Thread: DMC-LX7 preview

it's a CMOS sensor, so maybe they just bought an off the rack sensor from Sony instead of making their own. with the variable aspect ratio trick, it makes the actually used part of the sensor smaller than for instance the S100 or EX2F's 1/1.7" type sensors.

If Panasonic had used a larger 2/3" sensor, they would have needed to design a larger camera to accommodate the fast lens.

Hmm, near the bottom of the LX7 product page, I noticed:



Hopefully this implication is accurate, and there will indeed be a wide angle adapter for the LX7.

The sensor was designed for the new lens so regardless of size it should still give very good IQ.

Yeah, the sensor is smaller, but its CMOS instead of CCD, and probably had to be to work with the notably faster lens, given that they had to make the body slightly larger. The preliminary comparisons is that the jpegs from the smaller sensor are similar to those from the LX-5, maybe slightly better, not not significantly. But I've seen one piece of anecdotal evidence that the raw files may be significantly better, at least in terms of high ISO. I know some people find CMOS sensors to be noisier at low ISO than CCD, but I have yet to have a problem with the amount of noise in a low ISO shot, so I'm not concerned about that. I saw a processed raw file taken at ISO 3200 that looked a good deal better than the jpegs, so there's hope.

One other thing not mentioned is the additional control lever/rocker on the back of the body. It controls the ND filter and some of the focus functions, like AF spot position and, more important for me, the focus distance when using manual focus. Between that and the aperture ring on the lens, that means I'd almost never have to click between functions on the click wheel that Panasonic uses as its primary controller. That shouldn't be a big deal, but I used to get confused about which function I had the wheel set to control way too often with the LX5. With the LX7, it would always just be exposure compensation except when I specifically arm it to do something different, like change ISO, at which point it would automatically return to exposure comp. That's actually really big to me, probably a non-issue to a lot of folks, but that's the kind of thing that can make a camera far more enjoyable to use for me. So I remain cautiously interested even though I bought the RX100.

-Ray

http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/59...-camera-review


Cheers, Macjim.

Originally Posted by macjim

Panasonic Lumix LX7 review - Pocket-lint


Cheers, Macjim.

"To put it in perspective, the 1/1.63-in sensor size has close to 20 per cent less surface area than the 1/1.7-in version found in the LX5. But it’s still a larger-than-average sensor, and the 10-megapixel count is conservative, which avoids too many "pixels" getting crammed on to the sensor’s surface."

Not only did the author mess up the sensor size re: each camera, he messed up with his math, too...

yes, he confuses the sensors and the cameras which have them, but the 20% smaller figure is correct.
one other point though: the reviewer says the 24mm f/1.4 lens is unrivalled in the class, but the Samsung EX2F has exactly the same wide angle and f-number...

this

If manual focus is your weapon of choice then, sadly, there’s no lens focus ring. Instead the rear ND/Focus dial - which is nudged left or right and can be held in position - deals with focus control. A focus assist feature zooms in on the screen to actual size, while a focus-distance measure shows not only where focus lies in a feet/metres scale but also the depth of field dependent on the aperture selected. A manual focus override option even means it's possible to autofocus first and adjust manual focus after, without the need to adjust the focus switch.

should really please Ray!

looks like a great camera, I think I just got a little bit more excited about it :) at its full tele setting, it should be capable of shallower DOF than the RX100 or EX2F

Originally Posted by bartjeej

yes, he confuses the sensors and the cameras which have them, but the 20% smaller figure is correct.

Actually, he said that the 1/1.63" sensor is 20% smaller than the 1/1.7" sensor, so his 20% smaller figure was also incorrect. The 1/1.7" sensor is the smaller one.

Anyway, the author has corrected those mistakes. Maybe someone should let him know about that Samsung EX2F...

My Dad is ordering a LX7 today from where I work so we will both have one. Should be interesting to compare images and settings.