Our friends at
Panasonic are really coming out swinging today. Their new range of
Lumix compacts has some considerable spec bumps, and even if the designs do seem a little "safe" after
Samsung's recent release, we're sure most consumers could fine a decent fit among the new lineup. Headlining is the DMC-LX2 (pictured), a successor to their
LX1 which introduced the first compact 16:9 widescreen sensor. The LX2 bumps the megapixels to 10.2, has a 2.8-inch widescreen LCD, ISO 3200 (though not at full resolution) and intelligent ISO control that can automatically adjust for the sudden movement of a subject. Despite the increase in resolution, Panasonic claims they've significantly reduced noise thanks to their Venus III engine. The LX2 also includes a 4x zoom, and optical image stabilisation. Next up we have the DMC-FX50 and FX07, dual successors to the
FX01 shooter. Both of them share a 7.2 megapixel CCD, 3.6x zoom, optical image stabilisation, and that Venus III processor, ISO 3200 and intelligent ISO control featured in big brother LX2. The FX50 goes for a new 3-inch screen, while the FX07 sticks with 2.5-inches and manages a slightly more compact body. Finally, the DMC-FX3 takes some cues from its siblings, but cuts the megapixels to 6. The optical image stabilisation is always welcome, but the ISO 1600 and 3x zoom specs are a bit more standard. Some of the best news here is the prices for these four cameras, ranging from the $500 LX2 ($100 cheaper than the initial LX1 pricetag) to $280 for the FX3. All four should be out some time this September. Keep reading for pics of the rest of the lineup.
Read - DMC-LX2Read - DMC-FX50 & DMC-FX07Read - DMC-FX3
Lumix DMC-FX50
Lumix DMC-FX3
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Sidd @ Jul 19th 2006 12:44PM
we're sure most consumers could fine a decent fit among the new lineup.
i think thats supposed to be find
cycomachead @ Jul 19th 2006 1:08PM
crap!!!! My LX1 is now outdated, nice lil comapct though
I like the black on black and the 2.8" screen.
I'm glad to hear that the noise should be less, although I never found it much of a problem
And as far as pixels go 8 was enohg- after that it just wastes space (I like to shoot RAW)
Also can these use SDHC?
will chen @ Jul 19th 2006 1:34PM
Wow, the LX1 looks really gorgeous.
BK @ Jul 19th 2006 1:35PM
Does anyone know if the 10.2 resolution changes with the aspect ratio selected? Or does it stay the same (with the pixels elongating or shinking to fit the aspect ratio)?
TIA
Jill @ Jul 19th 2006 2:03PM
Does anyone know if you can pre-order, possibly closer to the release date?
Michael @ Jul 19th 2006 2:25PM
Wow that is a beautiful camera. And what specs it has. I've never really needed anything more then 3 megapixels myself but my Canon DSLR has 6 and I like that. 10 would just be plain crazy but I'll take it. More then anything thought I really like that black design. It's classic, yet timeless.
Joey @ Jul 19th 2006 3:50PM
they come out with a new version like everyday! I feel so outdated as I just received my pink fx01 today in the mail.
Eh.... but you really cant beat IS, 28mm leica lens for less than 300 bucks.
Joey @ Jul 19th 2006 3:52PM
@BK its probably the same for these models but on the fx01 when you change the aspect ratio from 4:3 to 3:2 it does limit the megapixel.
Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 4:15PM
@BK, the unique thing about the LX1 (and I assume it's the same with the new LX2) is that it has a widescreen sensor. So you would get 10.2 megapixel full resolution when shooting in widescreen mode. It would be slightly less in 4:3 or 3:2 mode.
For what it's worth, I have a DMC-LX1 and I have nothing but great things to say about it. It is a really, really excellent camera with tons of manual control, a great LCD and a great burst mode that is really easy to turn on and off. You can shoot 2-3 frames a second until the card is full. Also, the optical image stabilization is VERY effective.
Reviewers complained about noise levels on the LX1 but I have never found it to be much of a problem and most reviews I've read from owners (as opposed to reviewers) say the same thing.
The LX2 supposedly improves on Noise with the Venus III engine.
If you like this camera and have patience and money, I guess I'd wait for the LX2. But if bargains start popping up on the LX1 (I think I paid $400 about 3 months ago), I wouldn't hesitate to grab one of those either.
Zulu Photo @ Jul 19th 2006 4:36PM
I will be picking up a DMC-LX2 even if minimal headway has been made on noise reduction. The decreased shutter lag times that they are citing are welcome, though I can't say as an increased pixel count is very enticing.
The LX1 is slow in RAW mode (it's all I shoot in) and you definitely cannot get 2-3 under these circumstances, especially since autofocus is also slow. The noise problem cannot be understated - if you are at all interested in photographic quality you will not be able to live with photos shot at anything other than ISO 80 or 100, when the camera produces superb results after Photoshop processing. At ISO 200 you will not produce salable images and 400 will make you cringe. Knowing all this, I picked up an LX1 several months ago and have been hooked ever since.
You can see photos from the LX1 on my website. That said, the LX1 is dead. Long live the LX2.
Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 6:20PM
Zulu, I still think you are overstating the noise "problem" in terms of whether it will even be noticed by most users.
I think the fact that you are using this camera to try and produce "salable" images says an awful lot about the quality of this camera. It is a terrific camera.
