Go ahead. The next time you’re shopping for a new piece of gear and you can’t decide between three attractive choices, fire off emails to each manufacturer and see if they’re open to loaning you some samples to play with for a month or so.
Aha. See? So there are some advantages to being an internationally-beloved technology pundit.
And no, I wasn’t being mercenary. The field of “premium point-and-shoot” cameras has really found its spurs in recent years and it was nigh-time that I wrote a comparative review of the Nikon CoolPix P6000, the Panasonic Lumix LX3, and the Canon Powershot G10. The fact that I’d had a void in my coat pocket ever since my beloved Kodak V705 gave up the ghost had nothing to do with it.
(Seriously, dude…you’re just embarrassing yourself by even implying such a thing.)
The photo world has been going moderately ga-ga over the LX3. And who can blame them after shots like this one started to saturate Flickr?
Center stage at the Colonial Theater, Boston.
The LX3 redefines your expectations of compact cameras. If I saw this photo in anybody else’s Flickr stream, I’d have immediately thought “SLR. Tripod. Decent lens. Remote shutter release.” But in truth, all I did was stop for about five seconds on my way across the stage, take the LX3 out of my pocket, snap a quick photo, and then hustle to catch up to the pal who was showing me around after a performance of “Spamalot.”
I carried the LX3 with me faithfully for about a month and and its shots never disappointed. The LX3 has one hell of a lens. Made by Leica, it’s both very fast and very wide for a pocket camera, opening all the way to f2.0 and as wide as 24mm. Maybe that bit of extra wide-angle doesn’t seem like much (the Nikon’s lens zooms back to 28mm) but when you’re shooting a scene like this one, it’s the difference between a photo that’s framed by the natural margins of the stage, and one that’s simply cut off at the edges.
Plus, Panasonic has wisely chosen to step away from the digicam industry’s — oh, let’s call it a “spitting” contest — for megapixels. The LX3 is “just” 10MP, compared with 13.5 for the Nikon. The loss isn’t one that’s sorely felt by this photographer (it’s been ages since one of my photos was bought for use as a mural) but the benefits are profound. The image sensor has been engineered so that each individual pixel is far more sensitive and meaningful, which makes for superb clarity and low-light performance.
So! Slam-dunk for the LX3, eh? Done and dusted.
Nnnno. No. Nope.
Nuh-uh.
The LX3 takes exceptionally-good photos. But I wanted a pocket camera…and the Panasonic simply ain’t one of those.
Instead, it’s a “Hang it around your neck like it’s a giant diamond-encrusted medallion and you’re a 1980′s rapper” camera.
Which is perfectly fine. That’s well within the tradition of 35mm Leica rangefinder cameras. But it’s not the style of camera I wanted. When I’m in a situation where I can sling a camera around my neck, I’ll wear my SLR, thankyew.
What a shame. The Panasonic might take great photos, but I found it to be fairly annoying as a casual camera. Viz:
- There’s no integrated lens cover. I had to send a short note of apology to Panasonic; I lost the LX3′s lens cap somewhere during Week One.
- The LX3 isn’t substantially larger than the Nikon (I think it’s technically smaller in most dimensions) but the lens bit sticks out from the main body, which gives it a slightly awkward profile. The bloody thing was always getting caught on something as I tried to extract it from a pocket or a belt pouch. By the time I got it out, Mr. Brad Pitt and Mr. George Cooney had stopped making out with each other and my chance at a major tabloid bidding war evaporated. And even if I had managed to extract it swiftly, I’d still have missed the shot, because of
- Those stupid retro-style mechanical function switches. They kept getting bumped around into random settings. I’d look at what I shot, curse discreetly, and wonder why the image had come out all blurry and elongated. Then I’d do a switch check and shake my head. Yeah, well, it wasn’t set to Manual Focus and Vistavision Aspect Ratio when I put it in my pocket. Yet somehow, by the time I took it out again…d’ohh!
Even as a Biz Markie-style wearable camera, I found the LX3 offer a less-than-lavish shooting experience. There seem to be buttons and controls everywhere except actually inside the threaded tripod mount; there’s no place to “park” my fingers . The labeling on the buttons is a cruel joke, too. Many of the most important function buttons are marked only by a bit of unpainted embossing in the shiny metal. Unless the light hits them Just So, figuring out which button does what is a matter of guesswork.
This camera is no piece of junk. It’s built like a rock (a metal one, anyway) and it takes fantastic photos. People I respect (Scott? Stand front and center, please) love it.
It was just the wrong (wrong wrong wrong) camera for me. It would have been like casting Gene Hackman as Michael Corleone. He’s a fantastic actor, but that role belonged to Al Pacino. The LX3 was woefully miscast in the part of Andy Ihnatko’s Pocket Camera.
