You surely realize, however, that any/all ,jpeg shots are showing off the camera's PP skills are showing off what computers can do? Unless you're using film, there is no such thing as avoiding someone's PP skills, be it human or a silicon-based entity.
So that's it? You're basing your entire statement on the content of this thread? LOL. OK.
I dunno. I can make it take pretty good pics in low light.
And that text is rather undefined, as 'lower lighting situation' isn't a specific term, and they didn't say that the ISO 12,800 shots would...
Hmmm.... let's just say that I don't think the 'majority' of LX5 beauty shots are B&W; I've seen no data that would indicate that, and it runs counter to my experience.
Here's some color (and I apologize, as I've posted these before)
Bill and Ted's Excellent Departure by tanngrisnir3, on...
A. Ask yourself why you would even want to use those ISO levels in a camera like that.
B. Keep in mind the old saying, "It's the driver, not the car".
The LX5 is a certain kind of tool for certain kinds of shooting. If you think you the high ISO quality is a problem, you're either missing...
Yes, the LWA52, which gives a 35mm equivalent FOV of 18mm.
It can do wonders w/an already wondrous camera.
#2 Oaks in Sunrise Fog, Cathy's Valley, CA 140 by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr
Owens Valley Sunrise, Bishop, CA by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr