Panasonic DMC-LX2

10 MegapixelsHigh Res Movie ModeContinuous DriveManual ControlsWhite BalanceNight PhotographySports PhotographySD HC Memory

Recent Street Price: $427 USD, $552 CDN


 

 

 

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX2
Overall Score: AverageAverage

Assessment

The Panasonic Lumix LX2 is rather disappointing, perhaps partly because of the success of its predecessor, but mostly because of all that is special about this camera. The LX2 features a wide-aspect sensor for producing 16:9 images and 16:9 HD videos. Its lens, when combined with its wide-aspect sensor, features a 4X wide-angle zoom. In 4:3 and 3:2 mode, the zoom is not wide-angle anymore though. The downfall of this camera comes from its high image noise.

 

All six reviews listed below are highly critical of the LX2's image quality, giving the LX2 some of their lowest marks for image quality. Most reviewers agree that the LX2 produces usable results up to ISO 200, but not beyond that. Noise starts at ISO 200 and increases steadily, destroying details along the way. At ISO 800 and 1600, images are so noisy that they would not be usuable even for small prints. This below average image quality combined with a good feature set, leaves this camera just about average.

 

Other than its wide-angle lens and wide-aspect sensor, this camera is easily beaten by the Canon Powershot SD710 IS with a stabilized 6X optical zoom, the non-stabilized Canon Powershot A620 and the Fuji Finepix E900 with its wider-than-average lens and low-noise 9 megapixel sensor. In 4:3 mode, the E900 actually has a wider angle than the Panasonic LX2. Additionally, the E900 shows low-image noise up to ISO 800 and uses readily available AA batteries. All the compact digital cameras mentioned here feature full manual controls and custom white-balance.

 

With the image quality knocking it down, the truly unique feature of this camera is its wide-screen high-definition movie mode of 1280x780 at 15 FPS. One has to wonder about the usefulness of the 16:9 sensor though. It can be cropped to 4:3 or 3:2 but common 4:3 sensors can be cropped to 3:2 or 16:9 anyways. Whenever cropping is involved resolution is lost. It would be better to crop to the least common size then. Based on print and frame sizes, 16:9 seems to be less common. Evidently, wide-aspect landscape shots can be appealing and seem like panoramas. However, the 16:9 aspect is not favorable to all subjects.

 

Neocamera

baselong