I'm picky about my photos but I'm not a pro and I don't try to sell my images. Whenever I can, I lock the ISO at 80. I would do that anyway (I mean even if there wasn't a perceived noise issue). I also don't shoot in RAW and I doubt if most users do.
So, shooting in lower ISOs and in normal jpeg format (or whatever it is) I definitely get 2-3 frames a second of very good quality pictures.
Still, I agree with you that the upgrades on the LX-2 sound great. I have confidence in Panasonic with the Lumix line and if they're saying the new Venus III engine offers "dramatic" improvement, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt at least until some reviews come out.
Personally, I'm gonna keep the LX-1 and get an FZ50. I was holding off on the FZ30 for just this reason. Since noise was the only gripe anybody had about the FZ30, I figured Panasonic would focus on fixing that in the new model, and that's what they are saying they did.
I could do without the extra 2 megapixels but the marketing guys probably convinced them they needed to do it since the new Sony's have 10MP.
Tk @ Jul 19th 2006 8:22PM
I recently bought a FX-01 and love it. The ONLY thing I miss from my Canon Powershots is Stitch Assist mode. Why is there no comparable mode on the Panasonics? How hard or expensive would that be to add? Anyone have any advice for a workaround on the Lumix cameras? I love creating Panoramas using Stitch Assist!
Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 8:58PM
Here's an interesting spec on the LX1 from the press release. It will record video at 1280 x 720 pixels
at 15 fps.
I'm not sure what to make of that due to the low frame rate (meaning I'm not sure what it would look like in playback). Still, those are High Definition resolution numbers.
Damn, now I'm going to be waiting all the way until next July to find out if Panasonic will add full frame rate High Def video to the LX3.
The LX2 also does full frame rate (30 fps) video at 848 x 480 resolution, which is already a higher resolution than most dedicated video cameras.
I'm very impressed with the quality of video my LX1 creates. It is definitely not a Video camera but definitely IS just fine in a pinch.
Jake @ Jul 19th 2006 9:01PM
Oops, it's the LX2 that does 1280 x 720 video at 15 fps -- not the LX1
cycomachead @ Jul 19th 2006 10:44PM
yes I an very very happy w/ my LX1 I got it at Christmas (but I has to spend about 300 of my life svaings on it cuz my parents didnt want to spend so much.
I love the vidoe on my LX1, very high quality, and I get almost 10min of video on a 1gb card!
Jake I agree, to pretty much w/ everything you say
and yep I will wait for the LX3, and hopefully 8gn SD form-factor cards :)
As for me my lil compact is awesome and needs to do a little more work this summer, but... ahh its out dated
manic @ Jul 19th 2006 11:36PM
Im depressed. i was sooo psyched on the LX2, but then, found out its only USB 1.1 compatible!! Why wouldnt they make such a cam USB 2.0???
James Grinter @ Jul 21st 2006 6:36AM
Sadly they seem to be following the herd and leaving off viewfinders.
jungle @ Jul 23rd 2006 2:21AM
The noise problem is very real if you shoot anything other than outside sunny pictures. Forget taking a picture of your 4-year old in your living room after dinner, unless you are willing to burn him with a flash. As far as I've seen, only Fujifilm can do that really well within the consumer market. I hope the LX2 fixes the problem, because I really like all the other functions, but I will not buy it if the noise is anything like in the LX1. But a higher pixel density CCD looks like a step in the wrong direction. I'm skeptical and will wait until the professional reviews come out.
S.P. @ Sep 24th 2006 5:31PM
Here are some sample pics taken with LX2:
http://www.cyberphoto.se/?info.php?article=LX2b
Youll see wide vs zoom as well as ISO 100,200,400,800 and 1600.
S.P. @ Sep 24th 2006 5:31PM
The old LX1 got very high marks on C-Net which I like because of their numeric grading system (and their credibility). The new LX2 is slightly better in everything except the lack of TIFF. The Leica lens is, as always top grade.
The LX2 is very expensive in Sweden, but I found myself forced to buy one as I demand very good macro, at least 28mm wide-angle and optical stabilization. Wide 16:9 CCD is unique kind of bonus. If you care about low light photography there are better cameras out there, but none has such a wining blend of futures, quality and style. Ricoh R5 is similar, fast, excellent macro and it packs incredible 7x zoom but according to some reports has got some problems with color, flash photography and of course noise. Less pixels and no 16.9 sensor here, but is cheaper than LX2!
As always compact design means a compromise. So what about noise?
If you are picky about that theres a work-around.
Set ISO to 100 or even 200 if you must and shoot in RAW. Programs like Noise Ninja are better than any in-camera noise reduction. All you need is a 2GB memory. My newly ordered card is labeled 80x speed and it should do the job, even if there are faster cards out there.
Leopold Porkstacker @ Apr 30th 2007 1:07PM
Wow, the specs of the LX2 sound really nice. The writeup at dpreview.com (LOL, sounds like a gangbang porn movie review site!!!) pretty much lists all the details, but obviously I'd want to see comparisons as well as "good/bad" features/annoyances the camera has. I'm eager to replace my archaic and kludgy Nikon Coolpix 990, and the LX2 sounds like a great choice. Anyone else have any feedback?
-he who stacks pork