Reading mode: Light Dark

Iso Test [G12-P7000-LX5-FZ100]

Go to last post
Why is the LX5 so poor? I thought it was supposed to be a good camera. The FZ100's low quality, I expected.

My judgement: P7000 holds shadow detail and sharpness better than the G12, as it goes up the ISO ladder.
 
The problem with assessing these photos is that, as far as I can tell, there's no web-ready info on aperture/shutter settings used. I'm too lazy to download the photos and compare exif info. The P7000 looks good, but if it actually used a slower shutter speed, etc., then it's not apparent the P7000 has better image quality. What I can say, though, is that both Nikon and Canon have pretty good JPEG engines compared to Panasonic. Didn't think the LX-5 was that poor for JPEGs.
didyou said:
All from 100% crop to 640x480 from center of image
for detailed review go to:

www.pixelmantis.com

ISO 100
G12



P7000



LX5



FZ100



ISO 200
G12



P7000



LX5



FZ100



ISO 400
G12



P7000



LX5



FZ100



ISO 800
G12



P7000



LX5



FZ100



ISO 1600
G12



P7000



LX5



FZ100

Click to expand...
 
The p7000 does look impressive comparitively. I figured the lx-5 would have been better too.

I think your suspicion may be correct in comparing exif info. I downloaded a jpeg from Lx5 Iso 80 and it shows shutter speed at about 1/3 second. I couldn't find anything on standards for lighting, tripod, image stabilization, etc. But if handheld in varying lighting conditions, etc. etc. "results will vary." I know if shot in handheld for 1/3 second would explain blur on any of these cameras. And some stabilization features don't work well when on tripod. Hard to compare these really without the rest of the info.
David Chao said:
The problem with assessing these photos is that, as far as I can tell, there's no web-ready info on aperture/shutter settings used. I'm too lazy to download the photos and compare exif info. The P7000 looks good, but if it actually used a slower shutter speed, etc., then it's not apparent the P7000 has better image quality. What I can say, though, is that both Nikon and Canon have pretty good JPEG engines compared to Panasonic. Didn't think the LX-5 was that poor for JPEGs.
Click to expand...
 
Am I the only one noticing that the p7000 shots (all of them) have more/better lighting than the other cams?? Looks kind of like a biased test to me. Dunno. But, yes I agree that the lx5 jpegs compare quite poorly. Too bad, as I am really interested in the lx5 and don't shoot raw. :-(

Lance
 
Even though the LX-5 has the least detail compared to the G12 and P7000 and looks a bit underexposed, the way it produced the hair looks the most natural. The Nikon exposed the necklace the best, with the white and red parts retaining some texture, but the hair looks brassy. If the center piece of the necklace was supposed to be white, then it was the only camera to get the white balance correct.

The Canon actually looks like a good compromise. It's smeared away the detail in the necklace, and the hair looks a tad oversharpened, but to be honest, if I PP's from RAW, this is probably about where i would settle in terms of output anyway.

Also difficult to cross compare cameras at the comment. The G11 and the LX-3 were actually 1/3 a stop less sensitive than indicated; if that holds true we need to compare total exposure values and not just across ISO's.

(I wouldn't mind an LX-5, but the results suggest that you would have to use RAW all the time. What a pain)

--
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com
 
surfingringo said:
Am I the only one noticing that the p7000 shots (all of them) have more/better lighting than the other cams?? Looks kind of like a biased test to me.
Click to expand...
I have to agree with you. The P7000 shots are clearly better exposed and thus of better quality. Unfortunately, this makes the whole comparison worthless. :-/

--

'I ought never to act except in such a way that I can also will that my maxim should become a universal law.'
 
WOW!!!! Excuse me but you're a great salesman from Nikon(P7000). A lot of friends of mine have the FZ100 and the results are great.... and here at that forum we have a lot o great examples how good is the FZ100.
I suggest you to include examples with the Hasselblad H4D-31.
 
surfingringo said:
Am I the only one noticing that the p7000 shots (all of them) have more/better lighting than the other cams?? Looks kind of like a biased test to me. Dunno. But, yes I agree that the lx5 jpegs compare quite poorly. Too bad, as I am really interested in the lx5 and don't shoot raw. :-(

Lance
Click to expand...
I also agree, looks like the P7000 shots used flash. The EXIF info say not but look at the shadows around the black subject in the center. If no flash was used then there was significant better lighting in the P7000 pictures.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joharis/
 
