| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Canon G9 vs Lumix LX3
Mike Greener, Photographer
 |
Fairfield | CA | USA | Posted: 3:09 PM on 04.01.09 |
| ->> Well I decided I wanted to purchase a little point and shoot camera for dinking around with friends and family. Something to always have around when I am not lugging the big SLR gear around. I have narrowed do to these two models: The Canon G9 and the Lumix LX3. I have had extensive playtime with the G9 but I haven't had any hands on experience with the Lumix LX3. Does anybody have this model and/or can anybody make a solid arguement for a point and shoot with HD video over the Canon G9? |
|
Robert Catto, Photographer
|
Wellington | NZ | New Zealand | Posted: 5:30 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> Honestly, as always the issue is: how big a camera can you bear to lug around? I always tell people that any camera you have with you trumps the heck out of a much better one you leave at home; obviously you know this already, otherwise you wouldn't be looking for an SLR substitute!
My experience was this - had a Ricoh GR-D (fixed 28mm lens), very slim & portable, carried it everywhere, but eventually wished it had a bit of zoom. Sold it, bought a G9, carried it nowhere (it's a bit of a brick, definitely too big to pocket), sold it. Bought a used Leica D-Lux 4 (aka Panasonic LX3 with a 3-year warranty), carry it pretty much all the time again, has some zoom range but still a quick lens, fits some pockets (but not all).
So for that reason alone, it beats the G9 in my book; just like the G9 would beat a 450D, which would beat a 5DMkII, which would beat a 1D series...but in the final reckoning, I probably should have kept the Ricoh!
R |
|
Jonathan Castner, Photographer, Assistant
|
Longmont | CO | USA | Posted: 6:21 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> I've been looking for a usable semi-pro point-n-shoot since the digital era kicked in. Back in the film days we had lots of options for small but very high quality pocket cameras but these days the cameras are so complex and there is so much money in R&D and tooling that no company makes something as high quality, elegant and simple as a Nikon Ti35 or Konica Hexar.
The Lumix LX3 is getting close to that great old pro-pocket cam. It has a great and bright f/2.0 lens that goes to 24mm and doesn't try and cram as many pixels as possible into it just to help sales. That's the one that I'm getting as soon as I can put my hands on one. They seem to be sold out everywhere.
I've looked at the G10 but its much bigger, not as wide or as bright in the lens world - and since keeping these things to the lowest ISO possible is important that extra stop of lens helps there. The optical viewfinder is a total joke and you can't put and accessory one on as you can with the LX3.
So that's my two pesos. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 6:24 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> Myung and I tested out the Lumix, Nikon Coolpix 5600 and the Canon G10 at Samy's Camera one afternoon several months ago with the intention of doing a little video for the site on our tests ...
In a nutshell ... we both loved the G10 over the Panasonic and Nikon. While the still quality on any point & shoot is iffy (when you're using a pro dslr normally) we thought the Canon had the edge.
(The chip is the size of half a thumbnail, so what do you expect.)
At ISO 400 and higher, it's a real crap-shoot. Areas of dark or black will be very noisy. And if you underexpose at high iso, it will look sort of like a beach.
The thing that really sold us on the G10 were the controls. The G10 was very, very cool to use.
I have been shoot a lot of video with my G10 and the quality (both image and sound) is impressive considering it is a point & shoot!
(I used a Gorillapod on the G10 attached to a rail and have shot very nice quality video of my daughter's drumline in very dimly lit gyms with lots of echo...and the quality has been surprisingly VERY good.)
The Lumix is attractive because it shoots HD video (the G10 and Coolpix is standard def). But the controls we found ... clumsy and akward.
Another nice point in the Lumix corner is it's size...it is very, very small.
One pet peeve with the G10 is why Canon decided to eliminate the intervolometer feature (to shoot time lapse). I had a Cullen Cord made so I can use my MultiMax with the G10, so I have shot a lot of time lapse sequences as well.
I don't think you can go wrong with any of these cameras...but the G10 to me is a bit better. Throw in the very nice video quality and it's head & shoulders better.
Just my opinion...
Mahalo! |
|
Myung Chun, Photographer
|
Los Angeles | CA | USA | Posted: 7:29 PM on 04.01.09 |
| ->> The Lumix has a 3x zoom, it's really short on the tele end. I found that to be a drawback. |
|
Tom Sperduto, Photographer
|
Joe Cavaretta, Photographer
|
Ft Lauderdale | FL | USA | Posted: 8:59 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> And in case anybody has an older canon P&S hanging around and wants to have some fun, there's this:
http://lifehacker.com/387380/turn-your-point+and+shoot-into-a-super+camera
I plan to mess around some day on an older P&S in the closet. |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Roswell | GA | USA | Posted: 9:01 PM on 04.01.09 |
| ->> Going into a store and shooting with a camera isn't a good way to compare the quality and results. Here is a better review in my opinion http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmclx3/ |
|
Stanley Leary, Photographer
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 11:21 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> I checked out both the G10 and LX3 and they both had their pro's and cons
The LX3 is nice because its smaller, and its also a f2 lens that goes to 24mm wide. Generally I find this more useful than a slower yet longer zoom range but it really depends on what your shooting. The LX3 is only 24-60mm so that can be very limiting for some peoples shooting style.
