g10 or lx-3

[daesup45]

im new to the camera world, the only camera i use was the one on my phone which is stupid. i have been looking around and g10 and lx-3 is the 2 i narrowed it down to. i dont want a dslr just because im not that into pictures, but i do want to start it up as a hobby. the camera will be used for vacation and sport events, but hopefully i will fall into landscape and animals. i like the g10 because it seems to be more professional usage, but the lx3 is more simple i guess. but i would like to be serious in the photo world.

[netdog]

If you need the longer reaching zoom (sporting events come to mind), it's the G10. In all other respects, I far prefer the LX3, but the G10 is a good camera.

[daesup45]

when i say sport events its taking pictures from the sideline and i heard lx3 does not work wih mac

[netdog]

It works fine with your Mac, both in terms of the JPEGs and the RAW images.

[daesup45]

is that the only format i need to transfer the pictures to mac

[bertpalmer]

From what I've read/heard the LX3 has the edge in low light.

But if you're after resolution then the G10 might be better.

Always a compromise!

[toxic]

G10 for what you want - the LX3 isn't your usual point-&-shoot, since its lens doesnt even get to the telephoto range. both are tailored for more serious photographers.

[leighonigar]

Both are great. When you say 'sport' do you want close ups? No compact is really going to be ideal for sport photography. As has been said, the G10's zoom is a bit longer (but doesn't let as much light in, and is less wide). If I was buying one I'd get the LX3 for the wide angle, but it sounds like the G10 might be better for you. Are you certain that you don't want a longer zoom? Both canon and panasonic make compacts with longer zooms (e.g. the TZ5). The image quality tends to be a bit worse though.

I assume you don't want a big camera, as there are do-everything bridge cameras like the Fuji S100FS which can be reasonable too.

[lostinblue]

I would suggest the LX3 for the wider faster lens. You mention interest in landscapes and vacation photos so that wide lens may prove its worth. Here are some links to a 3 part review comparing the features of the G10, LX3 and Nikon p6000 with built in gps. Entertaining and hopefully helpful.

pt.1 (http://twipphoto.com/archives/2322)
pt.2 (http://twipphoto.com/archives/2450)
pt.3 (http://twipphoto.com/archives/2470)

[daesup45]

most of the people are suggesting lx3 but cant i adjust the light in photoshop or photo apps. well im new to that too. should i worry about the lighting more then the resolution or the zoom

[toxic]

most of the people are suggesting lx3 but cant i adjust the light in photoshop or photo apps. well im new to that too. should i worry about the lighting more then the resolution or the zoom

what do you mean by "adjust the light"?

[daesup45]

i dont know. i guess what i meant was making the photo lighter and darker

[leighonigar]

i dont know. i guess what i meant was making the photo lighter and darker

Is size a problem? You can get a DSLR like the D40 or A200 for less than these two compacts cost.

You can absolutely do the same adjustments with the output of all of these cameras. I suppose, hypothetically you could have an old version of software which didn't support the RAW format of one or two of them but it should not be a problem really.

Perhaps you should pick up a basic book on digital photography? Your knowledge seems a bit thin. Once you know more your wants might change.

[daesup45]

i was thinking about going to a dslr but i just want a camera that is a bit smaller and like i said before its mostly for vacations or pictures of some events im not into the whole hardcore photos right now but i would like my pictures to look good. and i think if i go into the dlsr world i will start to buy a lot lens and stuff. i just want something simple for my family to use and plus with good clear pictures.

[ChrisA]

im new to the camera world, the only camera i use was the one on my phone which is stupid. i have been looking around and g10 and lx-3 is the 2 i narrowed it down to. i dont want a dslr just because im not that into pictures, but i do want to start it up as a hobby. the camera will be used for vacation and sport events, but hopefully i will fall into landscape and animals. i like the g10 because it seems to be more professional usage, but the lx3 is more simple i guess. but i would like to be serious in the photo world.

For those subjects you will be better off with an SLR. Even an older used SLR. You can get a used Nikon system (system is one lens and one body) for about $300. so you'd actually save money.

The reason I say this is "shutter lag". All of the point and shoots have this. IT tis the slight delay between tripping the shutter and when the shutter snaps the image. Because of this lag time sports photography is very, hard same with shooting any kind of wildlife.

