Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2K: opinions?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by IJ Reilly, Oct 13, 2006.

  1. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #1
    I am looking for a new compact digital camera to replace our old Nikon CoolPix 995 (which has served us faithfully, but is starting get long in the tooth). Most of our photography is of architecture, so a good wide angle lens is a high priority. I am attracted to the Lumix DMC-LX2K, which has a 28mm minimum equivalent focal length lens (I think!), and otherwise looks like a lot of camera for the money. All thoughts welcomed, pro and con, as well as alternative suggestions.

    Thanks!
     
  2. mdntcallr macrumors 65816

    mdntcallr

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2000
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    #2
    I have been looking into this camera also.

    looks excellent. add to it the ability to record HDTV movies!. wow!
     
  3. garfield2002 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    #3
    I just heard of this camera through engadget which pointed at a new review from www.dpreview.com. The wide angle and 16:9 aspect ratio do make for very interesting composition as I was impressed by the sample photos. However, the review also points to higher than average noise at ISOs higher than 100. The trade off for the wide angle lens is softness at the corners. I was also not impressed with the quality of the video mode. The compression artifacts are quite visible and you cannot use the zoom while recording (optical or digital). I am comparing the video to my Canon S2.

    As I understand the really unique feature of the LX2 is the 16:9 aspect ratio. If you are not all that interested in this feature there are many other cameras in this particular category that are suitable alternatives (with a wide angle lens perhaps the new SD800 IS). :)

    EDIT: I just looked at the www.dcresource.com review and the author was not impressed with the image quality from this camera. I would suggest taking a look at both reviews. Cheers.
     
  4. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    Thanks, I found that review as well. Quite informative.

    Turns out a friend of mine (pro photographer) has the earlier LX1 model. I'm going to have a look at it today, and ask him how he feels about the results. He shoots mainly in RAW I believe.

    The 16:9 ratio is the main attraction of this camera to me. I'd be very surprised if I ever used the video feature.
     
  5. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #5
    Well, might not be that helpful but my Lumix DMC-TZ1 is a ripper of a camera.

    Shoots 5MP at 4:3 or 4.5MP at 16:9 - I just use 4:3.

    Videos are 30fps at 848x480, quality is pretty good, not as clear as a DVD movie but the size of the image is great - sure beats 320x240.

    The 10x optical zoom is fantastic combined with the image stabilisation - makes for some great surf shots when you don't have to be in the water to get the photo.
     
  6. garfield2002 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2003
    #6
    Yes, I believe that the LX1 was actually quite well received and got great reviews. I think both reviewers were suprised at the poor image quality of the LX2. If you are okay with a RAW work flow, I think many problems with the LX2 and its overprocessing of images can be avoided. Best of luck. :)
     
  7. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    Shooting at ISO >100 seems to be the main issue with the camera. This is a fairly minor consideration for my needs, but perhaps I should wait for the LX3?
     
  8. atari1356 macrumors 68000

    atari1356

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2004
    #8
    The LX2 was just released... so you could be waiting for up to a year for the LX3.

    Here's a nice gallery showing the image quality of the LX2 (with comparisons to an LX1):

    http://www.pbase.com/viztyger/lx_x_2

    http://www.pbase.com/viztyger/lx_plus_alpha
     
  9. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #9
    Update: I am now also considering the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX01. For about half the price, it seems to have most of the features of LX2K, except for fewer pixels and without the 16:9 CCD (it still takes 16:9 photos, but crops to obtain that ratio, I presume). It also has a 4:3 display. Does anyone have any experience with this camera? Is the LX2K really worth nearly $200 more?

    Thanks!
     
  10. BigPrince macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    #10
    I am going to be buying the LX2 probably this weekend. Other then some people saying its common to get a grainy or noisy picture, its a good camera. I spoke with someone who said that he loves the quality of the picture. I just wish it used regular batteries.
     
  11. furcalchick macrumors 68020

    furcalchick

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2006
    Location:
    South Florida
    #11
    i have the same camera, and it's very awesome. went on a couple of practice shoots with the camera, and the zoom is amazing, and i think this will be an improvement in my baseball pictures. actually the zoom and small size and price was the main factors in my decision, as my old camera only had 2x zoom and i was typically about 100 meters away from the subjects. with the new 10x, i'm hoping for some killer shots.

    and i haven't tested the movie feature yet...still have to look at that.
     
  12. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #12
    If the major complaint you hear is of slight noise at ISO settings above 100, I don't think you should worry too much. A 16:9 ratio is something you can't get from other cameras, while the slightly higher noise is judged by some very picky reviewers. I think the 16:9 ratio is a big plus while the noise complaint is a small negative.

    And besides, my Canon SD300 or 400 camera isn't so great with noise during night shots either (It's a slightly older IXUS model, 4 or 5 MP version, so I forget what the North American name for it is) , but hey......it's a small point and shoot, and the convenience offered by its small size more than makes up for the noisy photos I may take on rare occasions.

    Look at this: PBASE I don't think the LX2 photos at night look all that bad at ISO 200, and this is with noise reduction and everything else turned off. If you set it a bit lower than normal/standard, I think the photos can be very usable, even at ISO 400. At ISO 800, don't bother. ;)


    If I were buying a new p&s camera right now, I'd consider this Panasonic LX2, a Nikon 8400 (I think. I'd want the one with the 24 mm lens) or the Kodak V710 Dual lens model (a 23 mm fixed lens, but I'd have to see more example photos in low light for me to choose this one). I have a DSLR for that sort of photography anyhow. I use my p&s when out with friends and when it's not convenient to bring a DSLR. I understand the tradeoffs and I just put up with them. It's fine. :)
     
  13. IJ Reilly thread starter macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #13
    I'm not too concerned about the noise complaints, but for $400 the camera ought to be pretty clean IMO. The major issue for me is whether the LX2 is worth an extra $200 over the FX01. The optics are apparently the same, and the electronics at least quite similar. The main difference, AFAIK, is in the CCD and the display.
     
  14. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #14
    The image stabilization is supposed to be good.

    That's about all I know about it.
     

Share This Page