Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Sat Sep 20, 2014 12:34 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Sun Oct 05, 2008 11:02 pm 
Frank B wrote:
......The LX3 is better in low light because, at the same shutter speed, it allows you to use a lower ISO......
......I also don't agree on the smearing......
......It is better than most compacts......

One stop better is perhaps a 30 second window before sundown. Not significant. Also, smear is not something you agree on. It simply is there, or you get noise instead. You can't get the detail though. I can resize any LX3 outdoor landscape to 2400 pixels wide and see the *same* detail. Any larger and you just add noise and smear. Thirdly, how can it be better than most compacts when it's no better than a 3-1/2 year old Casio?


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 120
dalethorn wrote:
Frank B wrote:
......The LX3 is better in low light because, at the same shutter speed, it allows you to use a lower ISO......
......I also don't agree on the smearing......
......It is better than most compacts......

One stop better is perhaps a 30 second window before sundown. Not significant. Also, smear is not something you agree on. It simply is there, or you get noise instead. You can't get the detail though. I can resize any LX3 outdoor landscape to 2400 pixels wide and see the *same* detail. Any larger and you just add noise and smear. Thirdly, how can it be better than most compacts when it's no better than a 3-1/2 year old Casio?


One stop means I can use ISO 200 while you need ISO 400 or I can use ISO 400 when you need ISO 800. It makes a big difference to me when using a camera with a small sensor and high noise at higher ISOs. I have looked at a some of the pictures you posted on Luminous Landscape for the LX3 and TZ5 and think the LX3 has slightly better tonality, about the same detail and significantly less noise (Test 01, Test 02, Test 04). I note that the only person who commented on on Test 01 & 02 said "OK, on the basis of these samples I'd say the LX3 unquestionably blows away the TZ5". So opinions can vary when viewing the same test results.

_________________
Frank


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:09 am 
Frank B wrote:
......One stop means I can use ISO 200 while you need ISO 400......
......the LX3 unquestionably blows away the TZ5......

First, I don't know why you're arguing so much without providing any real info. The "blows away" comment is obviously fictitious since the photos are nearly identical. The ISO comment is likewise meaningless, since at *least* 99 percent of the time I can't get the photo with the TZ5 I also can't get it with the LX3. And when I do, it's all smeared anyway. Why argue with an LX3 owner like me who has decades of expertise in cameras, computer programming, and logical analysis? The issues I've described that point out the LX3's faults are beyond dispute. Unless you figure to win something by constantly repeating the same points. This topic would benefit from *new* info, such as posting a full-res LX3 image with some serious detail (example: trees and leaves etc.), and letting us judge for ourselves.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 120
dalethorn wrote:
Frank B wrote:
......One stop means I can use ISO 200 while you need ISO 400......
......the LX3 unquestionably blows away the TZ5......

First, I don't know why you're arguing so much without providing any real info. The "blows away" comment is obviously fictitious since the photos are nearly identical. The ISO comment is likewise meaningless, since at *least* 99 percent of the time I can't get the photo with the TZ5 I also can't get it with the LX3. And when I do, it's all smeared anyway. Why argue with an LX3 owner like me who has decades of expertise in cameras, computer programming, and logical analysis? The issues I've described that point out the LX3's faults are beyond dispute. Unless you figure to win something by constantly repeating the same points. This topic would benefit from *new* info, such as posting a full-res LX3 image with some serious detail (example: trees and leaves etc.), and letting us judge for ourselves.


"An appeal to authority or argument by authority is a type of argument in logic called a fallacy." (Wikipedia). I think that each of us is capable of reaching our own conclusions (in my case I have close to 50 years experience with photography) ; particularly, as reasonable people can differ over subjective judgments. Picture quality, although to some extent quantifiable, is ultimately a subjective judgment. The extra f/stop is a fact, but the value of an extra f/stop clearly depends on the photographer's needs.

_________________
Frank


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 4:25 pm 
Frank B wrote:
"An appeal to authority or argument by authority is a type of argument in logic called a fallacy." (Wikipedia).

Incorrect on two points. One, the fallacy is Argumentum ad Nauseam, where you keep repeating. Two, I'm not an official authority in photography - I simply have the images to prove what I say. My original point was that the LX3 is basically a TZ5 with manual controls and without the zoom. Nobody to my knowledge has posted images that refute that.


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:22 pm
Posts: 120
dalethorn wrote:
Frank B wrote:
"An appeal to authority or argument by authority is a type of argument in logic called a fallacy." (Wikipedia).

Incorrect on two points. One, the fallacy is Argumentum ad Nauseam, where you keep repeating. Two, I'm not an official authority in photography - I simply have the images to prove what I say. My original point was that the LX3 is basically a TZ5 with manual controls and without the zoom. Nobody to my knowledge has posted images that refute that.


This statement by you "Why argue with an LX3 owner like me who has decades of expertise in cameras, computer programming, and logical analysis? " is definitely an argument by authority. I think we are both 'guilty' of making the same arguments "ad Nauseam". :)

I basically agree with your assessment of the LX3 compared with the TZ5, with the obvious modification that the LX3 has a faster and wider lens. Also, based on your comparisons I think the LX3 has less noise at ISO 400. You give very little weight to the value of the wider lens (24mm vs. 28mm) and to the one f/stop advantage of the LX3. That is fine, but for many others these are important features, as is manual control. Finally, even if you are 100% correct in your conclusions as to the relative picture quality of the LX3 vs. the TZ5, it makes no difference to someone, such as myself, who requires manual control and a wider faster lens to meet his or her needs.

By the way, here is a link to PBase where I have some pictures posted from the LX3, including one full resolution picture.

http://www.pbase.com/frank_b

_________________
Frank


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: LX3
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 7:15 pm 
Frank B wrote:
......This statement by you (......) is definitely an argument by authority......
......You give very little weight to the value of the wider lens......

I reject the first contention above on the basis it's purely argumentative (legal), and has no other merit. On the wider lens, the poor image quality of the LX3 is prima facie evidence that making the view wider (to gather even more detail) is specious at best, and probably intentionally deceptive. In case you missed the point of my postings, they were specifically to refute claims made by Panasonic and forum principals which stated the desirability of wider lenses "to capture more detail", which as I've said is deceptive, since the detail isn't there. But thanks to real-life corporate dumbness, Panasonic and Canon and others are listening to the wrong people, and are moving in the wrong direction. Well, when the USA can elect a monkey as president, I guess I'm asking too much for a sensible camera design.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:52 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9975
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
I'm getting really tired of these arguments. Can we agree to disagree and move on?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 1:27 pm 
Hi everyone of this interesting topic.

One big question for me about the LX3 and the noise it's on the long exposures.

On the LX2, personally, I don't see many difference shooting @ iso100 by 15 seconds, iso200 by 8, or iso400 by 4 seconds... Ok, maybe I exaggerate a little bit, but is we go down one stop, and see a shot iso400 for 2 sec, compared with a shot of 8 at iso100 the differences become imperceptible in terms of chroma noise. Many times I do one or two stop's ev compensation and I get better results pulling gain on the shot, speeding up de exposition.

How is the new ccd LX3 behaviour in this particular instead cmos LX2??


I believe Gordon Laing could give us (on this LX3 particular attention) some great help!

Thank you in advance,
and thank you for your great job! :))


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:16 am 
Gordon - fantastic site! The video reviews are extremely helpful and are what brought me here (saw them on youtube).


Last edited by nazbot on Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:14 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:01 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9975
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Hi joseluissc, all I know about the LX3's high ISO performance is on the high ISO noise results page of the review - I'm afraid I didn't get a chance to try any long exposures with the LX3...

PS - Hi nazbot, welcome on-board!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:03 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9975
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Hi everyone, just a quick note to let you know we've posted our Canon G10 review here:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_G10/

This includes lots of feature comparisons against the LX3, and if you're considering either camera, you should definitely take a look! Unfortunately Panasonic was unable to lend me another LX3 during my G10 tests, so there's no direct side by side comparisons, but you can still open results pages from each review to see how they handle similar situations...

Gordon


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:43 am 
Hi Gordon,

Once again, thx for this wonderful site.

The G10 seems to be real competition for the LX3 or even better in a couple of points.
This is also a 'fun' article about the G10
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

I don't know if you still have the G10 to test but would it be possible to do some tests comparing noise in different resolutions?
I haven't found someone who has done this. Maybe it has no result but you never know.

If my reply should go to the Canon forum, please feel free to move it.

Regards,

Luke


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:22 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 3:32 pm
Posts: 9975
Location: Queenstown, New Zealand
Hi Luke-san, the G10 has now been returned to Canon, but I may try the noise tests at different resolutions for a future article...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:35 pm 
Hi all.The LX3 seems like a great camera.I would like to ask if there is a difference between LX3K and LX3S because there is a big price difference on amazon.Thank you


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group