Decide for me... XZ-1 or LX5

I know this debate has been beat like the proverbial dead horse, but I am coming from (perhaps) a somewhat different point-of-view, so thought I'd put it our there again...

I've always shot compact-enthusiast cameras (most recently an S90), but as of late have wanted to step into more "serious" photography. Camera size and weight had been a huge issue for me, so I'd settled on a micro-4/3 kit as a "do everything" camera. Specifically, I purchased an Olympus EP-2 with Panasonic 40mm (equiv) pancake lens. A nice set-up, but what I'm discovering is that the unit is large and heavy enough that there's really no reason not to just go all the way and pick-up a DSLR--i.e., if I'm going to have something that large, anyway, I'd prefer to have a viewfinder, built-in flash, and externally-available manual control.

SO I've resolved to sell the m4/3 set-up and eventually pick-up (probably) a Canon 60D. But I also want to have another very nice enthusiast compact, both for the interim, and for grabbing and taking when I don't want to carry the DSLR.

I've narrowed my search to the Lumix LX5 or the Olympus XZ-1 and can't decide which I want. Here's the details on my "style" and how I shoot: I always shoot RAW. Always. I like to shoot in low-light, and do not like using a flash except as a "last resort." I enjoy using really shallow depths-of-field. I shoot a lot in manual mode, and need the three main settings--ISO, shutter, and aperture--to be pretty readily available to me. I couldn't possibly care less about "art" filters or "scene" modes. Video is an extremely low priority. Camera-handling and RAW image quality are of paramount importance.

I think that I would buy the XZ-1, save for the fact that I have read that the ISO setting--very critically--is not immediately available. I.e., it's buried in the menu system. If that's truly the case, and it takes three or four clicks to get to, then that's a deal-breaker right there. But if it's reasonably easy to get to, I'd still consider it.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

Perhaps you should peruse the DPReview of the XZ-1 and check the page on Operations and Control. Here's a link to make it easier:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/page4.asp

It says that if you are in either the Program or Low Light Shooting Modes you have direct access to the ISO. If you are in any other setting you will need to dive into the menus.

Doing a side-by-side comparison, I'd take the LX5 (wider lens; closer focus; faster shutter), but that's just me...

--
pjs
RIP Kodachrome 1935-2010

If you read the reviews of each camera on this site you'll see that the Olympus is rated a little bit higher but when you come right down to it I don't think you could go wrong with either camera.

They're both very good.

I don't own either camera. I've always owned Canon DSLRs because I have Canon lenses and can't afford to switch brands (plus I'm happy with Canon) and I have a Canon compact.

I do have an Olympus E-P2 micro four thirds camera and the jpeg output of this camera is excellent. If the Olympus jpeg engine in the XZ-1 is anything like the E-P2 then I'm sure you'd be happy with it.

If you primarily shoot raw then the LX5 would also be excellent.

It's kind of a toss up but if I only had these two to choose from I'd probably go with the Olympus.

Hard choice.

They are close enough that either the 24mm wide angle and multi aspect sensor on the Panasonic or the slightly faster aperture and 112mm f2.5 long end of the Olympus should be the deciding factors. If neither of those sway your opinion, then just go on price - the LX5 is $100 cheaper on Amazon right now (At least in black)

tkbslc said:

They are close enough that either the 24mm wide angle and multi aspect sensor on the Panasonic or the slightly faster aperture and 112mm f2.5 long end of the Olympus should be the deciding factors.

Click to expand...

Agree with tkbslc, those are the most significant differences. Other things to consider is better EVF from Olympus and IMO slightly better handling on the LX5. I've tried switching to progam mode (on the XZ-1) to change Iso with the ring, then back to whatever mode I used. Seems to be easier than using the menu, but still a hassle.

Forget about shallow DOF on focal lengths that short. But if I may ask, why did you dismiss the Samsung EX-1? it excells at all the criteria you listed, its only weaknesses you specifically said wouldn't affect you (video, high-ISO JPEGs), and the control scheme is very reminescent of Canon's dSLRs, which would compliment your 60D nicely.