Next: what I expect from a pocket camera, why the CoolPix P6000 was the right and happy choice, and why the Canon G10 gets about three sentences from me, maximum.
“I carried the LX3 with me faithfully for about a month and and its shots never failed to disappoint.”
Am I misinterpreting that sentence?
Can’t wait for part two of the review. I had decided to buy the LX3 next month, now I am waitting 4 andy to tell me why not.
Interesting and informative article. I am anxious to read the next release. I am using the G9 and am happy with it but always looking for something better if it fits my needs.
I think that I would be totally happy with my G9 if it were capable of higher ISO and a little bit smaller. The form factor is my favorite of any camera that I own. Its obvious that the G10 fell short of many peoples expectations. Hopefully Canon is currently taking a step back and evaluating what they did wrong.
Thanks for the review Andy!
No, it’s just not as pocket friendly as Andy would have liked. It was wrong for him. I can tell that because of the sentence that reads: “It was just the wrong (wrong wrong wrong) camera for me.”
its shots never failed to disappoint. Huh?
Perhaps people should read more closely. Andy didn’t say he disliked the LX3 photos. He said it wasn’t the right camera for him, primarily for ergonomic reasons.
“…never fails to disappoint…” He’s just been listening too much to the collected sayings of George Bush.
Oh, that part I got, but I thought he WAS happy with the image quality. That’s why I was confused by “its shots never failed to disappoint.”
I would have thought he meant “it’s shots never failed to impress.”
He’s talking about the triple negative. Right now, the sentence says the shots always disappointed him.
What was meant to be said was “its shots always failed to disappoint” or “its shots never failed to (lets say) impress”.
Good review… and as an LX3 owner I pretty much agree with everything! With the exception that for me the LX3 is the right camera! :) (but the lens cap SLR style is still pretty annoying!)
I’ve never had the problem of the focus or image ratio buttons changing from the previous setting just from being inside a pocket, maybe that’s more to do with how you pull it out of the pocket.
The LX3 was actually a gift to my wife (yeah right! ;) ), because she kept complaining that my D300 didn’t match her purse (in size and shape) when we went to weddings and other social events. :)
So, I needed a camera that could fit in a small purse (it’s hers, so she has to carry it!) and that could capture photos with good enough quality that I could bailout the idiot official photographer for the weeding when he’s battery went dead just before the newly weds are walking out of the church with all the flowers flying around!! (yes, it happened)
The LX3 has lived up to these expectations and more!!
I recently went on vacation with the wife to Mexico and the LX3 went everywhere… the D300 didn’t!
- When walking along the beach
- Nights out at the various theme restaurants
- Night entertainment
- Snorkeling at the reefs (took some really great shots with the camera in a very cheap DicaPac bag – although for the less adventurers I advice being hypnotized to ignore the risk of the bag leaking in :) )
- Shots while riding bicycles in the middle of the jungle on our way to the pyramids in Coba (keeping my good eye on the road :) )
- And last, but not least, some pretty amazing videos!
So, if you don’t mind having to put it in a larger side pocket or belt pouch instead of the tight jeans pocket, I strongly advise it.
This is a perfect example of how not every camera is right for everyone. Andy like the images and that lens, but not the form factor.
Thanks for a great post Andy and i am eagerly awaiting the next installment.
Rrgh. Stupid typo. I’ve fixed it…thanks.
This article shows why I am so exited to have Andy writing here at TWIP. He’s a phenomenal photographer, but brings a great consumer/prosumer practicality view. I’m anxiously awaiting parts two!
As a film/video maker I cannot carry a full SLR around with me on my various shoots around the world. I need a quick, small, high quality point-and-shoot to carry with the rest of my gear. It’s taken YEARS for video cameras to get rid of most of the silly menus and funky buttons. (RED is getting close). I’ve really enjoyed using my Cannon S80 because of its easy, one-handed access to F-Stop and Shutter. Looking at all of the point-and-shoots mentioned, the Cannon G10 seems to be the only camera that has that old-school range finder feel and functionality. I was about to make a purchase until reading this….. Now what? Ugggg…. What’s the problem with the G10?
Andy,
Such a great post! In a world where you can no longer answer your home phone by just picking it up (instead you have to find, identify and press a button), it is a pleasure to read a review that deals with usability. Images matter, for sure. But if you hate using a camera, I believe you will get fewer good images.
What about lack of optical viewfinder? For some, it is not an issue. How does your user-centric approach to technology line up with this “improvement”?
As an LX3 owner I have to agree it is bulky for such a small camera. I think you need to look at it from a different perspective. I got mine as a smaller take everywhere substitute for my Nikon D700 with a 24-70mm lens. If you own this combo you have no doubt heard the words “boy that is a big lens” from countless people. Compared to the D700 the LX3 is tiny.
