angle in seconds, hold it in my hand, take a shot, and then put it
back on. Very fast.

Click to expand...

?? You mean that the LX3 is actually a 18-60mm (35mm equivalent) camera and by unscrewing something you extend the wide range from 24mm to 18mm??

roberto

Not sure what this means either. Unless he is talking about accessory WA lens. The LX3 is normally 24-60mm rangel

robydago said:

robydago said:

3. The lens 18-60mm is quickly accessed as I can unscrew the wide
angle in seconds, hold it in my hand, take a shot, and then put it
back on. Very fast.

Click to expand...

?? You mean that the LX3 is actually a 18-60mm (35mm equivalent)
camera and by unscrewing something you extend the wide range from
24mm to 18mm??

roberto

Click to expand...

Yes, sorry about that - I meant the WA attachment. Since it is so small, I can hold it in hand, shoot my pic, and reinstall. Very different from a DSLR's large lens when swapping. It just changes the flow for the better.

Oh, another advantage. Since there are 4 memory settings, one can program the memory to shoot specific type of scenes. In DSLR, I'll have to set the things manually each time I change ISO/Color Balance etc.

With the LX3, one can program 4 types of setups so that it can be selected by the twist of a dial, and a couple of button punches. Near instant.

Really, this whole system is set up for LOTS of fast responses/changes for my style o shooting.

MTMT

Thanks for your report, appreciated.

$345 shipped is an insane price. And $205 for the WA lens. Here, they would
actually end up at near $1K together.

I've been looking into getting the EF-S 10-22 and your post doesn't make
it easier. Low weight and small size is important for me too when I'm out
and about.

MT said:

For the extreme wide angle, this is every bit as good or better than
the Canon DSLR. The f2.0 lens wide open and image stabilization
allows for lower ISO (100,200 most the time, but never over 400)
which matches up well with Canon's ISO 1600 and wide open lens. More
detailed most the time.

Click to expand...

If the light lets you shoot at a low ISO on the Canon, there should be an
advantage in noise and DR.

MT said:

6. Distortion - seem to be at least as good or better than the DSLR
lens. It's just a great lens. (Warning - I tested two copies of the
LX3 and the other one was very soft and low resolution so not all LX3
works well with the wide angle.)

Click to expand...

We've had some reports on this forum about soft left sides. Is that what
you experienced too?

MT said:

This is so good that if the Leica version comes out and they get a
better handle on the misalignment between the Panasonic's sensor and
lens plane, I'll be all over the Leica - caveat is that the Leica can
use the wide angle lens.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by misalignment between sensor and lens plane.

My main hypothesis for the soft left side shown in some LX3s is that the
centre of the optical axis isn't in the middle of the sensor. Thus the sensor
is using the outer, worse part of the image circle on one side. Supporting
this is how some tcons have showed a decentered blackening of corners
on some copies of some previous Panny cameras and other brands).

Of course it could also be the sensor and lens planes not being parallel if that
is what you meant. Or a lens element that's slightly tilted or off axis.

The Leica version is made in the same Panasonic factory as the LX3. My
bet would be that the QC is the same.

By the very nature of the Leica camera versions costing 50% more, there
arises a need both for Leica and those who buy the Leica versions, to justify
the higher price. This created a fertile ground for various myths. So we have
heard people speculating that the Leica versions have different colour
processing, less noise, less intrusive noise reduction, that the lenses/sensors
that test the best get to become Leicas and those who test worse become
Panasonics, and so on.

None if these speculations have been demonstrated to be true. Allegedly,
the default, from-factory settings differ in some cases, but that's nothing
you can't alter yourself.

Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden

...or automatically via Silkypix. The lens actually has very strong barrel distortion toward the wide end of the range. There's also purple fringing. Panasonic is hiding the real optical performance and has stonewalled Adobe, apparently because Adobe refuses to redesign its applications to automatically fix the image flaws.

Correction of barrel distortion and artifacts results in loss of detail. While I'm still interested in an LX3, it's still short of what I'd like in a compact camera.

