Lumix LX-3 is here

[ennjott]

Framing is still possible even in very bright light, and the external finder won't do anything else than allow framing to begin with.

Camera shake shouldn't make a difference unless one is holding the device at arm's length. Such LCDs are not meant to be used that way but from a low viewing distance (<20 cm) from which they work very well (and where the VGA resolution of the new Nikon screens is a real plus).

[ho_co]

NJ--
According to Panasonic, one can extend battery life by turning off the LCD and using just the accessory finder.

Some people feel less intrusive shooting from the eye.

Some of us have tremors. Using a camera braced against the face would likely give a bit more stability.

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

Or--don't ask why. Panasonic just wants to sell accessories.

[ennjott]

Saw some other samples at photographyblog.com.
Unfortunately, image no. 20 there proves that the camera produces color blotches already at ISO400.

Such artefacts cannot be removed all that well through noise reduction software. Plus I sampled down the images and these are still visible at much lower resolutions.
Plus there is shadow noise even at ISO80 and the camera's NR is blurring details, which would mean tedious raw processing for acceptable results.
I'm now less sure about getting this camera.

[panoramer]

more pictures from the LX 3

[Isabelle Lenatio]

I have bought one on saturday to replace my G9 which I left in a train ... (I know!) I wanted to get the G9 again but my favorite shop didn't have them in stack and the salesperson mentioned the LX3,. So it only being an always carry around camera for which the G9 was used as well I bought it, it can't surely make worse images than my iPhone... Anyway I processed some images with it, both in-house at 400 and 800 and outdoors at min. iso.

The images itself don't surprise me since after all it is a 400€ point and shoot, what would you expect... however the 200 iso and 400 iso seem a bit smoother than the G9 but this is just seen form the eye.

What i do like is the wide angle possibility and the build quality. It seems like a firm package to me.... I will keep it, but anything close to the M8 ... I don't think so, different thing altogether but perfect for doing web images I would imagine

[Dlegrec]

Great pictures. However just one simply question: Is anyone aware if Leica is to produce (and when) the D-LUX 4 to compete the LX-3 ?

I am almost ready for a Panasonic but could wait for a real Leica.

Thanks

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Most probably it will be introduced at the PhotoKina. I thought about waiting a bit as well but then it will be 100€ - 200€ more expensive, well after reading the Leica world tour for 38K€ package offer it might even be 300€ more expensive

[guidomo]

I have the LX2 and I concur that it has severe limitations in terms of image noise. However, the LX3, though looking much improved and with a faster lens too, is a non starter for me as the longest FL is down to 60mm from 120mm (IIRC) with the LX2. Funny no-one mentions that here. Lots of the PNS versatility is gone with tele being virtually non-existent.

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Originally Posted by guidomo

I have the LX2 and I concur that it has severe limitations in terms of image noise. However, the LX3, though looking much improved and with a faster lens too, is a non starter for me as the longest FL is down to 60mm from 120mm (IIRC) with the LX2. Funny no-one mentions that here. Lots of the PNS versatility is gone with tele being virtually non-existent.

The camera has a purpose of supplying a good quality wide-angle to normal lens, and fast as well. This is a known spec, if it would of had a 38-200mm I surely wouldn't of bought it, the specs of the LX3 are exactly "up my street"

As for image noise, it remains a small sensor camera, but with 2.0 capabilities the range within you can shoot is pretty good. And up to 400 image IQ is very manageable, at 80 and 100 almost perfect.

[wstotler]

Originally Posted by Riley

All things considered, and debates about image quality aside, the retro hotshoe VF is an awesome idea and I'm glad to see it here. Easier for me and easier when you hand the camera off to somebody to take a shot for you. (Just look through there and press the button.) My wife would also *love* it. (She has a D-Lux 3.) She's always complained about the built-in VF positioning on snappies (ELPH, etc.) and likes using the external VFs when they're on my M8 so the hotshoe VF for this camera would be well-received. For a consumer camera? Great.

