Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Panasonic LX2/LX3 10 megapixel camera (updated)

editor

editor

hiraethified
lx2frontback-001.jpg


I really liked the Lumix LX1 digicam but the results were spolit by image noise, even at relatively low ISO ratings.

Well, here's the new LX2, boasting an upgraded 10.2 megapixel sensor, image stabilisation, high 1600 ISO performance with "Venus Engine III high performance image processing LSI to dramatically reduce the noise that challenged the predecessor."

I wonder if I can blag a review copy?!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0607/06071904panasoniclx2.asp
 
editor said:
lx2frontback-001.jpg


I really liked the Lumix LX1 digicam but the results were spolit by image noise, even at relatively low ISO ratings.

Well, here's the new LX2, boasting an upgraded 10.2 megapixel sensor, image stabilisation, high 1600 ISO performance with "Venus Engine III high performance image processing LSI to dramatically reduce the noise that challenged the predecessor."

I wonder if I can blag a review copy?!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0607/06071904panasoniclx2.asp
Click to expand...
I need a new un, how much are they going for?
 
A few more details: the camera is going for around $500 in the US - roughly £275 - and there's some not-exactly-overwhelming sample pics here

But it sure looks purdy as a picture.
lumix-lx2.jpg
 
Bizarre choice of images for an official site.

A very lovely looking laydee at the top, but if I was her, I wouldn't be too pleased about all the pixel peepers like me examining her pores and whiteheads in such microscopic close-up detail!


editor said:
A few more details: the camera is going for around $500 in the US - roughly £275 - and there's some not-exactly-overwhelming sample pics here
Click to expand...
 
Looks like they've rammed in more pixels on the sensor and then gone for noise reduction to cover up the noise.
 
Panasonic LX2 10 megapixel camera

Ever since the Panasonic Lumix LX1 came out with its otherwise excellent review on dpreview marred by the fact that it produces noisy pictures at high ISO numbers, I have been waiting for a follow up.

It seems that it was announced a week ago. So far there is only a press release but no details of price. I have a feeling that I will be buying a new camera around Christmas time. It could be a Panasonic, perhaps a Ricoh or maybe a Samsung. It is good to have a choice.
 
Is that the one with the variable aspect ratios? I'm amazed nobody else has done this yet, wish they did square format too. Nice Leica lens too!
 
I'm not so sure - they've crammed in more pixels onto the sensor and introduced more aggressive noise reduction in an attempt to cure the noise problem.

There's already a thread about this camera, so I'll merge them shortly.
 
It is a larger sensor than normal.

I'm always suspect of these outrageously named image processing algorithims. (LSI stands for large scale intergration which has nothing to do with image processing and is defunct teminology for how many transistors they could get on silicon chips.) If the camera is 1/2 decent it wouldn't need much in the way of post processing.
 
Sunray said:
It is a larger sensor than normal.

I'm always suspect of these outrageously named image processing algorithims. (LSI stands for large scale intergration which has nothing to do with image processing.) If the camera is 1/2 decent it wouldn't need much in the way of post processing.
Click to expand...
Check out the test photos. They don't look too good.

And the sensor is a smidge bigger than the last one, it's still much smaller than a dSLR - and with 10 megapixels on board, you're always going to get noise.

If only Lumix had used new Fuji's F30 sensor - they'd have a dream of a camera!
 
Ah - sorry to start a new thread when this one already existed. Obviously I had not seen it. On the noise issue - which to me was the critical one in preventing me buy the LX1, the press release claims that the Venus III engine on the new camera produces less noise than the version on the old camera. Only a thorough review will answer this question. The pictures on the web site only seem to emphasise resolution and at low ISO numbers at that. I bet that model wishes she had combed her eyelashes before the picture was taken. The camera can be cruel and heartless.
 
Hmm, its hard to tell, none of those images are taken when you have to start having exposure times lower than about 1/50th on even the lowest ISO. Then we'll know if its as bad as all the other panasonics I've seen. Never ceased to amaze me how shit they are at even the lowest ISO.
 
Sunray said:
Hmm, its hard to tell, none of those images are taken when you have to start having exposure times lower than about 1/50th on even the lowest ISO. Then we'll know if its as bad as all the other panasonics I've seen. Never ceased to amaze me how shit they are at even the lowest ISO.
Click to expand...

Sunray can you amplify those comments a bit as I am in the market for a Panasonic camera and don't want to waste my money?
 
Hocus Eye. said:
Sunray can you amplify those comments a bit as I am in the market for a Panasonic camera and don't want to waste my money?
Click to expand...
They're potentially noisy for low light photos (ie indoors) and for photos of people or objects moving quickly. (I think that's what it means)
 
Hocus Eye. said:
Sunray can you amplify those comments a bit as I am in the market for a Panasonic camera and don't want to waste my money?
Click to expand...
If you want a simple compact camera then go no further than a Canon, they have been great on that front for ages.

If you want to puruse www.dpreview.com you will see that the low light or high ISO performance of the Panasonics have let them down every single time. Noisy images on even fairly low ISO settings.

Have a look at the http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilmf30/page6.asp of the Fuji finepix F30 on dpreview to see what is now achievable at a stonking ISO800. Thats tempting me when i get some cash together.
 
If I want purple fringing and a screen that is not always visible in bright sunlight I will stay with my current Olympus C40Z which is several years old. It also has better manual control than the Fuji F30. I still like this camera a lot.

The whole point of my interest in the new Panasonic is that they claim they have overcome the noise problem. If I can be convinced of this I might buy one. For now though my ageing Olympus is good enough for me to carry on with until I am really impressed with something new. I got it right when I bought that camera and I intend to get it right again. There is a Ricoh and a Samsung in the list of possibles still.
 
