Is it worth getting the LX3 with the new LX5 on its way?

[ronald_smith6]

<p>I find this compact intriguing and it has earned a high reputation in a short time frame as a quality instrument. When I as a film shooter, I owned the Konica Hexar, it's great having a fast wide angle in a compact design. With the LX3, you can have a fast 24mm, 28mm and 35mm in one little package.</p>

<p>The new LX5 has a greater range and, undoubtedly, cleaner high-ISO performance. However, I have already seen the LX3 dropping in price.</p>

<p>Should I get one?</p>

[oofoto]

<p>I don't think there is any evidence yet of cleaner high ISO performance with the LX5.<br>

LX3 is good depending on ones expectations of a compact.</p>

[ted_raper1]

<p>The question boils down to how important the advantages of more range and cleaner high ISO performance are to you. The LX3 is a fine camera, and my guess is by the time the LX5 is widely available there may be big price difference between the two. So, are you willing to pay maybe twice the price for the advantages of the new camera? I just went through something similar when trying to decide between a (used) Panasonic G1 or a new G2. I bought the G1, mainly because the new features of the G2 (movies, touch screen) were of no use to me. And I'm perfectly happy with my choice.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

At $386 (Walmart) NO. At $286, YES. Maybe they will juice up the firmware, but right now the LX5 is not a huge advance, although the 61-90mm range and 1/4000 sec shutter are definitely worth a $120 premium. Panasonic's JPEG engine is not industry leading, to say the least, so I would not recommend either camera unless you are prepared for RAW workflow.

[joshroot]

<p>The LX3 is a great camera, no doubt. The LX5's longer zoom is tempting for me. but I wouldn't ever advise someone to NOT get the LX3. It's just too good of a camera.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Didn't you say the LX3 is "obsolete" by Samsung EX1 faster lens (F1.8 vs . F2, merely 1/3 of a stop) awhile back, Bill? Well, the lens on the LX5 is still F2 to 3.x...so would the LX5 be "obsolete" before its release? </p>

<p>OP, if the 60-90mm is important to you get the LX5. If not, I would get the LX3 and save...</p>

 

[eric_arnold]

<p>i dont think the LX5 is going to have better high-iso; the main differences seem to be a longer zoom and better video. that said, it looks like both the LX3 and LX5 trump the EX1 over ISO 400, though the EX1 has a lot of other stuff going for it.</p>

<p>if the lx3 drops down to $300, it will be hard to pass up for a lot of shooters, newer models or not.</p>

[bill_tuthill]

I retract my previous statements about the EX1/TL500. The Dpreview tests are in, and unless they tested a bad sample, which I am sure Samsung would not allow to happen (?) the LX3 is sharper at all ISO speeds. DPreview noticed poor left-edge sharpness on their EX1/TL500, but the right side isn't much better.

 

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/samsungtl500/page8.asp

[eric merrill]

<p>Ronald:</p>

<p>By when do you need a small P&S?</p>

<p>If the answer is now, get the LX3. You won't be disappointed.</p>

<p>If the answer is in a few months, wait and get the LX5.</p>

<p>I have the LX3, and I'm waiting to see what Canon comes out with for small cameras before going to the LX5.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[ronald_smith6]

<p>Eric, I'd say the S90 was Canon's answer to the LX3 and I don't see anything more coming for the foreseeable future. I have heard rumours about Nikon unveiling something to compete with this high-end compact game - that would interest me since I use Nikon DSLR's and the option of using Capture NX2 to process RAW files (I assume any high-end compact from ANYONE can deal with RAW files) would be an obvious preference.<br>

Will this be a svelte compact like the S90 or LX3?<br>

It might be best for me to wait another month or so to see what happens............<br>

The S90 has proven to be a great camera, so many complain about the rear dial, though......</p>

 

[eric merrill]

<p>Ronald:</p>

<p>Canon had a press release recently that basically indicated they're looking into the mirror-less camera systems. Larger than the S90. Smaller than the Rebel. Larger sensor like the Rebel, though. If I'm going to replace my LX3, I want to do so with a bigger sensor but not much bigger form.</p>

<p>Eric</p>

[Greg M]

