Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: DMC-LX2 release date?  (Read 7049 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7905



WWW
« on: July 22, 2006, 06:20:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Dear all,

Does someone know when Panasonic intends to release its new DMC-LX2?

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
amplexis
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2006, 04:43:17 PM »
ReplyReply

september is what i read. do you know if the lens is threaded to accept a filter? that is one feature i much desire that has not been mentioned in the press releases.vincent
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 23, 2006, 05:55:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Based of the pics of it it's the same body and lens as the LX1 with slight changes to accommodate the larger screen. If you want filters, there's ways to do it yourself.

It should be interesting to see how the LX2 performs. The sensor, lens and processing chips are the same from what I read of the press release as the LX1 but it's capable of ISO 3200 shooting. Considering the noise levels of the LX1 at 400, I wonder how useable anything higher would be given The LX2 is 10.2MP also.
Logged
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 30, 2006, 09:56:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It should be interesting to see how the LX2 performs. The sensor, lens and processing chips are the same from what I read of the press release as the LX1 ... The LX2 is 10.2MP also.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think the sensor must be different because the LX2 will be 10mp?
I saw some samples of Raw LX1 and although they werent as clean as others, I would say it cleans up pretty well in noise ninja.
(check: [a href=\"http://www.lexa.ru/andyt/DMC-LX1_vs_D-LUX2/]http://www.lexa.ru/andyt/DMC-LX1_vs_D-LUX2/[/url] for some raw files)

I'm not afraid of noise, but I am curious how the LX2 performs in this regard.
In Japan right now the LX1 is being discounted. Not on the websites but if you go to Yodobashi Camera you will get it for 40.000 (267 euro) compared to the 54.000 (369 ero) you will have to put down for the LX2 (I'm including the points you are given here).
« Last Edit: July 30, 2006, 10:49:57 PM by tensai » Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 31, 2006, 01:20:35 AM »
ReplyReply

I meant the sensor size is the same, sorry.

That is an interesting test, unfortunately, it needs to be taken lightly since exposure is all over the place. The tester would have been able to show better results setting things manually rather than using Aperture Priority.
Logged
61Dynamic
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1442


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 31, 2006, 01:57:30 AM »
ReplyReply

After looking at the file more closely, I notice the series of the column close-up is much more consistent with exposure and more useable.

Both cameras appear to have almost identical noise levels at ISO 200 and below. At ISO 400, the LX2 seems to be slightly less noisy. Clearly some stronger noise suppression os being applied to the LX2s raw data.

In each of the images the LX1 seems to be pulling the same detail as the LX2 if not slightly more in some areas (pay attention to the pearled column and the face in the door iron work). It's a very minute difference, but the stronger noise reduction in the LX2 files seems to be countering any benefit to be had by the extra pixel resolution. In fact, I'd say the LX2 images are noticeably less detailed at ISO 400 than the LX1 in the shadows.

Or... Perhaps the noise suppression of the LX2 is having a lesser negative effect than what I described above and the lens is simply the limiting factor in resolution.

Of course, this is based off a very small sampling of the two cameras. It would be nice to see more samples or better yet to use the LX2 before any conclusions are made.

Whatever the case may be, megapixel ratings seem to still be a useful marketing toy in the eyes of Panasonic's PR department. I just with they would strengthen the compression of the raw files (and release it in a firmware update for the LX1). I see they are still twice the size of their DNG counterparts.
Logged
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 31, 2006, 05:20:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Daniel - I made the exact same mistake as you, I think. I took a look at the RAW files and as far as I know these files are from the Panasonic LX1, and the Leica DLux2 (take a look at the site with the files again). Not the LX1 vs the LX2. The RAW files are also the same resolution, which I think is not possible with the LX2 (I'm not sure but RAW files are mostly available in maximum resolution only - with the distinction that you can get a cropped files from the LX1/2 series?).

Any way - it would still be very nice to see some samples of LX1 vs LX2. What I've seen from the iso 100 samples from Panasonic's site, it doesnt seem bad, but I personally doubt if it has been improved. The files there seem to have the same hint of noise in flat colour areas. Again, I don't know if I object, but I would be amazed if (but of course hope) they pulled off getting less noise at higher res and still capture the same detail.

regards,

tensai

Quote
After looking at the file more closely, I notice the series of the column close-up is much more consistent with exposure and more useable.

Both cameras appear to have almost identical noise levels at ISO 200 and below. At ISO 400, the LX2 seems to be slightly less noisy. Clearly some stronger noise suppression os being applied to the LX2s raw data.

In each of the images the LX1 seems to be pulling the same detail as the LX2 if not slightly more in some areas (pay attention to the pearled column and the face in the door iron work). It's a very minute difference, but the stronger noise reduction in the LX2 files seems to be countering any benefit to be had by the extra pixel resolution. In fact, I'd say the LX2 images are noticeably less detailed at ISO 400 than the LX1 in the shadows.

