LX5 vs LX3 mini comparison
Positive points I have read from the Internet so far is that the LX5 has better Dynamic Range and better noise control. But I have yet see any convincing sample that back those statements. So happen my colleague just bought the LX5, and I manage to borrow it for a while to perform some quick comparison with Adobe Lightroom 3.2 Trial. A caveat to note: the LX5 now has an optional tiny UV filter, which fit nicely on the lens barrel (very neat!). So the shots taken with the LX5 has a UV filter, while my LX3 doesn't.
The Scene
I placed the camera on top of a printer, focused on my colleague, recomposed and shoot. I try to have both camera shooting the exact same scene.
Camera settings for both cameras:
• Manual mode
• ISO 100
• 1/320s
• F2.0
Result
LX5
LX3
Observation
• It seems like the new LX5 have slightly wider field of view, just very slightly. Maybe it's due to the in-camera distortion correction algorithm? Anyhow, it's a very marginal difference and I wouldn't worry about it.
• While viewing both shots from both cameras, I notice that the LX5's LCD screen has better contrast ratio. This is evident when I am able to make out the texture of the carpet floor at the lower right of the photo in the LX5, while I can't see anything in LX3. So yes, the LCD has some improvement in contrast ratio, but I didn't manage to test in outdoor under bright sun light.
Pixel Peeping
• Chromatic aberration seems to be improved in LX5. It's still there, but it's much more pleasing and less noticeable.
LX5
LX3
• Both noise profiles are similar at ISO100 (too bad, didn't manage to test high ISO).
Dynamic Range
I've boosted the exposure to +4, just to see how much detail I can regain for this rather underexposed shot.
LX5
LX3
Interestingly, can't see much difference here. If I have to pick, the chair base on the bottom left seems brighter for the LX5 shot. However, LX5 colour noise seems to be more noticeable than LX3, as it starts to have some spot-looking colour patches. See the crop of the table corner below:
LX5
LX3
Handling
• With a slightly larger grip with rubber, LX5 is a little easier to grip as compared to LX3.
• Joystick is now gone, replaced by the Q-menu and the thumb dial. I have no preference on either one, but I think the dial is a bit stiff to turn for a camera with such small body. Perhaps it'll get loosen after some use.
• Additional record button is great for ad-hoc movie shooting, must have feature for any video-capable camera these days.
• Additional 1:1 ratio option at the top of the "lens barrel". Great if you do shoot in 1:1.
Conclusion
That's all I have for now, and seems to me I'll be keeping my LX3 until LX6 comes along 2 years later :). I'll see if I can get hold of my colleagues LX5 again and perform some high-ISO tests, which might yield some significant improvements over LX3.
The Scene
I placed the camera on top of a printer, focused on my colleague, recomposed and shoot. I try to have both camera shooting the exact same scene.
Camera settings for both cameras:
• Manual mode
• ISO 100
• 1/320s
• F2.0
Result
LX5
LX3
Observation
• It seems like the new LX5 have slightly wider field of view, just very slightly. Maybe it's due to the in-camera distortion correction algorithm? Anyhow, it's a very marginal difference and I wouldn't worry about it.
• While viewing both shots from both cameras, I notice that the LX5's LCD screen has better contrast ratio. This is evident when I am able to make out the texture of the carpet floor at the lower right of the photo in the LX5, while I can't see anything in LX3. So yes, the LCD has some improvement in contrast ratio, but I didn't manage to test in outdoor under bright sun light.
Pixel Peeping
• Chromatic aberration seems to be improved in LX5. It's still there, but it's much more pleasing and less noticeable.
LX5
LX3
• Both noise profiles are similar at ISO100 (too bad, didn't manage to test high ISO).
Dynamic Range
I've boosted the exposure to +4, just to see how much detail I can regain for this rather underexposed shot.
LX5
LX3
Interestingly, can't see much difference here. If I have to pick, the chair base on the bottom left seems brighter for the LX5 shot. However, LX5 colour noise seems to be more noticeable than LX3, as it starts to have some spot-looking colour patches. See the crop of the table corner below:
LX5
LX3
Handling
• With a slightly larger grip with rubber, LX5 is a little easier to grip as compared to LX3.
• Joystick is now gone, replaced by the Q-menu and the thumb dial. I have no preference on either one, but I think the dial is a bit stiff to turn for a camera with such small body. Perhaps it'll get loosen after some use.
• Additional record button is great for ad-hoc movie shooting, must have feature for any video-capable camera these days.
• Additional 1:1 ratio option at the top of the "lens barrel". Great if you do shoot in 1:1.
Conclusion
That's all I have for now, and seems to me I'll be keeping my LX3 until LX6 comes along 2 years later :). I'll see if I can get hold of my colleagues LX5 again and perform some high-ISO tests, which might yield some significant improvements over LX3.
Update 20110203:
A closer look at the UV filter.
Hi and thanks for the review. I'm a little confused by your reference to the mini UV filter mounted to the front of the LX5? I have this camera on order and have not been able to find any other reference to the filter (Panasonic link to a 52mm on and barrel adapter) - I'd be really grateful if you could provide some more information? (perhaps it's only available in certain coountries...)
ReplyDeleteMany thanks again and regards
Tim (tim.loveridge@gmail.com)
i think you mean "chromatic aberration" :)
ReplyDeleteHi thanks for the review. Interest on the mini UV filter, can you provide more detail about it, where i can buy such filter? Currently own a LX-3. Anyway thanks.
ReplyDeleteHi,Interest on the mini UV filter too, can tell me where can i buy it? Thanks.
ReplyDelete