The reason to buy a smaller camera like those you listed are because you need it to be small. But you pay in terms of image quality and in price too.

[nissan.gtp]

I had an LX3 on order, but canceled due to endless back-order, and got a DMC-TZ5 for $250 (G10 is nice but too big, I wanted a pocket camera to complement the D90). The extra zoom is appreciated (the only flaw with the LX3 IMO).
Just got it, a bit bigger than I anticipated, looking forward to working with it. The Macro mode is quite good for the price, and next week I'll do some speed and night shots at the 12 hours of Sebring.

[dubhe]

I bought the LX-3 last year, then work bought me a G10 for work :D

Anyway, both good but I do prefer the LX-3, I like having a proper lens cap that actually protects the lens, means you don't always need to keep it in a case. I also like the fact it fits in my jacket pocket.

But, OSX doesn't yet support the LX-3 RAW format (haven't tried the G10, use work PC) which is annoying.

[leighonigar]

It seems that the G10 is about £400 with the sliding pound. You can pick up a D40 for about £250 with lens, or refurbed for £200 [ http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewProdDetails.asp?prod_code=PON09B000016&Prod_name=Nikon%20D40%20&%2018-55mm%20AFS%20DX%20Refurbished ]

It's not huge, but perhaps too big to take everywhere on the off chance of shots. For a little over £300 you can get an olympus E-420 and standard zoom, or less than £400 for a twin lens kit. The E-420 is the smallest DSLR you can get. Worth checking out.

[Edit - oops, I got muddled with threads and thought the OP was in England. What I said probably broadly transfers to the US]

[toxic]

i dont know. i guess what i meant was making the photo lighter and darker

oh, i see what you're saying. no, that doesn't work. a G10 in low light will either be too noisy or will be too underexposed, and raising the brightness later won't fix it.

anyways, for what you want, rule out the LX3.

[daesup45]

i just came back from ritz camera to see how g10 was but he person convinced me to go for a dslr. i have been looking at d40 and the person told me panasonic g1 is good but its expensive. since im a beginner i was thinking about d40, d60, rebel xsi, or g1 because its pretty sick

[Phrasikleia]

i just came back from ritz camera to see how g10 was but he person convinced me to go for a dslr. i have been looking at d40 and the person told me panasonic g1 is good but its expensive. since im a beginner i was thinking about d40, d60, rebel xsi, or g1 because its pretty sick

OK, you opened the door to the DSLR world, so I can't resist coaxing you over the threshold. Here is why a DSLR is so much better, in a nutshell. For starters, the sensor will be much larger, so the dynamic range and noise handling with be far superior. For example:

http://www.megethos.com/Phrasikleia/CameraComparison2.jpg

(Click to enlarge and see detail)

The image at the top was taken with a Canon point-and-shoot (the SD800 IS), and the image at the bottom was taken with a Canon DSLR (the XSi with an EF100mm f/2 USM lens attached).

Why the huge difference? It's the size of the sensor:

http://www.megethos.com/Phrasikleia/SensorSizes.png

(Again, click to enlarge)

The bottom row shows common sensor sizes found in point-and-shoot cameras: tiny! Something that small with a decent number of megapixels must have really small photosites to accommodate all of the megapixels. Really small photosites result in weak signals. Weak signals have trouble being clean and strong, so they show a lot of "noise" and don't capture a nice range of lights and darks.

Then there's the whole issue of lenses. With a DSLR, you can attach the perfect lens for whatever it is you're shooting. With a point-and-shoot, you're stuck with one lens, period. So a DSLR is therefore a lot more fun, since different lenses enable different creative possibilities, and it has the potential to produce top-notch quality, if you invest in the right lenses.

[Abstract]

The new Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR is supposed to be quite good. ;)

DPR Article (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09020402fujifilmfinepixf200exr.asp)
Gallery with pre-production camera. (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09022304f200exrgallery.asp)

I'd much prefer the LX3 over the Canon G10, but this Fuji F200EXR is very impressive according to all reports and images, particularly in low light. Just look at the 1st and 2nd photos in the gallery. For a p&s......:eek: Anyway, it may even be better than my Fuji F31fd 6 MP, which is the best I've seen so far in low light (although it handles poorly). At ISO 800, it was just a step down from my old Nikon D50 DSLR. This F200EXR appears to be as good or better.

The LX3 was decent, but this F200EXR can take images at ISO 1600 that are better than what I get with my F31fd, although I really haven't taken a lot of ISO 1600 shots with my camera, so I can't be sure.

[toxic]

i just came back from ritz camera to see how g10 was but he person convinced me to go for a dslr. i have been looking at d40 and the person told me panasonic g1 is good but its expensive. since im a beginner i was thinking about d40, d60, rebel xsi, or g1 because its pretty sick

i'd suggest you choose between Nikon D40, Canon XS, or Olympus E420. maybe Sony a350 (or whatever the lower-end one is).

The new Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR is supposed to be quite good. ;)

i have high hopes for this camera, too...though i'll never buy it unless it supports RAW.

[daesup45]

sorry for the noob question dslr does not have auto focus right?

[Phrasikleia]

sorry for the noob question dslr does not have auto focus right?

Yes, of course they do. Any DSLR plus its kit lens will autofocus. There are some vintage lenses that will not autofocus on modern DSLRs, and there are some modern lenses that will not autofocus on Nikon's lower-end DSLRs, but in general, autofocus is standard.

[daesup45]

o ok i was thinking about getting a d40 or d60 but everyone who had that upgraded and for me i would like a camera that i will get and not upgrade unless it breaks. so i have been looking into canon xsi because d90 is expensive and the new panasonic g1. is g1 even worth it

[toxic]

o ok i was thinking about getting a d40 or d60 but everyone who had that upgraded and for me i would like a camera that i will get and not upgrade unless it breaks. so i have been looking into canon xsi because d90 is expensive and the new panasonic g1. is g1 even worth it

G1 has an electronic viewfinder, rather than an optical one. if that matters to you. other than that, Panasonic has a very poor lens selection.

as for the other options, look at the Canon XS and Olympus E420, though you've yet to give us a budget and if you still want something close to p&s size.

[daesup45]

i would like to spend about 600 to 700

[leighonigar]

http://www.adorama.com/IOME520K1A.html and a memory card would do almost anyone.

[daesup45]

some people told me not to touch Olympus

[toxic]

some people told me not to touch Olympus

for you, i don't see why not. it's small, and even if it has the worse noise handling of any SLR (i dunno if is), it's still better than any p&s available.

as for your options...
refurbished Canon XSi (http://www.adorama.com/ICADRXSIBR.html?searchinfo=xsi&item_no=3)
Canon XS (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-10-1MP-Digital-18-55mm-3-5-5-6/dp/B001CBKJGG)
Pentax K200D (http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-Digital-Reduction-18-55mm-3-5-5-6/dp/B0012Q72IY)
Sony a200 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/539540-REG/Sony_DSLRA200K_Alpha_DSLR_A200_SLR_Digital.html) or a350 (http://www.amazon.com/Sony-DSLRA350-Digital-SteadyShot-Stabilization/dp/B00138MVFA)
Olympus E-420 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/549009-REG/Olympus_262081_E_420_SLR_Digital_Camera.html) or E-520 (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/564508-REG/Olympus_262086_E_520_SLR_Digital_Camera.html)

i would not buy a new XSi ($680) since that leaves with no money for a second lens or accessories.

[daesup45]

id i get the used xsi which lens should i get

[leighonigar]

for you, i don't see why not. it's small, and even if it has the worse noise handling of any SLR (i dunno if is), it's still better than any p&s available.


Indeed, Olympus are really quite good. And their lens offerings at reasonable prices have made me wish I didn't have an F mount camera more than a few times. Whoever told the OP to 'avoid Olympus' was acting in ignorance.

id i get the used xsi which lens should i get

What for? I guess you should start with the 18-55 IS and then decide if you need anything else.

[lewchenko]

Im going to say take a hard look at the Panasonic G1.

It has a four thirds sensor system which gives it the quality of an DSLR camera, but without the size. (It replaces the reflective mirror in the DSLR's with an electonic viewfinder).This means its also really compact too.

So you have a compact camera with DSLR quality.It also has a really high def pull out/twist LCD on the back, plus a electronic viewfinder that can give you previews of the scene modes etc. Something a DSLR cannot do.

