P&S Help Canon G10 or Lumix LX-3?
I'm having a hard time deciding between these two cameras. I'm looking for a camera to replace my current P&S the Casio Exlim ExZ750. While it was nice a portable and performed great in bright sunny conditions, interior shots were abysmal. Anything past iso 100 is unusable.
I'm leaning towards the G10 mainly because I do have a Speedlite 580 from my dslr kit that I can use on it for low light situtaions. Has anyone used this setup and how are the results? How is noise in ISO 400 and lowlight?
The LX-3 looks intriguing becauseof is f2 leica lens for available light shooting and the HD movie looks like a handy feature for recording the kids. Anyone have any experience with this camera? How's the noise in high ISO on this camera?
Any help would be appreciated!
I'm leaning towards the G10 mainly because I do have a Speedlite 580 from my dslr kit that I can use on it for low light situtaions. Has anyone used this setup and how are the results? How is noise in ISO 400 and lowlight?
The LX-3 looks intriguing becauseof is f2 leica lens for available light shooting and the HD movie looks like a handy feature for recording the kids. Anyone have any experience with this camera? How's the noise in high ISO on this camera?
Any help would be appreciated!
-Carey
Canon EOS Rebel XT, EF-S 18-55, EF 50 1.8 II, Tamron AF 19-35 3.5-4.5, EF 24-70 f/2.8L, EF 70-200 f/4L, Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Digi Mini 718B.
Canon EOS Rebel XT, EF-S 18-55, EF 50 1.8 II, Tamron AF 19-35 3.5-4.5, EF 24-70 f/2.8L, EF 70-200 f/4L, Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Digi Mini 718B.
0
Comments
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/page7.asp
I think both are probably great cameras. I would go for the Panasonic simply because of the great lens. Looks like a real winner to me.
http://www.jonathanswinton.com
http://www.swintoncounseling.com
Be aware of a couple of things, though.
The G10 is NOT a very pocketable camera. It's somewhat chunky, and you won't be able to slip it in your jeans pocket as you could the Casio. For this reason, you should probably keep the Casio around.
The G10 will still be mediocre at best when you need to raise the ISO. It'll be an improvement over a small slim P&S, but the sensor is just too small to do well at higher ISOs.
IMO, staring at noise comparison charts is the wrong way to do things. You need to look at the desired functionality of the camera *first*, and after which look at your options with your desired functionality.
If you don't do that, then you'll end up with a camera that performs 10% better in some area, which in the end doesn't really matter.
.
Both are good and amazingly, at low ISO the Canon is, if anything, better. However, that wide fast lens and usable ISO200/400 makes the Panasonic a better proposition IMO. Oh, and having been an LX2 user for the past couple of years, I can say that in spite of the lack of extra dials, the control system is very usable.
If you will have plenty of light and you need the megapixels and you need more zoom reach, the G10 appears to deliver. There is this testament to the quality of the G10, but then again those landscape guys don't care about movie modes or high ISO, they always shoot from a tripod. You might lean to the G10 just to use that speedlight, like strobist.com does with the G9.
If you will use wide angle more than telephoto, and you need lower noise because you'll be shooting in low light without a flash, and you need a better movie mode, then the LX3 seems better.
I'm going with the LX3 because in my P&S I need low light performance and a better video camera substitute a lot more than I need more megapixels, and I rarely zoom all the way in with my current old Canon P&S. I only wish the LX3 had the ergonomic top dial layout of the G10.
http://kenrockwell.com/canon/g10.htm
I think both are great digicams, just have to pick which you like more. I think the Panasonic is a smaller and cheaper digicam with a faster lens at the cost of range, where as the Canon has better ergonomics and a better range at the cost of bigger build and cost.
I like lowest noise possible, fast lens, and cheaper prices, so for me, I'd go for the Panasonic.
I do think the Panasonic at iso 400 is probably cleaner. If you're printing large, that will matter.
If the largest print you're going to make is an 8X10, I doubt if there would be much, if any difference.
I have a gallery of shots from the G10, the bad news is, I've been playing with CS3 a lot with these shots.
