Panasonic LX-5 and Olympus XZ-1

<p>I want to buy a compact digital camera to take me to places where I would not want to take my DSLR (bikink, skiing etc.). I have narrowed my choices down to the Olympus XZ-1 and Panasonic LX-5.</p>

<p>Reviews point out that the video function of the XZ-1 is inferior to the LX-5 due to the file format it uses. Could someone elaborate on this? I am not knowledgeable about video.</p>

<p>The other thing I would like to ask is whether there is any difference between build quality/sturdyness. They get more or less similar ratings on review sites, but since I would be taking them to places where this matters, I was wondering if there were any differences.</p>

<p>I prefer the multi-aspect sensor of the LX-5, but the aperture and zoom range of the XZ-1 over the other contestant. I guess I'll have to weigh these for myself, but any help on the other two questions would be appreciated. This looks like a really tough choice, and after a couple of years of not being concerned about cameras of this type, I must say I am amazed at how good these compacts have become in general.</p>

<p>well, the TL500 has the best build of any of those cams in its class, but all of them have metal bodies. if i was buying today i'm not so sure i wouldnt get the XZ1 for the longer zoom. i believe the LX5 has 720p video, which is higher-resolution than what the Oly has, which is probably 460p. not that i want to make your choice more difficult, but the TL500 is said to have better skin tones than the LX5. if you shoot a lot of people shots, this might matter. i think all of them have both pros and cons, so its just a matter of prioritizing what's important, based on how/what you shoot.</p>

 

<p>Hard to answer....I have an LX5 and find the skin rendering just fine.....I don't care about video.......Leica lens is somewhat of a known quality......The Oly, I am really uninformed.....</p>

<p>DP review of the Oly images <strong><em>m</em><em>aybe </em></strong>look a little less noisy, but there are no meaningful lens tests at all..... so it's a bit of a crap shoot. The LX5 does allow a shiftable eye-level finder though....</p><div></div>

<p>The Olympus also offers the ability to use the same VF-2 EVF the Pens use, and it's tons better quality than the Panny EVF.</p>

<p>On the flip side, these are some basic features on the LX5 not included in the XZ-1, like an AE lock. There is no separate AE lock in the XZ-1 or way to configure a different button to be an AE lock, which is a huge minus for me. There is no way to lock exposure separate from locking focus, and the command dials on the XZ-1 are hard-coded to certain features dependant on the exposure mode you're using. You can't set them up the way you'd like to, which is suprising for such a....supposedly....high spec setup otherwise, and high price tag.</p>

<p>If it were me and those two models were the choice, it'd the the LX5 every time.</p>

<p>One I missed, the noise filtering on the XZ-1 is non-adjustable, which matters not a lick if you shoot RAW, but if you do want to shoot JPEG, you've got no noise filtering option other than what Olympus built into it.</p>

<p>I know about the ZX-1's shortcomings about the controls not being customizable, but I think they are fine for me the way they are. All the review sites rant about not having an AE-lock button, but honestly, I never ever use it on my DSLR, and couldn't care less about it. Most of the times I just shoot in manual mode, and when not, I can still use exposure compensation (but I very rarely do this). It would just be an extra button that I never use.</p>

<p>I much prefer the ring around the lens on the Olympus to the dual function command dial on the Panasonic. Basically if the Olympus retained the diagonal angle of view when switching aspect ratios (like the Panasonic does), it would be a clear choice for me.</p>

<p>I only shoot raw, so I also don't care about sharpening, white balance or any of the jpeg things.</p>

<p>If I am not mistaken they both do 720p 30fps video, but the file format is different. This is the main thing I would like to know more about.</p>

<p>Well, for me, the main difference would be the focal length, 24mm vs. 28mm. All the rest is more or less the same.</p>

The LX-5 writes video in AVCHD Lite, so will need special software to watch and edit. The advantage is that you can keep shooting video until the card fills up. The XZ-1 records video in AVI, an older format for which much software is available. AVI has a 2 GB size limit per file, so you need to stop and start a long video. I don't believe AVI is lower quality than AVCHD, just not as compact.

<p>Ok, thanks everyone. I think I am leaning a little towards the Olympus, but I'll think about it. About the focal length, it is not only 24 vs 28, but also 90 vs 112, which for me is a more important difference. It's also f/2.0-3.3 vs f/1.8-2.5. But yeah, it is pretty tough to decide.</p>

<p>personally, i find 24mm and 1.8 to be winners as far as specs go. that's one of the best things about the TL500 (which does have AE lock, btw). the XZ-1 matches this, adds a longer zoom range, and also has an s95-style click ring. it's also faster at the long end--f/2.5--than the LX5, which matters in low-light conditions. it doesnt have the flip-out monitor of the TL500 and overall build quality seems lower, but if i was picking a P&S on specs alone right now, i'd probably go with the Oly over the LX5. however, everyone who has an LX5 seems to like it, and i'm also happy with the TL500. So i really dont think you can go wrong with any of these cameras.</p>

<p>If you do plan to use the camera for video capture then the LX5 is the only P&S that can support full time autofocus and optical zoom in video mode. In other cameras, the focus point is fixed at the start of the video and only digital zoom (which is very poor in quality) is available. Other than this, the Olympus has received good reviews.</p>

From the dpreview XZ-1 review: "The camera is able to zoom and focus when shooting movies."

 

The Nikon P7000 can do this also. The Canons cannot. I don't know about the Samsung.

<p>Thanks Bill, for the information. I just read the review on dpreview and it does indicate that the Olympus can zoom and focus in video mode, but also noted that "Motion is conveyed well but the overall result is a little dull and fuzzy." and the posted video samples are of very poor quality which suggest that they may have resorted to digital zoom instead of optical zoom.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Nikon P7000 can do this also. The Canons cannot. I don't know about the Samsung.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>the samsung only shoots crappy 460 VGA video, so if this is a priority, i would remove it from consideration. i personally havent used this feature yet, but it is important to some.</p>

<p>The Nikon P7000 *can zoom* while shooting video, it however does not refocus the image until you stop shooting and start again with the new zoom setting, rendering the feature rather useless in my opinion...<br>

<br />The video AND sound quality from the P7000 are however, superb in my experience so far with this wonderful little camera. Quite the upgrade from the VGA only P6000.</p>

These two P7000 videos look like it is refocusing after zoom: