12 out of 12 people found this review helpful.
BEST ALL ROUND WIDE-ANGLE COMPACT--BEST!!
Date of Review: May 6, 2009
The Bottom Line: For great all round pictures, for stellar low light and wide angle views, this can't be beat. Sharp, solid, gorgeous.
Not just me, but dpreview, luminous landscape, and many other hardcore camera reviews sites have given this rave reviews. Details below, but here and now the simplest of observations: the photographs are breathtaking, sharp and colorful, even in low light without flash.
Okay, it isn't cheap, and it has no true telephoto coverage, but those are the downsides. Period. Otherwise it is fast, clear, clean, responsive, flexible, sturdy. It's a professional camera in a compact point and shoot body. It is, in a word: TERRIFIC.
There are a million things this camera has that are pretty standard now, like vibration reduction (OIS), a score of different camera modes (like baby, night portrait, on and on), auto (intelligent) ISO settings and white light balance, and 720 level HD movie modes (in 2 different formats), for starters.
But this camera has some things that most do not. It has FULL manual controls (for shutter and aperture) as well as A and S settings (partial automatic modes). It has a flash shoe (hot shoe). It has a lens which goes a little wider than most (more panoramic), measured as 24mm.
Most important of all, and most distinctive, are the ability of the lens to open very wide, f/2.0, which means it lets in more light in dark situations AND it lets you shoot at faster shutter speeds in all situations (sports and whatnot). And less obvious but just as important is that the sensor inside the camera is larger than other point and shoots. That just means higher quality pictures. It does not mean more pixels, but higher quality pixels. Translation: less noise, cleaner colors expecially in shadows, and much better low light performance.
Are there problems with the camera? Well, that's like buying a Jaguar and complaining that it isn't four wheel drive. If you wanted even higher performance you'd need an digital SLR. I have used several DSLRs and for normal shooting not requiring a super wide or super telephoto effect, I get equal or better results with the LX3 (better because the lens is painfully sharp). My Nikon D40 is faster to focus and shoot, and offers more options for lenses and flashes, but that's why people spend more and carry bigger cameras like that. For a point and shoot that rises above, the LX3 shines.
The one thing I warn people when thinking of buying the LX3 is that the telephoto is weak--it is designed for landscapes, parties, family events, street shooting, architecture on an amateur level, and so on, not wildlife or sports from the sidelines or situations where you need a lens to get you closer without walking closer. The image is such high quality you can crop and create a telephoto effect to some extent, but if you really like using the telephoto end of other cameras in the past, this one might seem limited.
And a small point that all (as far as I know) point and shoots have going against them--they have no "true" manual focus, where you grab the lens and twist it and it gets sharper and fuzzier.
But that's it, the lack of large telephoto is the one limitation. Oh, and the fact that the lens cap might get lost. People complain about that. I'm glad it is detachable like an old fashioned "cap" rather than the built-in type, which is just one more thing to go wrong.
I have used other Panasonic point and shoots (including an old LX1) as well as Nikon and a single Canon top of the line, and the LX3 blows them all away. There is a Leica model that is the same as the LX3 with apparently slightly different software but the same sensor and lens, so that would be comparable if you are wealthy enough to absorb the exta cost.
I needn't go on.