I agree there's something flawed about this comparison. There should not be that much difference between the p7000 and the others at least the ones on low ISO. Also I've seen the G and LX compared side-by-side at another site and while IMO the G was better on high ISO, it is not the dramatic difference shown here and the general IQ was not as far apart.
joharis said:
surfingringo said:
Am I the only one noticing that the p7000 shots (all of them) have more/better lighting than the other cams?? Looks kind of like a biased test to me. Dunno. But, yes I agree that the lx5 jpegs compare quite poorly. Too bad, as I am really interested in the lx5 and don't shoot raw. :-(

Lance
Click to expand...
I also agree, looks like the P7000 shots used flash. The EXIF info say not but look at the shadows around the black subject in the center. If no flash was used then there was significant better lighting in the P7000 pictures.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joharis/
Click to expand...
 
Claudiolky said:
WOW!!!! Excuse me but you're a great salesman from Nikon(P7000). A lot of friends of mine have the FZ100 and the results are great.... and here at that forum we have a lot o great examples how good is the FZ100.
I suggest you to include examples with the Hasselblad H4D-31.
Click to expand...
hello claudiolky..excuseme too.. ;)
if you wrote it was intended for me, you are totally wrong.
I never felt to be "salesman" of nikon / canon / fuji / olympus or any brand ..
I just love photography and just want to share photos and info ..

ithink its nice to knwo finally theres is any detailed review and we can compare them since the are are prosumer with price above $400

but if you devastated by the Fz100 result, sorry for that .. please do not protest to me, you can go to http://www.pixelmantis.com and do protest there :)
sorry for my poor english
ShutterBuck said:
I agree there's something flawed about this comparison. There should not be that much difference between the p7000 and the others at least the ones on low ISO. Also I've seen the G and LX compared side-by-side at another site and while IMO the G was better on high ISO, it is not the dramatic difference shown here and the general IQ was not as far apart.
Click to expand...
if you feel theres's something flawed..maybe you need to pm to pixelmantis.com [ who made this detail review] to make sure about flawed ;)

beside we can wait another detailed review about this..maybe in another review will make G12 and LX5 the best and make P7000 the worst ..who knows? :D

since there is soo many bad and ugly about P7000 report/experience..maybe people getting shock to know if P7000 can do Best than the other competitor?
LTZ470 said:
LTZ470 said:
surfingringo said:
Am I the only one noticing that the p7000 shots (all of them) have more/better lighting than the other cams?? Looks kind of like a biased test to me. Dunno. But, yes I agree that the lx5 jpegs compare quite poorly. Too bad, as I am really interested in the lx5 and don't shoot raw. :-(

Lance
Click to expand...
I also agree, looks like the P7000 shots used flash. The EXIF info say not but look at the shadows around the black subject in the center. If no flash was used then there was significant better lighting in the P7000 pictures.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/joharis/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
than thinking that the P7000 lighting is different,

why we did not think "maybe" P7000 metering system is in fact "better" than the other? :D
 
without intending to heat the atmosphere
I try to summarize technical data and performance of the detailed review
no hard felling pleas..its only a number :D

P7000
color accuracy total point:2342.99%
Low light (AF-Assist On): 0.42 sec.
Normal light: 0.40 sec.

G12
color accuracy total point:2322,69%
Low light (AF-Assist On): 0.81 sec.
Low light (AF-Assist Off): 1.10 sec.
Normal light: 0.81 sec.

LX5
color accuracy total point:2304,96%
Low light (AF-Assist On): 0.68 sec.
Low light (AF-Assist Off): 0.57 sec.
Normal light: 0.37 sec.

Fz100
color accuracy point:2299,51%
Low light (AF-Assist On): 0.60 sec.
Low light (AF-Assist Off): 0.54 sec.
Normal light: 0.41 sec.
 
You have no idea what you are doing didyou/pixelmantis, or you are not honest and you set the shooting parameters for all 3 other cameras other than the Nikon in such a way as to fool the viewer. I could do this also. Let's see, for one thing I could set the Noise Reduction to their highest settings in the other 3 so as to destroy detail. I could set the aperture to destroy detail. I could even edit the images to destroy detail. It looks like you did at least this much. So please no more reviews posted into dpreview. Thanks a lot.
--
Life as an artist has had some unusual times to say the least.
visit my web site http://www.flickr.com/photos/artist_eyes/
Remember to click on 'All Sizes' for better viewing.
Artist Eyes
 
Technical excellence doesn't correspond to real-world picture quality.

