I doubt the P6000 can really stand up to the G9 or the LX3, in terms of image quality. It has a smaller sensor with more megapixels than the G9...so U can expect the quality wouldn't even be on par.
You must be joking...
Go check on the specs before you make such statements. G9 and P6000 both have sensors that are 1/1.7 inch big. Plus number of effective pixels on G9 is 12.1million, compared to P6000's 13.5million. Meaning you get higher pixel density on the P6000 sensor.
That translates the greater resolving power and perhaps
better image quality. But that depends on the quality of lens used too.
You serious?
You do realise most compacts suffer when it comes to high ISO performance?
You do also realise that high ISO performance may not be a need for everyone?
I agree most pns do badly under high iso. No matter how prosumer/semi-pro that compact cam is.
But it is not good to rule out the use of high iso. It is something good to have. So one should not disregard high iso because he/she thinks that it is not needed currently. How can you predict your future needs with so much certainty?
Back to topic, LX-3, G9 and P6000 are able cameras. If you're concerned with noise, then compact cams should be ruled out altogether; you ought to be looking at dslrs. Compacts tackle noise by using low iso, like iso80, iso64 etc.
LX-3 large aperture may allow you to raise a few stops of shutter speed. Exactly how effective is the f2.0 - 2.8 lens is, you gotta try it for yourself.
G9 and P6000 allow you to use accessories like flash from the respective companies. G9's battery can be used in 450D, if one day you want to upgrade. P6000 offers in-built GPS. In my opinion, both are better choices than LX-3. It all comes down to price eventually.