The Canon has a very sharp lens and a pretty useful range but its a much larger camera which is its biggest limitation. Its just not a camera you can throw in your pocket.
The LX3 its worth noting though has the front lens always extend a bit and while it did fit in my pocket, it was a tight fit that made it really hard to get out again wearing jeans.
In the end I took my LX3 back and got a Fuji FD100 which is a true pocket sized camera and a 28-140 range. It takes surprisingly good images and has some of the best high ISO performance for its class. "Best" being relative in regards to even an entry level DSLR of course.
I still have a Ricoh GX100 as well which is another camera you should consider. Its got a 24-70 f2.5 zoom and its about the same size as the LX3. Its got great controls with twin control dials ala a DSLR, shoots RAW and theres some wide angle adapters to give you a 16mm wide end (in 35mm terms) |
|
John J. Kim, Photographer
|
chicago | il | usa | Posted: 11:41 PM on 04.01.09 |
->> wait - has anyone tried out the canon sx200? it was developed, supposedly, to compete directly with the panasonic lumix lx3. moreover, it shoots 720p hd video.
(has anyone tinkered with this camera? it's cheaper than both the g10 and lx3, but what i want to know is - will the video clips ingest into final cut pro easily, without having to use a third party software method or render each clip separately?)
having read the prof. reviews on various sites, it seems very attractive.. |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 8:42 AM on 04.02.09 |
->> I like the larger optical viewfinder of the G10, the one on the G9 was barely useful, really just too small. But too small is better than none at all. I've never been comfortable trying to use a viewfinder at arms length. Chimping is one thing, composing an image is entirely different. The live view can be useful for odd camera positioning such as on the ground or hail marys.
The controls of the G10 are intuitive and fairly well positioned.
I guess what appeals to me is that in either manual mode or AV with exposure lock it is still controlled by the photographer. I'm not all that impressed by the AF control and lag time can be an issue as well.
For a pocket camera I still prefer my G10, which fits in the hip pocket of a pair of Levi's if they aren't too tight. The image quality of the G10 is quite good and the video is there if one needs it.
My biggest complaint with all the P & S cams is their use of the 4 : 3 format, I much prefer 3 : 2. |
|
Gregg Riess, Photographer
|
Overland Park | KS | USA | Posted: 2:41 PM on 04.03.09 |
->> Brad,
my G9 shots HD video...does the G10 not? |
|
Ron Scheffler, Photographer
|
Hamilton (Toronto area) | Ontario | Canada | Posted: 4:42 PM on 04.03.09 |
->> Considered the G10 but bought the LX3 back in December. The deciding factors were smaller size and wider, faster lens. While the zoom range is somewhat limiting, my planned application was people photos where I'd be relatively close and felt wider angle was more important.
Results so far have been pretty good. The wider lens has been useful, as expected, for the typical friends & family photos, particularly in confined spaces where something like a 38mm focal length equivalent on many P&S would have been limiting. I've been impressed by how effective the image stabilization has been at crazy shutter speeds like 1/8 second. I've set the auto ISO cutoff at 800 and for the most part try to stay under 400. I also like the aspect ratio control and usually leave it set at 3:2. Perhaps that's out of habit from DSLRs and film before that. I really like the MF option. The LX3 has a focus button near the shutter release, which allows one to use it like a Canon or Nikon with back button AF to separate AF from the shutter release when the camera is set to MF. This way I can preset focus, then hit the shutter release when needed and not have to worry as much about timing being thrown off due to the camera running through the AF cycle before exposing the image. This is great for grab shots where timing is more critical and you can zone focus and let the depth of field compensate somewhat for variations in subject distance. Having a RAW option is also nice, and one of the main criteria I had when looking at cameras. Here the G10 would have been preferred because I'm a Canon DSLR and DPP user, which would have fit my exiting workflow much better. But I decided the LX3's wider lens and smaller size was worth the tradeoff. I've found the LX3's straight from camera JPEGs look a bit too much like P&S images with a certain muddied color quality in certain conditions, more so under lower intensity artificial light sources. It's kind of difficult to describe, but it looks different than DSLR tonality. Having RAW allows for a lot of options in this regard, though there is only so much room to push these files if exposure is not correct. And I wish Apple would add LX3 RAW support soon.
As for video, it's pretty good but I haven't been overly impressed with the audio quality. Haven't tried bringing any of it into FC yet either.
Considering cameras like the LX3 and the GH1 micro four thirds camera, it seems to me that Panasonic is putting a fair amount of effort into developing cameras that aren't just clones of the major traditional camera makers, rather ones that offer something different enough while also allowing photographers a lot of control over final image quality. |
|
Mike Greener, Photographer
|
Fairfield | CA | USA | Posted: 3:09 AM on 04.08.09 |
| ->> I am leaning towards the Lumix LX3 because of the fast Leica lens and the smaller size. Still I am torn over the features of both cameras. If only the Lumix had the time lapse function like the Canon G9. I feel like neither is the perfect fit. It's a tough decision. Thanks for the input everyone. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|