Yes the lens cap sucks, but they do include a little tether so instead of losing it, it just constantly gets in your way. I still love the camera and as an additional bonus, it takes great videos. Especially in low light. Nice big 1280 x 720 videos.
Now if they can just make the lens retractable and the camera waterproof I will have finally found the perfect pocket camera. But isn’t the search part of the fun? :-)
I actually like the lens cap on the lX3. One of the problems I’ve had with built-in covers is that dust and lint always seems to find a way in if you pocket it often. While the LX3 is too large for your shirt or pants pockets, it does fit nicely in any jacket pocket.
To each their own I guess.
EXCELLENT review!
I appreciate the “consumer” angle you have looked at with this review and tis just shows how great it is to have you here Andy.
I look forward to further parts!
My first digital pocket camera was a small Olympus. Very handy, but 2 Megapixels doesn’t take a very good picture (neither does my iPhone). My husband is a professional photographer using Canon (EOS Mark 137 or something like that), so my next 5 megapixel camera was a Cannon G1. Nice camera, good pictures, but I NEVER USED IT. It was TOO big. I gave it to my sister-in-law and she shot a million pictures with it in Ireland last September. She must have a bigger purse than I carry. My next camera was a Panasonic LX1. I wanted to shoot RAW and here it was, WITH a great lens. I don’t shoot low light much, so was not worried about noise. I handled many of the different Canon cameras, but the only one with RAW was the G10 and it was also TOO BIG.
So yes, when they released the Panasonic LX3, I had to have one and I am totally happy with it. It fits in my LX1 case, which fits in my purse. I do NOT hang it around my neck, but took the wrist strap from my LX1 and put it on my LX3. I also attached the string to the lens cover and don’t really have a problem with that. I’d just rather have the string attach to the right (like the LX1) rather than to the left, but I’m getting used to it. The combination of light weight and great pictures makes this the perfect camera for me. And since I always carry it in a case (unless actively shooting, like at MacWorld), I don’t have any problem with the buttons shifting. Though I will echo Andy’s complaint that the practically unmarked buttons are a pain. Though having used the LX1 for years, I know what most of the buttons should do. You really, really have to PICK THESE CAMERAS UP and hold them to understand if they are right for you. The LX3 is way, way too small (size wise) for my husband and he hates the lack of viewfinder. Luckily there are cameras out there for every hand size and taste.
G10 needs faster ISO and return of intervalometer/ time lapse function of g9. The only thing I care about in regards to its higher pixel count is, that it might make up for the shorter telephoto. But I consider g10 a step down.
Dude, just get the Leica M8.
Ummmm…yeah. For $5,000? I’d love to get it, buuuttttttt…..
“Even as a Biz Markie-style wearable camera…”
i think you mean flavor flav
I’ve recently gotten an lx3. It was an upgrade from a canon elph 1100 which was used primarily for convenient snapshots / video. I had a g7 and loved it, but moved to an xsi for stills. The lx3 is a near perfect camera / videocam for me. The lack of stereo audio is a bummer. But the wide lens allows non flash pix and flix to the sensor that is considerably larger than most others on point and shoots as well as pocket video cams. The image stabilization works well, and the size is comparable to if not better than average for it’s competition. I think if it had stereo, a built in cap, and zoom usable during video it would be unreal. For now it’s a great pocket cam. I haven’t gotten rid of the dslr yet.
“The LX3 takes exceptionally-good photos. But I wanted a pocket camera…and the Panasonic simply ain’t one of those.”
To get (technically) great photos you need a camera with a good lens a decent amount of chip real estate. It’s sheer physics. A bright wide-angle lens makes the calculation even worse. The more possibilities, the less opportunities. Right now, the LX3 seems to be the best compromise between size and picture quality. There is a solution for nearly everyone – but you always have to pay for it in one way or another. The rest is a matter of personal preference.
I have had my LX3 for 4 months and have carried it in my pocket all the time.
This is a case of ergonomics and “X factor” that didn’t fit the reviewer. He does acknowledge that the thing makes some awesome exposures.
I love that the review is personal. I’ll leave it to DPreview for the technical stuff, but I love hearing why someone uses the camera they do. I’m probably going to get a G9/G10 for my wife, because she wants to learn how to shoot my DSLR (40D) but doesn’t wants something she can put in her purse. While the G9/10 is large, it’s much smaller than even an XSi, but has has great manual controls that I think will help her learn how to adjust exposure.
If I was shopping for myself, I’d probably get an LX3, cuz I almost always wear cargo pants. :)
Pingback: Nikon Coolpix P6000 vs Panasonic DMC-LX3: Nikon Wins? | neutralday
Pingback: Digital Cameras » Blog Archive » Nikon Coolpix P6000 vs Panasonic LX3: Nikon Wins?