GX80 vs LX100

I was thinking of one of those lenses as a supplement to the 12-32 kit zoom. Working without a zoom at all is a more challenging proposition (and probably more expensive too). Remember that in most cases friends and family aren't going to wait while you change lenses.

So use the kit zoom most of the time, and the prime to supplement in the areas where it is weak.

However, you might still be better off spending more time learning to use your current LX100 to best effect. Perhaps post some shots showing what didn't work as you hoped and ask for comments.

Mark

It's my first... normal i'm on trials ;-)

It's not really what didnt work...

In fact, yeah. My major problem with the lx100 is the jpeg format. The IQ is medium or bad (even with my own paramaters). BUT the raw format is good. Perhaps just a little too noisy and a bit more detail would have been better.

The other little issue is the 12mpx => impossible to crop (or just a bit).

All the pics i take ask a lot of work to be what i like.

Kinsi said:

The other little issue is the 12mpx => impossible to crop (or just a bit).
All the pics i take ask a lot of work to be what i like.

Click to expand...

m4/3 doesn't give you that much extra to crop. Did you need to crop because you just got the framing wrong at the time or because the LX100, at maximum zoom, didn't give you enough reach (and you couldn't get closer). If the latter, then m4/3 gives you the option of longer focal lengths (fairly cheaply in the case of 40-150 f4/5.6 and 45-150 f4/5.6 zooms).

Mark

Hard to answer.
It depends the case really. But sometimes a details u want to make bigger.
Another problem, it's the crisp effects and details in landscape pics

Kinsi said:

Ok i believe i understant and what lens can u use to have equivalent iso???
Not too pricey but good with the gx80 (it's to make budget comparaison)...
So 14-32 + f1.8

Click to expand...

There is no exact equivalent but the 12-35/2.8 would be the closest you can get with a zoom.

There are many F1.4-2 primes you could add, Oly 12/2, Pana 15/1.7, Oly 17/1.8, Pana 20/1.7, Pana 25/1.7, Oly 25/1.8, Pana 25/1.4, Sigma 30/1.4, Pana 42.5/1.7, Oly 45/1.8. All good lenses, just depends on what focal lengths you like.

The Olympus 45/1.8 is a particular bargain if you find one used on eBay, should cost about $200-250. Plus it would let you use an ISO 3 stops lower than the 12-32, 1 stop lower than your LX100, and will give you more control over DOF. This lens is more of a portrait lens than a general purpose all around lens though.

The 15/1.7 or 17/1.8 are both good general purpose primes. These lenses will allow you to use an ISO that is about the same as your LX100, but keep in mind that this means noise performance will not be hugely better than with the LX100, as the LX100 is only about half a stop or so worse than an M43 camera.

As others have mentioned, 16MP is not a big increase in resolution over 12MP, the difference is only about 10% linear resolution, or an image 480 pixels wider (4592 x 3448 vs 4112 x 3088). So while you can crop slightly more, don't expect be able to crop in twice as close as you can with your LX100.

So, again, if you're content to stick in the 24-70mm equiv range, and don't plan to add an ultrawide, or a telephoto or some other unique lens to take advantage of the interchangeable nature of the system, switching cameras doesn't make much sense.

It's not really that it's mostly to have a system who is equivalent (in IQ + capabilities) if i'll bought it... and after, be able to add lens.

But yeah it's really really really super expensive.

Kinsi said:

Hu? It's not wrong see by yourself on this site for example.
If you use comparative labo page you can clearly see the lx100 better than the gx70 or 80...
BUT
It's my question... in these tests... what lens did they use???

Click to expand...

They use the best available fixed focal lens. Not the kitzoom!

Ok thx it's a precious info!!!

TheClueless said:

What I'm saying is that that LX100 is very noticeably soft, even more so than a MFT crippled with the 12-32 3.5-5.6. With a 12-35 2.8, a GM1 for example will destroy the LX100.

Click to expand...

Wrong, and you got a bad copy.

? explain?

Kinsi said:

? explain?

Click to expand...

The (LX100)-(D-LUX 109) is plenty sharp, and there are plenty of images on the internet proving so...Flickr is one. If there are photographers who have this issue, it is either the user or they have a bad copy, but i would go with the first option.

Yeah but it's true : if i use only jpeg... it's not really good.
BUT in raw + LR, it's super.

Kinsi said:

Yeah but it's true : if i use only jpeg... it's not really good.
BUT in raw + LR, it's super.

Click to expand...

The price you pay for quality in digital....RAW.

Better than processing film, time wise that is.

Ha yeah sure!

Kinsi said:

The question is open.
I know it's not the same BUT the gx80 with 14-32mm is pocketable... like the lx100
The question here is: what device have the best IQ.
When i see the review, in labo, the lx100 is better in iq than the Gx7 and gx8...
So as we know the gx80 seems to have an iq egal to the gx7-gx8 can we speculate, the lx100 stays better in terms of iq???

Click to expand...

Are you new to photography? Obviously the GX80 is the answer. It is a Swiss Army knife compared to the other

??? we have discussed this:
To have a IQ equal to the lx100, the gx80 need a len 2.8 12-35...
so it's super expensive to have a equivalent of lx100 !!!!

LX100 = 600 euros

GX80 = 700 + 700 euros = 1400 euros

To obtain the same IQ...

We can speculate:

If you want a better zoom...

gx80 + lens zoom : +> add 700 euros...

For 700 euros i can take the fz1000...

Kinsi said:

??? we have discussed this:
To have a IQ equal to the lx100, the gx80 need a len 2.8 12-35...
so it's super expensive to have a equivalent of lx100 !!!!
LX100 = 600 euros
GX80 = 700 + 700 euros = 1400 euros
To obtain the same IQ...
We can speculate:
If you want a better zoom...
gx80 + lens zoom : +> add 700 euros...
For 700 euros i can take the fz1000...

Click to expand...

A GX80 and:

- 12-35 f2.8 (700 EUR) will match an LX100 (600 EUR)

- 14-140 (450 EUR) will match an FZ1000 (700 EUR)

- 9-18 (350 EUR) will match a Nikon DL18-50 (700 EUR)

- 15mm/1.7 (450 EUR) will match a Ricoh GR (600 EUR)

- 17mm/1.8 (400 EUR) will match a Fujifilm X100T (700 EUR)

- 45mm/1.8 (250 EUR) will match... no point and shoot in the world will match it

- 75mm/1.8 (600 EUR) will match... no point and shoot in the world will match it

- 300mm/4 (2500 EUR) will match... no point and shoot in the world will match it

I've commented before, and I've been reading for the past few days. I'm not sure what you don't get - if you're only using a normal zoom lens (12-35mm in m4/3 terms), your LX100 can do just about as well as most options, regardless of format. HOWEVER most of us want the option to be able to use lots of different lenses, and that's when it starts making more sense to get one body and different lenses for different uses.

Nope sorry i don't get it at all.
We had this conversation and im totally lost.

GX80 in kit => 12-33 f3.5 - 5.6 = no match for LX100 (cause of f1.8 => more noise for gx80 with f3.5).

SO

If i want a match => i need a 12-35 f2.8 => and it's not totally true cause of lx100 f1.8.
In this case : GX80 = 600 euros nude + Lens 12-35 f2.8 = 700 euros = 1500 euros for a device that can just match lx100.
OK?

So a device of 1500 euros match a device of 600 euros!!!!!

If i want in addition a zoom +> i must add a lens of 14-140 = 450 euros...

SO =>

GX80 + lens to match lx 100 (nearly) + versatility with zoom = 1950 euros

Versus

LX100 + FZ1000 = 1100 euros...




Im just in euro addition here for the same quality.

Kinsi said:

Nope sorry i don't get it at all.
We had this conversation and im totally lost.

GX80 in kit => 12-33 f3.5 - 5.6 = no match for LX100 (cause of f1.8 => more noise for gx80 with f3.5).

SO

If i want a match => i need a 12-35 f2.8 => and it's not totally true cause of lx100 f1.8.
In this case : GX80 = 600 euros nude + Lens 12-35 f2.8 = 700 euros = 1500 euros for a device that can just match lx100.
OK?

So a device of 1500 euros match a device of 600 euros!!!!!

If i want in addition a zoom +> i must add a lens of 14-140 = 450 euros...

SO =>

GX80 + lens to match lx 100 (nearly) + versatility with zoom = 1950 euros

Versus

LX100 + FZ1000 = 1100 euros...

Im just in euro addition here for the same quality.

Click to expand...

Ok, then what happens when you want an ultra wide angle field of view like from an Olympus 7-14mm lens? Neither the LX100 nor the FZ1000 can do that.

What if you want to use a fisheye lens like a Samyang 7.5mm? Neither the LX100 nor the FZ1000 can do that.

What if you want to do portraiture with a lens that has shallow depth of field, like a 75mm 1.8? Neither the LX100 nor the FZ1000 can do that.

Let me know when you have a solution to those questions.