Trying to decide between a lumix lx3 or Canon G10

[john_macpherson]

"I'm actually looking for feedback from other people who where looking at the same cameras and what they based there final decisions on."

 

As Rob and Juergen note, and Matthjis underlines, your own needs, preferences and intentions are the most important.

 

However, for me....I would not want to be seen using a device made by a company that makes electric shavers if I wanted to be regarded as a serious photographer. My preference would be for a Canon as that C-word will be a huge clue to onlookers that what I've got in my hand is in fact a camera. FWIW I got the G9, but then I dont have a beard. YMMV

[kari v]

"For the LX3 there is supposed to be an attachable viewfinder that fits into the hot shoe and is sold separately. I believe it is very very expensive."

 

True, but you can use any external finder, not just Panasonic.

[larrybc]

<p>John MacPherson wrote:</p>

 

<p><i>However, for me....I would not want to be seen using a device made by a company that makes electric shavers if I wanted to be regarded as a serious photographer. My preference would be for a Canon as that C-word will be a huge clue to onlookers that what I've got in my hand is in fact a camera. FWIW I got the G9, but then I dont have a beard. YMMV</i></p>

<p>That's one of the worst reasons I've read for picking one camera over another.</p>

<p>For starters, Canon or not, the G10 still looks like a P&S so if you're worried about people taking you seriously, it's a non-starter. For that, you need a DSLR. Secondly, how many people actually know that Panasonic makes shavers? Probably fewer than those who know that Canon makes copiers.</p>

<p>larsbc</p>

[brian_goodman]

Interesting link here

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

 

Actually, when I'm shooting in a Natl.Park or around other people, I prefer not to be taking seriously so I can just fade in with the surroundings, and just do my own thing.

[john_macpherson]

<a href="http://grammar.about.com/od/il/g/ironyterm.htm" >Irony!</a> :-)

[john_alexander]

The luminous-landscape post is VERY interesting. I've followed that site for years, buying my 1st Canon D30 because Michael compared the D30's

smooth, "film-like" output to 35mm film. He was right.

 

It's interesting that Michael Reichmann (luminous-landscape's author) reviewed the LX3 and the G10 and, while he really liked the LX3, he has

chosen the G10 as the camera he will carry with him. "...the next time I take a walk in the woods, or go on a family vacation, I know which camera is

going to be along for the trip, nicely tucked away in my jacket pocket. The Canon G10."

 

This is a guy who can (and does) have ANY camera he wants, and he has picked the G10. That says a lot! :-)

 

imaging-resource.com now has test images taken with the G10, as well as a full review of the LX3 with test images. I compared a few of the G10 and

LX3 low ISO and high ISO shots. My conclusion is that the G10 is quite a bit sharper at LOW ISO (look at the fine lines in the beer bottle label), and

the LX3 is a hair sharper at HIGH ISO (or just has "sharper" noise patterns), though BOTH are seriously noisy at 800 and above.

[erick_k]

Dominic, I too had to make a decision between the G10 and LX3. I confess to being a Canon fan and all else being

equal I'd prefer to stick with Canon (my entire D-SLR kit is Canon). After weighing my particular needs, I bought the

LX3, and after 2 weeks of using it am satisfied I made the right decision.

<p>

What I wanted was a compact that was small and light, something that I would never hesitate to carry around, even

when I didn't think I'd have a need for it. The LX3 is 265 g, the G10 is 363g and much more bulky. After carrying it for a

few days, I'd say the LX3 is still too heavy for my wishes, namely a camera that I barely notice I'm carrying. The much

heavier G10 would almost certainly be left at home for its extra size and weight.

<p>

The other important point is that I needed a camera that performs reasonably well for low light photography. Imagine

going out with friends with a compact, and taking photos at dinner or while out on the town. The LX3 seems to have

better low light performance around 400 ISO. (I set the LX3 to never go above 400 ISO and so far it's been fast enough,

with f/2.0 and image stabilization, to take good photos at night. It's said the LX3 has more film-like grain compared to

sharper and less pleasant noise from the G10 at high ISO) Add to this the fact that it has a fast 2.0 lens and the case

for the LX3 as a low light camera is pretty compelling. As a bonus, the 2.0 lens helps generate more bokeh. I get

attractive bokeh (background blur) when I set it to 60mm equivalent and f/2.0. Achieving bokeh is otherwise difficult on

a small sensor compact. I set my LX3 to burst mode, it can take 3 RAW files in a one second burst. At 400 ISO max,

with stabilization and f/2.0, I always get a sharp, low-light, usable night/evening shot. Just what I wanted in a compact

camera.<p>

So based on my criteria of size, weight, and low light performance (= faster lens and less obtrusive noise) the LX3

prevailed. The G10 is an impressive camera and if it were my *only* camera I would almost certainly have chosen it

over the LX3. For more ambitious photography I'll carry my Canon 5D (and hopefully 5D Mk II soon). I have a lot of

respect for Michael Richmann's opinion. Luminous Landscape is my favorite photography related web site, and I trust

his word. He wrote a favorable <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/lx3.shtml">LX3 review </a> that you

might enjoy: "Very wide - very fast - very nice." He says there will be a head to head comparison article in

2 weeks.

