LX2 Rocks???


Status
Not open for further replies.

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#1
Is the LX2 gonna rocks liike the LX1?




Big Bike Fest, Small Cam Rocks!










 

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#2




Do note that I'm using Sikypix to develop the jpg files. Not sure about the control and settings such as WB, exposure and sharpening. So the jpg files differ from those LX1 jpg photos developed using Adobe.
 

SNAG

Senior Member
Jun 14, 2002
1,644
0
36
33
Visit site
#3
The shots seem fantastic.

It'll be great if you could do a comparison between this and the LX1 (especially on ISO noise and NR issues?)

I've got a FZ5 (and a DSLR), but I'm thinking of getting this for compact shots.
 

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#4
Apparently, at ISO 100, the LX2 appears more noise than LX1. Also, from the preview on the camera (basically looking at the jpg files) there seems to be some kind of watercolour painting effect.
If there LX2 is indeed better / worse off than LX1, the difference is minor. No point pixel peep.

At ISO 200 and 400, LX2 is without doubt certainly better than LX1.

LX1 at ISO 80 is certainly better than the LX2 at ISO 100.


So LX1 is still a keeper and good buy for new LX series users. UNless u wanna shoot at higher ISO, there's no point to upgrade from LX1.
 

xllms

New Member
Jan 31, 2002
83
0
0
43
AngMoKio, Singapore
Visit site
#5
i love the richness in the colours...wat kind of settings do u use in the first image, weekh?

am thinking of getting this or LX1 for architectural shots...also considering the ricoh GR-D...

xllms
 

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#6
xllms said:
i love the richness in the colours...wat kind of settings do u use in the first image, weekh?

am thinking of getting this or LX1 for architectural shots...also considering the ricoh GR-D...

xllms

For the first shot, I was playing around with the color setting in the Silkypix and choose the vivid option. I really love the details in the reflection but for the resized jpg file that u see here, those details are lost.

Don't see any advantage of the GRD in terms of optics. Moreover, the it is a fixed 28mm lens and will loose out big time to the Leica 28-112mm zoom. And with the cheap price of LX2 at ~$670, the choice is cyristal clear.
 

xllms

New Member
Jan 31, 2002
83
0
0
43
AngMoKio, Singapore
Visit site
#7
weekh said:
For the first shot, I was playing around with the color setting in the Silkypix and choose the vivid option. I really love the details in the reflection but for the resized jpg file that u see here, those details are lost.

Don't see any advantage of the GRD in terms of optics. Moreover, the it is a fixed 28mm lens and will loose out big time to the Leica 28-112mm zoom. And with the cheap price of LX2 at ~$670, the choice is cyristal clear.
could you post both the jpg and raw image for us to compare?

xllms
 

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#10
Wolfgang said:
Weekh, this shot..



looks pretty clean... what iso was it taken with? :)
All pics taken at ISO 100.




Wolfgang said:
Oh yah, i read some where that the focusing is a tad slow too. Is that an issue for you Weekh?
I don't notice it. In fact, it has severl options of focusing such as high speed focusing and spot focusing. For me, I'm just using the normal centre focusing.
 

xllms

New Member
Jan 31, 2002
83
0
0
43
AngMoKio, Singapore
Visit site
#11
weekh said:
All pics taken at ISO 100.






I don't notice it. In fact, it has severl options of focusing such as high speed focusing and spot focusing. For me, I'm just using the normal centre focusing.
so did u use the manual mode or auto mode when you take the image?

xllms
 

weekh

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2004
4,101
0
0
#12
xllms said:
so did u use the manual mode or auto mode when you take the image?

xllms

of course autofocus first lah... then later switch to manual mode if I wanna lock focus.
 

SNAG

Senior Member
Jun 14, 2002
1,644
0
36
33
Visit site
#13
weekh said:
Apparently, at ISO 100, the LX2 appears more noise than LX1. Also, from the preview on the camera (basically looking at the jpg files) there seems to be some kind of watercolour painting effect.
If there LX2 is indeed better / worse off than LX1, the difference is minor. No point pixel peep.

At ISO 200 and 400, LX2 is without doubt certainly better than LX1.

LX1 at ISO 80 is certainly better than the LX2 at ISO 100.


So LX1 is still a keeper and good buy for new LX series users. UNless u wanna shoot at higher ISO, there's no point to upgrade from LX1.
Thanks for the review. It's indeed disappointing to hear that the 'watercolouring effect' still exists (it's been around for quite some time). But they are still good cameras!

