new G10 review

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G10/G10A.HTM
--
http://www.fotolog.com/pitquim

Good to see they've got the review out, and thanks for the link.

I did see this quote, though:

"Weight is 14.14 ounces, over a pound, twice the weight of the LX3..."

I think they need to revisit their weight calculations a bit. ;-)

Al Ruscelli said:

Good to see they've got the review out, and thanks for the link.

I did see this quote, though:

"Weight is 14.14 ounces, over a pound, twice the weight of the LX3..."

I think they need to revisit their weight calculations a bit. ;-)

Click to expand...

Al Ruscelli said:

Good to see they've got the review out, and thanks for the link.

I did see this quote, though:

"Weight is 14.14 ounces, over a pound, twice the weight of the LX3..."

I think they need to revisit their weight calculations a bit. ;-)

Click to expand...

And their zoom range calculations. Although they state the zoom range of the LX3 correctly as 24-60, another part of the review says "The Nikon P6000 and the Panasonic LX3 both offer only 4x."

Bob

Hey, let me tell you the best way to get a lid off in the kitchen. Learned this many years ago when I was early into practice of pharmacy. Just take a hard object such as end of table knife and punch the center of the top sharply. It loosens the top a bit and you can twist it right off. Actually, it breaks the seal which heat has formed during processing. Your tidbit of new knowledge for the day)
--
Russ

--Interesting report. I have always suspected that any critique is based on the personal like and/or dislikes of the individual. They are not necessarily subjective. After reading this report I can’t help but wonder regarding one or two other reports that were less favorable. I suspect we judge most reviews and/or comments more on what we wish to see or hear agreeing with what we believe. Nothing wrong with that if our opinion is subjective.
Pap

only one thing can distinguish art from what is not art: “significant form.”
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pap_7/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/34495676@N08

Thanks, Russ. Nothing like a photo forum to pick up handy household hints

Bob

under "pros" it lists "very good low light performance". i've read a lot of g-10 reviews lately, and that is certainly the first time i've seen that.

tdnbc said:

under "pros" it lists "very good low light performance". i've read a
lot of g-10 reviews lately, and that is certainly the first time i've
seen that.

Click to expand...

We prefer not to complain about such and unbiased assessment...

;-)

--
I encountered a similar comment today on a thread I started.

I too have read a lot of bad low light press on the G10... so I wonder, is the negative press coming from those who want it to perform as well as an SLR? Or is it pretty good / excelent as far as P&S cameras are concerned?

The only P&S that I have heard rivals an SLR's ability to handle low light is the DMC-LX3K... so that model aside... how is it?

I have seen 1600ISO images that look really great with the ISO considered..., but I have also seen 1600ISO images that make those in the portrait look like they have some horrible skin disease.

I had an evil thought. And since this a Canon discussion: Is that how one takes the cap off an LX3?