Have a look here: LINK
If you're wanting to do indoor shots without a flash, the Pano would probably be the best bet.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
I think I will go with the LX-3. I do not need the telephoto range for my applications. Mainly pictures of the kids and group family party pictures.
The main reason I did like the G10 was the ability to use the Speedlite, but I'd always try to use available light where ever possible. With all your comments I think I've officially fell over the fence into the Lumix side.
Thanks!
Canon EOS Rebel XT, EF-S 18-55, EF 50 1.8 II, Tamron AF 19-35 3.5-4.5, EF 24-70 f/2.8L, EF 70-200 f/4L, Speedlite 580EX, Manfrotto Digi Mini 718B.
Sounds like the deed is done, but I'll toss in my comments too.
I do a fair amount of video as well as photos and the video output of the LX3 is really in a different league from the G10. That was a big part of the deal tipper for me.
I also find that indoors, with kids I use the f/2 and 24mm a lot.
The noise of the LX3 sensor is actually a hair less than the G10 (lots of specs and graphs and the like on an LX3 thread at NSN in the digital topics section). However, as Dave pointed out I think on an 8x10" print one would be pressed to see the difference.
It really comes down to shooting style. For what I use a P&S for f/2 - 24mm and video were important. If you usually need something longer than 60mm, or want the benefits of 50% more pixels for printing / cropping potential then the G10 is clearly better.
Both have great IQ and can make wonderful photos when in the right hands.
www.finesart.com
We never know how something we say, do, or think today, will effect the lives of millions tomorrow....BJ Palmer
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong10/
Was just reading that today...the conclusion sure is harsh on Canon, vs Panasonic.
From my read of the review on dpreview, the LX3 is better for lower light and indoor shooting with its much faster lens, and at higher ISOs. If you desire to use your P&S on a tripod, to stitch frames together, you can make a case that the G10 is an excellent choice, particularly if you limit yourself to ISO 200 and less.
I originally bought the G9, partly, because of the ability to use and control Canon ex flashes, but the focusing ability in low light is so slow, than I found I never used flash on the camera! SO I agree with K Rockwell in that regard. IF you prefocus with manual focus, then there is no shutter delay to speak of. I have seen skiing pictures captured with prefocusing with the G9!
For people, I have still not found a P&S that I can put up with, compared to an inexpensive DSLR by comparison. But for detail shots, still lifes, macros, and hand held panos the G9-G10 will work well for what I want it to do.
I bought a G10.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
But I'm really not impressed. For the money, I'd probably get a entry level dslr like a Nikon D40 or a Canon XS or a Olympus E-420 and live with the bigger bulk for better image quality and much much faster response.
The thing that makes me wonder is that these are for enthusiasts and such who want full control but I would think this market would also care a lot about image quality as well. In which case, I'd lean towards a dslr or maybe a Sigma DP1 or the upcoming Olympus digicams using a micro 4/3 sensor.
I think this is one of the biggest problems that we have today. Our expectations are so high, that almost no camera will be good enough.
We blow the shots up on our monitors large enough to wallpaper a living room wall, and we see, pixels, noise, artifacts, you fill in the blanks.
I have the G10, and I admit that I was hoping that it could do as well as a second DSLR body to be used for landscapes.
I don't think that was a realistic expectation, if I was a pro earning a living with my camera. But as a hobbyist, it may work out.
Now, will these shots be like the ones I get from my Canon XSi with a Canon "L" on it? Not a chance.
But I can take the photos from a G10, print them up to 8X10, put them in a scrapbook and I have no doubt that they'll look great.
Now I'm not saying we should lower our expectations, but we need to be a little more realistic.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
It really does come down to why a person buys one of these. For many, including me, an SLR does not enter into it. I have an SLR and it is used whenever possible. But for those times when the SLR is too large, I love having a P&S, something I can take absolutely anywhere.
The point is not to see whether it matches an SLR, or even if an SLR could be bought at the same price. It's like why people buy the extremely popular iPod nano - people are actually willing to pay the same price or more per gigabyte just to get the function in a smaller size. The size itself is a value added feature.
