Micro 4/3 Panasonci LX100 picture thread

Les Klein

Veteran
Dec 10, 2015
104
Montreal area
A recent trip to Wells Beach, ME. I guess I like sunset/twilight scenes . . .
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Twilight, Wells Beach by kleles, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Twilight, Wells Beach by kleles, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Dusk at Wells Beach by kleles, on Flickr

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Twilight, Wells Beach by kleles, on Flickr
 

Harry Cutts

Veteran
Jun 6, 2017
104
Huddersfield UK
Harry
I don't think there are any limitations Steve, but some berate it for cropping what is perceived as an already small sensor. I use micro four thirds as my main camera (EM1), and a good selection of lenses from both Olympus and Panasonic and I find the results to be more than I need. The LX100 is my go to camera when I just want a light/small camera with quality in abundance to walk around with.
Ignorance is no excuse to knock a camera.
 

MoonMind

Hall of Famer
Dec 29, 2013
124
Switzerland
Matt
I like the output from the LX100, but low ISO is not its forte - not because of the crop, but because of the strong chroma noise Panasonic 16MP sensors generally exhibit (the 12MP sensors were even worse). But guess what - you can use ISO 800 without too much of a penalty, and if you can tolerate more noise, ISO 1600 is feasible; depending on your software and denoise skills/tastes, that may not even be the lower limit. I myself limit the LX100 to ISO 800 (Auto ISO, but also manually); image stabilisation and the seriously nice, bright lens provide for quite nice night time usability nonetheless.

All in all, the LX100 is a remarkably good low light camera - mainly thanks to its very helpful feature set. The Ricoh GR, for comparison's sake, does better in terms of sensor performance (at least one full stop), but its lens is slower, fixed in terms of focal lenght, and there's no I.S. And in spite of what so many reviews seem to indicate, the results from 1" sensors simply can't do a lot more in low light (I limit my FZ1000 to ISO 800 as well - and it's quite mushy by then, clearly worse than the LX100). I know that the lastest Sony sensors should be better - but they need to be *a lot* better to seriously compete (possible, though).

The first compact camera that I have come across that might actually equal or even truely beat the LX100 is the G1X III - but I'll have to examine that further, especially since the lens is much slower, so the G1X III would need to be two full stops better in terms of noise performance - and at 24MP (though this appears to be the case so far, I'm far from definite about this as of yet). Would this take away from the fact that the LX100 is a perfectly usable low light performer? No way ...

Put differently, it wasn't a lack of low light performance that made me buy the G1X III - only the hope that the sensor should be able to compensate for the shortcomings of the lens.

And now I'll go out and try my hand at night time shooting - hand held, in the snow; I'll take a medium format camera with 3200 ISO film (Mamiya 6 MF), the G1X III - and the LX100 :)

M.
 

tonyturley

Hall of Famer
Nov 24, 2014
124
Scott Depot, WV, USA
Tony
Yeah, that looks cold. We're expecting several nights over the next week to drop into the single digits (F). Pretty cold for this part of the state. Late January and February should be interesting.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom