I want to say something about the Panasonic DMC-LX3. I've never written a camera review before, but I'm so inspired by the fact that finally someone made a compact camera for people who actually know something about photography, that I want to do something to encourage this trend.
For the past 10 or 15 years, camera manufacturers have invested in one awesome technological leap - digital - and a bunch of verging-on-useless features that bamboozle new users and complicate usage for everyone. Here's a quick sampling of just some of the non-features of a typical compact camera:
- face detection
- baby mode
- multi-point autofocus (for all those folks who do action photography with a compact camera)
- in-camera image processing (useful for people who don't own computers)
- 10x zoom (at f5.6, of course)
- 15 megapixels (crammed onto a 1/1.7 inch sensor)
Some of these features are harmful because they actually guide the user to use the camera in exactly the wrong way. For example, multi-point autofocus is enabled by default, since it's apparently too difficult to teach users the correct way to take a photograph (first focus, then recompose). Others are harmful mainly because they distract the buyer's attention from what's really important in a camera.
I was so excited by the LX3 that I ordered one on Amazon before there were even any published reviews. How did I know to do this? Well, what most buyers of compact cameras don't know - and what even a lot of camera reviews tend to downplay - is that most of what matters in a camera can be expressed with exactly three numbers. Here they are, in approximate order of importance:
- the f ratio
- the focal length
- the size of the sensor
The f number tells you how much light the lens is able to capture. The smaller, the better. Most really good photos are taken in low-ish light conditions, or of moving subjects. Photos taken of still subjects in the middle of the day are usually boring, with ugly colors. Therefore, the more light you can get, the better your photos will be. Most buyers of compact cameras don't even know what an f number is, and the salespeople don't tell them.
The focal length determines the field of view. Unfortunately, almost all compact cameras are equipped with zoom lenses. In theory, a zoom lens makes a camera more versatile by offering a range of different focal lengths. Compact cameras are marketed on the basis of how much zoom
they have (the ratio between the shortest and longest focal length). But in practice, cameras with more zoom take worse photos. It's very difficult to manufacture a good lens with a low f ratio and high zoom ratio. My gorgeous professional
16-35 f/2.8L costs $1300 and has just 2.2x zoom. A compact camera that costs $500 and boasts 10x zoom does not have a good lens! Furthermore, these zoom lenses generally begin at a fairly long focal length, robbing you of all the beauty of wide-angle photographs. Of course, there's no right
or best
focal length - the right focal length depends upon the subject matter. But, for the type of photographs that I use a compact camera for, I need some decent wide angle.
The size of the sensor limits the ugly digital noise that appears especially in low light conditions. It does not help to simply pack more and more pixels into a tiny space - resolution is not only limited by the number of pixels, but also by digital noise. A compact camera with a 15 megapixel sensor does not take photographs remotely comparable in sharpness and depth to an entry level SLR with a 12 megapixel sensor. That's because the sensor in an SLR is much larger. And a fullframe SLR like my 12.8 megapixel 5D is a different experience again. Unfortunately, a compact camera, by definition features a fairly small sensor.
So why is the LX3 different?
- f/2.0-2.8
- 24-60mm (35mm equivalent)
- 1/1.63-inch 10.1 megapixel sensor
By comparison, my previous compact camera (the best compact camera on the market when I bought it a year ago) was a Canon G9. I got a lot of use out of it this year on a motorcycle trip from San Francisco to Nicuragua, and I was just never very happy with it (unfortunately, there was no room on my bike for an SLR). The numbers tell the story:
- f/2.8-4.8
- 35-210mm
- 1/1.7 inch 12.1 megapixel sensor
Compared to the G9, the LX3 captures twice as much light, offers much more potential for dramatic wide-angle photographs, but has much less zoom (my experience is that the G9 takes ugly photographs at full zoom). In practice, this means I can take photos that I simply would not be able to capture using the G9.
Some examples:
Please bear in mind that most of these photographs were taken at night, by a drunk Australian.
Of course, the LX3 will never replace my 5D/16-35L combo. Don't expect it to rival any SLR with a decent lens. But I'm never going to take my 5D clubbing with me. So I could never have taken the photos above with the 5D. I can bring the LX3 almost anywhere. Most importantly, this camera is fun. I hate to admit, but I actually enjoy it more than an SLR...
Please buy this camera, even if only to help make it commercially successful. I already bought one for each of my sisters for Christmas this year :-)
UPDATE: a couple more points about the LX3:
- it's small, but jacket-pocket small, not trouser-pocket small
- yes, the lens cap is irritating - especially when your friends get their fingerprints all over the lens reviewing photos - but that's a small price to pay for such a great lens
- to my surprise, the ability to switch aspect ratio turns out to be more than just a silly gimmick - the native 16:9 aspect ration makes for some really interesting compositions
- the screen is so super-bright and contrasty that sometimes I'm tricked into thinking that an underexposed shot is fine :-/
- the images look great even after some pretty heavy post-processing which is unusual for a compact camera
- I hate and despise flash photography, but the couple of times I tried it, the flash seemed to be very well-metered (unlike other compact cameras I've used, this flash doesn't totally drain all color and depth from the scene and make everyone with white skin look like ugly hags) and if that's not enough, there's even a hotshoe for an external flash
- I would prefer a dial for fiddling aperture/exposure, but honestly the little joysticky thing seems to work just fine
- the mode dial at the top of the camera should be stiffer, it often shifts coming in and out of my pocket
- you have to enter the menus to change ISO, which is a major pain (but better than the stupid dial on the G9, which always got bumped coming in and out of the camera bag)
- it looks way sexier than the Canons
Cool! Been looking for a carry-along to complement my 30D. Looks very classic, too.
