LX7 - Not Bad for $299!

Bassman2003

Veteran Member
Messages
1,883
Reaction score
655
Location
US
f7be641a319048b3a7453f220e2962e6.jpg



92c3b692271342d586a68fa202cb0ed4.jpg

These two images were taken in Delaware last week on vacation. This was the first trip I did not take my 5D MKII along. The little LX7 can produce nice images though. These were shot in RAW and processed in Ljghtroom 5.

I want to upgrade to the LX100 but I need unlimited video recording for my "little" camera. Anyway, just thought I would share some love for the not dead yet LX7!
 
If you consider grossly over sharpened, horribly grainy images with blown highlights good then yes, the LX7 is not bad for $299.
A little extreme and mean spirited don't you think? Wow. The settings used in these photos are clearly the decision of the photographer. They were shot in RAW and processed to his tastes. Most people understand that whether you shoot in RAW or JPEG you have a very broad range of settings that you can adjust to suit your individual taste. The LX7 has proven itself as being a very capable camera with great image quality and they're are numerous photos here on DPR and around the internet that prove it.

-Tim
Ah yes, I forget I'm now in the land of unearned platitudes.

The images were not grossly over-sharpened? Frankly, I can do better with my smart phone.

I had two LX7's. I consider it to be one of the most over-rated cameras you can buy. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
At the pixel level I too feel that the images are a bit over sharpened but I felt that they still looked beautiful at normal screen viewing. Maybe the OP could use a lighter touch in his processing but that's a reflection on the photographer not the camera. I stand by what I said and I agree that the LX7 is a very fine camera. It just seems that you are taking this opportunity to needlessly bash this camera and the OP for whatever personal reasons you have.

-Tim
Why is criticism considered "bashing" around here.
It not your criticism, it is your condescending and cocky attitude followed up by some mediocre images that supposedly prove a point.
 
Ignore the criticism - you've done well to pick up a very capable little camera for the price, and you will enjoy using it I'm sure. Yes, of course it has limitations - it's a small sensor camera for heaven's sake! - but the LX series has always more than compensated for that with versatile usability, and its photographic 'winner' : variable AR with constant field of view.

I would add one note of caution however - you may find that shooting RAW with it brings little advantage, given 1) the size of the sensor and 2) the quality of JPEGs produced by the Venus engine.

Ok, I own the LX100, but the difference between the IQ of the two cameras is really only discernible in two things : subject isolation at full aperture, and low light shooting with higher ISO. And TBH, I nearly bought the LX7, until I saw the LX100.
 
If you consider grossly over sharpened, horribly grainy images with blown highlights good then yes, the LX7 is not bad for $299.
Oh dear, and DPR's first line of the LX7's 'pros' reads:

Excellent photo quality, with less noise than typical compact cameras.

Nuff said!
 
Lovely pictures. They provoke a calming reaction in me (which clearly they don't for everybody!).

Dave
 
If you consider grossly over sharpened, horribly grainy images with blown highlights good then yes, the LX7 is not bad for $299.
A little extreme and mean spirited don't you think? Wow. The settings used in these photos are clearly the decision of the photographer. They were shot in RAW and processed to his tastes. Most people understand that whether you shoot in RAW or JPEG you have a very broad range of settings that you can adjust to suit your individual taste. The LX7 has proven itself as being a very capable camera with great image quality and they're are numerous photos here on DPR and around the internet that prove it.

-Tim
Ah yes, I forget I'm now in the land of unearned platitudes.

The images were not grossly over-sharpened? Frankly, I can do better with my smart phone.

I had two LX7's. I consider it to be one of the most over-rated cameras you can buy. But hey, whatever floats your boat.
At the pixel level I too feel that the images are a bit over sharpened but I felt that they still looked beautiful at normal screen viewing. Maybe the OP could use a lighter touch in his processing but that's a reflection on the photographer not the camera. I stand by what I said and I agree that the LX7 is a very fine camera. It just seems that you are taking this opportunity to needlessly bash this camera and the OP for whatever personal reasons you have.

-Tim
Why is criticism considered "bashing" around here.
It not your criticism, it is your condescending and cocky attitude followed up by some mediocre images that supposedly prove a point.
Woof, woof.
 
Well with 40 years experience you should have experimented and got better results than you did IMO. It just needed to be setup correctly that's all! And please you tweaked the higher ISO Canon image in lightroom. I see similar grain and even some smudging in the rafters and color noise even after lightroom. Some of the grain might be the uploads to DPR too. My uploads don't always look as good as my images do locally. My ISO 640 in the museum in Boston was in very low light...it was very dim like one or two candles lit level and yet SOOC looks great. I never needed ISO 640 in the transportation museum...F1.4.

If I did the same as you with lightroom or DXO pro optics even neat image I could clean my images up a bit better but I wanted to show SOOC jpg quality when setup correctly. Plus any of them when printed the noise would be gone.

