for landscapes, nature and fine art, a good point-n-shoot like the LX3 could be the best tool for the job, sometimes even better than a DSLR or a $40k medium-format DSLR.
Why?
-Overall image quality will be just as good as a DSLR (if not better) because of all the reasons listed above.
This is a rubbish statement!
LX3 is good PnS performer but mislead ppl with this kinda statement without any proof
read the blog first so you'd understand what he meant, just quoted it from the link i provided and didn't he mention overall image quality basing from the reasons he listed? and btw the blogger is a professional photographer who owns a canon 5D
Yes I have read it.
I am referring to your statement.
Please read what you have written and compare to what his blog said.
The pictures were taken handheld. LX3 is a good PNS camera for night shots too.
Handheld without tripod
I like this one! Also illustrates the LX3's strengths when heading to places where you can't pack a large camera. Was this at the actual day or preview? Also, what ISO? I really gotta try shooting night exposures with the LX3.
As for the other statements, let's not read too much into absolutes I come from the land of full frame digital as well, and I respectfully disagree that the LX3's image quality is identical - it is not. That however, does not take away from the fact that it is a superb camera in its own right, which is why I have one today....complementing, not replacing, the SLRs.
As for the other statements, let's not read too much into absolutes I come from the land of full frame digital as well, and I respectfully disagree that the LX3's image quality is identical - it is not. That however, does not take away from the fact that it is a superb camera in its own right, which is why I have one today....complementing, not replacing, the SLRs.
Sadly there are still ppl who lack of knowledge and blindly believe that LX3 can produce IQ better than FF and MF :bsmilie:
hey dude, if you actually read thru the blogger's intention, he is not saying lx3 TECHNICAL image quality is better than dslr, didn't he mention OVERALL image quality? of course dslr TECHNICALLY better, larger sensor, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance but obviously the blogger sees that at certain situations, because of lx3's compactness, large aperture (ironically coupled with small sensor which results to large DOF even at small F, no need to set to high F for macro which limits diffraction, less tripod usage), inbuilt IS, faster synch speed, etc..one would be able to get the shot he wanted easier or faster or more conveniently which can result to better OVERALL image quality..he is pointing out the advantages of the lx3 over a dslr.. I have a dslr, i won't replace it with an lx3, lx3 can not duplicate what my f2.8 tele zoom can do, lx3 cannot do subject isolation at far perspectives but it's a pain for me changing lens to wide angle when at times i need to do group shots, occasional landscape etc., then what better alternative than to buy an lx3 to complement my zoom? Im not a pro, i don't do photography for a living, i don't do large prints..so what now?i just copied pasted the blogger's notes, never did i insinuate lx3 has better IQ nor the blogger did..
hey dude, if you actually read thru the blogger's intention, he is not saying lx3 TECHNICAL image quality is better than dslr, didn't he mention OVERALL image quality? of course dslr TECHNICALLY better, larger sensor, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance but obviously the blogger sees that at certain situations, because of lx3's compactness, large aperture (ironically coupled with small sensor which results to large DOF even at small F, no need to set to high F for macro which limits diffraction, less tripod usage), inbuilt IS, faster synch speed, etc..one would be able to get the shot he wanted easier or faster or more conveniently which can result to better OVERALL image quality..he is pointing out the advantages of the lx3 over a dslr.. I have a dslr, i won't replace it with an lx3, lx3 can not duplicate what my f2.8 tele zoom can do, lx3 cannot do subject isolation at far perspectives but it's a pain for me changing lens to wide angle when at times i need to do group shots, occasional landscape etc., then what better alternative than to buy an lx3 to complement my zoom? Im not a pro, i don't do photography for a living, i don't do large prints..so what now?i just copied pasted the blogger's notes, never did i insinuate lx3 has better IQ nor the blogger did..
Here a few more to poison u... Macro with Raynox Msn 202..
Remeber this few photos got no stacking done!!
1.
2.
3.
4.