<p>The accessory EVF would be enough to sway me to the LX5. I would most likely use it with the EVF more times than not and just put the EVF in my pocket when it made more sense to use the EVF. That's a nice option to have.</p>

[oofoto]

<p>The external EVF is optional and at no low cost either.</p>

[Greg M]

<p>Sure it is...and you know that going in, just like the accessory EVF Olympus sells for their Pen series. If you want one, you get it. If it's not worth it for you, you don't.</p>

[ronald_smith6]

<p>I have heard that the pre-production sample images over at dpreview are not great, many are already dismissing the LX5 as an unworthy successor.<br>

http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10072112lx5gallery.asp<br>

Thoughts?</p>

 

[Greg M]

<p>At this point? Any comments about the LX5's image quality....before anyone (real users) has had a chance to buy and use a production camera, is worthless.</p>

<p>Case in point, let me remind you what everyone on DPReview's Panasonic forum was saying about the LX3's image quality a little less than2 years ago at this same point, before it even went on sale...</p>

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28691393">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=28691393</a></p>

<p>Now...again...how much should we be worried at this point before any consumer has had an LX5 in their hands? The worst people you can rely on are pixel peeping geek testers who use cameras at their default settings and make no attempt to get the best quality out of a camera's file.</p>

<p>Haven't we all learned this by now?</p>

[bill_tuthill]

People on DPreview forums like to complain for no reason, or perhaps because they work for a competitor. It's a big YAWN usually. Anyway, the LX5 samples look good to me. The ISO 1600 ones look a lot better with Lanczos downsampling than with whatever crapola algorithm the DPreview slideshow is using.

[ronald_smith6]

<p>I take those comments about the pre-production with a grain of salt. I am sure both the new LX5 and the LX3 will go down as classics, there are a few compacts that fit that category. The PowerShot G6 was such a camera.</p>

[Greg M]

<p>What anyone considering the LX5 needs to do is read the post linked below, click on the link he provides and go look at the gallery of the guy he's talking about. It's quite beautiful, and worlds different from snapped images taken by the so-called camera "testers". Also goes to show what a difference it can be when someone who knows what they are doing is behind the controls...</p>

<p><a href="http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=35909639">http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1033&message=35909639</a></p>

[oofoto]

<p>Nothing the LX3 couldn't do though?</p>

[Greg M]

<p>Not the point....</p>

<p>We all know now how good a camera the LX3 is. What the LX5 has for those of us who never bought the LX3 is, an accessory eyelevel finder that works for all available focal lengths, moderately more zoom range and both the 24mm f2 wide end and accessory lens to get to 18mm is still there.</p>

<p>I've used several Panasonic cameras with back LCD-only viewing, from the TZ3 to TZ5 to LX2, enjoying everyone of them, but under certain lighting conditions they are also a royal PITA to see and compose with. Whether it's an LX5 or Olympus Pen, I'll not own one of these type cameras anymore without the accessory electronic viewfinder. Probably will use it 100% of the time.</p>

[zijun_qian]

<p>Just the jog dial is enough to convince me. And convince me it did... received my LX5 last week.<br>

Did a little overview <a href="http://blog.ronidesigns.com.au/2010/09/my-panasonic-lx5-why-it-will-never.html">here on my blog</a>.</p>

[kevin_dixey2]

<p>I'm late to the party but, I had that decision to make. Now that the LX5 is out the LX3 has dropped in price. I picked up a low mileage LX3 (about 500 shots) for around $200. That was about $150 less than I could get an LX5 for and for me the larger zoom, improved controls and ability to use a and EVF weren't enough to sway me. In the images I had seen from the LX3 and LX5 it looked to me as though the LX3's lens was a bit sharper throughout it's zoom range and while the LX5 had less noise in high ISO images that seemed to be at the expense of sharpness. I use Lightroom so I figured I could denise the images in there (it does a pretty good job at it as well).</p>

<p>I'm very happy with the LX3. I think the LX5 is a heck of a compact camera and I would have no reservations using one but it didn't seem to be enough of an upgrade to the LX3 to justify the extra cost. Of course everyone is different and for some folks the control wheel, or the ability to use an EVF might be the best thing ever. You just gotta ask yourself how much those things mean to you.</p>