Thanks,
Will

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Originally Posted by wstotler

All things considered, and debates about image quality aside, the retro hotshoe VF is an awesome idea and I'm glad to see it here. Easier for me and easier when you hand the camera off to somebody to take a shot for you. (Just look through there and press the button.) My wife would also *love* it. (She has a D-Lux 3.) She's always complained about the built-in VF positioning on snappies (ELPH, etc.) and likes using the external VFs when they're on my M8 so the hotshoe VF for this camera would be well-received. For a consumer camera? Great.

Thanks,
Will

I agree fully .... although the original VF is a tad expnsive, here in Europe at least, I will fit a VC one ....

[daveleo]

hi there
i have asked this question before, but never quite got the answer i wanted to hear, so let me try it again.

can you set the LX3 focal length at *exactly* 28mm, 35mm? or 50mm?

or do you fidget with zoom, LCD and external (fixed) viewfinder?

regards

[guidomo]

Originally Posted by Isabelle Lenatio

The camera has a purpose of supplying a good quality wide-angle to normal lens

That is so, and my point was that the LX2 was different (and more useful for me) in that respect. Few of the PNS around today end at 60mm FL, so it is worth noting.

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Originally Posted by guidomo

That is so, and my point was that the LX2 was different (and more useful for me) in that respect. Few of the PNS around today end at 60mm FL, so it is worth noting.

I obviously don't know what Panasonic' intentions were upon releasing this camera. For me it's a real good deal.... I shoot with the M8 at 35mm for 90% serious shots that is, I have a Pentax with 2.8 50-135mm and 300mm 4.0 which is excellent I must say, he Panasonic is an easy to transport/carry camera which enables me to to snapshot.... any time I want. The strength being the 2.0 and the quality of the lens. I don't need the tele part for when I want to use that it will be for something serious, in which case I would capture it with my pentax equipment, it does however take the M8 out of place, for 35mm summicron results do not differ much from the LX3 results, other than 400 + shotes which I don't do very often... It truly is a remarkable camera for it's price, I would recommend it to anybody

[guidomo]

Originally Posted by Isabelle Lenatio

I shoot with the M8 at 35mm for 90% serious shots

Originally Posted by Isabelle Lenatio

it does however take the M8 out of place, for 35mm summicron results do not differ much from the LX3 results

Wow, if the LX3 is a replacement for 90% of what you shoot with the M8, then it is a great deal. Couldn't say that of my LX2.

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Originally Posted by guidomo

Wow, if the LX3 is a replacement for 90% of what you shoot with the M8, then it is a great deal. Couldn't say that of my LX2.

I'm not saying that ....

[jerryharwood]

I don't know about the others on this forum, but I am a little surprised here; having tested numerous cameras, both digital and M + R models, I am quite disgusted really, at what i am seeing. I have a very old 4mp Olympus, which i use as a comparison type camera.
bearing in mind thid cameras is at least 6/7 years old, has had atleast three owners !- It still wipes the floor with these so called state of the art point and shoot cameras, not withstanding the stated 10.3 available MP. I regularly print up 8x10 shots from the Olympus; it takes a hell of a lot of looking/ comparing, but these are the equivalent of an M6 image. i have yet to see an equivalent from a panasonic whatever. Even the maligned Digilux 3- showing same subject side by side, without knowing which camera took which shot, you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. And this is supposed to be the latest ? Words fail me. Sorry about that, but i really had to post.

[andybarton]

Are you saying that a 7 year old Olympus p&s digital produces an image that is equivalent in quality to that from an M6?

Not sure that I follow you, there.

[lct]

Originally Posted by jerryharwood

...you would be hard pressed to tell the difference...

There are very simple ways to compare small sensor cameras to others. Unless you use it in macro mode, your digicam won't show you any optical blur due to the huge DoF of its lenses. Other way, watch the distorsion. Digicams like yours (or mine) have a more or less huge distorsion in wide focal lengths when that of a Leica prime for example is close to zero. Also we get more digital noise with our digicams due to the small size of the sensor. Or we get more smearing effect because the camera tries to reduce the digital noise. Compare as well A3 or even A4 prints out of your digicam to others and you will understand why we are not totally stupid when we use APS-C, 35mm, medium format or large format cameras. There's no free lunch i'm afraid.

[sdai]

This is the beauty of the Internet, ererybody could come up with some bullshit then run away without any proof or paying a price.