OK, there are existing threads with some discussion, but I'd like to "cut to the chase" between the newly-announced Canon S90 and the LX3, as "still cameras." Obviously, there's a big difference in the video, so if that's important to you, fine. But let's skip it, and talk about still images.
Here are the significant differences I see:
1. S90 should be quite a bit smaller in the pocket. A bit smaller overall, but mainly quite a bit slimmer.
2. Big huge difference: From what I can tell, "integrated lens covering." No lens cap. "Not that big a deal," but, you know, the LX3's lens cap is a hassle, at the least.
3. Panasonic forces Canon's hand. I'm flatly surprised that the new Canons have 10 megapixels instead of something closer to 20. And the S90 is a clear competitor to the LX3, as a "pocketable high-end" camera. (And a bit off-topic, "good grief," they finally returned the swivel LCD to the G series. Finally
reason to haul around a honking camera that big.)
4. Canon faithful. "Canon color" has its draw. Panasonic has won plenty of new customers, even with those "teal Panasonic skies." Can the simple ability to produce a blue sky win Canon those customers back? It could happen....
5. No 3:2 aspect ratio for the S90. Many other folks have come around to offering all three aspect ratios like the Pannys have. I'd almost always rather use 3:2 or 16:9 over 4:3.
Everything else is plainly obvious -- like the video, and the S90's lack of hot shoe, adapters for filters, and so on. And the less wide, but longer lens.
So. "A more-pocketable Canon with image quality and control somewhat equivalent to the LX3?" Given how I'll probably be able to stop by Best Buy and pick one up in a month or so, "could I resist?" Hmmmmmm....