Reading mode: Light Dark

Sold my LX-5 now i am confused what to get

Go to last post
The choice of in-body Vs in-lens stabilization has a lot to do with sensor size. The bigger the sensor, the harder it is to make in-body work as well as in-lens. The 4/3 and M4/3 sensor is enough smaller than the APS-C or full frame sensors that it's pretty much a non-issue at that size.

The advantage to the Olympus cameras is that they use in-body, and so have stabilization with the Panasonic lenses, including the non-stabilized 20 f/1.7. On the other hand Olympus lenses on the Panasonic bodies have no stabilization.

On that basis, I'd opt for the OM-D, the 12-50 mm lens, the 20 f/1.7, and maybe a 40-150 for a complete kit.
--
Jerry
 
Take a look at my post from a few minutes ago regarding stabilization. I think you really ought to give strong consideration to the Olympus OM-D.

I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't own either the Olympus or Panasonic M4/3 cameras, or any other mirrorless. Too often people recommend what they own or what they lust after, rather than what's best for you. (I have a Canon 60D & several P&S models)

Between Olympus and Panasonic, they have the best lens selection of any of the mirrorless cameras and you can adapt the older 4/3 lenses from Olympus, which are very good. Same with flash. Sony uses a weird proprietary flash on the NEX5n. Lots of flash options around for the M4/3 cameras.

About your LX5. Sounds like you have a case of Seller's Remorse. I've had that affliction a number of times with the result that I have owned several examples of the same model several times with several different models. (list on request) I'm a lot more careful now. So far, I've not been bitten by the "mirrorless" bug.
--
Jerry
 
GeraldW said:
Take a look at my post from a few minutes ago regarding stabilization. I think you really ought to give strong consideration to the Olympus OM-D.

I don't have a dog in this fight as I don't own either the Olympus or Panasonic M4/3 cameras, or any other mirrorless. Too often people recommend what they own or what they lust after, rather than what's best for you. (I have a Canon 60D & several P&S models)

Between Olympus and Panasonic, they have the best lens selection of any of the mirrorless cameras and you can adapt the older 4/3 lenses from Olympus, which are very good. Same with flash. Sony uses a weird proprietary flash on the NEX5n. Lots of flash options around for the M4/3 cameras.

About your LX5. Sounds like you have a case of Seller's Remorse. I've had that affliction a number of times with the result that I have owned several examples of the same model several times with several different models. (list on request) I'm a lot more careful now. So far, I've not been bitten by the "mirrorless" bug.
--
Jerry
Click to expand...
Thanks for your answer Jerry, i don't need to get the cam anytime soon, i´ll make a trip on August, so i still have time on deciding which cam to get, maybe newer models will come in that time. The problem of the OM-D is the price just the body is 1000 usd add a lens and addd a flash, at least 1500, i can´t afford that. At the beginning i considered the rebel t3i and d5100, but what really pushed me away of DSLR cameras is the size and weight of them. that was the main reason i opted and started looking for the mirror less ones as an option. I am not a professional and i am not looking for professional photography, as i mentioned before i like shooting composition pictures, playing with DOF and shutter speeds, and i really felt limited with the lx5 besides it is an excellent camera.
 
I understand. Did you know that the OM-D comes with a small add on flash? Might save having to buy one, at least for a while.

With a kit lens, or the 14-140 mm lens, you probably won't have much more depth of field control than you did with the LX5; because of those lenses' small apertures.
--
Jerry
 
Recall from previous post that I owned a GH1. Believe you'll find the GH2/G2 too big as well. These are smaller than APS-C DSLRs for the most part, but, when it comes to carrying a camera around, they are not ENOUGH smaller to go everywhere like the LX5 because they are so "thick". I frequently wound up leaving my GH1 at home, and carrying the LX5! But, like you, I want more now than the LX5 offers, so...

I agree with GeraldW, go with the OMD EM5, which is MUCH smaller than the G2/GH2, and does include a flash. To minimize your initial investment, suggest getting the kit with the very good 14-42 compact zoom (instead of the weather sealed 12-50 zoom) for $1100 (Amazon or B&H). You are at the same cost to start as several of the options you posted for the GH2/G2, much smaller in size, and with very similar or perhaps even better IQ.

