The truth on G10 LX3 comparison

[Max73]

--
Cool link eagle2a,
easier and very effective to compare like this rather than downloading.

However by downloading you can also check actual shutter speed and nominal ISO in the EXIF header.

Again, the outdoor sample shows more dynamic range in LX3 (see the white shirt's texture).

 

[O P S]

On the Imaging Resource site look at the proportional scale With the LX3 it's
way out of shape, it's not round .I never seen this with anyother camera .

If the camera did not have a defective lens ,then that would mean that distortion

is very very very bad. If you take something round like a jar lid and tilt it, it will still look round .... The camera had to have a defective lens right? Maybe someone

here with an LX3 can set at ease, anyone concidering the LX3, but are now troubled by what I have brought up. I'm sorry if I pulled a false alarm.
David F
FZ10 FZ28

 

[O P S]

SORRY false alarm. I just was at the LX3 vs Fujifilm F200 post. There you can see why I now know it was a false alarm by looking at what I said there and then quickly followed up with. I should have just went to some LX3 sites first. I'm sure most of you already figured it out.. Would you please go to the thread I mentioned above. I don't like feeling like an idiot though I should be use to it by now.
Truly Sorry
David F

 

[Tom Hoots]

Dan,

You're just completely wrong here:

There is no way the LX3 fits in your pocket, Andrew. Coat pocket, maybe, but even then it is too bulky.

I walk around with my LX3 in my front pants pocket all the time. I mean, "all the time." Walking around on my breaks at work, walking into the shopping mall, wherever I go -- I've got my LX3 in my pocket. "Front jeans pocket." "All the time."

Undoubtedly, "relaxed fit" plays a large part here, but I'm a "relaxed fit" kind of guy.

That said, I'd definitely agree with you if you said the same about the G10. When it comes to being "pocketable (barely)," the LX3 makes the cut, but the G10 is just completely too bulky to get into a pants pocket like the LX3 can.

Given all of the LX3's capabilities, its "pocketability" is probably the most important to me. It's the number one rule of photography -- a camera is of no good use to you whatsoever if you don't happen to have it with you. As far as I'm concerned, there's very little reason to have a camera like the G10 -- either make it pocketable, or you might as well make it a superzoom. I really applaud Panasonic for making such a top-of-the-line camera with such excellent image quality, and most of all, making it in a size that I can fit in my pocket.
--
Tom Hoots
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tomhoots/

 

[toomanycanons]

I know some complain that the 24-60 is just too short a zoom but it seems we can agree that the LX3 does what it does really well. I was just out shooting with my Nikon D40 with its 27-82 kit lens (ok 18-55) and found myself only using the lower end of its zoom.

My personal revelation was: I was pretty satisfied with an LX3-equivalent zoom for all of my shooting yesterday. If I want more zoom I can take my FZ18/FZ50/TZ5.

 

[O P S]

Oh shoot I was right to begin with. Just went to a LX3 website and viewed a round image that was way out of proportion. You have to look at the larger size to see it. This was not to deter anyone fron the LX3, Iam the owner of two Panasonic cameras which I like very much.

David F

 

[Jeff Charles]

...
I speak of shutter speeds because nominal ISOs are a bit meaningless
as you can read here:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/ (appareil1) 240|0 (appareil2) 247|0 (onglet) 0 (brand) Panasonic (brand2) Canon

The actual ISO is the 'sensor' sensitivity, or better, the electronic
gain applied to the sensor. Higher ISO means higher gain, i.e. higher
signal and higher noise.

Finally I donloaded some tests images from here:
(see ISO series little bit after begin of the page)
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/G10/G10A7.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/LX3/LX3A7.HTM

And here is my summary, where the actual ISOs are reported as well as
the nominal shutter speeds used in in a testlab to get images with
the same perceived brightness.

Panasonic LX3
Nominal ISO| Real ISO | ShutterTimeRef
80 | 53 | 1/15
100 | 65 | 1/20
200 | 130 | 1/40
400 | 259 | 1/80
800 | 505 | 1/160

Canon G9
Nominal ISO| Real ISO | ShutterTimeRef
80 | 93 | 1/20
100 | 117 | 1/25
200 | 240 | 1/50
400 | 464 | 1/100
800 | 955 | 1/200

This topic got a lot of discussion last fall. The DxO Labs results, IMHO, do not have much relevance (or correspondence) to the actual performance of the two cameras in the field. Back then, I compared both raw and jpeg images from IR and from this site, and once exposures are equalized, it turns out that the actual ISO values of the two cameras are nearly equivalent.