Ahh well, of the two you listed I'd pick the Panasonic, as its the only one I have experience with since I tried it on a store before buying my EX-1 and found it to be a joy to hold, solid and very well built. Only problem was, the same went for the EX-1 and it was much cheaper, at least where I live
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek

Thanks for that--I actually think I will bring the Samsung camera into consideration, possibly. I recall there being something about it that kinda killed it for me, but perhaps I should go back and take another look. As of now, I'm swinging very heavily toward the LX5. It's a tough choice. If I were planning on buying a DSLR right away I wouldn't be agonizing so much. But that purchase may be close to a year off, for me, so I am looking for something that will be my primary shooter for quite a long stretch. I want to get it right.

Thanks again!

Draek said:

Forget about shallow DOF on focal lengths that short. But if I may ask, why did you dismiss the Samsung EX-1? it excells at all the criteria you listed, its only weaknesses you specifically said wouldn't affect you (video, high-ISO JPEGs), and the control scheme is very reminescent of Canon's dSLRs, which would compliment your 60D nicely.

Ahh well, of the two you listed I'd pick the Panasonic, as its the only one I have experience with since I tried it on a store before buying my EX-1 and found it to be a joy to hold, solid and very well built. Only problem was, the same went for the EX-1 and it was much cheaper, at least where I live
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/Draek

Click to expand...

Michael Doleman said:

But that purchase may be close to a year off, for me, so I am looking for something that will be my primary shooter for quite a long stretch. I want to get it right.

Click to expand...

The fortunate part is that there is no "wrong", just a few different right answers. Pick one, learn to use it and be happy. No matter which you choose there will be pros and cons.

Totally agree, particularly when we are talking about a camera with a small sensor--there really is only so much you can do, and all of the cameras in this class do about as well as can possibly be expected--they simply compromise in different areas. It comes down to handling, style, and functionality.

I've looked-at and quickly excluded the Samsung TL500/EX1, for a couple reasons: 1) I'm a Mac/Aperture user, and it seems that RAW import is (at this point) an impossibility with that combo; 2) while video is not a "big" deal for me, I have now read that the TL500's video output is so bad as to be virtually unusable. That, alone, wouldn't be a deal-killer, but the two factors in combination, plus the fact that the LX5 is a little more compact and offers a nice EVF seem to be pointing me in that direction.

Thanks for all the great advice! I'll be looking forward to using the camera, and to picking-up a DSLR when the time comes...

tkbslc said:

Michael Doleman said:

But that purchase may be close to a year off, for me, so I am looking for something that will be my primary shooter for quite a long stretch. I want to get it right.

Click to expand...

The fortunate part is that there is no "wrong", just a few different right answers. Pick one, learn to use it and be happy. No matter which you choose there will be pros and cons.

Click to expand...

only true pocketable camera among the premium compact.

I suggest you go to a store and try them out. That's what I did when I was trying to decide between the LX5 and the S95. Fifteen minutes spent trying to use the LX5 in manual mode convinced me to get the S95.
--
Andy

Michael Doleman wrote:

A nice set-up, but what I'm discovering is that the unit is large and heavy enough that there's really no reason not to just go all the way and pick-up a DSLR--i.e., if I'm going to have something that large, anyway, I'd prefer to have a viewfinder, built-in flash, and externally-available manual control.

Michael Doleman said:

SO I've resolved to sell the m4/3 set-up and eventually pick-up (probably) a Canon 60D. But I also want to have another very nice enthusiast compact, both for the interim, and for grabbing and taking when I don't want to carry the DSLR.

Click to expand...

I find the weight difference in carrying my canon rebel along with lenses, off-camera flash, and accessories and my epl1, lenses and similar accessories to be significant. So I guess I am gently asking if your basic premise of why you are moving the direction you are is in fact really valid. I am a vacation shooter and weight is huge on my list of reasons why I like the micros. The canon stays at home and the micros come with me. the carry bag of the canon and lenses is really heavy and the carry bag with the epl1 and my gh2 does not even come close. This is, of course, just my experience and your mileage may vary.

--
Curt on Cape Cod

Jefftan said:

only true pocketable camera among the premium compact.

Click to expand...

I was about to say the same ... as another suggestion..AND bearing very much in mind what you have said about particular features you must have ...

The S95 will, I just know (well..it's my thought from usage ) give the equal of either the others for practical purposes..what it will do in any light within reason, is just incredible...BUT a big factor is that on the S95 you can set the FRONT ring to control ISO..the rear wheel then controls EV..and it reallly is a doddle to use any setting of those two ..

