Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 73 posts | 
by ColorChange on Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:08 am
ColorChange
Forum Contributor
Posts: 593
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
I haven't had time to do a good review but agree with everything here.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/LX3/LX3A.HTM
Tim
 

by Royce Howland on Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:44 am
User avatar
Royce Howland
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11719
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Member #:00460
Looks promising, Tim. I've read several reviews now and everybody says the noise performance is dramatically improved over the LX-2. Some are viewing the new lens design as a minus, but I view it as a plus -- wider and faster. I think I'm going to give one a try...
Royce Howland
 

by Phil Colla on Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:56 am
Phil Colla
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Location: San Diego
I love mine. I posted some sample images with links to full res and raw on my blog, walk about shots but gives you an idea of file sizes and resolution. I plan to shoot some landscapes on a tripod later this week up the coast and will post a few examples of those when I return.

That review is a pretty good one.
Phil Colla
[url=http://www.oceanlight.com]Natural History Photography[/url] and [url=http://www.oceanlight.com/log/]Blog[/url]
 

by Tim Churchill on Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:01 am
User avatar
Tim Churchill
Forum Contributor
Posts: 434
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
Location: Apple Valley, Minnesota USA
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... /lx3.shtml

I wasn't in the market for a P&S, but this one looks interesting, and it might be handy for my upcoming winter vacation to Maui. Wish the zoom went a bit longer, but it should be a good pocketable scenery camera.
Most people want security in this world, not liberty. —H. L. Mencken

Tim C
 

by ColorChange on Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:05 pm
ColorChange
Forum Contributor
Posts: 593
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Royce ... it really is much more of a photographer's camera. I really like it. I occasionally miss the zoom but the shots are so nice for a P&S, the noise is at least 2 stops better, the fast lens is awesome, and HD video is sweet. Great little P&S and the major weakness ... noise ... is way better managed. Way better. :)
Tim
 

by Bill Lockhart on Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:17 pm
User avatar
Bill Lockhart
Lifetime Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
Location: Safety Harbor, Florida
Member #:00215
Dern. Maybe I should have waited!

I bought the Canon G10. But so far it does produce some nice images. That is, when shooting at ISO 80-200 but not higher.
Image
And I have some thoughts thus far:

Noise

As with the G9, the G10 displays unacceptable amounts of noise in images shot at ISO 400. In fact, I would not likely shoot at higher than ISO 100 when using the camera.

Lens

The 28-140mm instead of the 35mm-210mm on the G9 is an improvement for me, since having a wider angle lens will aid in doing landscape photography. And, at the same time I have the chance to do portraits at around 100mm. A good choice on the part of Canon. My only wish is that it were a 24mm lens instead.

Barrel Distortion

Some users report that the G10 displays unacceptable barrel distortion. I have found distortion, but the distortion is typical of a wide angle lens and has been minimal in the shots I have done.

Ergonomics

In my opinion the ergonomics of the G10 are superior to the G9. It is much easier to hold and use. Moving some dials helped me immensely and adding others makes a great deal of sense to me.

Viewfinder, WYSINWYG

The viewfinder is not accurate. In the photo below, the color chart filled the viewfinder when I took the shot. In order to center the subject, one must move the camera up and slightly to the right. In other words, what you see is not what you get. I don’t understand why Canon engineers can’t fix this issue or provide me with a viewfinder that fits in the flash slot that is correct. Many of us prefer to shoot with the viewfinder, that is my preference and I find it difficult to do. As well, when extending the lens to 140mm the barrel of the lens appears in the viewfinder making it even more troublesome to use.
Image
Exposures

With the help of the live histogram it is nearly impossible to overexpose a shot using the G10, however, the camera does have a tendency to blow out highlights. I note an improvement using the G10 versus the G9 which often required that I keep the exposure to -2/3 to avoid overexposure. The G10 may require a -1/3 exposure in high contrast situations, but the live histogram is a great aid in compensating as it was with the G9.

Image Quality

So far, I like the image quality I am getting with the G10 when shooting in RAW mode. Converting RAW files is only possible using the DPP software provided by Canon. One must buy or upgrade to Adobe CS4 in order to process RAW files with Photoshop software as Adobe will not support the G10 for CS3 users.

Colors

Colors appear natural and vivid using the G10. One issue that does affect colors is that one does not have a choice when shooting, one must use sRGB. I wish Adobe 98 were available.

Over-expectations

The Canon Powershot G10 is not a DSLR and one cannot expect that the camera will rival or replace one. It is what it is, a small compact camera that is intended for everyday use when one does not want to carry a larger camera and two or three lenses.

My expectations for using the camera on my forthcoming trip to Slovenia and Scotland loom in my mind. Hopefully, upon my return from that trip I will be able to share with you more about my feelings about this camera.

But so far, I sorta like the creative things I can do with it.
Image
Bill Lockhart
[url=http://www.phototravelreview.com]Photo Travel Review[/url]
[url=http://www.bill.lockharts.com]Personal Website[/url]
 

by ColorChange on Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:32 pm
ColorChange
Forum Contributor
Posts: 593
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Bill, they are some sites promising direct comparisons soon. I'm curious from my end. The biggest difference according to specs (in my world) was 24 to 28 at the wide end versus 60 to 140 at the long. This is a trade off and for P&S work, I used to find myself backing up more often (with a 28mm) than walking forward to foot zoom. The faster lens is also nice at f2.0. The third was HD video versus VGA. This was the deciding issue to me.
Tim
 

by Bill Lockhart on Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:55 pm
User avatar
Bill Lockhart
Lifetime Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
Location: Safety Harbor, Florida
Member #:00215
Hi Tim,

Well the review at imaging-resource is very positive for the Panasonic. And, I agree, the 24mm would have been wonderful on the G10. Guess my problem was that in the past Panasonic produced some duds. Now, I am wondering just how cool the Leica version of this camera will be. I understand that Leica is doing some magic to JPEGS. We will see. In the meantime, I am out shooting with the G10 and I sorta like the results I am getting despite the ISO issues. And yes, HD video would have been wonderful. We all live and learn. I hope Panasonic does succeed with the camera. Nothing like solid competition to improve what consumers can buy.

Best regards,

Bill
Bill Lockhart
[url=http://www.phototravelreview.com]Photo Travel Review[/url]
[url=http://www.bill.lockharts.com]Personal Website[/url]
 

by Royce Howland on Tue Oct 21, 2008 4:40 pm
User avatar
Royce Howland
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11719
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Member #:00460
There are very few cameras in this class of "serious" P&S, and so far none of them are identical to each other any more than most of the mid- to high-end DSLR's are clones of each other. There are some things I like about the Canon, others I like about the Panasonic. (And things I like about others I've looked at reasonably closely, like the odd-ball Sigma DP1, or Ricoh GX200.) I was close to buying both an LX-2 and a G9 at times in the past, but in the end each one had a deal-breaker flaw for me. With the LX-2 it was image quality (mainly noise), and with the G9 it was the lens. (The Ricoh is not officially available in Canada, I don't think, and the DP1 I had to reject as just too unusable in its first generation state. Both of these are pricey as well, compared to the other contenders.)

Now with the follow-on versions of the Canon and Panasonic, each is improved in the most important areas that I considered flaws of their respective predecessors. In addition to the fact of Panasonic dealing with some serious imaging issues, I like where they went with the lens. The G10 lens is better for my needs than the G9's was, but still not where I'd ideally like it for WA focal length or maximum aperture.

I also like the fact that Panasonic held the line at ~10MP, while Canon upped the pixel density yet again. I know we always bring up this tired chestnut, but the latter seems uncalled for in a serious P&S -- surely nobody is going to try to use these cameras for image files where a few extra MP would be a better choice over improved IQ. (Unless Canon's thought is that people will be brutally cropping the files.) In other words, if Canon could make the G10 perform at a decent level with ~15 MP, I have to believe they could make it perform even better with only ~10 MP. I have read Emil's thoughts on sensor performance profile with advancing pixel density, and I buy it for DSLR's. But the G10 is now at a pixel density of 34 MP/cm2 according to the dpreview stats; surely to pete this is getting beyond the pale. The LX-3 by comparison is 23 MP/cm2... and the DP1 Foveon sensor is at 1.6 MP/cm2 though not an apples-to-apples comparison.