The DxO sensitivity results are measured prior to the conversion of the raw files. In actual use, the ISO we experience in the field may result from exposure being boosted or reduced during raw conversion, either in the camera or on the computer. What is interesting, is that no tag in LX3 raw files specifies that the raw converter should boost exposure. I confirmed this by examining DNG files generated from LX3 raws and also got confirmation from an Adobe Camera Raw engineer that LX3 raw files are not getting any unusual exposure boost. Which raises the question of how the nearly one stop gap in ISO that DxO reports between the LX3 and the G10 is practically eliminated in actual field use. One possible explanation is that DxO's sensitivity results for the LX3 are incorrect.

Jeff

--
Whatever it is, this is it.

 

[amicah22]

If I did not have dslrs I would have a g10 because of the higher resolution and more range but the lx3 works better as a compliment to my k10\20d.
--
Aaron W.

 

[JohnClif]

...because you're comparing what the LX3 does with 1/3rd stop more light.

Why not set the LX3 to underexpose by 1/3rd of a stop, and then look at the resultant pictures? Or, set the G10 to overexpose by 1/3rd of a stop? In other words, ensure that the same EV is set on both cameras?

I personally think the LX3 is a very good camera, as is the G10. The G10 is more versatile and has better image quality, however it is not as portable as the LX3. To me, the interesting camera in this niche is the new Fuji F200EXR, and time will tell if its image quality lives up to expectations. If so, it will be the pocketable camera class leader.
--
'Do you think a man can change his destiny?'
'I think a man does what he can until his destiny is revealed.'

 

[Bellefield]

I understand why some people want to say which camera is the better one, and why some others say that unless you use both then your opinion is worthless.

Personally I just love the LX3, I don't care if the G10 is better or worse, i was never in the market for a G10, or a G9 or even an LX2.

For me, the LX3 is exactly what I want, and that enough of a reason for me to have bought it.
--

'Every portrait that is painted with feeling, is a portrait of the artist, not of the sitter.' Oscar Wilde

 

[Frank B]

There is no way the LX3 fits in your pocket, Andrew. Coat pocket,
maybe, but even then it is too bulky. The G10 is bulkier, yes, but
the two cameras are actually much closer in bulk than folks describe
here.

...

Cheers,
Dan
LX3 + R1

I have had my LX3 since September and carried it in my pants pocket every day. I admit it is a little difficult to slip it in my pocket when I wear jeans. I would not own it if I could not carry it in my pocket.

--
Frank B
LX3 Gallery
http://www.pbase.com/frank_b/panasonic_lx3
All Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/frank_b

 

[Frank B]

Actually we are having a nice spring day and I changed into my jeans and had no problem putting my LX3 in the pocket. They must have stretched a little.
--
Frank B
LX3 Gallery
http://www.pbase.com/frank_b/panasonic_lx3
All Galleries
http://www.pbase.com/frank_b

 

[JortS29]

The
G10 is more versatile and has better image quality, however it is not
as portable as the LX3.

What is better image quality? More resolution at lower ISO? Or more dynamic range (and slightly less noise at higher ISO)?

Depends on priorities imho.

 

[Max73]

--
You are right about the light difference,
because that's exactly what i care about, and what i was intending to show;

when same shutter speed is used to compare 2 cameras, the camera with more light needs less overall gain (mainly on the sensor) to obtain same luminance output, therefore less noise, to say the least.

Moreover the Fuji F200EXR has a maximum relative aperture of F3.3, which is more than 2.5 stops less light than the Panasonic LX3. However the fuji seems to provide a very interesting sensor and very interesting options on how to bin the pixels to handle low light with less noise overall.. and it is ultra-compact yes. Still I will go for the LX3 cause I just love the jpegs that come out of it

 

[dkny]

I guess some people are more comfortable with bulging pants pockets than others perhaps.

Or maybe you shop for your trousers in the tents section of your the sporting goods store.

Or maybe you don't just put your pants on one leg at a time, you put them on only one leg.

The LX3 is a great camera. It's dynamic range probably surpasses my Sony R1. The HD video is great. It's the camera I've been wanting for the past several years. And its portability is what sold me. Its pocketability? No. It is certainly not a subcompact camera.

Is it more portable than the G10? Yes. Is it more pocketable than the G10? Yes. Will the LX3 fit in my pants pocket? Well, yes, but I'd look like a dork and wouldn't be able to chase after my three-year old without giving myself a charlie horse or worse...

 

[Andrew Mitchell]

I guess some people are more comfortable with bulging pants pockets
than others perhaps.

Or maybe you shop for your trousers in the tents section of your the
sporting goods store.

Or maybe you don't just put your pants on one leg at a time, you put
them on only one leg.

The LX3 is a great camera. It's dynamic range probably surpasses my
Sony R1. The HD video is great. It's the camera I've been wanting
for the past several years. And its portability is what sold me.
Its pocketability? No. It is certainly not a subcompact camera.

Is it more portable than the G10? Yes. Is it more pocketable than
the G10? Yes. Will the LX3 fit in my pants pocket? Well, yes, but
I'd look like a dork and wouldn't be able to chase after my
three-year old without giving myself a charlie horse or worse...

--

Gosh, I can only repeat what I said earlier (and in several other posts), and what Tom has said in no uncertain terms as well:

The LX3 fits perfectly in my pocket (it just slips in it's so easy to do), it does not bulge, and I regularly walk around all day with it in that position (when it's not in my hand.)

Not only that, but:

I can also get it in my pocket with the extension tube and wide angle lens attached. However, that is a bit of a squeeze.

Dkny, I just cannot imagine for the life of me where you are buying your trousers!

--
Andrew (Brit expat in Taipei, Taiwan since 1985)

 

[Max73]

--
Here they do compare them...:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=31229635

 

[Brewer]

Is it more pocketable than the G10? Yes.

Not sure I subscribe to 'levels of pocketability'. Surely something is either pocketable or it isn't?

The LX3 is clearly pocketable.

It might not be everyone's preferred way to carry it, but it's an option, and that's the point.

Usually I carry a small bag around with my daily junk in it. It just seems more practical than trying to pocket all the detritus I have with me most of the time.

But if I go out to dinner, or to a bar with friends, I generally won't bother with a bag (and it's too warm for a jacket here most of the time) so I will slip the LX3 in my trouser pocket. I simply couldn't do that with the G10. So for me, the G10 would stay at home a lot more than the LX3 does.

Which, incidentally, is exactly what I found with my G5, and why the OPTION to pocket a camera was a very big deal for me when the time came to replace it.

--

 

[RicksAstro]

---------------

"I think the comparison outcome is more than obvious on which image has more noise (see the light blue pillow)! Therefore I decided to go for the LX3! Not only it has a brighter lens and even a slightly bigger sensor (1/1.63' VS 1/1.7' of Canon), but it outperforms canon in terms of noise already at low ISOs!"
---------------

Ironically, it was this comparison (specifically the light blue pillow) a few months ago that helped drive me to the G10.

The LX3 has washed out all details on the light blue pillow on the sample you showed...compare it to any DSLR sample at ISO100 and you will find that the G10 is not producing noise, it's reproducing detail. The LX3, in this case, is washing out the detail completely.

As has been said, both are fantastic camera and have their niches...I just found it ironic that I came to a completely different conclusion given the same image...maybe it's that "look" thing, since I generally prefer the Canon "look".

--
Rick Krejci
http://www.ricksastro.com

 

[Andrew Mitchell]

Is it more pocketable than the G10? Yes.

Not sure I subscribe to 'levels of pocketability'. Surely something
is either pocketable or it isn't?

The LX3 is clearly pocketable.

It might not be everyone's preferred way to carry it, but it's an
option, and that's the point.

Usually I carry a small bag around with my daily junk in it. It just
seems more practical than trying to pocket all the detritus I have
with me most of the time.

But if I go out to dinner, or to a bar with friends, I generally
won't bother with a bag (and it's too warm for a jacket here most of
the time) so I will slip the LX3 in my trouser pocket. I simply
couldn't do that with the G10. So for me, the G10 would stay at home
a lot more than the LX3 does.

Which, incidentally, is exactly what I found with my G5, and why the
OPTION to pocket a camera was a very big deal for me when the time
came to replace it.

--

Sounds like me. I usually take the LX3 out in an old Lowepro Nova Micro shoulder bag which can carry: the LX3, the wide angle lens (and adapter), a mini flash (but haven't tried it with the new FL-220 which I just got and is a bit bigger), my cell phone, wallet, single car and garage door keys, and a spare battery. Oh, and my tin of Copenhagen!

I carry the camera on a wrist strap and have done away with the lens cap attachment string thing. Never lost a lens cap in 30+ years of photography anyway. If I know I won't be using the camera for half an hour or so, I just slip it in my pocket.

As an aside, the LX3 + wide angle lens + wrist strap is really easy to carry, balancing against wrist and fingers.

If I'm out boozing I put it in a waist bag ("fanny pack"?) which I get a lot of stick for wearing!

The Canon G10 looks like a neat camera, but as soon as I held one and saw how much bigger than the LX3 it was, it just was not an option any more.

Cheers

--
Andrew (Brit expat in Taipei, Taiwan since 1985)