LX3 vs. G10?

[Crabby Guy]

I'm seeking more words than contained in the recent reviews on LL comparing the Canon G10 and the Panny LX3.  Yes, I understand they are quite different cameras.  

(This is my first posting here.  If I'm in the wrong forum, please be gentle.)

[DarkPenguin]

If the different feature set and form factor (one IS pocketable and the other is not) does not give you the answer is sounds like the G10 if you're willing to spend the extra money for it.

[budjames]

I just got a Lumix LX3 after seeing the Leica DLUX-4 equivalent at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC last week. B&H Photo had an order taking booth at the show and the guy I met there owned the LX3. He said that the $400 additional cost to buy the Leica was basically for a longer warranty and red plastic logo. He loved his LX3, so I ordered one in black, of course.

I've taken it on a few walks this week through my local park and the images seem nice, but I hate having to use Silky Pics to process the RAW files. I cannot wait until LR releases an update to read the RAW files.

The LX3 is well built and all metal. The flash works very well for a compact camera and all of the controls are easy to reach for manual adjustments on the fly. I'm still playing with the controls so perhaps I'll post a few sample images here when I get around to it.

This camera is a little bigger than my Panasonic FX-50, but the lens on the LX3 does not retract flush to the body, so although it fits in a coat jacket pocket, it's a little bulky.

Bud James

[sidero]

I'm no expert but to me it's a tie; depends on what's important to you:

Ergonomics and handling: G10
Compact size: LX3
Resolving power: G10
Dynamic Range: LX3
Low light shooting: LX3
Range of lens: G10

[barryfitzgerald]

The LX-3 looks pretty good, but there is a nasty little secret it hides!

In jpeg Panasonic are using in camera processing to remove vignetting and correct barrel distortion. The bundled Silkypix is also doing distortion/vignetting correction too. Any other raw converter will not do this. Could be a major issue for LR users, which have 0 distortion correction tools. (hey I asked for it long ago, on deaf ears it seems)

Few reviews so far have mentioned this, though Imaging Resource have updated their one and mention it.
Silkypix is ok, but the GUI is pretty poor, not my choice for working on many images have to say. I would pass on the LX-3 on this basis alone, the distortion is really heroic in proportions, near fisheye levels. And it is most def a camera you need to shoot raw in, to get the best out of it. Maybe the Ricoh alternative is a better bet, lens wise.

[cbcbell]

After using an LX-2 as a P&S camera for the last two years, I recently purchased a G10, which I prefer on all counts, especially the ergonomics of the dedicated dials on the top deck. The wide lens distortion on the LX2 is also pretty fierce, and I do all my raw processing in Lightroom. My solution was to set up PTLens as an external editor on my Mac (PC version also available), and round-trip out those files where the distortion was visibly problematic:

http://epaperpress.com/ptlens/

[dalethorn]

The LX3 is good for wide shots in good light where the subject(s) are more-or-less level with the camera. However, details quickly become mushy and badly smeared as light dims, which does not seem to be a function of ISO particularly. That is to say, at higher ISO's the visible noise increases, but the smearing of detail increases out of proportion to the noise. Sorry for not having a better explanation.

[NYRich]

An interesting comparison (along with the Nikon P6000) is at...

http://www.bythom.com/compactchallenge.htm

[dalethorn]

DPReview did a thorough review of the LX3 Tuesday, and while the info was generally accurate and informative, the questions regarding their pet peeves were wrongly framed. The strengths and weakness of the LX3, G10, and P6000 were clearly shown, but instead of asking the reader "which better suits your main application for the camera?", they digress into hand-wringing about pixel densities. And BTW, I was "removed" from the Cameralabs forum, not because I committed a cameralabs sin, but because "my insistence that comparing the end result was the only thing that mattered provoked too many other members." There are some similar problem folks here who believe that their knowledge of certain tech issues makes them experts. Ho hum.

[dalethorn]

I just got a Lumix LX3 after seeing the Leica DLUX-4 equivalent at the PhotoPlus Expo in NYC last week. B&H Photo had an order taking booth at the show and the guy I met there owned the LX3. He said that the $400 additional cost to buy the Leica was basically for a longer warranty and red plastic logo. He loved his LX3, so I ordered one in black, of course.

I've taken it on a few walks this week through my local park and the images seem nice, but I hate having to use Silky Pics to process the RAW files. I cannot wait until LR releases an update to read the RAW files.

The LX3 is well built and all metal. The flash works very well for a compact camera and all of the controls are easy to reach for manual adjustments on the fly. I'm still playing with the controls so perhaps I'll post a few sample images here when I get around to it.

This camera is a little bigger than my Panasonic FX-50, but the lens on the LX3 does not retract flush to the body, so although it fits in a coat jacket pocket, it's a little bulky.

Bud James

I bought the brown case for the Leica D-Lux4 to use with my LX3.  Very nice case, and perfect fit.