If it works out, perhaps I will be able to do a direct comparison of my own between the LX-3 and G10. In the meantime I will be eager to see a couple of good, head-to-head reviews once they start appearing online...
Royce Howland
 

by ejmartin on Tue Oct 21, 2008 6:08 pm
ejmartin
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2693
Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Well Royce.... both of these cameras have raw capability, and it seems that we have owners of both the G10 and LX3 on the forum. If the owners would be kind enough to provide raw files to my specifications, PM me if you are willing; I will do the analysis.
emil
 

by Royce Howland on Tue Oct 21, 2008 6:35 pm
User avatar
Royce Howland
Forum Contributor
Posts: 11719
Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Member #:00460
I certainly would be interested to see the results of that... :)
Royce Howland
 

by Scott Fairbairn on Tue Oct 21, 2008 6:58 pm
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
I too, would like to get a decent P&S camera. I tested a G9 out a while back, but the 35mm on the wide end didn't suit me, and I was a little surprised at the noise, but I am probably comparing to a DSLR and thats asking too much.
 

by Phil Colla on Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:25 pm
Phil Colla
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Location: San Diego
ejmartin wrote:If the owners would be kind enough to provide raw files to my specifications, PM me if you are willing; I will do the analysis.
As I mentioned earlier and in another post, I've posted a bunch of samples of the LX3, linked from my blog. All of them include links to the full res JPEG, and most of them also link to the RAW files.

http://www.oceanlight.com/log/panasonic ... mages.html

I will shoot some tripod mounted landscapes in the next three days or so and will post a few more samples after that. All the samples so far are handheld snapshot type stuff, which is how I use the LX3 in practice.
Phil Colla
[url=http://www.oceanlight.com]Natural History Photography[/url] and [url=http://www.oceanlight.com/log/]Blog[/url]
 

by ejmartin on Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:35 pm
ejmartin
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2693
Joined: 22 Oct 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Phil, I had in mind a technical evaluation of noise, dynamic range, and sensor efficiency. Generic raw files are inadequate for this task. One needs pairs of identical raw files; ideal are slightly OOF images of colorchecker charts. As I said, if you are interested to help, I can provide specific instructions as to what is desired.
emil
 

by Phil Colla on Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:43 pm
Phil Colla
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2146
Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Location: San Diego
Emil, OK, I did not (but should have) realized you were looking for specific images. I am happy to help. I have a shoot until this weekend. If you like, PM with instructions on what to shoot with the LX3 (I do not have any other P&S) and I will generate some images for your testing.
Phil Colla
[url=http://www.oceanlight.com]Natural History Photography[/url] and [url=http://www.oceanlight.com/log/]Blog[/url]
 

by ColorChange on Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:32 am
ColorChange
Forum Contributor
Posts: 593
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
I'm in Emil.
Tim
 

by c.w. moynihan on Wed Oct 22, 2008 7:56 am
User avatar
c.w. moynihan
Lifetime Member
Posts: 10459
Joined: 7 Mar 2006
Location: Middle Grove, NY
Member #:00801
Bill Lockhart wrote:Hi Tim,

Now, I am wondering just how cool the Leica version of this camera will be. I understand that Leica is doing some magic to JPEGS. We will see.
According to the Luminous-landscapes review of the panny and the leica, they are virtually indentical and the Leica premium of $400 is not worth it.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... /lx3.shtml
Christian

[i]Cuz I'm free as a bird now and this bird you cannot change ! [/i]
 

by Bill Lockhart on Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:23 am
User avatar
Bill Lockhart
Lifetime Member
Posts: 3058
Joined: 29 Sep 2003
Location: Safety Harbor, Florida
Member #:00215
Christian,

I understand that the bodies are different, Aluminum versus Magnesium. A two-year warranty with the Leica versus one year with Panasonic. Better software for RAW processing. And, somewhere I read that Leica processes JPEGs differently. Course, what one reads on the net is often fabrication. I agree though, $400 is a big difference. Although you gotta love the leather case that one can get for the Leica. Reminds me of Humphrey Bogart. Fits perfectly with the retro look. :-)

Best regards,

Bill
Bill Lockhart
[url=http://www.phototravelreview.com]Photo Travel Review[/url]
[url=http://www.bill.lockharts.com]Personal Website[/url]
 

by c.w. moynihan on Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:38 am
User avatar
c.w. moynihan
Lifetime Member
Posts: 10459
Joined: 7 Mar 2006
Location: Middle Grove, NY
Member #:00801
Certainly the Leica has the "Glam" factor on it's side....;)
Christian

[i]Cuz I'm free as a bird now and this bird you cannot change ! [/i]
 

by Neil Losin on Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:24 am
User avatar
Neil Losin
Forum Contributor
Posts: 3005
Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Can anyone who has an LX3 comment on the video modes? The HD mode in particular interests me. It would be nice to have such a small device that could capably shoot video... Any opinions?

I am quite keen to keep reading this thread -- any and all review/analysis on the LX-3 will be welcome.
___
Neil Losin
Los Angeles, CA
Website: http://www.neillosin.com
Blog: http://www.daysedgeproductions.com/blog
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
73 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group