Hope that Panasonic modifies its firmware to turn off NR completely soon (but then again, people may get stunned from seeing so much noise!)
 

micah4

New Member
Sep 14, 2005
384
0
0
#14
SNAG said:
Thanks for the review. It's indeed disappointing to hear that the 'watercolouring effect' still exists (it's been around for quite some time). But they are still good cameras!

Hope that Panasonic modifies its firmware to turn off NR completely soon (but then again, people may get stunned from seeing so much noise!)
I don't think it's to turn off the NR completely, but more as an option for users to turn it off if they desire - what is available on current firmware is the high and low NR option - at least that's what the petition is all about - to get pannie to offer a 3rd option of 'Off' for NR. :)
 

kross

New Member
Sep 15, 2004
1,271
0
0
earth
#15
micah4 said:
I don't think it's to turn off the NR completely, but more as an option for users to turn it off if they desire - what is available on current firmware is the high and low NR option - at least that's what the petition is all about - to get pannie to offer a 3rd option of 'Off' for NR. :)
i doubt they'll listen to the appeal.... it'll show that their initial decision was a 'mistake'...
they'll probably listen and prevent this 'mistake' with the next update model....
 

tao

Senior Member
Jan 7, 2005
3,770
1
38
Beach Road
#16
SNAG said:
Thanks for the review. It's indeed disappointing to hear that the 'watercolouring effect' still exists (it's been around for quite some time). But they are still good cameras!

Hope that Panasonic modifies its firmware to turn off NR completely soon (but then again, people may get stunned from seeing so much noise!)
Is there still the 'watercolour NR' effect if we process the images using RAW? Should not be right?

Yah... I agree that the 'painterly' NR is a necessary evil for your typical users when all they use is JPEGs.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#17
tao said:
Is there still the 'watercolour NR' effect if we process the images using RAW? Should not be right?

Yah... I agree that the 'painterly' NR is a necessary evil for your typical users when all they use is JPEGs.
should be alright with raw... since the watercolor seems to be caused by the new Venus III
 

unseen

Senior Member
Dec 14, 2004
2,622
0
0
NTU and Wdls
#18
ExplorerZ said:
should be alright with raw... since the watercolor seems to be caused by the new Venus III
Makes me wonder... Most of the other brand cameras has got low noise at the cost of low details, soft (and video like) images while Panasonic delivered higher noise, high details, sharp images... EVERYONE was going on and on about the noise.

Now Panasonic turned up NR (with an admittedly stranger algorithm) to please those noisy idiots (pun intended), they change camp and start complaining about high NR, want a choice to turn it off.

Pick up most canon PnS, Nikon PnS, Olympus PnS, you'll get MUCH more NR than any Panasonic camera. I wonder why people never launch petition to those companies.Makes me wonder if those "noisy" people are actually hired by other companies.

Gee, I really pity Panasonic's Team. They seem to be getting more tech people than photographers as clients.
 

ExplorerZ

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2006
7,752
0
36
West Legion
hkchew03.deviantart.com
#19
unseen said:
Makes me wonder... Most of the other brand cameras has got low noise at the cost of low details, soft (and video like) images while Panasonic delivered higher noise, high details, sharp images... EVERYONE was going on and on about the noise.

Now Panasonic turned up NR (with an admittedly stranger algorithm) to please those noisy idiots (pun intended), they change camp and start complaining about high NR, want a choice to turn it off.

Pick up most canon PnS, Nikon PnS, Olympus PnS, you'll get MUCH more NR than any Panasonic camera. I wonder why people never launch petition to those companies.Makes me wonder if those "noisy" people are actually hired by other companies.

Gee, I really pity Panasonic's Team. They seem to be getting more tech people than photographers as clients.
haha its always like this... when they announce the introduction of fz50 and some other cam with 10MP, ppl will start complaining 10MP = more noise than 5-8MP :bsmilie:
anyway i think it is very difficult to introduce a camera that will fit everyone, unless they plan to have some minor change on a camera and named in V.2. like a FZ50 with 6MP perhaps instead of 10. :dunno:

to add one, i must say that they did improve... at least now they doesn't use the pixel binning solution to kill all the noise at high ISO.
 

sequitur

Senior Member
Apr 17, 2003
3,267
0
0
flickr.com
#20
all in all i still think it's a great cam.

just the only downside is the huge files... especially the RAW ones. it's like 6 times the size of my current camera's RAW files... haha
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom