• 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.

panasonic releases a slew of new cameras

ElFenix

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
LX3
24(!)-60 f/2(!)-2.8 lens, 10.1 MP (not an increase!), full manual controls, hot shoe, a huge number of accessories, and small enough to fit in your pocket, new noise processing algorithm. designed to complement an SLR, it's possibly the best jeans pocket camera on the market.

also taking a bow, two slim cams: FX-37 and FX-150, and a new superzoom FZ28


now, will panasonic also release an update to the FZ50?



lx3 official product page

lx3 full size samples (no idea what firmware revision it has)
ricoh gx200 for comparison (dunno what is up with the lighting for this one, it's 1 stop less exposed than the other two)
canon a590 for comparison (this is the same exposure as the LX3, i guess the white balance is different)
i'd find a G9 for comparison but i can't read japanese. frankly the LX3 is destroying the two cameras i did find.
fuji f31 for comparison



tons of samples

 
Wow that LX3 looks nice

And lol the FZ8 that I bought about 4 months ago is now already outdated with the FZ28's release...if the FZ28 improves on the FZ8's high ISO performance, then it would be an awesome camera.
 
holy shit the LX3 sounds good. I really hope it performs... the G9 needs some serious competition. And the DP-1 was just a huge disappointment.
 
hmm, so I could mount my SB-800 to the LX3's hotshoe? kinda defeats the purpose of the pocket camera form factor, but cool nonetheless.
I do need to pick up a pocket camera, though. hopefully this'll make my list.
 
Panasonic has promised and consistently failed to deliver quality high-ISO performance from their pocket digicams.

Great design. Great features. Great OIS. Amazing lenses. Bad image processing engine.
 
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Panasonic has promised and consistently failed to deliver quality high-ISO performance from their pocket digicams.

Great design. Great features. Great OIS. Amazing lenses. Bad image processing engine.
Click to expand...

at least the lx series has had raw. the leica version has typically had a better jpeg engine, though it has a crappier warranty (wtf leica). and the tz5 is a big improvement over it's predecessors, so there is hope.

and with that f/2 lens you don't need to go to high ISO as much.
 
Originally posted by: jpeyton
Bad image processing engine.
Click to expand...
yeah, that's always the killer. The first samples I saw I almost threw up from this... but apparently it was from a cell phone review site, I don't think the guy knew what he was doing. Looking briefly at all the reviews, it looks decent, but I still prefer canon's processing.

I will wait to see what the actual "i've bought off the shelf" reviews to make a better call.. but I have a feeling it won't matter since I might need a new lens soon, heh.
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
now, will panasonic also release an update to the FZ50?
Click to expand...
this is actually what i was expecting when i saw they announced new cameras. i was curious to see what they'd replace it with.
 
I owned the LX1 as my first camera and absolutely loved it. As long as you had enough light it took absolutely great pictures for a compact camera. Full manual controls are very important if it's complimenting a DSLR. The hot shoe, faster lens and better noise control will only make it better. I would buy this one in a heartbeat if I needed another compact.
 
Do you know of any actual samples from the LX3 around? I really wonder how it stands up to the G9 and the GR digital II...
 
Originally posted by: brzgeek
Do you know of any actual samples from the LX3 around? I really wonder how it stands up to the G9 and the GR digital II...
Click to expand...

there are some samples, but the firmware version is .1, or so i heard (apparently the tz-5 improved greatly from initial samples to version 1 firmware). also, diffraction sets in at f/8, so i would not be shocked if wide open performance is better.

http://www.infosyncworld.com/news/n/9604.html (i had never heard of these people until now, but it appears they're mostly into cell phones. so who knows what they did. the pictures are in landscape mode which does horrific things on the tz-5 according to a poster on dpreview)

http://www.digitalcamerareview...ew=panasonic+lumix+lx3


http://www.focus-numerique.com/news_id-889.html


http://www.photographyblog.com...mix_dmc_lx3_photos.php

official samples:
http://www.panasonic.net/pavc/...allery/models/lx3.html
 
LOL!! Just saw the samples,and even the ones from the official Panasonic website are truly shocking coming from a $500 camera.
I just don't get it.A top-notch Leica lens, a brand-new sensor...Hell, it's gotta be that thrice-accursed Venus engine! Its track record is not exactly exemplary...
My sister has a TZ-3, and any ISO above 200 ironically looks like an image from Venus... Remember those Venera probe pictures? they were taken in an atmosphere 90 times as dense as ours at sea level, at about 400 degrees celsius, making everything look blotchy and pointilistic.Furthermore, the concept of edges and boundaries on Venus is rather elastic, both from the optical distortion due to the glass-thick atmosphere as well as the erosion and melting going on at that temperature.
At slightly higher isos that's exactly what happens to pictures seen even at 50%. If, however, one shoots RAW (such as in the FZ18), results are much better. In other words, that Venus III sucks royally.
I can only surmise Venus IV keeps up the family tradition, using noise suppression more akin to noise (and image) destruction.They could learn a thing or two from Digic...
Let's hope those mountain-sized kinks get ironed out before actual production models hit the stores. So far the only options for a "DSLR companion" are the G9 and GR Digital II, and both have drawbacks which (in theory) would be covered by the LX3's specs.
Lets root for the Panasonic eggheads, everybody! Get those in-camera JPEGs right! (at 3.5mb for 10mp, there's obviously WAY too much compression going on... Casio's 10mp compacts produce 6mb files! Heck, my 6mp Fuji F31 produces 3.5 mp files!)
 
i'm not going to worry about it until final firmware is completed, and even then i tend to use raw so i don't know if it'd make a difference.
 
Wow this is exciting. I've always thought that a person should have 3 cameras in their arsenal. Ultracompact (like Canon Elph), Regular Sized (like Canon G9), and an SLR (Canon 40D). I have the compacts covered (2 actually) and a 40D but would love an in between camera and this might fit the bill! I hope low-light is good.
 
they simply need bigger sensors in these things cause cramming all these MP on these lil sensors just doesnt work out for higher ISO noise.

either that or wait until the sensor technology get there cuase it is usually noise city on these things at anything over 400
 
Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
they simply need bigger sensors in these things cause cramming all these MP on these lil sensors just doesnt work out for higher ISO noise.

either that or wait until the sensor technology get there cuase it is usually noise city on these things at anything over 400
Click to expand...

so's film

*shrug*

bigger sensors require bigger lenses and bigger cameras. as much as people want an aps-c body camera with a fast, quality lens that fits in a pocket, i'm not really sure it's doable. sure, we had stuff like that back in the film days, but film doesn't have the angle of incidence problems that digital sensors with their microlenses do.


the lx3 has a larger sensor than the typical compact, though.
 
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
they simply need bigger sensors in these things cause cramming all these MP on these lil sensors just doesnt work out for higher ISO noise.

either that or wait until the sensor technology get there cuase it is usually noise city on these things at anything over 400
Click to expand...

so's film

*shrug*

bigger sensors require bigger lenses and bigger cameras. as much as people want an aps-c body camera with a fast, quality lens that fits in a pocket, i'm not really sure it's doable. sure, we had stuff like that back in the film days, but film doesn't have the angle of incidence problems that digital sensors with their microlenses do.


the lx3 has a larger sensor than the typical compact, though.
Click to expand...

sigma came out with a larger sensor on a small camera, so your statement is blatently false. they just screwed the pooch in other areas.

 
Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so's film

*shrug*

bigger sensors require bigger lenses and bigger cameras. as much as people want an aps-c body camera with a fast, quality lens that fits in a pocket, i'm not really sure it's doable. sure, we had stuff like that back in the film days, but film doesn't have the angle of incidence problems that digital sensors with their microlenses do.


the lx3 has a larger sensor than the typical compact, though.
Click to expand...

sigma came out with a larger sensor on a small camera, so your statement is blatently false. they just screwed the pooch in other areas.
Click to expand...
that depends on how you define "small." though it is pocketable I guess. Regardless, sigma had a chance to really grab a niche crowd... but I feel they failed big time. they managed to get an even smaller niche crowd. The thing just seems too slow to function as a decent everyday type camera, many limitations. Namely, ISO performance and UI. Price too maybe, but I was willing to dole out the cash if it performed.
 
Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
Originally posted by: ElFenix


bigger sensors require bigger lenses and bigger cameras. as much as people want an aps-c body camera with a fast, quality lens that fits in a pocket, i'm not really sure it's doable. sure, we had stuff like that back in the film days, but film doesn't have the angle of incidence problems that digital sensors with their microlenses do.


the lx3 has a larger sensor than the typical compact, though.
Click to expand...

sigma came out with a larger sensor on a small camera, so your statement is blatently false. they just screwed the pooch in other areas.
Click to expand...

i wouldn't consider 28 f/4 to be 'fast', and neither would most other people, so my statement stands.

see rob riley's post on 2/13/208 at 3:14 am for why a compact big sensor camera with a fast lens ain't likely

maybe jacket pocketable is doable.
 
i can live with f4 if it has a snappy processor, good UI and also good performance at higher ISO's because i can take it everywhere i go easily.

we will see a camera such as this within the next 5 years.
 
Originally posted by: idiotekniQues
i can live with f4 if it has a snappy processor, good UI and also good performance at higher ISO's because i can take it everywhere i go easily.

we will see a camera such as this within the next 5 years.
Click to expand...

i'd like to see one and i think olympus with their 4/3 sensor is in the best position to do so (well, that and they have much less to lose by selling something like that, unlike canon and nikon who push SLRs for image quality). i really hope this sigma doesn't set the market back.

though, a lot of people's biggest complaint for the DP-1 is the slow lens. sure, you might get two stops in sensitivity with the bigger sensor, but you're giving back a stop with the slow lens. the lens on this panasonic is two stops faster, has the convenience of zoom, and has IS.

it's actually amazing how similar the LX3 and the DP-1 are. the LX3 is only 5 grams lighter and 4 mm thinner. that's it.

i wonder if the flash from the DP-1 (or the old contax flash it ripped off) play well with the LX-3?
 
When you people talk about fast or slow lenses are you referring to the widest available aperture at various focal lengths (i.e. lower number for aperture translates to faster shutter speed at the same exposure setting) or the speed of the lens's autofocus mechanisms? I presume the former, but it's a point of confusion for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top