Wow, this comparison or review of the photos by GX200, LX3, G10, DP1 AND P6000 will be of interest to many of us. The following are photos taken for the same scene by a photographer with various serious compacts (click to see):
GX200 LX3 G10 DP1 P6000
What say you? Shed light (also see: the nightshots comparison):
The window shopping some hours ago has almost provoked my AgIDS illness. Just in case you’re in Hong Kong or are coming here, and have the money to burn (All in HK$/ body only): GX200 = $3,280 GRD2 = $3,380 LX3 = $3,180 G10 = $3,280 Prices are available form a gear shop on the 1st floor of the Mongkok Computer Centre. Besides these new low prices, I found that Wing Shing Photo (55-57Sai Yeung Choi St., MK Tel: 2396 6886/ 91-95 Fa Yuen St., MK Tel: 2396 6885) is offering a Sony A700 + Carl Zeiss Lens package for HK$9,980 (hopefully, a bargain will make it some hundreds cheaper).
Comments
The DP1 is in fact in another class I think regardless of the file formats.
The strong saturation on the DP1 and P6000 looks strange and unrealistic. The G10 color on the other hand looks real to the point of being enhanced (not a bad thing). Color aside, the DP1 clearly has the most subtleties owing to its higher dynamic range and lower noise sensor, even if the G10 and P6000 have more pixels. The LX3 looks very sharp and natural all in all. Interestingly, the GX200, the least sharp overall, is sharp on the far left -- lens defect?
If I was picking a camera by these photos alone, I'd take the G10. However, size, weight, and ergonomics are also important so I'm leaning toward the LX3. I would consider a GX200 but there is nowhere to try one out in Canada.
Thanks for the links!
The JPEG of GX200 is notorious I think for its slight washy look. On the contrary, Canon's photos give me a general impression that they are (too?) enhanced and sharpened. I personally don't like the photo to be too saturated (I found the sky colour too saturated in some areas; too blue). The LX3's is nice even though some local users here commented that some JPEGs taken with LX3 give a plastic sort of colours. That doesn't really show in the photo here. P6000 seems to be a loser on every front in the serious compact race.
As a GX200 user, I can point out that in general use, I haven't found any noticeable len defection. The photos I have taken with it so far provide good details. Yes, the straight-out JPEGs are sometimes a wee bit washy and need some simple PP twisting to correct it. But then I admire the portraits taken with GX200 cos' the colour is mild and nice for skin tone, really flattering esp to babies and girls. GX200 users are able to tune the default contrast and colour depth up to rectify the issue too. But don't tune up the default sharpness (rather tune to -1 in fact) cos' it is known that GX200 straight-out photos are sharpened more than GX100's.
Shooting RAWs may be a better choice for GX200 if you bother to do PP work.
Nevin