DX7590 - rated "Above Average" from DPReview - meh rating, eh :p?




Claudiolky said:
WOW!!!! Excuse me but you're a great salesman from Nikon(P7000). A lot of friends of mine have the FZ100 and the results are great.... and here at that forum we have a lot o great examples how good is the FZ100.
I suggest you to include examples with the Hasselblad H4D-31.
Click to expand...
 
Maybe the p7000 metering system IS better. I would love to know if it is! Unfortunately we won't find out from this test. The p7000 shots were either taken with flash or with other off camera lighting not used for the other cameras. The light glare on the hair is from .... LIGHT! :-). This test was unfortunately (but clearly) set up to make a "winner" of the p7000. Jeez man, that's the consensus here on the NIKON forum where folks WANT to believe! Try posting this on the canon and panny forum...see if they notice anything amiss. ;-)
 
surfingringo said:
Peter Nelson wrote:
You have no idea what you are doing didyou/pixelmantis,

or you are not honest and you set the shooting parameters for all 3 other > cameras other than the Nikon in such a way as to fool the viewer.

I could do this also. Let's see, for one thing I could set the Noise Reduction to > their highest settings in the other 3 so as to destroy detail.

I could set the aperture to destroy detail. I could even edit the images to > destroy detail.

It looks like you did at least this much. So please no more reviews posted into dpreview. Thanks a lot.
Click to expand...
I do not know why we should be "soo angry" with things like this .. ;)

if you do not like, simply you dont have to read/comment, do not tell the truth or not fair, me and pixelmantis no relation whatever ..

if you want to make the review itself and with your own parameters or maybe you find for review that you feel honest/fair, go ahead .. and please post here ..

it is good to know each other share their info without blaming each other, if you feel i have no idea..please give me idea soo i can make it right?

I was sad and surprised,I mean just giving the information only, whether there was a rule we should not give the link info review here?
and if it turns out there are rules that prohibit it, I'm sorry I do not know

and once again I have no intention whatsoever! if you want to protest please pm brother x2x3x2 [ http://www.dpreview.com/members/5322412556]if you do feel there is something wrong with the review ..

i believe he/she more aware of "issues you feel" from that review, because in my opinion, he is a person who directly make the review :)
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=36813716
TechOutsider said:
Technical excellence doesn't correspond to real-world picture quality.

DX7590 - rated "Above Average" from DPReview - meh rating, eh :p?



Click to expand...
absolutley 100% agree! :D

I also wonder why people sometimes respond too serious for tecnical specification or review
I really appreciate people with an open mind and relax like you ;)
surfingringo said:
Maybe the p7000 metering system IS better. I would love to know if it is! Unfortunately we won't find out from this test.

The p7000 shots were either taken with flash or with other off camera lighting not used for the other cameras.

The light glare on the hair is from .... LIGHT! :-). This test was unfortunately (but clearly) set up to make a "winner" of the p7000.

Jeez man, that's the consensus here on the NIKON forum where folks WANT to believe!

Try posting this on the canon and panny forum...see if they notice anything amiss. ;-)
Click to expand...
you are correct,

and also could have indeed there is something that is not honest with the review .. :D
there is always a possibility for all,

therefore, as I wrote earlier, this is only one review and there will be many reviews again the days to come for P7000 .. G12 .. LX5 and FZ100,
so that we can take a more "correct conclusion"? ;)

I'm not going to load it on Canon and Panasonic forum. because I believe this will only fuel the anger,

I post only in the Nikon forum because it is my intention that I made the object P7000 comparison with G12/LX5 and FZ100, since i only have P7000 in my hand right now

maybe i will post ini canon/Panasonic after i buy g12 and LX5 too, at least so that people do not consider me only as rioters/troll/fanboy.whaterver it call :D

I can not imagine if I post this in the forum Canon and Panasonic, considering the position of G12 and LX5 less than the P7000 according to this test,
not to mention there are meras that this review is not honest and true .. :D

honestly, I really do not care if the reviews are making G12/LX5/P7000 winner ..
it's all just a tool, there are more important than that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top