When Panasonic
threw down the much-anticipated successor to the
LX1, we couldn't wait to get our paws on one, and while
glamour shots tell a portion of the story, we all know it's the performance that counts. The digicam gurus over at DPReview put the DMX-LX2 through a gauntlet of tests, and found that Panasonic (
yet again) delivered a "unique, powerful, and innovative" camera that suffers from an
all too common inability to shoot at even moderately high ISOs. While the crew was thoroughly impressed with the near-perfect 16:9 implementation, plethora of manual controls, and "effective image stabilization," they just couldn't get over the "excessive noise" seen at all ISO levels above 100. It was noted that image quality was "superb" when plenty of natural light was available, and even minute details like the "big, bright LCD monitor" and "high quality construction" were given adequate attention; however, the unnecessary increase in pixels and less-than-effective Venus III engine rendered disappointing low-light results. Nevertheless, reviewers did admit to being overly critical due to
Panasonic's neglect in addressing the noisy shortcomings from the LX1, but eventually awarded the LX2 a shiny "Recommended" medal for those confident in their post-processing skills (and ability to
conjure light).
[Thanks,
cycomachead]
posted Oct 12th 2006 5:26PM
if Panasonic ever nailed their noise weaknesses (without giving the cam excessive noise reduction to obliterate detail like in some of their latest cams), they would totally clean up in this price bracket.
The LX1 was a beautiful thing, but toooo noisy. This seems to be very similar.
Yes please.
I just purchased this camera a week ago. My main camera is a 20D and main lens is the Canon 24-105 IS L, so you know where I'm coming from.
The Venus engine does indeed do a pretty sad job on jpegs. Even ISO 100 shots have a painterly feel to them. Having said that, this camera is highly advanced and is one of the few compacts that shoot RAW.
If you buy this camera, you have to be fairly advanced to get the most out of it, but with a little help and careful shooting this camera shines brightly.
Just make sure you shoot in RAW mode to avoid the Venus engine and let Photoshop handle the noise issues.
For someone like me, who needs a pocket backup camera but doesn't want to give up features, the LX2 is almost perfect.
If you're just starting to branch out into a more advanced level and are thinking about this camera, consider an entry level DSLR instead, unless you need to pocket the camera.
The manufacturers need to wake up and stop deluding themselves into thinking cramming more megapixels onto a tiny sensor is a good thing. The same problem happened when Nikon released their 8700. They took the same sized chip as was in the 5700 and upped the res from 5 to 8MP. What resulted was a camera with poorer image quality at higher ISOs (anything above 200 was pretty graining and crappy.) By it's very nature, the CCD is going to be introducing spillover noise when you make the photosites smaller and closer together.
I just got one too - it's compact, shoots 16x9, has lots of features - to me, that's the main selling point. I don't think Panasonic is making good use of those leica lenses with the high noise levels...but I'm really pleased with the camera. It is what it is. Personally, I like the super-fast shutter response.
But I wouldn't try to take professional pictures with it anyhow. No viewfinder! No focus ring! I still think it's strange that so many so-called "pro" photographers are accepting less from their cameras, now that they've transitioned to digital.
No viewfinder of course, but manual focus works nice. The real problem is the small size of CCD sensor which means NOISE. I belive pros use this camera as a backup or when dicression is needed.
I have taken over 7000 photos with my LX1 and I was very happy with it (http://www.flickr.com/photos/iainb). The majority of my pictures have been taken in bright daylight so I have avoided the noise issue for the most part. Brandon is bang on target when he suggests that RAW should be the format of choice when shooting in all/low light conditions. Playing with the settings in manual mode will also minimize the noise. I have since upgraded to the LX2 and I feel it is a nice evolution over the LX1. I look forward to more megapixels (detail!) as this line develops. The noise issue must continue to be minimized but not at the expense of megapixels. This camera supports SDHC which supports 2GB+ SD cards.
hey my tip was posted cool!
yeah I love my LX1 and I don't feel too bad about the update, though the all black is pretty darn cool!
BTW my website is http://www.canyonhillsdebate.com ( accidentally put 3 "L"'s
No hyperlink to the DPreview review? Where's the journalistic/Pagerank love?
you people always complaining about noise... slightest motor noise and your jumping around screaming ''aaaargh my eeeears - theyre bleeeediiiiing!'' - get some earplugs if the noise is that damaging...
Chris
you can never go wrong with Lumix.. this is one brand you can trust..
http://www.picturedeland.com
Noise is a false problem, noise reduction, instead, can seriously alterate a picture.
I'd rather prefer a non-elaborated (or noisy, if you prefer) picture with a lot of details than a noise suppressed one.
All CCD sensors produce noise.
I have an LX-1, and I use Noise Ninja for Photoshop to remove noise. Noise Ninja is more accurate (and also you can select the areas of the picture where to apply noise reduction) than every engine you may find inside a camera. Output is perfect and I can control all the pearameters to get the picture exactly as I want...
noise only affects pixel-peepers who look at files at 100% mag. Those who resize-for-display or print on paper rarely have noise issues, and there's always noiseninja to lightly scrape what is there off. Truly, the online and print "press" has latched on to this "fact" of panasonic noise -- it isn't any worse than iso-400 tri-x film, folks. But nooooooooo, y'all gotta be little parrots and go around going "noise, *braaak* noise! *braaak* polly wanna clickthrough fee". I mean, really, who the hell displays a 10 megapixel image at 100%? At 72 dpi that's over 40 inches wide! I think the DLSR-crowd is still deluded about the SLR being "the best" and MUST deride everything else that is not SLR, logic be damned.
I just wondering, and I just found that my LX2 only comeout with 72 dpi quality (10MP). But from my D100 (6MP), D200 (10MP) and D2Xs (12MP) with 300dpi. That's mean they have no competition even same MP from Compact DC to D-SLR...
whoaa.... i'm buying this camera tonight!!!
hehehehe