LX5 or X10

Planning a trip to Barcelona and wondering whether it would be better to go with the LX5 or X10?

X10 much nicer looking and I reckon wins hands down on quality. For me it would be X10 vs GF3X vs GX1 vs NEX5N ie vey high quality in a reasonably small package. NEX5N has best sensor but fuji has viewfiinder, allround ease of control and good quality zoom lens

Was trying to decide if I needed more zoom in say the G12 or P7100 or if something with a faster lens would be most important or 24mm lens?

MBell said:

X10 much nicer looking and I reckon wins hands down on quality. For me it would be X10 vs GF3X vs GX1 vs NEX5N ie vey high quality in a reasonably small package. NEX5N has best sensor but fuji has viewfiinder, allround ease of control and good quality zoom lens

Click to expand...

Both are going to be good cameras

LX5 goes wider with its 24mm equiv setting and also can do multiple aspect ratios without lose of coverage. Additionally there is a very good wide angle adapter taking it to 18mm equiv.

Really depend on how you like to shoot.

For some a X10 zone focused and using the OVF in an external finder style is their preferred method. Others are going to take to the LX5's ultra wide ability.

Its like asking what type of car is best etc. No one size fits all as they are all have some different features and suit different needs

For some the +$230 price difference alone could be a deal breaker

For others, its the 28mm wide end in 4:3 isn't wide enough

Other still really preferred the slightly longer and faster lens paired with the slightly larger sensor

Or the more dedicated controls such as manual zoom ring or EC dial

snapshot09 said:

Planning a trip to Barcelona and wondering whether it would be better to go with the LX5 or X10?

Click to expand...

--
http://www.millsartphotography.com

Optical viewfinder, in my opinion, is essential. I'm going for the X10.
--
Tom Schum

Not saying X10 vf is bad, but you do realize its got no shooting info, no AF point, gives no DoF perception and its only 85% coverage right ?

LX5 on the other hand, does allow you to add on an external finder for a given focal length, giving 100% coverage, and is going to be bigger brighter still. Won't zoom though of course and will cost $150-400 each focal length

Likewise, theres the VF1 evf for the LX5, which while not great, does show 100% view, and shooting info

Have you tried both ??

Tom Schum said:

Optical viewfinder, in my opinion, is essential. I'm going for the X10.
--
Tom Schum

Click to expand...

--
http://www.millsartphotography.com

I was looking at my old LX5 high ISO shots. ISO 400 on the LX5 looks to me comparable to 800 on the X10.

AF seems the same. The X10 has up to 10fps and the viewfinder is actually very usable. The X10 is a little larger.

Oh and video on LX5 suffers from sensor blooming.

I'd go for X10.

I just picked up a LX5 ,really nice and fits in my pocket,really tempted by the X10 but don't really want to lose the pocketability .

millsart said:

Not saying X10 vf is bad, but you do realize its got no shooting info, no AF point, gives no DoF perception and its only 85% coverage right ?

LX5 on the other hand, does allow you to add on an external finder for a given focal length, giving 100% coverage, and is going to be bigger brighter still. Won't zoom though of course and will cost $150-400 each focal length

Likewise, theres the VF1 evf for the LX5, which while not great, does show 100% view, and shooting info

Have you tried both ??

Click to expand...

No, I have tried none.

My last real compact was a Lumix DMC-LZ5, 6mpix and 6 years old now. Still can't be beat for workaday macro shots. I swore I'd never buy another compact without an optical viewfinder. This is why I never found the Canon S95 interesting, but my wife's A590IS was much more to my liking.

More recently I've used DSLRs, but have gotten thoroughly tired of lugging all that gear around. Still, image quality is way up there. I have a Sigma DP2 which some would call a compact, but to me, without the zoom lens it's more a specialty camera. Absolutely great image quality, but not much versatility.

So, adding a viewfinder to an excellent zoomable compact is not for me. Lugging a spare battery is pretty much going to be my limit this time. I'm not really critical enough to worry about the lack of coverage in the optical viewfinder, since if I really get interested I can go to live-view and frame with the display.

Same goes for shooting info. With the viewfinder I can shoot first and pick up the pieces later (with in-camera processing). I've been using my DSLRs in low light mostly, and have found that spot metering seems to deliver good exposures more often than not. With any luck I can use the X10 the same way. Besides I like the look of the camera. I'll take a chance with it.

I'm on the "email me when it becomes available" list at B&H, so I will not be among the first to have an X10. That's ok too.
--
Tom Schum

I have an LX5 and it's a fine camera for your pocket especially after the recent firmware update.

Having said that I'm waiting for an X10 to replace it and the LX5 itself is rumoured to be replaced by something a little bigger next year so don't pay too much.

Personally Id look at the new GF3 with one of the tiny Lumix X lenses ; only marginally bigger and higher quality.

Or would something like the GF3, NEX-C3, or Nikon J1 possibly still work better?

When tried side by side as i did in CamWorld, no contest. To me X10 is a class above.

--

HCB "Photography has not changed since its origin except in its technical aspects, which for me are not important."

Agree! But the real deal breaker is the 28mm on the X10 while having 24mm on the LX5.

Kopend05 said:

I just picked up a LX5 ,really nice and fits in my pocket,really tempted by the X10 but don't really want to lose the pocketability .

Click to expand...

millsart said:

Not saying X10 vf is bad, but you do realize its got no shooting info, no AF point, gives no DoF perception and its only 85% coverage right ?

Click to expand...

So has every viewfinder I have used with the exception of DSLR cameras though. They're still useful on compact cameras if the light is too bright to see the LCD. It's a better framing indication than not being able to see anything at all, and you can adapt to incomplete coverage with experience and trial and error.

I just sold an LX5. Couldn't get good color out of it even shooting RAW, developing color profiles, etc.. I got much better colors with my LX3 shooting RAW. JPEG - forget it.

I judge colors by how well flesh tones are rendered - with pleasing being the operative term. Fuji's high end cameras are celebrated for their color rendition, especially skin tones, and if the X10 performs similarly, it will be far better than the LX5 for taking pictures of people. Then again, if the X10 has only fairly good flesh tones, it will crush the LX5.

I still have my LX3 - I love 24mm ability that fits in a pocket. I'm either going to get an S100 or X100. Or maybe both, for my next small camera. The LX3 is dying a slow salt water death so I need something that will fit in my pocket. But the X10 calls to me much more than an S100 with f/5.6 on the long end.