Gretest advantage GF1 over LX3

Perhaps you are a little like me. I too have tried, then returned several cameras over the past year. I don't do this intentionally, but because there is no other way to actually hold and try the camera. I recently settled on the Panny G1 from Amazon for $399, but also bought the GF1 for the 20mm lens. The price difference between the GF1 with the lens and the lens only was under $300 so I decided to buy both as a back up. I love the G1 but I am still deciding on the GF1 and 20mm. So far, so good, however, and I do have the flexibility to swich lenses and bodies this way.

I have found that there is almost as much pleasure in the anticipation and research of the next new camera as there is in owning it! I love photography and use my cameras often to take photos of my grandchildren and our travels, but I also love learning about new technology and anticipating the next new thing!

My experience has been that Panasonic's quality and ease of use is unsurpassed. The G1, considering it is the first real m4/3 camera, has everything right--the viewfinder, the articulating screen and intuitive control. It is not "pocketable" but I carry a handbag anyway and I have decided that I'd rather have features than pocketability. A DSLR, however is just too big and heavy.

You sound as if you are still wanting that GF1 with the 20mm. I don't find the lens limiting at all. It is actually quite refreshing to really think about photography again with this lens. Go with your heart, (if you can afford it) then don't look back. Easy to say, of course, but not so easy to do!

Sandy

redrunnertc said:

IMHO, the image quality in most instances is close enough to not be important.

The significant difference is DOF. If you actually want To control DOF, you have to go to a larger sensor. I totally disagree with the post above - say you set your LX3 to f/2, you will see the same DOF with thte GF1 at f/8 or maybe even smaller!

If you like a deep DOF, this can have huge advantages because obviously you can take advantage of the wider aperture light gathering. The first time, however, that you want to blur a background and get any kind of subject isolation, though, you're done - it is simply not possible with small sensor cams.

Click to expand...

Shallow DOF is not a strongest feature of m43 cameras too, and it does not come cheap either. Just check prices for Lumix 45mm/f2.8 or Leica 25mm/f1.4. Of course you can resort to fast legacy manual lenses, but then you will need better grip and absolutely need good viewfinder. So, I would look into dslr-like m43 cameras - e.g. G1 - used one goes for from $200(body only) to $350 (14-45mm kit lens).

redrunnertc said:

IMHO, the image quality in most instances is close enough to not be important.

The significant difference is DOF. If you actually want To control DOF, you have to go to a larger sensor. I totally disagree with the post above - say you set your LX3 to f/2, you will see the same DOF with thte GF1 at f/8 or maybe even smaller!

Click to expand...

This is not true. The sensor on the LX3 and LX5 has a crop factor of 2.25 with respect to m43, which means you optimally get the same DOF on the GF1 at f/4.5 (that's if you take a 4:3 pic, the crop factor is smaller for e.g. 16:9, as the GF1 does not maintain constant viewing angle) as on the LX3/LX5 for f/2.0. For full frame format you get the same DOF for f/9.0.

The sensor size makes a big difference. I took a Sigma DP1 (APS sensor size) and a G9 with me to Europe in 2008. Even thought he DP1 was annoying to use I kept almost all of the pictures I took with it. The G9 was easy to use and I tossed most of the pictures I took with it and sold it. Since I've had M43 I've the best of both worlds. Good image quality and ease of use. Also the flexibility of adding lenses. If these things don't matter to you stick with you LX3 which is one of the best point and shoot cameras.
--
Ann Chaikin
Painting & Photography:
http://www.annchaikin.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/annchaikin/
Photo a Day
http://www.blipfoto.com/achaikin
Family Websites:
http://www.chaikinsofbellingham.com

Sorry for all the typos. It's been a long day.
--
Ann Chaikin
Painting & Photography:
http://www.annchaikin.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/annchaikin/
Photo a Day
http://www.blipfoto.com/achaikin
Family Websites:
http://www.chaikinsofbellingham.com

I have both an LX-3 and a GF-1. Mostly I grab the GF-1 when I'm heading out the door, but when I know toting a camera around my neck is not convenient, I take the LX-3. I'm NEVER without a camera and the LX-3 still is great for backpacking, general outdoors, or just to carry in my purse. Don't leave home without it.

