Actual LX5 vs LX3 ISO 1600 comparison. I prefer LX3 result.

Started Jul 21, 2010 | Discussions thread
OP Condor Senior Member • Posts: 1,768
Re: For your reading pleasure

Jeff Charles wrote:

Condor wrote:

Jeff Charles wrote:

We can't conclude from one photo that there actually are problems. Patience may do more to address them than raw

What about all the other LX5 photo problems commented in "page 5" of this thread?

Commented, but not confirmed with a production version of the camera.

That Page-5 several side-by-side LX5 vs LX3 photo comparison is, as far as I know, between 2 "production" cameras. Several LX5 production cameras were given to different reviewers almost 2 days ago in Japan and that review seems to be a consequence of that meeting.

The chance that Panasonic is going to bring a camera like the LX5 to market with obviously poor IQ is pretty slim,

What is the chance that Panasonic brought to the 24-60mm 2.5x LX market some forced merged between that beautiful market plus a new 60-90mm 3.8x market (more optical problems in between) with poor IQ, just to gain more customers or just to fight back Canon S90 28-105mm 3.8x market? ...

You seem to be saying that the longer zoom range was a marketing decision and that the result will be poorer IQ. It may be true that it was a marketing decision, but that does not mean that the lens will not be as good or better than the LX3's. We've already seen that the new lens reduces ghosting from light sources.

Reducing ghosting from light sources???? Emperor's New Clothes Argument? Those sunlight-beams coming down (in the following "production" cameras comparisons) are the kind of beautifulness that I loved in LX3 for my eventual touristic photos, as several people does, included probably the majority who bought that camera.

LX3 "production" camera sample:

LX5 "production" camera sample:

I also followed my own advice and yesterday I showed my wife the "quesabesde" boat scenery comparison without any previous comment or recommendation, and she answered almost instantly,... the left one of course... (LX3 sample). Well, for me that's a kind of definitive conclusion.

I think. The first pro reviews,…

mmmmm Pros... mmm.... equal to "experts" that lives from these reviews based on trips and expenses and advertisment paid by Photography companies..... mmmmm

This site does honest reviews, as do many other review sites.

I do not say that this site or "quesabesde" or other sites are dishonest, but they are run by humans, as we are, and "we all strongly wanted that LX5 were better than LX3". That can end up in contradictions like the following: This is the “quesabesde" reviewer conclusion about the above "boat scenery":

Quote: "...el ruido cromático está mejor controlado...(en la LX5)"
Meaning: "... chromatic noise is better controlled...(in LX5)"

Chromatic... they are talking about colors. And then some dpreview member put our attention in the woman's legs:

LX3 sample cropped:

LX5 sample cropped:

Do you honestly think that colors are better controlled in LX5 sample woman's legs? What does the rest of the members of dpreview forums think?

Do you want another expert review? This time about two production models, as far as we know. The ASIA Net reviewer said the following about the following "river scenery" comparisons. Quote "The higher contrast settings mean the background of the mountain as well as the foreground of the water are far more detailed and defined in the LX5's photo."

But......and as I pointed before

Please look up at the detail of the people walking around the river at the left side of the photos (Again, I recommend increasing the zoom level of your monitor to 200% for this purpose).

In LX3 sample I can observe some sort of father and son looking to the river and also a couple of adults walking ("away" even). But in LX5 sample case, I could only "deduct" (and just because LX3 sample gave me already that more details), that maybe there is also that father and son there... but no other specific detail.

LX3 Sample:

LX5 sample:

So, this reviewer makes a statement like this "...are far more detailed and defined in the LX5's photo"... And then we found, at least in the LX3 sample, people walking by the river, who can hardly be detected in LX5 sample... Was that in fact a "far more detailed and defined" LX5 photo?

What do you think? What does other think? And I repeat this pair of questions because I'm meaning... What do you objectively really think by your own despite even that so strong "wish" we all had that LX5 was better?

Finally, and even though you cut the last part of my answer from yesterday, which was this:

and even better, the first end-user feedback, will give us the true story.

Now, I'm with you. I hope several of real dpreview members that already have their LX3 and for some reason get and LX5 could do us the favor of full-size unbiased "Ai" real life simultaneous side by side comparisons photos with the original "Firmware" (curiously today appeared a new one mmmm....take care of the firmware that provided you all those beatiful photos in the past)

Today, in this same dpreview main page appears...Quote:

"Panasonic updates firmware for DMC-LX3, DMC-TZ7 and DMC-TZ6

Panasonic has released firmware updates for its DMC-LX3 premium compact, and the DMC-TZ7/ZS3 and DMC-TZ6/ZS1 compact superzooms. The company..." has not provided any information about the updates' actions"... beyond the..." slightly obscure"...'Optimization of software processing. ... (09:33 GMT)

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow