Why xz1 is still mentioned contrary to the lx5

where are you coming up with the XZ-1 as a poor landscape camera? Is it your own experience? I have seen over the years plenty of nice landscape photos taken with it posted here on this forum and elsewhere. I have no idea why there aren't more LX-5 posts over in the Panny compact forum but folks that post here love there XZ-1s and I don't recall seeing comments about it being poor for landscapes. My XZ-2 does just fine.

LX7 is a much better replacement to LX5 - F1.4 lens, better sensor, 120p video, reasonable price.

XZ-2 is a bulkier camera and (initially) priced unreasonably high. And also happens to be released around the same time as RX-100.

In addition, prior to XZ-2 release, XZ-1's price had dropped to $199 for over a week. This means there is a significantly larger XZ-1 user base than XZ-2.

I must also jump in on the criticism of the XZ-1 as being a poor landscape camera. I used it as my DSLR backup camera about 6 months ago, on a trip to the U.S. Southwest. Made a point of taking at least a few shots of most everything shot with the DSLR. No complaints whatsoever. in fact, I felt it quite equal to the SLR for most shots. It's a great camera in good light. And most shots were in good light. I have considered using the XZ-1 camera in liu of purchasing a DSLR lens of the same approximate range (since I sold the DSLR lens used on the trip to try out the Canon EOS-M system, which I have since returned, leaving me with no DSLR lens in that range). I (personally) feel the XZ-1 is that good.

fotosplaneta said:

fotosplaneta wrote:

"...the XZ1 doesn't produce very good landscape pictures but its pictures taken at a closer range distance look good (but grainy)." The 16:9 pictures taken with the LX5 are specially wide and with certain "mojo".

Click to expand...

I beg to differ here (see a few samples below). Granted, if you mean that the 24 MM 16 x 9 spectrum photos of the LX series show better with regards to landscape photos than the regular 28 MM view of the XZ-1 - then yes, that is agreeable. So I don't agree with the way it was stated that the XZ-1 doesn't produce very good landscape photos.

fotosplaneta said:

What is the reason the XZ1 is still appreciatedc contrary to LX5?

Click to expand...

Panasonic releases tons of cameras (or so they have), as a result, there's a wealth of postings regarding the latest and greatest on that forum. Since the LX7 trumps the LX5 in "newness," it stands to reason that most folks would be talking about the newer cam. Olympus, on the other hand, doesn't release too many worthwhile P&S releases. Sure, they released the XZ-2, but it didn't have the hold and devotion that the previous XZ-1 had - thus the postings (and demand) is still quite active on this forum for the XZ-1. But I must say that overall IQ-wise, I prefer the LX5 over the LX7. And finally, the postings are few and far between on this Oly forum anymore. Compare the number of postings here with the numbers over on the Panasonic forum.

Here are some landscape type of photos taken with the XZ-1. Remember, you can do 16 x 9 in the XZ-1 also

fotosplaneta said:

fotosplaneta

www.flickr.com/photos/fotosplaneta

Click to expand...

--
Have a great one....
Bernd (Ben) W. Herrmann
North Carolina, USA
link

Thanks for sharing. Panasonic has many advanced aspects to its cameras-especially the wonderful spot and pinpoint focus.

On the other hand, Olympus excels at what I would call "photogenic" output. My XZ-1 JPEG files are outputting to true 11x15 inch image area beautifully.

fotosplaneta said:

fotosplaneta wrote:

Checking the olympus and panasonic forums it is noticeable that the XZ1 is still regularly mentioned and commented but currently it is very unusual to find a new post about the LX5. Both cameras apparently share the same sensor and were released to the market more or less at the same time, hence they should have similar technology. Own both cameras, the LX5 seems better built and has more bells and whistles, the XZ1 doesn't produce very good landscape pictures but its pictures taken at a closer range distance look good (but grainy). The 16:9 pictures taken with the LX5 are specially wide and with certain "mojo". What is the reason the XZ1 is still appreciated contrary to LX5?

fotosplaneta

www.flickr.com/photos/fotosplaneta

Click to expand...

With all due respect, I have to disagree with your opinion of the XZ-1 not performing well with landscape pictures. Here is an example of one even at long range that I feel has great color, sharpness, and certainly doesn't appear grainy to me.

No Regrets said:

No Regrets wrote:

No Regrets said:

fotosplaneta wrote:

Checking the olympus and panasonic forums it is noticeable that the XZ1 is still regularly mentioned and commented but currently it is very unusual to find a new post about the LX5. Both cameras apparently share the same sensor and were released to the market more or less at the same time, hence they should have similar technology. Own both cameras, the LX5 seems better built and has more bells and whistles, the XZ1 doesn't produce very good landscape pictures but its pictures taken at a closer range distance look good (but grainy). The 16:9 pictures taken with the LX5 are specially wide and with certain "mojo". What is the reason the XZ1 is still appreciated contrary to LX5?

fotosplaneta

www.flickr.com/photos/fotosplaneta

Click to expand...

With all due respect, I have to disagree with your opinion of the XZ-1 not performing well with landscape pictures. Here is an example of one even at long range that I feel has great color, sharpness, and certainly doesn't appear grainy to me.

Click to expand...

I thought I'd add another long range landscape in low light, hand held.

Hi ,

Your two images show the strength and weakness of the XZ-1's CCD , and I find exactly the same results, in daylight the great lens shows excellent detail better than many kit lenses on larger cameras .

In low light though the sensor just can't cope , the detail is smudged throughout due to excessive noise reduction, more detail can be extracted from the raw files though.

folks get upset when you point out that that the camera has a small CCD and Olympus could not do anymore with this sensor thats why nothing in this area in firmware updates and while they kept the lens the XZ-2 went to a CMOS sensor with better low light capabilities.

Aaron Sur said:

Aaron Sur wrote:

Hi ,

Your two images show the strength and weakness of the XZ-1's CCD , and I find exactly the same results, in daylight the great lens shows excellent detail better than many kit lenses on larger cameras .

In low light though the sensor just can't cope , the detail is smudged throughout due to excessive noise reduction, more detail can be extracted from the raw files though.

folks get upset when you point out that that the camera has a small CCD and Olympus could not do anymore with this sensor thats why nothing in this area in firmware updates and while they kept the lens the XZ-2 went to a CMOS sensor with better low light capabilities.

Click to expand...

Hi Aaron,

I agree with your points regarding the low light performance of the small sensor. I just wanted to also point out that some of the smudging/blurring of detail in that particular photo was due to me hand holding instead of using a tripod and also from me standing on a draw bridge that keep vibrating and flexing as the traffic was driving past behind me.

I'm still very much a beginner in this photography hobby, but I've been having a blast with this little camera. I love how small it is, so that I can have it with me when I come across a picture opportunity. I have yet to try shooting in raw and learn what that is all about. That will come with time.

And I disagree about the XZ1 not being a good landscape camera.

I like both cameras, think they are very different and provide different shooting experiences. My main love of the Panasonic cameras is the ability to shoot wide in 16:9 aspect ratio as a 'native' aspect and I do agree that is compelling reason to use the panny over the oly for landscapes. I'll never understand why Panasonic dropped that feature for the ILC cameras (but explains why I don't own any Panasonic ILC cameras).

The updates are really different and might explain what you are seeing. The LX7 is basically the same thing but improved compared to the LX5 (I'm not convinced entirely, as the LX5 seems to have sharper lens than the LX7). And it was initially sold at $299 in US and currently sells quite often at prices lower than $325. For me personally, I haven't updated because I'd have to buy the newer EVF and then it becomes expensive.

The XZ2 is a totally different camera than the XZ1 and might not appeal to anyone wanting a very small camera. And it is very expensive and has stayed expensive - I never see it for less than $450. Plus, you can buy EPM2 plus lens for less money, which is hard to overlook. And there have been several APS-c sized compacts since these cameras were released --- and constant rumors of Oly premium compact makes me keep waiting.

I haven't upgraded either camera because I really don't need the upgrades and the value isn't justified for me.

And finally, this website dpreview NEVER did a review for the XZ2.

Pikme said:

Pikme wrote:

And finally, this website dpreview NEVER did a review for the XZ2.

Click to expand...

Your numerous posts, in this Oly CC forum, decrying the lack of a full review of the Oly XZ-2 are answered by Simon Joinson, Editor In Chief of DPReview:

"Anyone who thinks our output has reduced needs to understand that from 2007 we switched focus to ILCs, which take around 4x longer than compacts. This was because our audience made it clear, in no uncertain (and in mostly insulting) terms that they weren't interested in reviews of point and shoot models any more. We listened and concentrated on high end cameras."

This quote is located in Mr Joinson's post: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52182805 .

Any further complaints about reviews of the XZ-2, or other compact cameras, will be considered off topic. Please post your concerns about this subject to the new Feedback and Suggestions forum, located here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/5001..._source=mainmenu&utm_medium=text&ref=mainmenu .

Steve