SF Photo Gal
Canon 1DsIII & 5DII/Panasonic GH1-GF1-LX3

losangeles said:

redrunnertc said:

IMHO, the image quality in most instances is close enough to not be important.

The significant difference is DOF. If you actually want To control DOF, you have to go to a larger sensor. I totally disagree with the post above - say you set your LX3 to f/2, you will see the same DOF with thte GF1 at f/8 or maybe even smaller!

Click to expand...

This is not true. The sensor on the LX3 and LX5 has a crop factor of 2.25 with respect to m43, which means you optimally get the same DOF on the GF1 at f/4.5 (that's if you take a 4:3 pic, the crop factor is smaller for e.g. 16:9, as the GF1 does not maintain constant viewing angle) as on the LX3/LX5 for f/2.0. For full frame format you get the same DOF for f/9.0.

Click to expand...

For 24mm EFL, even at f2.0 DOF extends from about 3.5 ft to infinity. Unless it focused on subject closer than about 7 feet.

For 90mm EFL, at f3.3 (LX5) DOF will be comparable to f7.4 (almost f8) on m43 - definitely not a portrait lens.
The only good shallow DOF will be seen in macro shots with LX3/5.

Another point in favor of GF1, if it interests you. While m4/3 lenses are expensive, there's a lot of cheap legacy glass out there along with cheap adapters. You can get a lot more creative with those if you're so inclined.

losangeles said:

This is not true. The sensor on the LX3 and LX5 has a crop factor of 2.25 with respect to m43, which means you optimally get the same DOF on the GF1 at f/4.5 (that's if you take a 4:3 pic, the crop factor is smaller for e.g. 16:9, as the GF1 does not maintain constant viewing angle) as on the LX3/LX5 for f/2.0. For full frame format you get the same DOF for f/9.0.

Click to expand...

You are wrong. LX5 has 4.7 crop factor. LX5 lens 5.1-19.2mm. Divide 24/5.1=4.706

Although LX5 is great camera, its impossible to get shallow DOF (except when doing macro work, but that is true for most P&S cameras).
--
http://www.pbase.com/jevtovic

rkhndjr said:

I am once again considering a GF1 or keeping my LX3 and getting a G12 or G10 to go with it. The LX3 has remarkable IQ IMO and I wonder how others feel about this type situation. Any help will be appreciated.
--

Click to expand...

I like to always try and use the best tool for the job. When size and weight really matter (when out cycling or doing some strenuous walking) I find the combination of the LX3 and the TZ7/ZS3 best meets my needs, as I seldom print large sizes or display on other than a TV or monitor.

When I am needing good low light indoor photography I find the GF1 plus 20mm lens is better than the LX3 (although not by much), and also the GF1 is ideal for walking around with when on holiday/vacation.

I also need to take photographs for my local community newspaper, and here oddly people expect you to use a dSLR and sometimes think you are not serious without one. I do not usually have either the time or the inclination to try and explain IQ to them, but do have an editor who is demanding the highest possible quality. Here I used to use a G1 but will probably use the GH2 in future, although its real purpose is to get me rediscovering videography.

I am fortunate enough to have worked hard most of my life in responsible positions so am able to afford all this. If my budget were to be curtailed and I had to stick with just the one camera it would probably be the LX3.

if you get a canon G10/12 you will have something very similar to your LX3 : when will you take one rather than the other? I don't see the point of having both.You will end up selling one of the 2.

I understand if you get the GF1 you must sell the LX3? and no money for an extra lens?

Well If I had to pick only one it would be LX3 : easier to carry around, 24-60 range and "remakable IQ" as you put it...

GF1 + 20mm makes more sense if you have several lenses or several cameras...

What is it you find lacking in LX3 ?

rkhndjr said:

I am once again considering a GF1 or keeping my LX3 and getting a G12 or G10 to go with it. The LX3 has remarkable IQ IMO and I wonder how others feel about this type situation. Any help will be appreciated.
--

Click to expand...

--
Yves

http://www.flickr.com/photos/37414915@N04/

Just one of many reasons why my LX3 will remain in my family. I gave the LX3 to my daughter when I upgraded to a LX5.