Oh, and it's my understanding that the 24mm equivalent is at the wide aspect crop. You don't get 16mm equivalent with the LX-3.

I'd love to believe the LX3 was on par with any DSLR for image quality, but I've seen the images and while they're good for a compact digital, they're far short of large sensor quality.

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT

If someone could achieve this, they would own the P&S market. Of course we would love to believe it, too!! But, c'mon!!

BJN said:

I'd love to believe the LX3 was on par with any DSLR for image
quality,

--
BJ Nicholls
SLC, UT

Click to expand...

I have an LX3 as well. I think you should try the G1 when it becomes available in less than 1 month. I think it would compliment your LX3 nicely.

Tommy

DSLR's like the 40D can also store custom profiles.

--
Peace!
sygyzy
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sygyzy/

BJN said:

Oh, and it's my understanding that the 24mm equivalent is at the wide
aspect crop. You don't get 16mm equivalent with the LX-3.

Click to expand...

You have the same (24mm) FOV at all aspect ratios by using different
crops from an oversized sensor (that's why the sensor is bigger than the
LX2's).

The 18mm wcon thus gives the same (18mm) FOV at all three aspect ratios.

What the OP meant was that the horizontal FOV at 16:9 is as wide as
one of a 16mm lens in a more square format (unclear if he meant 3:2 or 4:3).
At the expense, of course, of vertical FOV which will be less wide than 18mm
then.

Just my two oere
Erik from Sweden

I love my LX3 for many of the same reasons you do. For my travels now, the LX3 and G10 are a 1-2 punch. The 1D MKIII and D3 gear can stay home.
--
Thanks,

Teski
http://www.tedescophotography.com

My company gets an EPP deal with Panasonic as well...I paid $388, but there was also tax and shipping (I expedited). Still a far better deal than anywhere else, and well worth it for this camera. Having a lot of fun with it.
--
Thanks,

Teski
http://www.tedescophotography.com

Ehrik....

1. Yes, on lower ISO, the Canon will walk all over the LX3 in terms of smooth noise free photos.

For example, my wife and I got a once in a decade shot at Zion national park some years back with the Canon using ISO 200 or so, RAW, smaller aperture with the 10-22mm Canon lens. It's spectacular shot of us as a couple in a gorgeous context. The LX3 can't possibly approach that low noise and lar print capability.

Thus, my reflection is on a very specific narrow focus - indoor, zero flash, wide angle pics. Stuff I do for work.

2. I rechecked my shots last night and it does seem that the Canon is optimized for longer distance focusing - 30-40 feet an beyond while the Panasonic's lens may do better on close distance. not sure why. So on a larger room with hundreds of people, the Canon holds its own and may exceed the LX3 with wide angle attachment. But I think that may be because of my setting with the LX3. Still learning it.

Of course, all in all, it's an amazing package for something so small.

2. Thanks for your interesting insights on the left right inconsistency. Yes, the right side is sharper than the left side. I've evaluated so many digicams at 100% that I recognize the 'look' almost immediately of a lens that is focusing correctly on the sensor.

I once tested SIX Sony F707 side by side. 1 was terrible. 3 were clearly off between left and right or different corners. 2 were better. One was just tack sharp across the entire plane - I now still own that camera and it stands up to a LOT of large printing simple because there is so much detail there even on a 5mp camera. That experience taught me a lot about evaluating what I think is an alignment problem between lens and sensor plane. I think cameras with image stabilization is worse in this aspect as the stabilization mechanism may add to the misalignment. This is PURE CONJECTURE so nobody quote me - please.

Since then I have had chances to test various different cameras and concluded that most digicams have this problem. The LX3 is no different.

Your comment about the lens circle makes sense.

It's of course possible that software correction could be the culprit also but I'm not sure how the left and right would be different. I do know that RAW processing gives more details for those with a good lens. I've seen that. I think my copy is a good lens - just not as good as I know it can be.

The Canon 10-22mm is a great lens for that price range. I highly recommend it.

MTMT