(Shot in Marco mode of the LX3, the picture of these bamboo scaffolding sticks proves that a digital marco mode for a shorter focal distance is preferrable for a more intriguing image of the marco world)
With a LX3 on loan to me for a week, I am doing without the GX200 for some days. Instead of trying out all the functions of the LX3, I intend only to use it in a way just as I have been with the GX200 for purpose of doing some comparisons between the two.
I will play with the LX3 for a few more days and post the photos here, with my reflections on the particular days about using the LX3. The posts are not intended to be a proper review. It is just interesting to get some hand-on experience in the implementation of the comparable aspects of the two cameras targeted at the same market segment. This is just for fun.
Elegance
In my hand, the LX3 emits a quality of elegance which is rather understated (lacking of?) in GX200 or even GRDs. The elegance probably comes from the LX3's glossy finish, the sturdy build and the casing of its lens. In comparsion, the GX200 assumes a lower profile (the lens feels relatively wobbly too; but not the lens of the GRDs).
In a way, this elegance is to my liking. At the same time, the shiny camera body attracts too much attention of the passers-by than I would prefer. After all, the "stealthness" of the serious compacts possesses the advantage of the contrary. I for one don't wish to alarm subjects in the street when I shoot pictures of'em.
(I chose to take a test shot for the colour performance of LX3 with the big Fa Pai, or literally, Coloured Board. Fa Pai was once the popular way among the local shops to mark their openings or promotional sales before the 1980s, the likely reason being the commissioning of the underground railway at the time here introduced to Hong Kong the imaging technology to print extremely oversized posters for ads on huge bilboards. The billboards eventually edged in from the underground to the outdoor ad market)
Colour
GX200's images have a character same as the camera itself: unassuming. Some argue that the colours in GX200's photos are less vivid to the point of bland, or even hazy. It is probably a matter of personal taste, what the viewers are used to and sometimes the exposure combos or the lighting situations. To me, the GX200's images are just right, nicely balanced between vividness and the details. Bearing this in mind, I have found that the images produced by the LX3 are more likable in terms of colour which is reasonably vivid without noticeably sacrifying details in the images. It has something to do with the new Venus imaging engine, I think, which is head and shoulders above its predecessor. There are no photos in the first lot which require any post-tuning for the colours. But since I've been using the GX200 for some months, it seems to me that GX200's handling of colours in the images is more loyal to the actual hues of the scenes. I don't expect many non-Ricohians to find the same though.
Marco
With a faster Leica lens, the LX3 produces marco photos with a wee bit more beautifully defocused background. One thing which I wish for, as compared with the GX200, is a digital marco mode enabling the photographers to zoom in closer to the subjects.
In theory, the focus-mode switch on the casing of the lens is a plus for photographers since it saves users the trouble of diving into the menu system. However, in actual operation, the small size of the camera makes it a bit difficult for my big (not really big) thumb to slide the switch without turning the camera sideway and holding it tight with my other hand. So this solution is not necessarily better than the implementation of a clear menu system. For example, I can hold my GX200 with one hand and press the Marco button with my thumb while composing for a scene.
(The back of an old bus shows signs of rusting. There only a small number of simialr old buses serving the old areas. They are not air-conditioned and popularly known as the Hot Dog for a reason. This can make another special post to tell the story of it)
Body Mass
The LX3 is not much bigger than the GX200 but it feels much more heavier. I prefer to lightness, however. The LX3 feels just less secure when held with one hand due to its heavier weight. The slightly protruding lens casing makes it less possible to fit into a shirt pocket, which I do sometimes with the GX200. But every coin has two sides. The protruding casing somehow makes me feel just right because I can hold the LX3 in a way I do with a DSLR: with my left hand grasping the bottom of the lens. This position feels more natural to me as a long-time SLR user. Another advantage is that I can steady the camera better with such a holding position when the situations oblige.
(The bus driver of the rusting bus just alighted at the terminus to take a breather, which is as brief as a pee stop)
Comments