Then, you have the absolute state of the art body in micro 4/3rds, with what looks to be best in class 5 axis image stabilization on every lens you ever put on it, and in a size that approaches the LX5 (when using smallish lenses)l

When you go the Oly route, you have more lens flexibility and you get better low light performance overall than when you go the Panasonic route.

For example, I tried the fine Oly 14-54 4/3rds lens (NOT micro 4/3rds) on my GH1 to get a brighter zoom lens. It worked, but AF was very slow, and of course, no IS, which negated the speed benefit of the faster zoom. Sheesh! Money down the drain on the GH1.

Now switch the body in this scenario to the Oly OMD. Every lens you ever use is now stabilized through the body, all OLY lenses work faster/better for AF, including the Four Thirds lenses like the example I cited above.

If you start with the OMD + 14-42 compact zoom for $1100 USD, then you can add the excellent and tiny 14mm F2.5 Panasonic prime as a low light lens as a next step when finances allow for under $200 (I paid $188 new for mine on ebay). This would be a great starter kit, with lots of upside flexibility through lenses and adapters.

Right now, to my eye the OMD is just a better and more flexible base to work from, allowing you to more fully exploit the range of micro 4/3rds and full 4/3rds lenses more than with a Panasonic body.
--
Create the future or live someone else's. Choose wisely!
 
1100 usd Is the amount of money I was planning for a new camera, I am really considering the OMD EM 5 now, you are right I can get lenses later. one question what about the 1.7f 20mm Panasonic lens instead the 14mm f2.5 ? Obviously thinking to get that lens a couple of months later Thank you very much for your help
Robbster said:
Recall from previous post that I owned a GH1. Believe you'll find the GH2/G2 too big as well. These are smaller than APS-C DSLRs for the most part, but, when it comes to carrying a camera around, they are not ENOUGH smaller to go everywhere like the LX5 because they are so "thick". I frequently wound up leaving my GH1 at home, and carrying the LX5! But, like you, I want more now than the LX5 offers, so...

I agree with GeraldW, go with the OMD EM5, which is MUCH smaller than the G2/GH2, and does include a flash. To minimize your initial investment, suggest getting the kit with the very good 14-42 compact zoom (instead of the weather sealed 12-50 zoom) for $1100 (Amazon or B&H). You are at the same cost to start as several of the options you posted for the GH2/G2, much smaller in size, and with very similar or perhaps even better IQ.

Then, you have the absolute state of the art body in micro 4/3rds, with what looks to be best in class 5 axis image stabilization on every lens you ever put on it, and in a size that approaches the LX5 (when using smallish lenses)l

When you go the Oly route, you have more lens flexibility and you get better low light performance overall than when you go the Panasonic route.

For example, I tried the fine Oly 14-54 4/3rds lens (NOT micro 4/3rds) on my GH1 to get a brighter zoom lens. It worked, but AF was very slow, and of course, no IS, which negated the speed benefit of the faster zoom. Sheesh! Money down the drain on the GH1.

Now switch the body in this scenario to the Oly OMD. Every lens you ever use is now stabilized through the body, all OLY lenses work faster/better for AF, including the Four Thirds lenses like the example I cited above.

If you start with the OMD + 14-42 compact zoom for $1100 USD, then you can add the excellent and tiny 14mm F2.5 Panasonic prime as a low light lens as a next step when finances allow for under $200 (I paid $188 new for mine on ebay). This would be a great starter kit, with lots of upside flexibility through lenses and adapters.

Right now, to my eye the OMD is just a better and more flexible base to work from, allowing you to more fully exploit the range of micro 4/3rds and full 4/3rds lenses more than with a Panasonic body.
--
Create the future or live someone else's. Choose wisely!
Click to expand...
 
emblema said:
1100 usd Is the amount of money I was planning for a new camera, I am really considering the OMD EM 5 now, you are right I can get lenses later. one question what about the 1.7f 20mm Panasonic lens instead the 14mm f2.5 ? Obviously thinking to get that lens a couple of months later Thank you very much for your help
Click to expand...
I also own the f1.7 20mm Panasonic, it is VERY GOOD! The choice just depends on where and how you see yourself using one of these primes. For example, If you want to shoot candids of people indoors, then you might take the 20mm as the best option. If you want to get bigger groups of people, whole rooms, or perhaps landscapes then the 14mm would be a better choice (guess that is why I've acquired them both over the last couple years).

Hope this helps, and enjoy whatever you decide!
 
You know, I really liked the K-01 image quality and ease of use as well as the look/design, but wound up returning it because at the end of the day, with lenses I wanted to use, it was actually in the exact same size range as the other APS-C DSLRs, and if you only use that beautifully compact prime to keep it smaller, it's just too limiting. I posted some reviews on the Pentax forum (and boy did I get blasted for deciding it was just too big by some of the less polite members of that forum, so silly!).

My guess is that it would be too big for the need being discussed here.

Here is one of the test shots I took, great detail, color, and bokeh, but if I was willing to go this big in a body, I'd just get the excellent Pentax K-5 and have a viewfinder as well.

My hope is that the OMD EM5 will come very close to this image quality, but in a much smaller package, and with the viewfind as well.





--
Create the future or live someone else's. Choose wisely!
 
I am sold, going for the EM 5 with the 14-42 mm lens, I could compare some advantages over the g models, later getting good lenses but at least I know that the provided one will make meanwhile his job, thanks for your help
Robbster said:
emblema said:
1100 usd Is the amount of money I was planning for a new camera, I am really considering the OMD EM 5 now, you are right I can get lenses later. one question what about the 1.7f 20mm Panasonic lens instead the 14mm f2.5 ? Obviously thinking to get that lens a couple of months later Thank you very much for your help
Click to expand...
I also own the f1.7 20mm Panasonic, it is VERY GOOD! The choice just depends on where and how you see yourself using one of these primes. For example, If you want to shoot candids of people indoors, then you might take the 20mm as the best option. If you want to get bigger groups of people, whole rooms, or perhaps landscapes then the 14mm would be a better choice (guess that is why I've acquired them both over the last couple years).

Hope this helps, and enjoy whatever you decide!
Click to expand...
 
So much advice and it becomes very confusing doesn't it?.... I've been considering either the G3 or the GH2. Reason for these two over the others that have been mentioned. 1. Some don't have the articulating screens. 2. Some have a flip up and down screen but they don't swing out. To me very limiting. 3. Some don't have an electronic viewfinder which is a must for me.

I was definitely going with the G3 until I saw the price of GH2 had dropped a lot, but... do I want that big of camera. G3 is smaller then the G2 and GH2. So there you go. If you have any place where you can compare cameras I would do that. If the screen doesn't make a big difference, and you don't want an electronic viewfinder then probably most that have been mentioned would work. To me the Sony NEX5n would be my choice then.

--

Karen

If it pleases you then to hell what everyone else thinks!
 
morepix said:
zs7guy said:
Erik Ohlson said:
Get a ZS6 or7, or go for the newest and get a ZS15 - look at Danielsonkin's pictures with his ZS15 from his trip to Spain in the last week or so, in this forum.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Don't do it. It doesn't shoot raw. Who'd buy a camera that doesn't shoot raw? :(
--
Latest at: http://www.pbase.com/morepix/europe_2010
Click to expand...
"RAW" is the most over-rated thing in photography today.

If you feel you just "must" have 'raw', get PhotoShop Elements 8, import your Jpegs into the "raw" processor & you can do anything you want.

In 99% of cases, if you work hard at it, you can make a "RAW" image as good as the out-of-camera Jpeg. In the remaining 1% you MAY get some tiny improvement.

-Erik

--
DP Review Supporter.



'He who hesitates is not only lost - he's miles from the next Exit.'
http://www.flickr.com/ohlsonmh/ [email protected]
 
emblema said:
Sincerly i never considered it it is a really downgrade from the lx5
Click to expand...
Sure, they're apples and oranges -- or is it oranges and apples?

I do, however, think a better-quality superzoom camera, like the FZ150 (which does capture raw) could be a replacement for an LX5, if you'd like to enjoy doing what you can do with that long zoom. If my LX5 bit the dust, I'd consider replacing it with an FZ150 and making do with that until the LX6 materializes. It lacks the f/2 of the LX5, and it's a lot bigger, but:
  • f/2.8 isn't so shabby
  • the lens is reputed to be excellently sharp
  • it has a flippy LCD
  • I hope it might come close to matching the LX5 noise up to ISO 400
  • it has a flash hotshoe
  • it looks like it may focus manually easier than the LX5
In short, I wouldn't mind having one, so it comes to mind to mention. If I didn't have some MFT stuff, I'd probably put that high on the list, as I guess you're doing.
--
Latest at: http://www.pbase.com/morepix/europe_2010
 
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