• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Just ordered a Panasonic LX7

Throckmorton

Throckmorton

Lifer
I've been looking for a good quality compact camera to carry around and take landscape photos, street photos, candids, etc. I have a Sony A35 but it's not very convenient always carrying around the camera + kit lens (which sucks) + 35mm prime + 50mm prime + 70-210 Minolta Beercan. Being too lazy to want to switch lenses causes me to miss a lot of shots that I used to get when I just had a regular P&S. Even when I'm carrying both cameras I can leave my kit lens home and mostly just keep the 35mm or 50mm on the Sony. At 24mm equivalent the LX7 is also really wide, especially since the variable aspect lets you use 16:9 for 5% extra horizontal field of view.


But the main reason I'm posting now without a review or sample pics though is that the camera is currently on sale at B&H for $298 until March 23rd!! It says $448 - $100 but when you add it to your cart the price is $298. If you need a compact, just buy it!
 
Last edited:
Nice camera. If I had to do it all over again, there's a chance I would have gotten the LX7 instead of RX100. Note that it was on sale for $289 at J&R a month or two ago.
 
that's a great price for a great compact.

if i wasn't saving up for a backup OM-D this would be an option. i remember the lx3 fondly.
 
i am *loving* mine. coat-pocketable was a big deal for me and i carry that a lot because its easy to carry around. my dad has a t2i that i can borrow anytime but....god, i hate carrying around that much stuff. so bulky :-/

heres a couple of galleries of stuff ive taken lately. im not a great photographer or anything, kinda bought the lx7 to learn on since it has RAW support and manual control, but i think i get a few nice shots now and again

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4j3wksj6sit9ldn/l0IpVD3xsJ

and do yourself a favor and get the auto lenscap. all the extras i have are the auto cap and a fisheye. the fisheye is, meh, ok maybe. the lenscap is super convenient.

http://www.amazon.com/PANASONIC-LUMI...x7+accessories


im very happy with the lx7 as a starter camera. i could see me wanting a m4/3 one day down the road to upgrade on what the lx7 lacks...if i feel like i can get the hang of things enough to justify spending the money.
 
This is a great deal. I bought my dad one of these cameras when Amazon had them on sale for $300 just before Christmas. I might buy one for my girlfriend's birthday, which is coming up in June. Adorama has the same price, and I have a fair number of Adorama reward bucks floating around . . .
 
Last edited:
xSauronx said:
no clue, but amazon has a holster for the lx7. clearly for a camera, but it is leather and made to fit. did you see that?

http://www.amazon.com/MegaGear-Prote...ds=lx7+holster
Click to expand...

Yes but the problem with those is you have to leave the camera in it and remove the top half to access the controls.

I bought a holster on eBay for the LX5 even though it's not vertical... at least it's a nice brown leather and I'm guessing it will fit
http://www.ebay.com/itm/120960303530?ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1423.l2648
MjXJ5vq.jpg
 
I got the camera and it seems to be defective. At smaller apertures (6.3+) there's a blue spot in the center of the image that shows up when you photograph something dark. I guess there must be dust inside the lens?!

Also, it overexposes. I need to figure out how to set it to -0.7 or -1.0. And also it's noisy even at 400 ISO. I'm guessing 200 is the max usable

kR4f9Kz.jpg
 
Doesn't seem like there is any way to set it to -0.7 EV. That could be a deal breaker. The alternative is to manually expose each shot. I'd rather use aperture priority...
 
Here are some crops to show the noise at each ISO. This is with the default noise reduction setting in Lightroom (25 color 0 luminance)

o3Ilt6h.png


DdXzlK8.png


GMVwq3o.png


D2pzbfW.png


3N2lZag.jpg
 
Last edited:
Theres some new SLR's that can go up to 64000, and produce excellent images at 3200.

Eventually those sensors will be in smaller cameras.
 
Looks out of focus or something as even the ISO 80 isn't tack sharp. Use a tripod and remote shutter release or self-timer?

Should be able to do manual exposure comp, can't imagine why not. Read the manual?

Small sensors don't cope with higher ISOs as well as larger sensors. LX7 attempts to offset that somewhat with a lens with large max aperture. Don't expect miracles, it's a compact camera. And note that even the LX7's IQ is probably not far from 35mm film. Today's DSLRs go up to ISOs almost unimaginable back in the film era, to the point where I find it comical that people complain that ISO 400 isn't completely clean. It won't matter unless you print really large prints. Really.
 
blastingcap said:
Looks out of focus or something as even the ISO 80 isn't tack sharp. Use a tripod and remote shutter release or self-timer?

Should be able to do manual exposure comp, can't imagine why not. Read the manual?

Small sensors don't cope with higher ISOs as well as larger sensors. LX7 attempts to offset that somewhat with a lens with large max aperture. Don't expect miracles, it's a compact camera. And note that even the LX7's IQ is probably not far from 35mm film. Today's DSLRs go up to ISOs almost unimaginable back in the film era, to the point where I find it comical that people complain that ISO 400 isn't completely clean. It won't matter unless you print really large prints. Really.
Click to expand...

Hand held 1/8 sec and wide open f1.4, hence the softness.

The 1600 ISO pic was 1/160 and the 400 ISO was 1/80 also f/1.4
 
Need self-timer on tripod to really make any accurate IQ statements. f/1.4 is gonna be a little soft even then.

RE: the photo of the trees, I don't see any blue dots unless you are counting that ghosting (which isn't really a dot, it's a ghost, also incorrectly called flare sometimes), but that's not a sensor defect, just stray light bouncing around. Try taking more shots where the sun isn't in the frame or isn't anywhere near the edge of the frame and see if the ghosting persists. If so, it could be dust.. hard to say.
 
Last edited:
blastingcap said:
Need self-timer on tripod to really make any accurate IQ statements. f/1.4 is gonna be a little soft even then.

RE: the photo of the trees, I don't see any blue dots unless you are counting that ghosting (which isn't really a dot, it's a ghost, also incorrectly called flare sometimes), but that's not a sensor defect, just stray light bouncing around. Try taking more shots where the sun isn't in the frame or isn't anywhere near the edge of the frame and see if the ghosting persists.
Click to expand...

The point is to show noise, not image quality.

The shot of the trees is the opposite direction from the sun with a completely cloudy sky. There was nothing to cause flare and it was only at apertures smaller than f6.3 which is why I think it must be dust
 
Can't show noise without holding everything but ISO constant, and if you're hand-holding that is not holding things constant.

I guess maybe it's dust then. f/6.3 is at the diffraction limit or even beyond it, at that sensor size. Up to you whether or not you want to ask for an exchange or something.
 
I'd be curious (!) to a couple of those not cropped; maybe the full image but re-sized to screen resolution ( n x 768 or 1080).

Maybe just the ISO 400 or 800 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top