LX3 comments

[DigitalSparrow]

Have to tell it as it is - the LC1 is not the answer to everyone's
prayers - just a very well made camera ahead of its time - mainly a
showpiece to exhibit the fact that Panasonic could build an
impressive camera if it wanted to.

The wonder of the LC1 is that it was a well thought out unique camera
that was built like a tank a loss-leader for Panasonic and valued
especially because it is no longer made. Not so much that it was a
statement of imaging perfection - however it doesn't do that bad a
job.

Tom,

After trying long enough to land an LC1 someplace/anyplace, I plunged and got the Leice version.

Having it in my hands for only the last two days, I am impressed even by today's standards. Definitely not the fastest, not the most feature rich, not the bext EVF... but the controls are where you can use them quickly and simply. I'd take them over the joystick of the LX3 (or any other current Panny) anytime.

As for picture quality, here's a sample of one of the first shots I took when I first got it.



This Digilux 2 won't replace my R4 or GX-100 for everyday use, but its a camera I will enjoy using simply beause of its feel and results. I will need to see much better LX3 results before considering it further... while hoping for better controls in the next variant... or better yet, an LC2.

 

[kissdadookie]

Here's a quick preview with some sample pics, the classic Panasonic smearing seems to be back in full swing, especially the first sample shot which was supposedly shot at under ISO 200:

http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/9604.html

and one more here:

http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsId=3580

 

[Tom Caldwell]

The LC1 and its Leica equivalent are one of the classics (your acquisition is someone else's loss) - it should be in a glass case but like all good tools it needs to be taken out and thoughtfully carressed every now and then.

Seriously there is too much ranting and raving about the image quality of every new camera released - in the end it overlooks the fact that the real joy of photography is the photographic experience of using the tool and making a good capture.

A good tool rewards thoughtful craftsmanship.

Therefore thinking photographers drift towards the tools that are a pleasure to use. I found with my LC1 and also the GR-D that usng such a thoughtfully put together camera made me a better photographer as with their intuitive controls they encouraged me to play with the settings - over and over again. Practice makes perfect and something that encourages your to practise the photographic craft must be a better camera. Of course this would not be possible with a camera that had lousy imaging performance - however even if it has not got the ultimate in IQ the fact that it has extended your abilities means that the camera brings out the best in your talent and of course your very best efforts are always better with this sort of camera than a camera with the highest IQ used in a less than perfect manner.

I will judge the LX3 when I can feel and use one - I am not about to make any predictions yet based on "sample images". The sample images only show what someone can do with the camera and is a poor indication of what I can do if inspired by the mutual communication between myself and the tool.

By the way - on the LC1 native b&w at 400 ISO produces classic images "to die for". Leica Rangefinder deja vu.

--
Tom Caldwell

 

[paulobiz]

Here's a quick preview with some sample pics, the classic Panasonic
smearing seems to be back in full swing, especially the first sample
shot which was supposedly shot at under ISO 200:

http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/9604.html

Did you miss the following editorial note just by chance?

"Editor's note: Our Panasonic reps have informed us that the models they were kind enough to let us try were actually pre-release hardware, so the finalized version may be different. Check back for our complete review when the final hardware has been released."

These samples were initial ones, from pre-production cameras, and as such are not representative of production cameras.

 

[kissdadookie]

From experience with many other electronic equipment (many in pre-production stages), a pre-production model usually does not deviate much from a production model. The hardware is pretty much set in stone at that point and most changes come in firmware/software and once in awhile, the aesthetics (which actually does not happen last minute, as dies are already produced for the originals). With that, the two most important aspects of the LX3 are pretty much set in stone, the sensor and the lens. I highly doubt with the impending release so close, that production has not already started with lenses and sensors.

I offered the links for one simple reason, for real live images from the LX3, not sample images from the manufacturer. I saw some posts with people analyzing some test shots from the LX3. I offered the links just to try to give everybody a fuller picture of the LX3 with additional test shots. The LX3 is quite nice on paper and appears to handle much like the LX2 (which was a joy to use) so in that account, it's golden, but I understand how some of us likes to get down and gritty and go straight for image quality so I'm just trying to help with that.

Of course, no one will know how good of a cam this is until it's released, but mind you, that release date is just a skip away and these reports are from July 22nd (relatively recent). Even though the Panasonic stated that this was a pre-production model, they obviously are confident enough thus throwing the big preview for journalists in NYC. Judging from that, I wouldn't say that those sample images were the be all and end all but it does give us a nice gauge as to how the final product might be.

 

[saotupp]

Maybe you should've read more posts from the time these samples were posted. Those samples were shot at f8 and at those conditions that's about what you would expect from a preproduction model. Since that there has been hundreds of more samples so I'm surprised you choose not to post any of those that actually look good.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28691393
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28767938
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28883041

I really don't see any point at speculating these samples that have no value at the current state, soon we'll see REAL user pictures.

--

If a man empties his purse into his head, no one can take it away from him. An investment of knowledge always pays the best interest.

 

[DigitalSparrow]

My main point to Panny is to get rid of that joystick. Even the second artcile you linked speaks of that particular interface not being very intuitive. That author wanted dials... and I agree with him/her.

I have 3 Pannys myself (Fz1, Fz15, Fz18) and they are good tools for what they do. The Fz18 was the first one with the joystick (and the first one where I could experience the Panny smearing in jpegs). It works, but its not a good user interface. I miss more shots trying to change settings that I ever would with a Ricoh model.

As for pictures. I already realized for myself that the early photos were not good representations of what the camera might actually be able to do. But what Ricoh has with their GRD and GX is an excellent user interface and damn good IQ. My R4 has proven to me its worth several time over.

The LC1/Digilux 2 have a completely different user interface than the Ricohs, but it works for me. Plus excellent IQ.

So even if the LX3 IQ is on par (or better) than my Ricohs, or my Digilux 2, the handling isn't what it could be... simply because of my dislike of their joystick gimmic.

Sure, I could get use to it. But if I alredy know it doesn't work for me based on my experience with the Fz18 (unless you are in one of the simple modes) then why get a high-end camera that probably won't be used much because of being more difficult (less thought intuitive) to manipulate?

 

[kissdadookie]

Just took a look at those samples you posted. They are better composed and exposed. The smearing is visible at ISO 100 and very obvious at ISO 200. To tell you honestly, the quality is the same as from the ones I posted earlier. Don't get me wrong, I really do enjoy the Leicasonics but I think by now, after all the horn tooting on how they want to cater to the enthusiast, they should've listened and adjust their processing engine so that the NR isn't so heavy that it smears out all the fine details. It was the same issue they had with the LX2 (which I had owned).

 

[kissdadookie]

I would like to point out however, straight out of camera b&w JPG sample shots look superb on the LX3. If they will finally totally remove NR from their RAW images, this would probably be the next camera I get! It's a slick piece of kit and the DR looks very very good (those dark pictures of NYC, due to having the Exp Comp turned to a -.3 or a -.7, that's a good sign of good DR).

 

[DigitalSparrow]

Tom,

Thanks for the tip on B&W @ISO 400.
Another nice surprise with this camera.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Not a problem - image is a good exercise in using the b&w mode - I have found (based on a recommendation from Guy) that -0.3 EV works well. It is a matter of taste but the slightly darker image seems to bring out more detail in the darker shades - but feel free to play with "EV" - I have found it very liberating.

The original recommendation was for the R4 but I find it works just as well with the LC1 and my Canon dslr gear - especially when using b&w.

--
Tom Caldwell