I recently bought a GF1 body at a price too low to pass up. I already had lenses with my G1. It is a fun camera, it is much heavier than the LX3 and if I want the range of the 24-60, I need to carry additional lenses. In bright sunlight the GF1 (like the LX3) definitely needs the external view finder. I like wide and the 24mm of the LX3 suits me more than the 40mm equivalent of the 20mm 1.7 which I find very sharp. Once I put the kit zoom lens on the GF1, the setup is not small anymore.

In any case, Russ good luck with your decision. But you will not be going wrong by keeping the LX3; it has a nice zoom range (although short) and the f2 lens comes in handy when light is dim.
--
Howard
http://www.photo.net/photos/howardfuhrman

AAAhhhhh, the Panasonic/Oly dilemma!! I love it! How lucky we are to have two such capable camera systems!!

I agree with you that the most fun is in the search/research/waiting! I think the very best time is the time between the actual purchase and camera arrival. I sit and read as much as I can find about a camera and then enjoy rereading while i wait for it to arrive. What fun!!

I have owned both Panny and Oly cameras and have loved both, so would have a hard time answering the main question! I shoot with the Oly ePL-1 right now. Love the versatility of interchangeable lenses AND light weight! Just great!! Waiting on a 9-18mm lens right now.

Somehow the anticipation in waiting for a lens isn't the same as waiting for the camera!!

Beth
--
Story Hour Photography
'Life's a story. Let us illustrate it!'
http://www.pbase.com/cokids/ or
Blog: http://storyhourphotography.blogspot.com/

Djordje Jevtovic said:

losangeles said:

This is not true. The sensor on the LX3 and LX5 has a crop factor of 2.25 with respect to m43, which means you optimally get the same DOF on the GF1 at f/4.5 (that's if you take a 4:3 pic, the crop factor is smaller for e.g. 16:9, as the GF1 does not maintain constant viewing angle) as on the LX3/LX5 for f/2.0. For full frame format you get the same DOF for f/9.0.

Click to expand...

You are wrong. LX5 has 4.7 crop factor. LX5 lens 5.1-19.2mm. Divide 24/5.1=4.706

Click to expand...

If you misquote me, of course I'm wrong! Read again...

Why are people in the m4/3 users forum completely trashing the m4/3 cameras, basically implying they are inferior to tiny sensored compacts in every aspect.

Steven Alan said:

Why are people in the m4/3 users forum completely trashing the m4/3 cameras, basically implying they are inferior to tiny sensored compacts in every aspect.

Click to expand...

You're misrepresenting them when you say they're bashing m43 cameras, as they are simply dissatisfied with the lack of fast standard zoom lenses, as you would know had you read their posts carefully.

losangeles said:

Steven Alan said:

Why are people in the m4/3 users forum completely trashing the m4/3 cameras, basically implying they are inferior to tiny sensored compacts in every aspect.

Click to expand...

You're misrepresenting them when you say they're bashing m43 cameras, as they are simply dissatisfied with the lack of fast standard zoom lenses, as you would know had you read their posts carefully.

Click to expand...

I wasnt talking about them, I was talking about you and others in this thread lol

Steven Alan said:

losangeles said:

Steven Alan said:

Why are people in the m4/3 users forum completely trashing the m4/3 cameras, basically implying they are inferior to tiny sensored compacts in every aspect.

Click to expand...

You're misrepresenting them when you say they're bashing m43 cameras, as they are simply dissatisfied with the lack of fast standard zoom lenses, as you would know had you read their posts carefully.

Click to expand...

I wasnt talking about them, I was talking about you and others in this thread lol

Click to expand...

I know ;-) Anyway, I see m43 simply as in the middle between high-end PnS and FF. However contrary to PnS and FF, m43 doesn't offer a fast standard zoom, so its benefits over PnS are to some extent negated for those of us who can not afford to buy 5 different lenses and adapters and/or don't like always changing them. I think it's very simple logic really, and not worth an argument.

Unless you need interchangeable lenses the LX3 is a great little walk around.

Orson

You consider the LX3's image quality "remarkable" and would only want the 20mm lens with a GF1.

1. Isn't "remarkable" IQ good enough for you?

2. Would you really feel comfortable in your range of photos giving up the 24~60mm equivalent LX3 zoom for a fixed--albeit excellent--40mm equivalent lens?

3. Have you actually handled the GF1 w/ and lenses to see if it's too big for your comfort level and portability needs?
4. If you still stymied and have the funds, why not have both?