It WORKS well , I can assure you.. and as said above.. after using an LX2 and an LX3, I personally doubt if the S95 can be said in any overall comparison, to fall short in the fundamentals...AND it does RAW ,..AND it can be carried in the smallest of pockets..

--
eric-UK
Staffordshire

I agree that this is a very good point, and it's my own "quirkiness" that has me second-guessing the EP-2. I'm one of those people that really obsesses about these things, and I want the "holy grail" for my money... The thing that simply does not exist...

I really did think that the EP-2 would be the perfect compromise, allowing me to comfortably bring it along in almost every situation. But after just a few weeks of use I am finding that not to be the case. I'm constantly leaving it behind because it does not fit-in conveniently enough with what I want to do: hiking, bike touring, walks around town, etc. Yes, it is very significantly smaller and lighter than a DSLR, but the point (for me anyway) is that it's not small and light enough to make-up for the other compromises that I have to accept: smaller sensor, no built-in flash, manual controls a little fiddly/difficult, etc. In other words, why not go with a camera that's nearly as capable (XZ-1, LX5, S95), but offers truly portable size and an all-in-one solution, as opposed to a kit?

For some folks, I think that something like the EP-2 (or other mirrorless) would be perfect. For me, though, it is not. For more "advanced" picture-taking opportunities, I think that I truly do want a DSLR, and I have my eye on the 60D. But I also want a highly-capable "always with me" camera, like an LX5.

Thanks!

curtmill22 said:

A nice set-up, but what I'm discovering is that the unit is large and heavy enough that there's really no reason not to just go all the way and pick-up a DSLR--i.e., if I'm going to have something that large, anyway, I'd prefer to have a viewfinder, built-in flash, and externally-available manual control.

curtmill22 said:

SO I've resolved to sell the m4/3 set-up and eventually pick-up (probably) a Canon 60D. But I also want to have another very nice enthusiast compact, both for the interim, and for grabbing and taking when I don't want to carry the DSLR.

Click to expand...

I find the weight difference in carrying my canon rebel along with lenses, off-camera flash, and accessories and my epl1, lenses and similar accessories to be significant. So I guess I am gently asking if your basic premise of why you are moving the direction you are is in fact really valid. I am a vacation shooter and weight is huge on my list of reasons why I like the micros. The canon stays at home and the micros come with me. the carry bag of the canon and lenses is really heavy and the carry bag with the epl1 and my gh2 does not even come close. This is, of course, just my experience and your mileage may vary.

--
Curt on Cape Cod

Click to expand...

The irony, here, is that I actually sold my S90 (which I liked) to get the EP-2

I haven't exactly "ruled out" the S95, but there were a couple things on the spec-sheet that made me think I preferred the LX5 or XZ-1... I can't even recall, now, what those things were.

To my mind, just about all the cameras in this general class (save for the G12 or P7000) are all about equally-portable. They all "carry" about the same. I don't need something that's pants-pocketable. I only want to be able to more easily slip it into a coat pocket, a belt-loop pouch, or the organizer pocket of a messenger bag, etc.

I will take a closer look at the S95. But what I recall from the S90 is that it was not particularly easy to use in full-manual mode. If I'm going to shoot that way, then I want immediate control of the "big three" settings: ISO, shutter, and aperture. It just seemed to me that getting those things in-order was a bit of a pain. Maybe it's the same deal with the LX5, but at this point something in a review I read made me think that it was easier to get to the manual settings...(?)

Based on what others have said in this thread, about the XZ-1, I think I have ruled it out due to the absence of a direct-route to changing the ISO setting when in manual mode. That's simply a deal-killer, as I am constantly shifting ISO.

Thanks for the input! Much appreciated!

ericN2 said:

Jefftan said:

only true pocketable camera among the premium compact.

Click to expand...

I was about to say the same ... as another suggestion..AND bearing very much in mind what you have said about particular features you must have ...

The S95 will, I just know (well..it's my thought from usage ) give the equal of either the others for practical purposes..what it will do in any light within reason, is just incredible...BUT a big factor is that on the S95 you can set the FRONT ring to control ISO..the rear wheel then controls EV..and it reallly is a doddle to use any setting of those two ..