Although the image quality of the Fujis are superlative in low light, 'proper' photographers are soon going to get fed up with its fiddly interface.

Compared to the LX1/2 and the mighty Ricoh GRD, even the latest Fuji F30 is a bugger to use if you want to get creative with yer settings.

I have to say the Ricoh's control system is the best I've seen on any compact digicam, with the LX1 not far behind.
 
And the first review suggests it's got exactly the same problem of the LX1: everything about the camera is ace except the sensor.
 
It's a shame because I love the look and feel of the LX cameras, but seeing as I do a lot of night photography that noise would become a real pain.
 
Many nights I spend watching the sunset over Granada. Bottle of beer in one hand, spliff in an other, sketch pad and pens in the others and camera on a tripod (they're very useful occassionally).

I chuckle when I see 9 out of every 10 digital shooters walk away shaking their heads.

THE SHOT that most visitors want on holiday (anywhere in the world) is a low or, difficult light shot just after sunset. It's a magical time of day when we're wound down and merry for the start of the night. So few digital cameras can capture it without a spoil of noise.

The rise in popularity of nightime photography is something I suspect the developers didn't foresee. Night is a different world. Physically there are many diffrent light sources shaping the environment. Cities by night are now much safer thanks to brighter street lighting as much as anything else. Possibly, we're looking for something that only we see - a unique experince that goes beyond the picture postcard. Not sure myself.

Why has night time photography become so poplular?
 
Stanley Edwards said:
Many nights I spend watching the sunset over Granada. Bottle of beer in one hand, spliff in an other, sketch pad and pens in the others and camera on a tripod (they're very useful occassionally).
Click to expand...

STOP IT STOP IT STOP IT!!!

Ask anyone who knows me, and they'll tell you that I have wanted to move to Granada since christ was a kid. :(

Do you want a geordie sherpa?
 
Stanley Edwards said:
Why has night time photography become so poplular?
Click to expand...


I think that is an invertible result of our cities becoming lit at night - something that seems quite new. I'm only twenty six and I can remember when most churches, public spaces and bridges weren't lit. It seems to be a new trend to illuminate mundane buildings with lights, especially in the cities. As a result it gives it a different atmosphere that isn't aberrant from what we see during the day.

Take a look at how a vernacular building changes at night if it is lit up properly. Textures are heightened and exaggerated, as are shadows, angles and places of light. Sunlight makes everything look ordinary, it is illuminated in the same light all over - where as night time illumination picks out the best bits.
 
riot sky said:
...

Do you want a geordie sherpa?
Click to expand...

You'll have to compete with one with good looks, tits and a unique mind :D


Seriously, dirt cheap flights to here and bargain accommodation. May well be taking guests myself from next week. All urbanites welcome.


--/ Currently wondering about this Foveon sensor. It's all beginning to make sense to me and I may need to bend one to it's limits soon.

Thing is, that film technology ended up on the three layer capture because it was better than a single colour value for each capture point. Makes perfect sense to me that a three colour values over a single pixel are more accurate than one. I'm not a believer in the current theories of visual perception and cones capturing single colours.

Whatever, can't afford to blow a grand on a new dSLR right now so, I guess I'll be scanning Ebay for those that carry the Foveon sensor. Dirt cheap some of them.



The light here just after 8PM is absolutely mind blowing ATM. Fucking gorgeous.
 
riot sky said:
...

Take a look at how a vernacular building changes at night if it is lit up properly. Textures are heightened and exaggerated, as are shadows, angles and places of light. Sunlight makes everything look ordinary, it is illuminated in the same light all over - where as night time illumination picks out the best bits.
Click to expand...


The other thing I notice is that buildings lit from a very close light source reflect more clear light. It's a rare morning that the sunlight is so crisp that everything is in sharpest detail. Cities at night these days are a mixed bag of many light sources. It gives a 3D perception that is quite unreal. Bright, mid frequency (5500K) light is overwhelmingly clear. Mecury vapour and old fashioned sodium lighting is somehow sent to the background. And, yet the human mind can make sense of it all.
 
Panasonic have just announced the Lumix DMC-LX3 offering the usual manual controls and a fast F2.0-F2.8 24-60mm (35mm equivalent) lens with a 1/1.63-inch CCD sensor sporting the same 10.1 million effective pixels (good to see Panasonic not doing the pointless playing pixel catch-up).

I so wanted the LX1 to be a hit but the high ISO noise was awful, and it was the same story for the LX2. If they've nailed it with the LX3 they might have a contender on their hands, although the zillions of daft scene modes take away from its pro aspirations somewhat ("Pin Hole' wha?!).

It'll be available in the UK from August for £399.99.

panasoniclx3.jpg


http://www2.panasonic.com/webapp/wc...8085043706&surfModel=Content07212008085043706
 
So this is the camera that I saw in Amateur Photographer magazine.

It caught my eye as the photo of it in AP showed it with an external optical viewfinder.

I like small cameras for discreet street stuff, but I can't use LCDs for composition (I really have tried), so I'm always interested in digital compacts with decent viewfinders.

On the press release on dpreview it says it has a zoom lens (24-60mm), so how does that work with the optical viewfinder?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Why are official companion camera apps always so crap?
Replies
2
Views
499
weepiper
weepiper
I
Beginner-friendly video camera recommendations
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
iona
I
hiccup
Casio wrist camera photos on U75
Replies
4
Views
959
RoyReed
RoyReed
sim667
Anyone else ever get overwhelmed by their camera gear?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Virtual Blue
V
Puddy_Tat
Digital Camera Recommendations
Replies
5
Views
590
Puddy_Tat
Puddy_Tat
Back
Top Bottom