I do like the Canon colors tho thus is why I shift the auto white balance in my Panasonic cameras and they come very close to Canon colors and my 7D. I rarely have to touch the colors. Most of the time even the auto color balance in PS or any other program changes nothing after shooting with my color adjustments.

And with the F1.4 lens you don't need to use high ISO's 99% of the time. Except for very dim museums. Plus it takes fantastic low light video.

So its a fine camera as is your S110! I have been impressed with the posted images from that little gem. G15 looks good too!
Thanks (I think) for some of the positive comments.

I'm not an LX7 hater. A good camera indeed, not the best but, good.

F1.4 is OK but then DOF becomes an issue.

All the images I posted were shot in RAW and converted to JPEG at half the resolution of the originals. I don't post my best shots on the interweb, as a rule. I've already had people steal my images and post them elsewhere to knock my work. That's fine, comes with the territory when you question some of the "over enthusiastic" claims of fan boys and gals.

On these forums, you can paint a Mona Lisa and you'll get harshly criticized so, I don't bother.

If one doesn't believe me, just buy a G15, shoot side a by side with an LX7 and see for yourself. That's what I did. I'm not a Canon fanboy either, sold all them too.

I'm off. Tired of the bludgeoning.
 
If you consider grossly over sharpened, horribly grainy images with blown highlights good then yes, the LX7 is not bad for $299.
Don't know what to say here Peter. These were the first two images I have shared in a long time on this site. Don't know why one would post in the future. What is to be gained having to fend off the arrows?

I put these up hastily I admit. I forgot how serious one has to be in order to post photos. I am so ashamed to enjoy a few images. Since these were not going to a gallery, I did not focus on sharpening and noise. (They were shot at ISO 80, so the processing caused the noise and my sharpening defaults were set too high).

So to clear my name I have re-processed these two shots just for Peter. I am feverishly trying to learn how to use the camera now that I have been called out btw...

Peter - These are a few vacation snaps on "P" mode. Give it a rest.

c3daa8125b13458a97a7b5446e99bb7f.jpg

696537923e8d4f069d780a920324f6b8.jpg
Sorry for the negative criticism.

Your redo's are much, much better! Kudo's.

Fine shots.
 
Thanks for your follow up Peter. I will treat this as forum mis-understanding and be happy going forward. Criticism is welcomed, tone is what offends folks.

The LX7 is my "fun" camera. My 5Ds with L lenses never leave manual mode. The LX7 represents just pointing the camera and letting it make all of the decisions (which I then fix in post). I also keep the auto-ISO limited to 200 as the noise is too much for me above ISO200.
 
Thanks for your follow up Peter. I will treat this as forum mis-understanding and be happy going forward. Criticism is welcomed, tone is what offends folks.

The LX7 is my "fun" camera. My 5Ds with L lenses never leave manual mode. The LX7 represents just pointing the camera and letting it make all of the decisions (which I then fix in post). I also keep the auto-ISO limited to 200 as the noise is too much for me above ISO200.
Oh, I didn't mean to be mean. It's hard to relate a thought in text form. What brews in my mind is not usually the same as what appears in the text.

I did kinda forget I was in the Panasonic forum.

I'll recant and say the LX7 is indeed a great camera and at $299 for a new one, a bargain. I mean it.

How's that?
 
Well with 40 years experience you should have experimented and got better results than you did IMO. It just needed to be setup correctly that's all! And please you tweaked the higher ISO Canon image in lightroom. I see similar grain and even some smudging in the rafters and color noise even after lightroom. Some of the grain might be the uploads to DPR too. My uploads don't always look as good as my images do locally. My ISO 640 in the museum in Boston was in very low light...it was very dim like one or two candles lit level and yet SOOC looks great. I never needed ISO 640 in the transportation museum...F1.4.
Yes, you have to "tweak" all RAW files.

Similar noise you admit. From a higher ISO, I say. Draw your own conclusion.

Smudging in the rafters? at F/2.0 the rafters are way out of the DOF. Naturally, there will be little detail there.

The G15 shot at ISO800 is even better and I can assure you, the LX7 has trouble at that ISO.

That doesn't make it a bad camera. My XZ-1 is awful at above 400 with it's CCD sensor but, I love it none-the-less. In fact at 400 and below, no camera is sharper and more colorful than the XZ-1 (maybe the Canon G12 and LX5 but, I'm speculating at this point).
If I did the same as you with lightroom or DXO pro optics even neat image I could clean my images up a bit better but I wanted to show SOOC jpg quality when setup correctly. Plus any of them when printed the noise would be gone.