We know we can't get SLR quality out of a P&S, so the question can become more focused. The question is not how close to SLR quality you can get, but how far from total crap can you get. If I get a good, fast lens, low noise in low light, manual controls and exposure compensation, image stabilization, and a reasonable number of MP (not too many, or else my cards and drives hold fewer pics), why not? So I buy a nice raw-capable P&S over your garden variety full-auto JPEG pocket camera.
In some threads (not just here but other boards) people remark "who's gonna blow up a P&S shot anyway." Well, sometimes you want to, because that's the camera you were able to bring when a certain shot came up. In that case, I'll hope my P&S is capable of as much of that quality as possible. A few years ago, people posted about the nice enlargements they made from their 3-megapixel PowerShots. Well, now that we have 10+ MP and raw support so we can bypass the in-camera sharpening and NR and get the most out of that data, heck yeah I'm going to enlarge some P&S shots.
It is matted and framed in the entryway of my house, and I think it is lovely. Sharp, grainless, better than any 35mm Cibachrome image I ever printed.
I also have 11x 16in prints from a Lumix DMC-LX1 as well.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Showoff.:D
I rarely print anything over 8x12. No problems at all at that size.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
Hiya Dave!:D
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I've taken a few shots with the G10, I think it works pretty well.
My favorite so far.
A power tower with clouds moving really fast by it.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
I am looking forward to my G10.
Interesting link here comparing the G10 and the LX3.
The numerical differences seem small enough to be inconsequential to me - they do not publish statistics of error measurement that I can find.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
There may be some noise in the sky, but I still think it's a cool shot.
Seeing as it's Thanksgiving, and we're still having high's in the 30's with no snow on the ground, the weather's been pretty nice.
Of course we need some cold stuff to move in to get our local winter shots of eagles and swans, but I can't really say that I'm hoping for cold weather.:D
I went to the link you posted, for a 3rd camera, put in a DSLR and you'll never buy a P&S again.
I don't spend to much time with , numbers, tests, RAW, JPG, this stuff is helpful, but what really matters is I have a small camera that works well,
and because it has the same buttons as my Canon DSLR, it's very easy to use.
I guess that's why there's so many cameras out there, one size doesn't fit all.
Have a good Holiday folks.
Basking in the shadows of yesterday's triumphs'.
its funny to me how everything is....some people put in vignette with software, but pay $1000 more in the equipment to avoid vignette....
(yes, im guilty too) its all kinda funny to me...
i was watching a interesting show the other day about a photographer... when in preperation of her plates by chance she gets dust or something on them and enjoys how these things makes her image better....
myself, im just glad to be able to take a photograph....
I'm pleased about the quality of the photo's. They may not be at a DSLR standard yet, but for a compact i think they are good. Images hold a lot of detail and the colours are good from the beginning of pp work, which is really nice. I also have a KM Z6 but all photos come out blueish which really annoied me. These photos have been shopped but mostly on contrast and WB, not so much on sharpening or NR. I still post them because i pp almost all my photos so it's just as fair
1/200 sec. F 3.5 ISO 200 colour setting: off, mild CA visible at left upper corner
1/320 sec. F3.5 ISO 80 setting: vivid colours. love how the autumn colours came out. they really were that vivid!
SQweeiill!! 1/125 sec F4 ISO 200 colour mode: vivid
1/8 sec F4.0 ISO 80 (IS was really handy here) Colour setting: off
1/4 sec F 3.2 ISO 100 colour: ?
1/6 sec F 3.5 ISO 400 (as you can see, noise comming through) colour: ?
Originals for the pixel peeper at the link above. In my opinion, you shouldnt use the camera above ISO 400 and keep it at or below ISO 200 if possible. The noise is not pretty above ISO 400. I don't think the camera is overly slow at low light, certainly not slower than some of my DLSR lenses, who sometimes have a bit of trouble finding something to focus on. I put the 430 flash on it once but didnt like to hold it. the center of weight makes holding it a pain. Although the IS is really nice and lets you handhold it to about 1/2 sec, I would still grab my DLSR for nightwork or put the G10 on a tripod or something because nightwork isn't where the G10 shines :P. i dont have any experience with the LX-3 so dont know how it compares. hope this helps.