Or... Perhaps the noise suppression of the LX2 is having a lesser negative effect than what I described above and the lens is simply the limiting factor in resolution.

Of course, this is based off a very small sampling of the two cameras. It would be nice to see more samples or better yet to use the LX2 before any conclusions are made.

Whatever the case may be, megapixel ratings seem to still be a useful marketing toy in the eyes of Panasonic's PR department. I just with they would strengthen the compression of the raw files (and release it in a firmware update for the LX1). I see they are still twice the size of their DNG counterparts.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72215\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 31, 2006, 07:05:46 PM »
ReplyReply

O.k. After some searching I have found some test images of the LX2 on the Japanese site digital camera watch.
All iso values are represented. Check it out for yourself.

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/01/4325.html

tensai
« Last Edit: July 31, 2006, 07:13:01 PM by tensai » Logged
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #8 on: August 22, 2006, 08:23:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Just posted this in another thread but thought that for completion sake it might be better to post this here as well...

There are some new comparisons posted of the LX1 and the LX2 and from what I saw now, I would say the LX2 looks very good - and I might have to reverse my opinion on these two. I don't know if the previous test was with a pre production camera or something but I have to say I am impressed. I think the LX2 looks good/better than the LX1 in jpg at iso 100 and iso 200. At iso 400 the LX2 looks a bit more blurry, but has less chromatic noise.  The colours on the colour checker look slightly plasticy but we are taking about jpgs here, with Raw these files should be very nice?
I am curious what people here think of these images...
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/22/4436.html


Quote
O.k. After some searching I have found some test images of the LX2 on the Japanese site digital camera watch.
All iso values are represented. Check it out for yourself.

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/01/4325.html

tensai
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72276\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
« Last Edit: August 22, 2006, 08:30:51 AM by tensai » Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4812



« Reply #9 on: August 22, 2006, 09:08:07 AM »
ReplyReply

My review of the LX2 willl appear next week.

The larger screen is nice, but the noise isn't.

Michael
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7905



WWW
« Reply #10 on: August 22, 2006, 06:02:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Dear all,

Answering my own question, it seems that the LX2 will become available this Friday 25th in Japan.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #11 on: August 22, 2006, 08:09:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My review of the LX2 willl appear next week.

The larger screen is nice, but the noise isn't.

Michael
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Great to hear, because it's been somewhat confusing.
I thought the LX2 files from these looked quite bad, noise and noise reduction wise:
[a href=\"http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/01/4325.html]http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/01/4325.html[/url]

I took a look at the studio shots from that link, and some studio shots from the LX1 and I printed some out.Based on that I personally made the choise to get the LX1 instead of the LX2. In these files the LX2 seemed to have quite heavy noise reduction, and I prevered the look of the LX1 files over the LX2 files for that reason.

Then came the files from the new link (from the same site)
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2...08/22/4436.html

and based on those I thought the LX2 files looked good - much better than the files in the first link. Lets just say it would be great to see your review to put things in perspective...
Logged
jhandl
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2006, 11:15:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi! This is my first post.

First of all, I am a photo enthusiast with two small kids, so my needs may not match yours. My ideal camera would replace my old film-based reflex yet slip into my pocket, and be ready to capture that magic moment when my 1 year old daughter hugs her 4 year old brother at bedtime when only the reading light is on. Oh, and by the way, I absolutely hate flash. I would rather write down a description of the moment than burn my subjects with a flash.

I was about to purchase a digital camera, and I almost couldn't decide between Fujifilm's F30 with its amazing low-light capability yet otherwise unimpressive features, and Panasonic's LX1 with its unique features yet abysmal low-light, um... inability? You can see I was ready to buy the F30, but then the news about the LX2 came out, so I decided to wait to see the reviews and sample pictures.

Now, after seing the sample pictures refered to elsewhere in this thread, my personal impression is that the LX2 appears to have reached the level of an average digicam ISO-wise (nice shots up to ISO 200, barely usable at 400, anything over that is just marketing). So the LX2 at ISO 400 seems to be comparable to the F30 at ISO 1600 (there's no need to say that this is a very subjective and personal impression, so I won't).

Of course, I am not going to judge the LX2 by a couple of pictures in a japanese site which might be saying "this is a fake review"... I will patiently wait for dpreview.com, imaging-resource.com and other similar unbiased professional reviewers to share their wisdom before I make a purchase. Or I may end up ordering both, who knows!  

On a side note, one thing that puzzles me is that the vast majority of sample pictures are taken outdoors in broad daylight. Even my phone camera performs well in those conditions.

What I really want to see is pictures taken under the following real life (or should I say "my life") conditions:
- at night (when we're all together)
- indoors lighting (we happen to live inside a house, you know)
- moving subject (kids move a lot)
- shaky hands (my wife's, mine are steady as rocks!   )

THAT is the real test in my book.
Logged
boku
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493



WWW
« Reply #13 on: August 27, 2006, 09:00:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What I really want to see is pictures taken under the following real life (or should I say "my life") conditions:
- at night (when we're all together)
- indoors lighting (we happen to live inside a house, you know)
- moving subject (kids move a lot)
- shaky hands (my wife's, mine are steady as rocks!   )

THAT is the real test in my book.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74609\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Nothing made, now or in the near future, will meet those requirements. Either you need to lesson your requirements or wait a while for the technology to develop. It will, eventually.
Logged

Bob Kulon

Oh, one more thing...
Play it Straight and Play it True, my Brother.
jhandl
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #14 on: August 27, 2006, 04:35:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Nothing made, now or in the near future, will meet those requirements. Either you need to lesson your requirements or wait a while for the technology to develop. It will, eventually.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74642\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You mean there is no camera out there, of any kind, that will take clear, low-noise pictures at high ISO? I think you are wrong. Most DSLRs and one compact (Fuji) can do that. I was hoping the LX2 would too, because I really like all the other features it has.

The thing is, if the CCD produces high noise, you are forced to make a choice between noise and detail. Pick one, you cannot have both. On the other hand, 10 Mpix may be enough overkill that the lost detail is not going to be missed. I think this is the strategy Panasonic chose to follow.

The LX1 vs. LX2 ISO comparision series of pictures exemplify this very well. If I only look at the sequence produced by the LX2 at different ISO settings, I feel that above ISO 200 the images are terribly smudged. Yet comparing that with the same pictures taken with the LX1, the improvement is awesome. No amount of noice-ninja-ing would turn the LX1 pictures into LX2 pictures, and I did try. So, I find this tests inconclusive.

I would like to see side-by-side tests with other cameras (I don't pretend the LX2 to meet the F30 standard; the older E900 would be more than enough). Also, some real-life tests in dim light with walking people or playing children would give me a better idea of what to expect of this otherwise outstanding camera.
Logged
Chris_T
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 541


« Reply #15 on: August 28, 2006, 07:15:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Why do the Panasonics have more noise than other manufacturers' comparable models (according to the reviews)? While Michael's recent article points out that noise comes from high resolution small size sensors, why don't other manufacturers' models suffer the same way? Are the Panasonic sensors smaller?

How is noise "reduced" or "smoothed" in these cameras? Is it done before generating the raw files by hw circuit control, or by sw after the raw data is captured?

Perhaps knowing these answers can align our expectations of whether Panasonic can realistically solve the noise problem.
Logged
Dale_Cotton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 580


WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 28, 2006, 10:40:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Chris T wrote:
Quote
Why do the Panasonics have more noise than other manufacturers' comparable models
Given the same imager dimensions, Panasonic imagers have been weighing in with more noise per ISO than the Sony imagers used by most other compact camera companies. I'd guess something on the order of 25% more; enough that noise shows even at the base ISO of the imager. Apparently Panasonic's R&D have been pursuing what they call LiveMOS technology as the main thrust of their imager development, rather than low noise. With the increase in pixel counts over the last year or so, noise has become a real issue.

What is the development cycle of a new imager? I'd guess it's on the order of 12-18 months. If you think back that long ago, Panasonic's decision to concentrate on more megapixels and LiveMOS over lower noise probably seemed the only safe course to take. They also probably assumed they could cover up the noise issue with more aggressive and more sophisticated in-camera NR. If you read the LUMIX website, you'll see they've retooled their in-camera NR (Venus III) for separate luminance and chroma processing.

Quote
How is noise "reduced" or "smoothed" in these cameras? Is it done before generating the raw files by hw circuit control, or by sw after the raw data is captured?
NR is done as part of the in-camera post-processing that results in the JPEG or RAW file that is written to the memory card. The entire process is coded to what they call their Venus engine LSI chip (i.e., hardware encoded), which is now at Venus III for the TZ1, FZ50, and LX2. Whether all or some portion of NR is by-passed for RAW file generation in Venus III is a critical question that perhaps an FZ50 owner can weigh in on. One would certainly hope so.
Logged
jhandl
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #17 on: August 28, 2006, 12:13:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Chris T wrote:
Apparently Panasonic's R&D have been pursuing what they call LiveMOS technology as the main thrust of their imager development, rather than low noise.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74750\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

From what I've read, the LiveMos chips have larger pixels, which means they're aimed at higher ISO with lower noise... So how did they end up performing so badly? Or are the noisy chips in Panasonic cameras not LiveMos?
Logged
tensai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


WWW
« Reply #18 on: August 29, 2006, 01:21:08 AM »
ReplyReply

To come back to the original question, at least here in Tokyo it is on sale now.
Havent been to a lot of stores, but Yodobashi in Akiba has them.



Quote
Dear all,

Does someone know when Panasonic intends to release its new DMC-LX2?

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71459\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad