NickTrop
Veteran
LX5? Not a believer in high-end digicams. The great equalizer of all these cameras is their CCD. All about the same size (or not really different enough to matter) - whatever glass they slap on them can't do much with that CCD constraint. Don't get me wrong - these are fine cameras, but I just don't see the point in springing for any one of them costing more then $250 US. As point-n-shooters, they're excellent for this purpose. They can slap whateve lens on them, build them from titanium, add this or that (including a red dot)... but they're all going to produce the same image quality. With these cameras, it's all about what miracles you can work with them in Photoshop.
Spleenrippa
Yes, Right There
You don't seem to take into account the processing done by the camera itself. There's a lot going on behind that little sensor- to say there's no difference between cameras of equivalent sensor size is crazy, IMO... I can assure you there's a world of difference between my GRD II and the Kodak EasyCrap my parents use
GoodPhotos
Carpe lumen!
There is a big difference in IQ between the smaller sensor ~$250 digicams and the larger sensor $400-$500 digicams (like the LX5, S95, G11... and maybe the P7000?).
Granted the new class of so called 'EVIL' cameras (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lense) with APS-C sized sensors will likely eventually replace the high-end digicam with unquestionably better IQ, but the price point just hasn't come down to where most enthusiasts are willing to pay for them yet.
Granted the new class of so called 'EVIL' cameras (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lense) with APS-C sized sensors will likely eventually replace the high-end digicam with unquestionably better IQ, but the price point just hasn't come down to where most enthusiasts are willing to pay for them yet.
mackigator
Well-known
I think the LX5 is a good camera, and proof that Panasonic is listening to photogs (step zoom, better grip were both oft cited LX3 wishes). I've owned the LX1 and now the LX3, but I'm waiting until after Photokina to replace the LX3.
And odds are it will be with a Sony NEX of some sort.
Any chance you'd be willing to put up a noisy shot from the LX5? Or a couple, that show the sensor handling things well on its way to loosing it, noise-wise?
And odds are it will be with a Sony NEX of some sort.
Any chance you'd be willing to put up a noisy shot from the LX5? Or a couple, that show the sensor handling things well on its way to loosing it, noise-wise?
NickTrop
Veteran
You don't seem to take into account the processing done by the camera itself. There's a lot going on behind that little sensor- to say there's no difference between cameras of equivalent sensor size is crazy, IMO... I can assure you there's a world of difference between my GRD II and the Kodak EasyCrap my parents use
What - the firmware? Please. Kodak isn't capable of creating decent firmware? Here's a rrecent EasyShare review:
Overall, however, the Kodak Z950 takes very good pictures. The color representation is very good as are the details. The noise level is lower than most other camera in this class, even at high ISOs, which is a big plus. The ISO can be manually set from 100 to 1,600. The lens created a small amount of barrel distortion in wide angle shots, but this was so slight that many people won’t even notice it.
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Kodak-EasyShare-Z950-Digital-Camera-Review/976/7
No offense - just my opinion, the overall picture quality of point-n-shoot digitals are all in the same range all along the various price points. - they just are. It's, however, not a bad range! They're all competent little picture takers - including Easy Shares. I love little Fuji digital, and take it with me everywhere. Expensive ones, however, make about as much sense as expense high-end "disk cameras". It's like "designer beans" and "rice mixes" that I see in health food stores that cost 3X as much per ounce as the bulk stuff. Beans are beans, rice is rice - it will all taste the same. And how it all tastes is good! But if you want to spend 3X as much for the fancy stuff - be my guest. Compacts all have the same sensors, competent firmware that all major manufactures can do, and there's only so much resolution you can get out of these cameras no matter what lens you slap on it. Price points vary based on build-quality, circuitry that effects start-up time and shutter lag (which is under control these days, largely, even the cheap ones), and whether they have some kind of image stabilization or not. - oh, and how "cool" they look. (And, yes, the LX5 looks very sexy...)
Personally, however, - again, just my opinion, I can't see spending near-DSLR or 4/3 money on one. I like them a lot, they're good to have, not knocking them! But none of the $400+ dollar ones is going to have break through image quality over a lowly EasyShare. The LX5 is going for $500 at Ardorama! Yikes! That's more than I paid for my new Nikon DSLR body! The best small sensor application is the "compact super zoom" with image stabilization that enables you to shoot "way out there" and get a crisp clean shot, hand-held, instead of using a giant supe-expensive lens the size of your arm on an immobile tripod like you had to do in the "film days". The rest? By and large all the same. - With one semi-exception, the no longer produce Fuji 10,11,20,30,31's because of their proprietary sensors and lowish pixel counts.
retow
Well-known
Why a LX5 for USD 500? A new Samsung NX with kit zoom can presently be bought for $430 at Newegg (net after coupon and VF included) a new GF1 with kit zoom is available for $599. Don't know the best bargains for Oly's ELP1 with zoom, but assume its in the same price ranges. So why bother with a tiny little sensor camera?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Buy used.
I just bought a near mint DP-1 for 120 EUR, it will be quite difficult to find a decent used DSLR or 4/3 anywhere near that.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
The LX3 and GRD2 small sensor cameras I owned were really nice to use, their interfaces were better than my Nikon DSLR (which I like). If only they figured out we want larger sensors for that kind of money....
GoodPhotos
Carpe lumen!
I will respectfully disagree with that. It is true, the Leica/sonic Digilux/LX, The Canon Gs (and s90/95), the Nikon P7000 are no match for even the 4:3 sensors in today's EVIL rigs, but all of them have LARGER sensors than any EasyShare and the latest versions of these larger sensor digicams all surpass what my Nikon D100 was capable of in 2002 and in a MUCH tighter package that cost me roughly $2k less.
That is a good thing and definitely sets them above the EasyShare set.