<p>

Having said that, I think the G10 and LX3 are quite different, and appeal to very different needs. The G10 has higher

megapixels and for better final image quality in bright light, wins out over the LX3. (How much better? Hopefully

Reichmann will give us a clear idea.) What I really like about the G10 are the controls: for a Canon user, the dials are

intuitive and fast. I'm still learning the LX3's controls, they're pretty good once you learn them, and the number of

settings that you can change for creative use is similar to a DSLR. Yet the G10's dials are superior. If Canon made a

10MP compact the size and weight of the LX3, maybe with a CMOS sensor (wishful thinking for a future Canon

compact), that would be my ideal. When image quality is of the utmost importance, most of us will turn to DSLRs.

<p>

PS One can save a pretty penny by using Voigtlander viewfinders for the LX3's hotshoe. Thus far the LX3's screen

composition has been a good experience -- for composition it's clear and bright. I've heard that the G10's viewfinder isn't

very useful. I've used a G9 through its viewfinder and it wasn't very good. YMMV.

<p>

Here's another <a href="http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_LX3/">LX3 Review</a> that gives

you an idea how its interface and handling are. Notice on page 2 the side by side shot with the much bulkier G10. Hope

this opinion was of use to you: they're different cameras for different needs.

[erick_k]

There is an error in my last paragraph. I said the photo on page 2 of that review shows an LX3 vs G10 size comparison.

It's actually a comparison with the G9, which is smaller than the new G10.

[don_canning2]

I have the Canon G10 and I am satisfied with it's performance. I don't shoot high ISO so I can't comment on those possible problems. I have

other cameras if I want to do serious work but I think the G10 is a great walk around camera. Canning

[alex_p._schorsch]

Why not wait a few more days and buy a G1?

[dominic_romer]

The G1 is interesting but a little big for my needs. I might as well carry my D300. Although I'll be the first in

line when they release a decent full frame range finder that works as well as a modern DSLR.

[bill_tuthill]

Erick K, the LX3 lens is f/2.8 at 60mm, but point taken.

[erick_k]

Oops, Bill is absolutely right. Zooming in to 60mm adjusts the aperture to 2.8. I wish it were a constant f/2.0.<p>

At the widest end, 24mm equivalent, there is some bokeh at f/2.0 if I place my subject close enough to the camera. But it

isn't the same as f/2.0 on a full frame DSLR. Bokeh (blurred background that makes your subject "pop out") is less

pronounced on small sensor point and shoots. At 60mm/2.8 I get pleasing bokeh, the result of compression and the relatively large 2.8

aperture.

<p>

That makes me wonder: at what point does the G10 stop down as it's zoomed in?

[bill_tuthill]

The LX3 has thirteen zoom stops between 24 and 60mm (equivalent)

so the f-stop probably narrows gradually from f/2 to f/2.8.

Owners could shoot wide open at each zoom stop and check the EXIF.

 

As I posted in another thread, I compared the ISO 200 and 800 images

on imaging-resource.com between these two cameras. The G10 has

higher resolution at 200 while the LX3 has higher resolution at 800.

But even at 200, when images are zoomed to fit on screen,

the LX3 produces results that to me look more realistic and 3D.

[dominic_romer]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I ended up getting the G10. Mostly because it was available to me locally, I can get an underwater housing for it, and the zoom is a bit more useful. I really was leaning towards the LX3 but no one anyone near me carries it and B&H had it on back order.

[drj]

I had a similar process deciding between the G10 and P6000. I was convinced going in that I was going to buy the

P6000. Everything I have is Nikon, and I happen to have the SB400 if I ever wanted to add a flash to a P/S.

 

I've been using the G10 for about two weeks now and love it. Minimal shutter delay isn't brought up much here, but that

was a noticeable difference between the Nikon and Canon, the Canon is almost DSLR quick in shutter release. Maybe

not by actual measure, but in practice. Yes, the viewfinder is tiny, but it is enough to frame a shot, and is nicely rubber

coated (in case you wear glasses... I do). I tried it at my son's football game this weekend... not really good. But took it

to the beach the next day and got some great, painless shots of my sons with nice color, contrast, and sharpness.

 

I'm actually thinking about going back to buy the Nikon as well, play with both for a few week, then sell one off. I think I

like Nikon's menus better, but I'm used to them, so I'm trying to reserve judgement.

 

I completely agree with handling any camera before buying it. Ergonomics are so subjective, and it must be comfortable

or you'll avoid it. I do like that the Nikon is a good bit smaller than the G10 and still has the viewfinder.

[bill_tuthill]

When deciding between the LX3 and G10,

photographers who shoot a lot at wide angle

should consider the barrel distortion of the Canon lens,

visible in the first Bodie picture

<A HREF="http://kenrockwell.com/canon/images/g10/gallery.htm">here</A>

in a Ken Rockwell gallery.

[marty_sasaki]

I share the advice to try out the cameras to decide. They definitely feel different in the hand, and having something that you want to use and feel comfortable with is really important. I live in the Boston area so there are shops that have the cameras in stock. In my case, I went to Hunts Photo (I guess I should have waited for the annual sale!) and tried out both the LX-3 and the G10.

 

The LX3 is a little smaller, it really will fit into the shirt pocket and the front pocket in my cargo pants more easily than the G10.. The G10 feels a little bit more solid, possibly because it is larger and a bit easier for me to hold onto.

 

I took an SD card with me and shot a few photos with both cameras, and then brought it home to study the images. Quality was comparable.

 

I ended up choosing the LX3 based on size and the wider lens and faster lens. I don't think you can go wrong with either of these cameras.

[derek_stanton2]

John MacPherson wrote:

"However, for me....I would not want to be seen using a device made by a company that makes electric shavers if I

wanted to be regarded as a serious photographer."

 

Outstanding reasoning!

But, if you're shooting with a Canon G10, don't flatter yourself. No one will regard you "as a serious photographer." You'd

look just like my grandmother or any ten year-old tourist girl.

 

But, to step down into your frame of mind, if you want Other Serious Photographers to regard you as a serious

photographer, shoot the camera with the 'Leica' lens on it - the Shaver Company's camera. Serious photographers take

two things seriously: Leica-branded stuff, and people who shoot with the right camera for the purpose, regardless of

brands.

 

Now.... What was the original question?

 

Oh. I hadn't been considering a P&S digital, but happened to stop by a store today and took a look at the G10 and LX3.

The G10 looks and feels wonderful. Pretty solid, and it seems like it has a lot of 'metal' in the construction. I love the

dedicated ISO dial. The camera is smaller than i thought it would be, and yet it's still too large for a true 'pocket camera,'

unless you typically wear winter coats. The LX3 was much smaller than i thought, but the fact that the lens doesn't fully

retract means it's also not fit for jeans pockets. Operationally, i'm used to Canon dSLRs, so it seemed to make more

sense immediately, and the LX3 seemed more like a typical compact. But, these were only quick impressions, and i'm

sure i'd familiarize myself quickly with either, once i cracked the manual. Both cameras operated smoothly, although i

seemed to feel the LX3's live LCD may have been smoother - closer to looking through a live window rather than a video

feed.

 

The G10's viewfinder is horrid. I thought, perhaps, it might be an advantage to have it, but having peered through it, i

know i'd never use it. If it's too dark to use the LCD, it's too dark to take pictures without the imposition of noise. I do not

like that the LX3 has a separate/detached lens cap. IMO, any compact should have an integral, retracting lens protection

system. The point of a P&S is/should to diminish effort.

 

That said, i'm on the fence on the issue. I think i'm leaning toward the LX3, but for an embarrassingly superficial reason

that i'll not disclose.... I think one should decide based on two factors: lens range and ergonomics/comfort. I think i'd

prefer a 24mm wide end, and i don't often shoot with telephotos, so the LX3 is fine for me. Ergonomically, the G10 is

superb, but i somehow feel the LX3 might be small enough to go places i might not take the G10. But, only barely. I'll

take another look before i make a decision.

[bill_tuthill]

I know the lens cap seems impractical, but it has advantages.

In wet conditions, water droplets are less likely to get on the lens,

and in cold conditions you can put a desiccant (silica gel packet)

behind the lens cap.

[john_macpherson]

Thanks Derek - you might have got the point of my post; unlike Larry Anon.

 

I'm still trying to decide whether your grandmother has a beard, and what kind of hirsute ten year old girls you have where you live! :-)

[wk_soh]

<p>G10 is doing better than expect..... here is comparison site I found..... :)<br />IMGXXXXX is canon G10<br>

<a href="