Bob Ross Posted July 21, 2008 Share #1 Posted July 21, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) DMC-LX3 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Bob Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 21, 2008 Posted July 21, 2008 Hi Bob Ross, Take a look here Lumix LX-3 is here. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
akiralx Posted July 21, 2008 Share #2 Posted July 21, 2008 Yes, this looks very good. No Mp race, fast WA zoom. Nice new LCD, and hotshoe and possible external finder. I sold my LX2 but this looks much better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdommin Posted July 21, 2008 Share #3 Posted July 21, 2008 This is probably the D-Lux 4. I hope so, the feature set looks nice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted July 21, 2008 Share #4 Posted July 21, 2008 Yes, hopefully it is the D-Lux4 but I have to say this time I think I would save my money and just by the Panasonic version. The hotshoe is a great addition and I wonder if those bounce flash guns shown in the accesory section might also work with the M8? Now, that would be cool. LouisB Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
audidudi Posted July 21, 2008 Share #5 Posted July 21, 2008 And check out some of the accessories for it at DMC-LX3 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic ... an external finder, add-on wide-angle lens, a filter adapter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 21, 2008 Share #6 Posted July 21, 2008 The new f/2,0-2,8 lens looks great, they're adding an external VF and boasting ISO 6400. This little baby is gonna be a M8 killer. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted July 21, 2008 Share #7 Posted July 21, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thus far samples from this new camera do not bode well at all... Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 preview with image samples - infoSync World Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 21, 2008 Share #8 Posted July 21, 2008 Samples from a pre-production model do not bode well at all... Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 preview with image samples - infoSync World ... I'm not sure how much they can improve it by the time it ships This should not bother the LX3's target audience at all. All they care about is the spec on paper and the Leica moniker. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnpack Posted July 21, 2008 Share #9 Posted July 21, 2008 Why don't they ever increase the size of the ccd like sigma dp1. the photos i got from my lx2 looks like crap in %100 size. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Barry Posted July 21, 2008 Share #10 Posted July 21, 2008 All of which is why I am seldom the first on my block with a new toy. The specs sound great and the addition of a hot shoe and a removable viewfinder is intriguing. As a traditional photographer approaching age 70, I really am having a hard time getting used to holding the camera out away from my eye. I'm new to the forum; joined because I just bought my first Leica in decades, a minty D-Lux 2. I used to have M2s and M3s, but I succumbed first to autofocus and then to Contax and then to digital capture. I had heard about the noise problems with the D-Lux 2 and its Panasonic near-twin, but I downloaded profiles for the Panasonic version to my Noise Ninja 2. It really takes care of the noise (including ISO 400). The primary reason I bought the D-Lux 2 was the 16:9 aspect ratio, and as soon as I get photos worth posting, I will do so. I like everything I've seen thus far about this Leica user forum. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted July 21, 2008 Share #11 Posted July 21, 2008 Why don't they ever increase the size of the ccd like sigma dp1.the photos i got from my lx2 looks like crap in %100 size. actually i think they did, well marginally anyways and Mp is less "The LX2's sensor was widely considered a weak link in an otherwise strong chain, with poorly controlled noise and compressed dynamic range limiting the previous-generation camera's appeal with those serious about image quality. From all indications, Panasonic went back to the drawing board for the LX3, returning with a completely redesigned 10.1 megapixel, 1/1.63-inch CCD." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted July 21, 2008 Share #12 Posted July 21, 2008 ...the photos i got from my lx2 looks like crap in %100 size. And at print and display size? 100% is interesting, but we don't look at photographs with a magnifying glass. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Edwards Posted July 21, 2008 Share #13 Posted July 21, 2008 The new f/2,0-2,8 lens looks great, they're adding an external VF and boasting ISO 6400. This little baby is gonna be a M8 killer. ...or a must-have backup... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted July 21, 2008 Share #14 Posted July 21, 2008 actually i think they did, well marginally anywaysand Mp is less "The LX2's sensor was widely considered a weak link in an otherwise strong chain, with poorly controlled noise and compressed dynamic range limiting the previous-generation camera's appeal with those serious about image quality. From all indications, Panasonic went back to the drawing board for the LX3, returning with a completely redesigned 10.1 megapixel, 1/1.63-inch CCD." This I cannot figure out. Panasonic says: "While the LX2 also featured a large CCD – its 1/1.65" CCD was just slightly smaller than the LX3's 1/1.63" unit" That's just a 0.02 difference! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted July 21, 2008 Share #15 Posted July 21, 2008 Thus far samples from this new camera do not bode well at all... Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 preview with image samples - infoSync World Wow! Those are indeed crap, not so much for the smeary detail (which I suspect would be the same on a lot of P&S at 100) but for the flat colours. There is, after all, a "Summicron" fronting this beast. A bit weird that Panasonic would let someone blast away with a product if, for example, it does not have the final versions of firmware etc in it. If this is the finished produt I'd want to see a full DPreview work up with samples before contemplating a purchase. LouisB Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 21, 2008 Share #16 Posted July 21, 2008 Don't forget, it's only a $500 camera and the fact that not all Summicrons are created equal Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Mitchum Posted July 21, 2008 Share #17 Posted July 21, 2008 The LX-2 had 10.4 total pixels and 10.2 effective pixels The LX-3 has 11.3 total pixels and 10.3 effective pixels What does this rather large (1mp) disparity between total and effective pixels mean? The LX-2 in 16:9 had a resolution of 4224 x 2376 The LX-3 in 16:9 has a resolution of 3968 x 2232 The LX-2 in 3:2 had a resolution of 3568 x 2376 The LX-3 in 3:2 has a resolution of 3776 x 2520 The LX-2 in 4:3 had a resolution of 3168 x 2376 The LX-3 in 4:3 has a resolution of 3648x 2736 So the LX-2 had higher resolution in 16:9 but lower in 3:2 and 4:3 which suggests they are no longer using the 16:9 sensor which I guess is obvious given the lack of a widescreen display. It seems they have gone back to the typical 4:3 sensor used in most compact P&S cameras. Not to be confused with the 4/3 format which is much larger but also a 4:3 ratio Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted July 21, 2008 Share #18 Posted July 21, 2008 Don't forget, it's only a $500 camera and the fact that not all Summicrons are created equal We need some positive thinking here, folks ... at least there has never been a Summicron this cheap. Have you even heard of a Vario-Summicron? it's a broken record. LOL Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ennjott Posted July 21, 2008 Share #19 Posted July 21, 2008 That first sample shot is terrible, but to really see what that camera is (or isn't) capable of, we need to check out its raw output developed with a good converter and noise reduced in a specialized tool like Neat Image. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahnpack Posted July 21, 2008 Share #20 Posted July 21, 2008 And at print and display size? 100% is interesting, but we don't look at photographs with a magnifying glass. I agree but sometimes we need to crop them. i think that's a good camera with 2f and 24-60mm range but the still the sensor needs to get bigger for both pixel quality and shallower depth of field. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.