Prev: Photomerge panorama problems
Next: New Pentax 645 and the death of the CF card
From: Rich on 12 Mar 2010 20:35
Seems to hang in ok until 200 ISO, then starts to hurt. 1600 & 3200
are a write-off. IMO, these cameras are no better than the old bridge
P&S's with their bigger, better 2/3" sensors.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/panasonic_lx3_iso_noise_

From: Bruce on 13 Mar 2010 05:33
On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:35:05 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>Seems to hang in ok until 200 ISO, then starts to hurt. 1600 & 3200
>are a write-off. IMO, these cameras are no better than the old bridge
>P&S's with their bigger, better 2/3" sensors.
>
>http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/panasonic_lx3_iso_noise_


I carry a Panasonic LX3 with me all the time and I agree with your
analysis of those results.

I just bought a Panasonic GF1 to replace it. The GF1 doesn't shine at
high ISOs either, but the shots at ISO 1600 are acceptable, and far
better than those from the LX3.

Anyone want to buy an LX3? High miles, one careless owner ...

From: Ted Nolan <tednolan> on 14 Mar 2010 01:29
In article <89qmp5pkcpr8opo2c4dpddt3ikebfqcqlj(a)4ax.com>,
Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:35:05 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>Seems to hang in ok until 200 ISO, then starts to hurt. 1600 & 3200
>>are a write-off. IMO, these cameras are no better than the old bridge
>>P&S's with their bigger, better 2/3" sensors.
>>
>>http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/panasonic_lx3_iso_noise_
>
>
>I carry a Panasonic LX3 with me all the time and I agree with your
>analysis of those results.
>
>I just bought a Panasonic GF1 to replace it. The GF1 doesn't shine at
>high ISOs either, but the shots at ISO 1600 are acceptable, and far
>better than those from the LX3.
>
>Anyone want to buy an LX3? High miles, one careless owner ...
>

I'm quite happy with mine. Why push the ISO? You can get some very nice
pictures at night if you go to aperture priority and use a tripod:

Some (not all..) of these for instance:

http://www.tednolan.net/closings/pix/09-12-11-brookgreen-candles/index.html

Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
From: Rich on 14 Mar 2010 01:34
On Mar 14, 1:29 am, t...(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
> In article <89qmp5pkcpr8opo2c4dpddt3ikebfqc...(a)4ax.com>,
>
>
>
> Bruce  <docnews2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 17:35:05 -0800 (PST), Rich <rander3...(a)gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >>Seems to hang in ok until 200 ISO, then starts to hurt.  1600 & 3200
> >>are a write-off.  IMO, these cameras are no better than the old bridge
> >>P&S's with their bigger, better 2/3" sensors.
>
> >>http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/panasonic_lx3_iso_noise_
>
> >I carry a Panasonic LX3 with me all the time and I agree with your
> >analysis of those results.  
>
> >I just bought a Panasonic GF1 to replace it.  The GF1 doesn't shine at
> >high ISOs either, but the shots at ISO 1600 are acceptable, and far
> >better than those from the LX3.
>
> >Anyone want to buy an LX3?  High miles, one careless owner ...
>
> I'm quite happy with mine.  Why push the ISO?

Handheld shooting in dim environments, shooting when you can't use a
tripod, shooting moving subjects in less than perfect light, etc, etc,.
From: Bruce on 14 Mar 2010 06:17
On 14 Mar 2010 06:29:24 GMT, ted(a)loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
<tednolan>) wrote:
>Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>I carry a Panasonic LX3 with me all the time and I agree with your
>>analysis of those results.
>>
>>I just bought a Panasonic GF1 to replace it. The GF1 doesn't shine at
>>high ISOs either, but the shots at ISO 1600 are acceptable, and far
>>better than those from the LX3.
>>
>>Anyone want to buy an LX3? High miles, one careless owner ...
>>
>
>I'm quite happy with mine. Why push the ISO?


Because, sometimes, I have no choice.


>You can get some very nice
>pictures at night if you go to aperture priority and use a tripod:


I carry the LX3 because it fits in a pocket. I don't carry a tripod.

The whole idea of the LX3 is that it is always with me when I am not
carrying a DSLR, so I don't ever miss an opportunity through not
having a camera available.

I always keep a tripod in my car and I often carry a monopod, but they
are for use with my DSLRs. If I need to carry a tripod, I might as
well carry a DSLR too. The LS3 is about keeping things small and
light. A tripod doesn't fit those requirements.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Photomerge panorama problems
Next: New Pentax 645 and the death of the CF card