Go check out the review on dpreview.com. It comes highly rated. It may have less lenses available for it than the traditional crowd, but the lenses that are available are high quality.

I am currently considering this camera as DSLR's are too bulky, and compacts suffer from far too much shutter lag.

Here is a pro/con list from someone who reviewed it on amazon :

This camera is well suitable for:
1) Enthusiasts currently using bridge/compacts who are looking to upgrade to a camera with better fexibility, resolution and image quality.
2) DSLR users who find having a full DSLR kit (lenses and camera) too bulky and heavy to go around, but do not want to compromise on quality.
3) Entry-level DSLR users who have few lenses and can easily afford to swap over to the M4/3 format.
4) Travellers (I am one).
5) People looking at DSLR alternatives and would not care to buy 1000 quid lenses, but rather stick with VERY GOOD kit lenses that would cover the range of everyday needs.

This is definitely not for:
1) Professional DSLR users or pixel-peepers with a huge selection of top-class(expensive) lenses.
2) Stubborn people who cannot accept a modern format but rather, stick with a 60-year old technology. DSLR snobs, in short.
3) People who regularly prints at >A3 sizes.
4) People with gorilla-sized hands.
5) people who also want to use their camera for Video as well as photos (no video mode).

[daesup45]

has anyone ever bought anything from this site http://www.prophotonation.com/cart.html
the cameras are mad cheap

[bking1000]

id i get the used xsi which lens should i get

If you are completely a newbie, don't get the G10 or LX3, but rather the Panasonic TZ5. Canon also used to make a great series of A cameras for beginners, but the A series has really declined now.

If you insist on a DSLR, you could get the Olympus 520 and be quite happy, but Canons are more common and perfectly great for a beginner (I have a Canon). A good set for a beginner would be the Canon XS or XSi, with the kit lens (18-55IS) and also the 55-250IS for telephoto. You could also save some money if you got a used Canon XT or XTi. There are reasons to get an XSi, but as a newbie, those reasons will not really be important to you until you get some experience.

Lots of people have very valid reasons for one camera over the other, but as a newbie, you will not be able to understand the differences until you go out and get a camera and start taking pictures! So, just get one and start, and you can learn the rest (and then spend money like water, like the rest of us) :-)

[bking1000]

has anyone ever bought anything from this site http://www.prophotonation.com/cart.html
the cameras are mad cheap

I never have, and they may be OK, but check ALL online vendors at www.resellerratings.com. In general, Adorama, J&R, B&H Photo and Amazon are the best on-line retailers for photo equipment. Beware -- there are a LOT of scammers in photo equipment, so check anyone not from the list above.

[bking1000]

Im going to say take a hard look at the Panasonic G1.

It has a four thirds sensor system which gives it the quality of an DSLR camera, but without the size. (It replaces the reflective mirror in the DSLR's with an electonic viewfinder).This means its also really compact too.

So you have a compact camera with DSLR quality.It also has a really high def pull out/twist LCD on the back, plus a electronic viewfinder that can give you previews of the scene modes etc. Something a DSLR cannot do.

Go check out the review on dpreview.com. It comes highly rated. It may have less lenses available for it than the traditional crowd, but the lenses that are available are high quality.

I am currently considering this camera as DSLR's are too bulky, and compacts suffer from far too much shutter lag.

Here is a pro/con list from someone who reviewed it on amazon :

This camera is well suitable for:
1) Enthusiasts currently using bridge/compacts who are looking to upgrade to a camera with better fexibility, resolution and image quality.
2) DSLR users who find having a full DSLR kit (lenses and camera) too bulky and heavy to go around, but do not want to compromise on quality.
3) Entry-level DSLR users who have few lenses and can easily afford to swap over to the M4/3 format.
4) Travellers (I am one).
5) People looking at DSLR alternatives and would not care to buy 1000 quid lenses, but rather stick with VERY GOOD kit lenses that would cover the range of everyday needs.

This is definitely not for:
1) Professional DSLR users or pixel-peepers with a huge selection of top-class(expensive) lenses.
2) Stubborn people who cannot accept a modern format but rather, stick with a 60-year old technology. DSLR snobs, in short.
3) People who regularly prints at >A3 sizes.
4) People with gorilla-sized hands.
5) people who also want to use their camera for Video as well as photos (no video mode).