The review seems to be on http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/ nowadays
Now if you only could zoom manually by rotating the lens it would be perfect! ;-)
While I didn't get half of what you said wrt the must-have of a a good camera, I loved the pictures, especially the first one and the last one. The first one is very strange: the color, the faces, their expression, etc. What would have been PERFECT is the same picture but while the water is being poured in the glass!
I'll email them this link to ruin the surprise. Hehe.
Sacha, I seriously doubt it was water. But you never know :)
Very interesting camera, indeed. How is your experience regarding image quality at high (400 - 800) ISOs?
Totally, I've been thinking how that's a missing feature!
Here's one thing that's funny about the LX3: because the camera's small, and the lens has a bunch of glass in it, the lens can't retract into the body. So you need a ... lens cap! Just like on a real camera! But, whereas I've never been consciously bothered by having to mess with the lens cap on my SLRs, it really is a bit irritating on a compact camera. Funny how we just get used to certain things...
Thanks Sacha! Here's my flickr page, if you're interested to see more.
So apparently I didn't do a good job of explaining the technical stuff. So here's a link to a guy who does a much better job of it than me.
What's the chance of getting that yellow light to flash at exactly the same moment as the waiter was pouring the juice, and me clicking the shutter... ;-)
I've got to be honest and say that I very rarely take digital photographs above ISO 200 though I'm know there's a time and place for it, and I really should experiment more. Those night photos above were all taken at ISO 100 ;-)
According to the reviews I've read, the LX3 performs significantly better at high ISO than the competing products from Canon and Nikon (due to the lower pixel count of the sensor, essentially). So I definitely want to start taking advantage of this.
Alright I think I'll check this camera out. It looks really promising in terms of a (ouch) secondary cam to my DSLR. I need good quality at higher ISOs in a camera that is small for concert photography at venues where I can't use my DSLR.
But Michael, aren't you going to need at least moderate telephoto for this application? Remember that the LX3 lens is very biased toward wide angle.
To be honest, I kinda doubt that any compact camera can really do the combo of low light and telephoto. An f/2 85mm lens is by nature very big. Perhaps the new Canon G10 is a better option for you, though I have no experience with it and am frankly suspicious of the 5x zoom lens.
Thanks so much for the review, It was full of useful information and will be a real help when I replace my camera. I'm embarrassed by how much I didn't know before reading this.
Your photos are incredible. I'll be friending you on Flickr so I won't miss any.
Overall, it's speed that is the current problem with compacts. Sure, they aren't designed for action photos but if you're used to (D)SLRs, it is quite frustrating to frame something moving with that small control and then try to compensate the shutter lag by guessing.
The megapixel race is amusing (as you pointed out), personally I would in most cases give away 2Mp for every ISO step in less noise. Well, down to 4Mpx at least ;-) If you're never printing any photos larger than postcard size, you aren't going to need those extra megapixels. Generally, compacts tend to have noisy shadows above ISO 200 or so, but again, If you aren't printing posters, noone is going to notice. Outdoors, they are great (well, with the exception that few models go as wide as yours). And due to the smaller sensor, they give a depth-of-field that a full frame is going to struggle to provide. OK, it can but light diffraction probably will start to play in at f/32 or so.
PS. Nice hardware you have. No matter what Ken Rockwell says about gadget freaks ;-) There is still the 5DMkII + EF 14 f/2.8L II USM if you need to buy yourself a christmas present ;-)
Hehe :-) Actually my christmas present to myself might end up being a Sigma 50mm f/1.4. Please tell me I don't really need to spend an extra $1000 for an extra half an f-stop!
On the other hand, I have a real lust for one of these for portraits...
The Sigma appears quite nice, even better for those not stuck in 1.6x-crop-land. Although it has it's advantages, EF-S 10-22 covers quite a lot while you hit the cropped sweet spot on a 70-200 with a 1.6x bonus.
I knew what lens that link pointed to before clicking when you mentioned ;-) Although with f/1.2 on a FF, you will end up with the nose out of focus if you focus on the eyes from under 2m...
The 5x aren't as bad on fixed-lens cameras as on DSLRs since they know exactly how the lens behaves and can do software magic. Of course, the limit has to go somewhere, they can't invent correct information where it's not available.
Funny how you can't (usually) bring a DSLR with a 2.2x zoom to concerts etc but that 12x mega-ois-thingie is just fine according to security checks. Not that they can do much to prevent the pocket cameras, though.
I really recommend following this link if you're interested in improving your photographs.
Thanks! Muy amable! :-)
I'm aware of the telephoto issue but I prefer more light over zoom. Actually you can make pretty interesting compositions using a wide angel lens at concerts. Most of the time I use a 50mm 1.4f lens on my dslr for shows.
As Nicklas already said.. door rules regarding cameras at concerts are a bit hilarious.
Oh yeah... nice pics on flickr. That Motorcycle trip must have been a good one! My flickr profile is http://www.flickr.com/photos/rockriot
Hey Gavin, excellent review man, I totally agree with you. Excellent choice. I wish I owned one. Keep Cool. J.