I do like the Canon colors tho thus is why I shift the auto white balance in my Panasonic cameras and they come very close to Canon colors and my 7D. I rarely have to touch the colors. Most of the time even the auto color balance in PS or any other program changes nothing after shooting with my color adjustments.
The only Panny I've owned that did a good job with colors was the GX7. I haven't owned them all but a great many. Panny has always had "cool" color balance and unnatural skin tones. I too have shifted my Pannies to the warm side but, they never really competed with the Canon or Olympus colors, IMHO. Not quite as bad as Sony but, close.
And with the F1.4 lens you don't need to use high ISO's 99% of the time. Except for very dim museums. Plus it takes fantastic low light video.

So its a fine camera as is your S110! I have been impressed with the posted images from that little gem. G15 looks good too!
Actually, the LX7 is a very good camera and shot within it's sweet spot parameters, quite capable:

82afb631e71349f9b795516ee2e94f8b.jpg



I wouldn't tell anyone not to get one. I've kinda settled on Olympus for the time being and I certainly don't see a compelling reason to switch back to Panasonic. Perhaps you could persuade me?

I do miss the GX1 though. Loved that camera.
 
I think you and I have spoken before about this. I remember the images you posted of the raw processed LX7 images. You complained back then about the colors.

I get deep depth of field with my LX7 at F2 when shooting wide. Was that a long zoom image you posted? I am not at my computer...posting from my cell right now.

There is at least one other guy on this forum that used the G15 for a while. But that person was comparing it to the FZ200.

I seem to remember an S110 in the same conversation. Maybe it was you! :). That ISO 800 image you posted from the G15 looked very good.

I am still plenty happy with the LX7...its still fast at 90mm at F2.3 so I never have to go as high as ISO 800. That one shot I posted at IS0 640 is quite good...with a little tweek its fantastic.

It seems colors that people prefer are all over the map. My stepson who has a Canon DSLR saw some of my FZ200 images before I changed the colors to what I like and he loves them over his Canon. Go figure. To each his/her own I guess.

Ron
 
The image I mentioned you tweeked was from the S110 and you said it was a jpg. I know you have to process raw files to get a jpg. I have been shooting for at least 35 years myself. Film SLRs starting in very early 1980s. I also grew up using and working on computers....I worked for Wang Labs through the 80s so I have seen it all. Proprietary Wang PCs and main frames and eventually IBM based PCs of Wang design. Don't laugh I worked on hard drives that were 10MB and the size of a clothes washing machine. LOL. These were for the big main frame computers. Boy have things changed!
 
The image I mentioned you tweeked was from the S110 and you said it was a jpg. I know you have to process raw files to get a jpg. I have been shooting for at least 35 years myself. Film SLRs starting in very early 1980s. I also grew up using and working on computers....I worked for Wang Labs through the 80s so I have seen it all. Proprietary Wang PCs and main frames and eventually IBM based PCs of Wang design. Don't laugh I worked on hard drives that were 10MB and the size of a clothes washing machine. LOL. These were for the big main frame computers. Boy have things changed!
The S110 shot was from RAW. If I stated JPEG, my error.

Yep. I remember Wang. I worked for DEC in Marlboro, MA. I also remember the old disk drives. I worked on some of the first microprocessors. Learned tube theory in technical school. Was in the last class to use slide rules. 4K of RAM was unprecedented at the time!

I put together my first dark room about 43 years ago, when I was 14. But I like to keep up with the times. Had all the digital camera gear I care to mention. Name a camera, I can probably show you an image or two I shot with it. Don't dabble in FF, not that rich. Settled on M43 for the best balance of price, quality and size but I probably use my Galaxy S5 more and more as my primary shooter now. I've grown to appreciate the handiness and convenience. The quality is not bad either, in good light of course.

069a8ab4207b46738d62c1adbc61c04d.jpg

Even a small camera, like the S110 can be a pain to carry around. You have to have a small case, wrist strap, a spare battery or two, a couple of memory cards, etc, etc. Much easier to whip out the cell phone, snap, poke at the screen a few times and away the image goes to friends and family. I find I take many more pictures now with the smart phone and am becoming quite creative with it. Video quality is especially, surprisingly good. The built-in processing apps are getting quite amazing. The smart phone has reignited my passion for photography, believe it or not.

My favorite point & shoot is the XZ-1 with the G1X a close second. In fact I'll be buying another one as soon as a deal comes my way. Know anyone? I had all the P&S's including G1X II, RX100 and G7X which are superb cameras. Had Coolpix A's, Fuji X100s, EOS M, all the NEX series, a6000, etc, etc.

I may have been too harsh on the LX7, I apologize. It's all just recreation anyhoo.

I have several on-line galleries but I don't post links publicly. I can send you a link if you ask via PM.



Cheers.
 
I did kinda forget I was in the Panasonic forum.
The words "sour" and "grapes" come to mind for some reason. I've rarely found negative or spiteful behaviour here. Quite the reverse. And FWIW, your original comment did come over as harsh rather than constructive.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top