This is pretty inflamatory. The G1 is not for people stuck w/60 year old technology? How about the G1 is not for people who want to shoot fast action, because the high ISO is junk, and the EVF is not responsive enough. I am all for getting the G1 if it solves these issues.

Or, how about the G1 is only for weak-armed people who can't hold up an extra 100g.

The G1, by the way, doesn't have video. The new one does (GH1?) and what is that -- like $1500 with lens?!?!? I don't need video in my DSLR that badly!

I'm not dissing the G1, just your characterization of who would want it. I actually want to like it, but it's just not a good fit for my purposes -- whether you think it's because I've got gorilla hands and am stuck in the past is your hang-up, not mine.

[bking1000]

has anyone ever bought anything from this site http://www.prophotonation.com/cart.html
the cameras are mad cheap

Looking at that site -- $249 for an XSi is nothing but a scam. These places get you to place an order, then call you bag to hard-sell you for a battery and other basic equipment. Then, when you refuse you may or may not get your money back. Check resellerratings.com, but I've got to think they are a scam house.

[bearcatrp]

Suggest you consider this...... http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=17630 .

Is as close to a DSLR as you will get. My wife has this and shoots incredible photo's.

[daesup45]

if i was going to get a camera that size then i would rather get a dslr and in the long run i think it will be more beneficial to me. i am looking for a i guess a beginners dslr and i hoping to get the right one so i dont have to upgrade the camera other then the lens. like d40 or 60 people get it and upgrade it but i want a one time buy and keep it until it dies. i was thinking about canon xsi or nikon d80 but it seems a bit old. and is live view a good thing, and i heard people complain about the AF on the xsi

[toxic]

there will always be something to complain about. as for keeping it for a few years, the XSi will do fine. there's nothing groundbreaking between the original Digital Rebel and the XSi (3 generations later), and there's no reason to think there will be in future versions.

buy the XSi with the 18-55 IS kits lens and a 55-250 IS. those two lenses will cover just about everything. outdoors, anyway. inside you'll need a flash, but that's for another day.

[daesup45]

is d80 worth it

[gkarris]

some people told me not to touch Olympus

Really? :rolleyes:

http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7274634&postcount=290

Found my E-420 body new, free shipping, and USA warranty for $321. :eek:

You can probably get a lot of 4/3 lenses used with people switching to other manufacturers...

Suggest you consider this...... http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=17630 .

Is as close to a DSLR as you will get. My wife has this and shoots incredible photo's.

Yes, definitely. If you HAVE TO go P&S, Canon is definitely the best ones out of the many I have used or have seen my friend's have.

there will always be something to complain about. as for keeping it for a few years, the XSi will do fine. there's nothing groundbreaking between the original Digital Rebel and the XSi (3 generations later), and there's no reason to think there will be in future versions.

buy the XSi with the 18-55 IS kits lens and a 55-250 IS. those two lenses will cover just about everything. outdoors, anyway. inside you'll need a flash, but that's for another day.

I love Canon also, and just scored an awesome deal on a used 20D... :D

Canon makes great cameras too. From the cheapest P&S I have for work, to this 20D I tried out briefly today - great pics!

[Abstract]

(snip)

Not to be a "DSLR snob", but the experience of using an electronic viewfinder was horrible. I don't know if we'll have to wait for OLED displays to be super-cheap to be able to make a decent EVF, but I'm willing to wait for something that doesn't suck.

That, and in your hand, the Olympus E-420 isn't much bigger. There's very little visible difference between them. I'm certain that the E-420 is a bit longer, and just slightly thicker, but with the 25 mm f/2.8 lens, it was far smaller than the Panny G1 with a kit lens. Anyway, once you get into this size range, it doesn't really matter. Neither are small enough to fit into a pair of jeans, but both are probably small enough to fit into some jacket pocket, particularly the Oly E-420 with 25 mm f/2.8 lens.

[gkarris]

^^^

I just got the Calumet catalog and they've got the E-410 with kit lens closeout/refurbed for $299... :eek:

I don't think we need another format (Micro Four Thirds).