It WORKS well , I can assure you.. and as said above.. after using an LX2 and an LX3, I personally doubt if the S95 can be said in any overall comparison, to fall short in the fundamentals...AND it does RAW ,..AND it can be carried in the smallest of pockets..

--
eric-UK
Staffordshire

Click to expand...

Michael Doleman said:

I will take a closer look at the S95. But what I recall from the S90 is that it was not particularly easy to use in full-manual mode. If I'm going to shoot that way, then I want immediate control of the "big three" settings: ISO, shutter, and aperture. It just seemed to me that getting those things in-order was a bit of a pain. Maybe it's the same deal with the LX5, but at this point something in a review I read made me think that it was easier to get to the manual settings...(?)

Click to expand...

I've got an S90. In manual mode, you can set your ISO to the Shortcut (S) button on the back and then the aperture and shutter speed to the front ring and rear dial. It is as easy as my Canon DSLR to control the big 3. Aperture and Shutter speed are right there and ISO is 1 button push away.

Both are excellent cameras. If your mind is reeling, rely on your gut. Which one "feels" right? Which one can you picture yourself using?

You are not going to make a bad choice. Both companies make solid products.

Thanks for that. The more I look at it, the more I think you are correct. The thing I keep coming back to is I love the way the LX5 takes full advantage of it's sensor area, with the different aspect-ratios. That's a fun little feature. I also like the ergonomics of the camera, after holding one in my hands. Pretty sure that's what I'm getting. That and a Canon 60D in another few months...

alfredo_tomato said:

Both are excellent cameras. If your mind is reeling, rely on your gut. Which one "feels" right? Which one can you picture yourself using?

You are not going to make a bad choice. Both companies make solid products.

Click to expand...

14 years in retail taught me that too much information tends to confuse a person and makes them doubt their judgement. They over-think. Even though I know about that, I tend to go back and forth on a purchase.

No matter what you buy, you will get buyer's remorse. That's normal. Fight it by going out and taking a bunch of pictures.

Michael Doleman said:

I like to shoot in low-light, and do not like using a flash except as a "last resort."

Click to expand...

The xz-1's lens is better for zooming low light.

lx5's aperture values as you zoom -

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1033&message=36234550&changemode=1

xz-1's aperture values as you zoom -

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1008&message=38015616&changemode=1

Apparently 50mm-equivalent was a very useful zoom range for a prime lens in the days of film, a sort of "standard zoom length".

On the lx5, when zoomed to 50mm-equivalent you're up to f2.7. On the xz-1, you're still at f2.0 - almost a stop better for low light.

Michael Doleman said:

I enjoy using really shallow depths-of-field.

Click to expand...

If you read dpreview's review of the xz-1, they say between it's excellent aperture values and it's zoom range, you can effectively get the same depth of field (blurry background) effect that you could get with a crop-dslr like the 60d with it's kit lens (the dslr could do better with a prime I assume).

I assume this is not nearly as true with the lx5.

Michael Doleman said:

I shoot a lot in manual mode, and need the three main settings--ISO, shutter, and aperture--to be pretty readily available to me. I couldn't possibly care less about "art" filters or "scene" modes.

Click to expand...

Wish I could answer this one, but I don't know. I don't like getting taking any "omg you can't access this control it's to much work" advice that I get online to strongly until I've tried it myself...so many times it turns out to be wrong, or there's some workaround.

Michael Doleman said:

Video is an extremely low priority.

Click to expand...

haha, apparently the lx5 is better for video than the xz1, but this isn't really a drawback then...

Michael Doleman said:

Camera-handling and RAW image quality are of paramount importance.

Click to expand...

RAW image quality seems to be nearly identical. I'm not sure about handling - the lx5 has more of a grip on the front. I think Richard Franiec sells a grip for the xz-1...I really don't know if it's any issue at all though.

Michael Doleman said:

I think that I would buy the XZ-1, save for the fact that I have read that the ISO setting--very critically--is not immediately available. I.e., it's buried in the menu system. If that's truly the case, and it takes three or four clicks to get to, then that's a deal-breaker right there. But if it's reasonably easy to get to, I'd still consider it.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

Click to expand...

haha, good luck...I do think the xz-1's better lens might open up more possibilities for you. I personally do prefer the s95 as I do want something "jeans pocketable".