Panasonic LX5 no better than a joe average P&S camera?

Man, I am so mad at myself for missing the GF3X deal this morning. I was even the one that posted it at mu-43 but hesitated about 15 secs too long and it went OOS. A GF3X kit for $350. I could easily have sold the GF3 body for $200 making the lens $150. I could have sold my regular 14-42mm GF2 lens for $100 making it $50. For $250 I could have had a GF2 + 14-42mm X lens that would have been roughly LX5 size but with GF2 quality.
 
I should note that the Leica image is the best B&W image from the RAW DNG file I could do in Lightroom, I was going for a noir kind of look I suppose.

The LX5 image is also the best B&W image I could do at the same focal length from the RAW file, it took a couple more steps to get it to this stage in Lightroom than the Leica image.

The LX5 image was taken about 3 weeks after the Leica one.
 

Boid

All-Pro
Location
Bangalore, India
Real Name
Rajiv
I recently picked up a LX5. I'm about to return it and am hoping to get some feedback. I originally posted this on the sister site, mu-43. I already have a GF2. Sizewise, the LX5 isn't much smaller at all. Is there any reason to keep the LX5?

I've been trying out the LX5 I got. The buttons and dials all feel very nice and high quality. Then I looked at the pictures it took. They are nothing special. Just your average P&S shots. Yes, the bokeh does look better than at F2, but otherwise I was not impressed. As for that bright lens in low light. Once again, I'm not impressed. I sought out one shot to illustrate my disappointment. Here is a low light shot and the same shot using my Sony TX5. Both were 1/4 sec exposures and both were on automatic. The LX5 was at F2 and ISO 1600. The TX5 was at F3.5 and ISO 3200. The first image is the LX5, the second the TX5. I think they speak for themselves.

I had high hopes for the LX5 based on the glowing reviews. It does feel and look nice but in the end I prefer function over form.

I completely get your frustration with the LX5. I bought it for 600$(!!) at a duty free at some airport I was in, having gone for a holiday without a camera! So you can imagine my frustration with the sub par jpeg processing and noisy images in low light which this camera threw out. The SOOC jpegs are rubbish. Always. Period. I've never had a usable image straight out of the camera. After grappling with the camera for over 2 years I finally went and bought an X100, and finally the LX5 makes sense to me. I carry both cameras now and the LX5's strength lies in capturing moments that the X100 with it's fixed lens, just cannot. I was at a wildlife sanctuary (not a serious safari) in a boat and got some usable images from the LX5. It's a great little camera for composition, with it's fast lens and wide angle that actually captures the moment rather well. In post, one needs a fair amount of work on the images to make it look acceptable, and a good image is there in the RAW file somewhere! Here are a few pics I would have missed shooting if I was carrying only the X100.


An Osprey on a tree stump in the middle of a lake, shot from a boat
6826693742_90029e95ec_b.jpg


Feeing rather inadequate with my little point and shoot on the boat
6826693986_0a9dfeedbf_b.jpg


The woods are lovely dark and deep...
6826694370_b39a18d23d_b.jpg


Elephant
6972812481_f68665485a_b.jpg


It makes a nice little back-up camera I think, and I'm finally at peace with it.
 

bartjeej

Hall of Famer
Real Name
bart
The elephant photo is fantastic! I'm disappointed to hear that the problems with the jpegs are experienced by more people though! My dad's LX3 has produced loads of very nice jpegs, at least to my standards...
 

P.H

Regular
Location
Derby, UK
I've had mine about 18 months and been very satisfied with it, I don't have the experience of owning many cameras as some do on here, so my comparisons are against other decent small sensor cameras. And it is a small sensor, there's no getting away from the limitations that imposes. Micro four thirds is becoming so compact the advantages of a high end compact camera seem to be diminishing, I may switch, though I'll maybe hang on to see what announcement Panasonic make about the next LX first.
When I do compare it to the other cameras I've owned it comes out pretty well. The JPEGs are not fantastic, but the RAW files are easy to work with. The noise levels are what I'd expect from a compact. The lens is the highlight for me, it is fast and sharp, combined with the effective IS I rarely need to go above ISO200 in daylight, even poor daylight. The other big plus for me is the ease of use, I've had other cameras with many of the LXs features, none of them have been so easy to access.
As said above, you can of course get great shots from any camera. I'm sure every photo I've kept since owning the LX could have been obtained on a lesser camera, the question is could I have taken them, and the answer is probably not.

6733384861_1e830398dc_b.jpg
 

tanngrisnir3

Regular
I recently picked up a LX5. I'm about to return it and am hoping to get some feedback. I originally posted this on the sister site, mu-43. I already have a GF2. Sizewise, the LX5 isn't much smaller at all. Is there any reason to keep the LX5?

I've been trying out the LX5 I got. The buttons and dials all feel very nice and high quality. Then I looked at the pictures it took. They are nothing special. Just your average P&S shots. Yes, the bokeh does look better than at F2, but otherwise I was not impressed. As for that bright lens in low light. Once again, I'm not impressed. I sought out one shot to illustrate my disappointment. Here is a low light shot and the same shot using my Sony TX5. Both were 1/4 sec exposures and both were on automatic. The LX5 was at F2 and ISO 1600. The TX5 was at F3.5 and ISO 3200. The first image is the LX5, the second the TX5. I think they speak for themselves.

I had high hopes for the LX5 based on the glowing reviews. It does feel and look nice but in the end I prefer function over form.

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 the point or looking at the wrong tool.

6826887168_d75277f80e_b.jpg

Stoneman Bridge, looking west, Merced River by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr

6950819629_df7688f83f_b.jpg

Stoneman Bridge, looking east, Merced River by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr
 

Lili

Hall of Famer
Location
Dallas, TX
Real Name
Lili
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 the point or looking at the wrong tool.

6826887168_d75277f80e_b.jpg

Stoneman Bridge, looking west, Merced River by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr

6950819629_df7688f83f_b.jpg

Stoneman Bridge, looking east, Merced River by tanngrisnir3, on Flickr

Superb! Jpeg or RAW?
 

BBW

Legend
Location
betwixt and between
Real Name
BB
Tann is The Man with that LX5 - these are, as are so many of your photographs, simply exquisite.

Normally, I keep up with you on Flickr but for the past couple of months I've fallen way behind. Thanks so much for weighing in with your photos. It's good to see you and your images again around here, Tann.:th_salute:
 
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 the point or looking at the wrong tool.

Those are pretty shots. As you say, it's the driver and not the car. You could have probably gotten the same with most P&S cameras. Why is a majority of LX5 "beauty" shots are B&W?

Why do I want high ISO? Because the LX5 is advertised as a good low light camera attributing the bright F2 lens and high ISO. Unfortunately, that bright F2 lens is attached to a sensor that has poor high ISO performance defeating it's low light abilities. So if I'm missing the point, then so is Panasonic.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom