Panasonic DMC-LX1 Announced

July 20, 2005 | Mark Goldstein | Digital Compact Cameras | 796 Comments | |

Panasonic DMC-LX1Panasonic DMC-LX1 is announced today. The Panasonic DMC-LX1 is an 8.4 megapixel digital camera with a 4x Leica optical zoom lens equivalent to 28-112mm, optical image stabilizer and a 2.5 inch LCD screen. The DMC-LX1 is the world’s first digicam with a wide angle lens and 16:9 aspect CCD. The aspect ratio can be easily selected between 16:9 or 3:2 in addition to the conventional 4:3 by using a switch on the lens barrel. The Panasonic DMC-LX1 can also record moving images at 848 x 480 16:9@Wide VGA at 30 fps. The Panasonic DMC-LX1 will be available in the UK in August in silver priced £449.99.

Panasonic Europe Press Release

Panasonic is launching a new LUMIX 16:9 wide LX series with the introduction of the DMC-LX1, 8.4-Megapixel 4x optical zoom (equivalent to 28 mm to 112 mm on a 35mm film camera) full manual compact camera. This creative compact incorporates a 8.4-Megapixel CCD and a high resolution 2.5-inch LCD in its undersized body. The aspect ratio is easily selectable between 16:9 wide, 3:2 and conventional 4:3 with a switch located on the lens barrel to shoot in the framing aspect that best suits the subjectsf composition or imagefs purpose of use.

The lens unit is comprised of 4x optical zoom LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT Lens and renders superb picture quality. Like other LUMIX cameras, what distinguishes the DMC-LX1 from the rest is MEGA O.I.S. (Optical Image Stabilizer), a key feature Panasonic considers should be standard in all digital still cameras. Unintentional handshake, the major cause of digital camera misshooting, is controlled by MEGA O.I.S. to allow every user to take clear, beautiful images even indoors or at nighttime. The newly incorporated Extra Optical Zoom extends the zoom ratio by using the center part of the high resolution CCD to achieve 5x for 5.5-Megapixel 16:9 image recording with minimal deterioration.

Extensive manual controls including manual focus and manual exposure can be smoothly operated with a joystick incorporated along with an omni directional cursor. Just pressing and holding the joystick shortcuts to a setting menu containing the frequently used white balance adjustment, ISO setting, image size setting and compression format.

Taking advantage of these outstanding features, the LX1 incorporates the high speed, high quality image processing LSI, the Venus Engine II. It boasts quick responsiveness that realizes the best-in-class level release time lag of 0.01 sec. For the AF, five AF modes are available; 9-point, 3-point high speed, 1-point high speed, 1-point normal speed and spot. The 1-point high speed AF boasts predominantly fast AF for stress-free focusing.

In addition, the DMC-LX1 is the first digital still camera that can record moving images at 848 x 480 16:9@Wide VGA, as smooth as 30 fps.
With a volley of features providing both enhanced image quality and responsiveness, the DMC-LX1 is an advanced compact offering elaborate manual controllability while being accommodating to entry-level users through a variety of scene modes and auto setting functions. Panasonic dares to introduce this artistic instrument suited to users at all levels who enjoy creative shooting.

1. 8.4-Megapixel 16:9 aspect CCD and 28mm wide 4x optical zoom LEICA DC Lens
The DMC-LX1 features the 8.4-Megapixel Industryfs first* 16:9 aspect CCD and 4x optical zoom 28mm wide angle** (equivalent to 28 mm to 112 mm on a 35 mm film camera) LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT lens. Incorporating three aspherical lenses provides high optical performance while preserving the compactness of the unit. The aspect ratio can be easily selected between 16:9 or 3:2 in addition to the conventional 4:3 with a switch on the lens barrel on a shot-by-shot-basis to best suit the composition of the image. Even after shooting, the 16:9 ratio can be converted to 3:2 or 4:3 with the camera according to your purpose of use.

The extra optical zoom, made possible by using the center part of 8.4-megapixel high resolution CCD, further extends the zoom ratio to 5x for 5.5-Megapixel image recording in 16:9 aspect with minimal deterioration.

* As a CCD of digital still camera, as of July 7, 2005.
** In 16:9 aspect ratio.

2. Image stabilizing technology MEGA O.I.S.(Optical Image Stabilizer) and high speed high quality image processing LSI Venus Engine II
MEGA O.I.S.(Optical Image Stabilizer), that Panasonic thinks it indispensable for all digital cameras, especially for compact models that lacks stability, is subsumed under LUMIX all line-up released in this year. Every slight hand-shake movement is detected accurately with the sampling frequency at 4,000 times per second and will be compensated to render clear, sharp images.

MEGA O.I.S. is equipped with 2 selectable modes. In gMode 1h, the O.I.S. lens continuously compensates for vibration and in gMode 2h, the O.I.S. lens suppresses hand-shake only at the moment the shutter button is pressed. In this mode, the lens can move in all directions at the moment to maximize its effect, and higher-resolution image can be taken by capturing the image as close as to the center of the lens. In consequence, since MEGA O.I.S. enables a beautiful picture shot without blurring at slower shutter speeds of more than three steps compared to the conventional models without O.I.S., you can enjoy shooting clear and beautiful pictures easily even in the situations using slow shutter speeds, like indoor shots for portraits and nighttime scenery for illuminated object, as well as in shootings using zoom or macro mode.
For the brain of the camera, high-speed high-quality image processing LSI Venus Engine II is incorporated to render clear images in detail, compensating for the color aberration at the edges subject to occur. It also compensates for vignetting and generates bright image in every detail. This engine boasts its high performance resulting in the industry leading level in class release time lag of 0.01 sec for achieving more stress-free operation.

*Not including the time for AF.

3. Joystick-operated intuitive manual control
The DMC-LX1 offers manual focus and manual exposure, and both are adjustable with a joystick independent of an omni directional cursor. A switch on the side of the lens barrel lets you quickly change the focus mode between MF, AF or Macro AF. When you focus in the Manual Focus mode, not only the focus distance but also the DOF (depth of field) according to the zoom range and aperture is displayed. An MF assist function enlarges the center of the image to make focusing easier. Both features contribute to easy and comfortable manual focus.

A joystick was incorporated to facilitate operational ease and thereby get the best technical advantage of the multitude of functions offered by the camera. You can quickly shortcut to frequently used variables containing white balance adjustment, ISO setting, image size setting and compression format just by pressing and holding down the joystick, even while monitoring a subject on the LCD.

Shutter speed extends up to 60 sec at slowest in Manual Exposure mode and adjustable from 1/2000 to 60 sec for wider ranging shooting opportunities. Noise reduction is available for images taken at slow shutter speed.

The AF/AE lock button supports free framing while keeping the focus locked or fixes the same exposure setting regardless of the color of a subject for taking multiple shots.

Panasonic DMC-LX14. Crystal-clear, large 2.5h LCD monitor
The 2.5h large LCD is excellent not only in size but also in the resolution, which is as high as 207 k pixels. The advantage is apparent when you check the focus during or after shooting, or when you display images even in tiny thumbnail size, across which you can move an omni-directional cursor to select. They can be played back in 9, 16 and 25 on multi-split screen in addition to the normal 1 frame playback thanks to the large high resolution LCD. This helps you to search for the image you want out of a number stored on the SD Memory Card, even if the images are in bulk. Furthermore, you can virtually checkmark your favorite images and keep them selected apart from the others to make a special slideshow with them only, or make concurrent deletion of the non-checkmarked ones if you do not need them anymore. Thanks to this feature, the LX1 can serve not just as a tool of shooting images but also as a digital album, to enjoy the seeing and showing of your favorite pictures.
To offer a clear view even in sunny outdoor conditions, the Power LCD function increases brightness by 140% just by pressing an independent button.

5. Excellent responsiveness, smart control and quick AF
The DMC-LX1 incorporates high performance image processing LSI the Venus Engine II in both speed and image quality. Thanks to the multi-task image processing, response has also been accelerated, resulting in the best-in-class level release time lag of 0.01 sec achieving more stress-free operation. For the burst shooting mode, it also boasts high consecutive shooting performance, providing shooting at 3 frames/second at 8.4-Megapixel full resolution. This function can be@instantly activated with the independent button*. Unlimited Consecutive Shooting function** allows limit-free consecutive shooting up to the capacity of the SD memory card.

An AF method can be selected according to the shooting situation: 9-point, 3-point high-speed, 1-point high-speed, 1-point normal-speed and Spot. The 1 point high-speed AF, initially incorporated in the high zoom line DMC-FZ5, dramatically reduces the AF time to realize stress-free operation. Although screen-freeze in high-speed AF is now minimized, if you take the picture of subject with fast movement, you can select 1 point normal-speed AF which does not have any screen-freeze while focusing.

* The button also performs as gDELETEh in playback mode.
** The speed of the unlimited consecutive shooting varies depending on the SD Memory Card.

6. Industryfs first 16:9 aspect Wide VGA moving image recording*
In addition to the conventional 4:3 VGA moving image recording, the LX1 can record moving images even in the 848 x 480 16:9 Wide VGA format at 30 fps, making the most of the industryfs first 16:9 CCD. Shooting is one thing but viewing is another, and you will be suitably impressed by the 16:9 moving image when it is displayed on a wide screen TV.

* As a digital still camera, as of July 7, 2005.

7. Easier and more comfortable operationality
Along with the joy stick and omni-directional cursor, a dial-operated mode shift also improves the camerafs controllability. The mode dial allows quick, direct switching between various shooting modes, moving picture mode and playback mode. In addition to the conventional ProgramAE, the LX1 is equipped with Auto mode, which caters for the entry level users. A total of 14 scene modes including Baby, Soft Skin, Food, Starry Sky and Candle helps you to take beautiful images easily in wide-ranging situations. Still it is easy to select the one out of them thanks to the Scene Mode Help Screen that shows the description of each mode and the knack for shooting of each scene and helps users to take beautiful image easily.

The LUMIX DMC-LX1 is like no other compact camera, enabling both high-end amateurs and entry-level users to explore the creativeness that surely enhances the joy of shooting.

Tracker Pixel for Entry

Your Comments

796 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#101 stupidlammer

I'd appreciate it much indeed if you could post em up, doubt my email has the space anyway. Really need to evaluate if its still noisy.

It was published 1" in width? Maybe thats for the body itself, cant be 1" including lense.

9:33 am - Monday, August 29, 2005

#102 nick

All the ads I read said 26mm as the thickness, Why would the undetachable lens NOT be included? Maybe we can unscrew the lens? DUH!!!! Go to and open a mailbox for just pictures... easy!

9:45 am - Monday, August 29, 2005

#103 stupidlammer

.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)


9:57 am - Monday, August 29, 2005

#104 stupidlammer

ever tried taking the photos in RAW? does it help in reducing any noise?

2:13 pm - Monday, August 29, 2005


Did Nick's pictures exhibit more noise than you would have liked?

FYI, if you shoot in TIFF or RAW, you cannot use the LX1's auto-bracketing or burst mode features, and the accompanying JPEG is Standard quality only. It sounds like these formats are pushing the limits of the LX1's processing power, which is certainly understandable.

7:19 pm - Monday, August 29, 2005

#106 nick

RAW is ALL the data in the image, JPEG is removing different numbers of pixels to make the total package smaller, artifacts (Noise) are those missing pixels...The LX-1 has 2 levels of compression, I shoot, naturally , in the "Fine" mode, or,what is the manufacturer's least compressed mode.. I am feeling the image quality, that is overall look and arifacts, as slightly better than the F828 ( at the best ASA )

10:20 pm - Monday, August 29, 2005


I do not expect my wife to be shooting any RAW because of her direct-from-camera printing, for which JPEG, at its highest quality setting, has always been satisfactory; however, the TIFF format of the LX1 intrigues me in the sense that you can consider it the "ultimate" quality JPEG. If you get a chance to test the LX1's TIFF, I would like to know if its large file size noticeably hampers the camera's shooting performance in comparison to the "Fine" quality JPEG. Glad to hear you are retired. :)

12:46 am - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#108 nick

I dont have to shoot any pictures to tell you that there will be a noticable time lag! Everyone has their own likes and dislikes, I Like JPEG , it's quality and speed are much preferred. I shot some TIFF, or Raw shots once and had them printed at the photo shop, I couldn' see a difference! I would have IF they were printed at 40x60" I'm sure. You may have a professional printer that puts out awesome large prints, I have a standard printer that costs too much to keep ink in, so it became a scanner only ( Awesome scans) the camera shop prints at 3.8 million pixels!! Think about it!, why give them any more than 3.8 million pixels in a file????

1:04 am - Tuesday, August 30, 2005


I have never been a big fan of lossy compression schemes, whether it be for music, video, or otherwise. Also, you never know when you are going to get that once in a lifetime shot, and wish you had used TIFF, or even RAW. If the LX1 could handle these formats reasonably well, I would always use them, knowing full well they were overkill. Ideally, I would use the combination JPEG/RAW mode, print the JPEGs for practicality, and keep the RAW shots for posterity, but only if the LX1 could capture a Fine quality JPEG with the RAW, which it cannot. This is not meant to be a putdown of the LX1. The fact that it even offers TIFF and RAW is better than most ... I keep wanting to say "ultra-compacts".

11:30 am - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#110 nick

You may not be able to say "Ultra-compact", I CAN ! Lottsa stuff that most don't have...Most dont even give you a viewing angle of more than a 35mm equivilent, most are 38mm, 28 is ideal, more angle and you got big correction problems.. Count the compacts with 28mm, Image stalilization, 16X9 aspect ratio, 8mp,built in warm/cool filters, zoom/resizeing copy ability, Grid overlay, histogram display , and more... How many did you come up with? For now, it's the only game in town at it's size... Better not fret too long Gary, you're missing alot of those "Perfect Shots"!

12:25 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#111 stupidlammer

Do you think the OIS is a reason good enough to get the LX1 over the S80's much less noisy pictures? Does it mean that for a night shot, with OIS, i can use longer shutter exposure times with lower ISOs as compared to the S80, which higher ISOs should be used?

12:33 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#112 nick

I dont know anything about the S80, night shots, I assume, mean long exposures? If so, a tripod is required. If you mean taking hand held shots at night, then the flash would take care of sharpness unless there was ambient light, then the weany flash would be a problem, solved with another flash that had a slave control, where-as the weany LX flash would trigger the power flash. I have been thinking about digging out an old flash and slave, just for that purpose (Day and night shots)

1:03 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#113 nick

I just read the S80 report... WoW! Being a Canon lover, I can relate to alot of it's processes. The S80 is a MUCH more versatile camera with LOTTSA options, I can see your concerns more clearly now. I think you should buy the Canon , and the acessories, for its abilities, AND, I think you should buy the Panasonic, for the reasons I bought mine, for it's uniqueness. They both will make about the same bulge in a pocket, you just will have to buy a bunch of shirts with 2 pockets! The price is right on both, and with the tele-lens, there is no need for a SLR ....

1:25 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#114 stupidlammer

if only the canon has an OIS, then the choice would be clear. I think the panasonic has more features thou, longer exposure time, more shots per second etc. difficult choice.
i dont take night shots with flash, i dont like the flash, hence the exposure time and OIS is important for me.

1:54 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#115 Carsten Ranke

Another production model first impressions are on in the Panasonic forum - this guy bought his LX1 also in Japan, and I am quite disappointed that the LX1 is not 26 mm, but 50 mm(!) from back to lens cap, more than S70/80 :-(

1:58 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005


Nick, the LX1 has more advanced features than any other ultra-not-so-compact :), I agree.

I think what stupidlammer was asking, and I would like to know also, is how well the LX1's OIS works to prevent blur when using longer exposures for low-light situations without a flash or tripod.

Something else I am curious about, which should be right up your alley, since you shoot a lot of JPEG and are familiar with other cameras. How does the LX1's "Fine" quality compare with other cameras which have "Super Fine", "Very Fine", etc.?

6:41 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#117 nick

My only view has been my Vaio's 16" screen to eval the few pictures I've taken, I can only say, simply, that I prefer to use the LX1 over the F828 for picture quality. I NEVER change from the highest quality JPEG (lowest compression ) setting, I seldom ever shoot at a higher ASA setting , except with the Canon10D, where there is no visible difference between ASA 100 and 200.., I never use "Auto ASA" nor "Auto Flash", I NEVER use "Digital Zoom" But when I want to do a really zoomed picture I will first shoot with the Canon 10D/Sigma 170-500 ( which is really a 168-550 F5.0-5.6 before the 1.6 x factor, 269-880, F5.0-5.6, after ), take the CF card out, install it in the Sony F828 and select the display images icon>menu>trimming>zoom and align>copy at 8mp... Results in a super quality extra zoom image written in the Sony. Sorry, you ask me the time, and I end up building you a clock! Anyway, all those terms of "Fineness are just maker's levels of more and more compression, the thing to do is just use the least compression=Superdooperultramegafine setting. Panasonic says +3 lower EV capability for hand held shots which means you should be able to hand-hold the camera in a situation where the speed falls below YOUR ability to maintain a sharp image, which really is different for different folks. Small arms training in the Corps taught me how to "hold and sqqueeze 'em" so I can get real slow on hand held, but as a rule of thumb I look for around 1/250th as a standard for images at focal lengths normal and higher, 1/60th for scenics wider, the IS system should allow 3 steps slower to those standards for me, havent tested that aspect yet, I do know the IS works, and is a real blessing, dont need to worry so much anymore about speeds......

11:50 pm - Tuesday, August 30, 2005

#118 Amazingly Amazed

Did someone say that the price is a problem?
The camera is only going to cost $600...... for the world's first compact (but not ultra-compact) digicam with a 16x9 CCD (or should I say 1:1.65) at 8 Megapixels, 28mm on the wide (remember, it's 16x9 wide at 28mm which is massively different to 3x2 (1:1.5) or 4x3 (1:1.33) - go and measure that difference, will you?), and 30frames/sec video with that framing, thus resolution. It also has stabilization, does it not? Not only that, you can switch the framing if you want to, to either of the other 2 "past" standard framings at the flick of a switch.

I have no idea what you mean by saying that the camera is too expensive. Comparing it to other cameras which you can't do, since there are no other digital still cameras with 1:1.65 framing - the closest comparisons would be against other 8 Megapixel compact digicams. And the price is nothing, really, for what one get for it, I think.

And from the looks of what this guy Nick says here, it shoots nice photos.

12:05 am - Thursday, September 1, 2005

#119 Nick in Japan

I don't recall ANYONE complaining about price! I felt alittle guilty paying $499 , I would have paid more if I knew then, what I know now about what this camera give me, lottsa good feelings! kinda like when I used to shoot 6X9 shots with that old Mamiya Press Universal. Gotta get busy reviewing a bunch of shots I did this a.m., "20-a day-keeps-the-doctor-away"

4:06 am - Thursday, September 1, 2005

#120 stupidlammer

I realised noise aint so much of a problem since NEAT IMAGE cleans up the image pretty well indeed.

10:49 am - Thursday, September 1, 2005


The LX1's price sounds steep for an "ultra-not-so-compact", that is, until you factor in its numerous advanced features. What I said previously was, if the LX1 had cost any less, I would have been suspicious Panasonic had cut corners on the quality, which obviously, they have not.

What I was hoping for, with respect to the LX1's "Fine" JPEG, is that its compression artifacts are very low (i.e., comparable to other cameras' "Super Fine" JPEG), and if you wanted any less compression, you might as well be shooting in TIFF.

6:54 pm - Thursday, September 1, 2005

#122 nick

I noticed in my pictures that I shot yesterday that fringe light that is obvious in the Sony F828 images sometimes, Isn'there in the LX-1 pictures, at all! I am very impressed with what I am getting. I'd be happy to send you an e-mail sized batch if you post an e-mail address, or, call me and give it to me personally. My thoughts now are about the next best thing, ie. The new Canon is out because of the bigger sensor that doesnt give the 1.6X factor that I have grown to love for Zooming, plus it doesnt have a flash, which I use alot for fill and dont care about external flashes so much, so that means IF Panasonic puts this 8mp 16x9 sensor in a model that has the IS and Super-Zooming like the FZ-30, I will be looking real hard at it vs. whatever Sony comes up with, and Canon. I am really impressed with this 16x9. Sony is experimenting with the H-1 in the IS and zooming increases, I almost bought one , but the Japanese model sold here in Japan doesnt have a language menu, a kinda basic need that Sony skimped on, a REAL "Beta" model !!( Beta refer's to experimental ) Dont have faith in Beta stuff, software or equipment. Gotta go, more close-ups of Lotus blossoms today, they soon will be gone, and the Higanbana will start blooming in the rice fields 13 September.

10:02 pm - Thursday, September 1, 2005


Your verbal descriptions are doing the trick. Speaking of other cameras ...

Nikon just announced a 6 megapixel Coolpix S4 model, with a 10x optical zoom lens (38-380 mm), in ~ the same compact size as the LX1. It also has a 2.5" swivel LCD, a 1/1.8" CCD, and a host of in-camera processing features such as red-eye fix, blur warning, D-lighting, and face-priority autofocus, plus it uses AA batteries.

I was excited when I saw this, until I realized they just forgot one thing, OIS, which makes the camera practically useless. What were they thinking?

11:25 pm - Thursday, September 1, 2005

#124 Nick in Japan

38mm could actually be considered as near-normal view, somewhere along the way the camera makers have convinced the general public that 38 is wide angle, DUH! The beauty of a near-compact is the scenic, near full length portrait ability of the camera, mass poduced 38-? just won't hack it! Gotta have , at least 28 to be at MINIMUM qualifications.

1:11 am - Friday, September 2, 2005

#125 zymonk

No 16x9 on any of the Nikons. The film mode is a bit disapointing on most of them as is the lack of a wide lens. The WiFi connectivity is cool though. Looks like the LX-1 is still the one to beat.

1:34 am - Friday, September 2, 2005

#126 nick

The one to beat at this moment! Digital cameras are multiplying faster than spermatazoa! That swivel LCD is a great idea! Are you listening Panasonic?????

3:43 am - Friday, September 2, 2005

#127 Amazingly Amazed

I agree. The LX1 is definitely the one to beat.

(And I apologize, I made a mistake, I meant to say 1:1.78 instead of 1:1.66....... dunno where I got the latter, it just got stuck in my head for some reason, I think I was thinking about European 35mm motion picture photography)

And then, of course, eventually everyone else will have 16x9 CCD and the next step in still photography will be achieved, and we can move away even more from the 4:3 or even 3:2 modes.

BUT! The thing about 16x9 is that IF you are going to show photos on your TV (as would be the future intentions of cameras such as these) - you would have to shoot everything horizontally...... which would mean that the Portraits won't look very good in this Wider framing. I mean if you were to shoot a human face, for example, there would be all this space to the left and right of the shot, as a face will not be able to fill up a 16x9 frame - unless you shoot close-ups framed in all the way to just the eyes, for example. Not that I care, since I never shoot people (haha bad pun), as I am looking to shoot landscapes and scenery with the LX1. So, the 4:3 and 3:2 modes will always have purpose, I suppose, especially for Portrait shooting.

It's a real shame about the new Nikons not having 16x9 or any sort of stabilizing technologies. Longer zooms and no OIS is a boo-boo, and someone should tell the bosses at Nikon that their tech department is behind the times, and that some heads need to roll! Right?

I am also looking forward to PRINTING these 1:1.78 framed photos. You can fit these photos comfortably on to U.S. Legal sized paper (14x8.5 inches), as 1:1.78 is basically 14.25x8 Inches so you would do some squeezing to fit the photo, but you would have a very useful border all the way around the photo where you can grab the paper without smudging.
I hope I made myself clear.

Nick -
I would be very interested in hearing your results once you have printed some of the LX1 photos on to an appropriately sized paper. I would also love to hear how you think the photos look when the camera is plugged directly in to a 16x9 HDTV.

The camera is slated for release here in the U.S. at the end of September. I am ITCHING to get my hands on this lovely device!

4:41 am - Friday, September 2, 2005


A 28-280mm lens would have made the S4 awesome, but even a bigger letdown because of the lack of OIS or Anti-Shake. Yes, the LX1 is the one to beat "at the moment", but my wife's birthday is not until the end of January, and I guarantee you, I will be waiting until the last moment before I buy.

7:12 am - Friday, September 2, 2005

#129 nick

Sorry my reply took so long, I tweaked about 20 more shots I did this morning, E-Mailing the resized images to Friends and Kin keeps me busy.....There will always be a place for all the different sizes, in-fact, during that red-eye test I did, I put the switch to 4x3 for a better looking horizontal portrait of Little Joe, it was about 1 meter away which wasnt too good for the 16x9 BECAUSE I zoomed out to about 50mm for an undistorted image, gotta remember that 28mm distorts the image and you may not notice it in the heat of battle. As of now I havent gone over to the camera shop to see what they have as far as a paper size to print these selected 16x9's on, I sure hope they can help me out, they have a panoramic print but it's pricey here in Japan. I may end up NOT printing so much in this mode if it is cost restricting. I may end up making a collage , and put up with a few smaller images. I will get an answer about printing probably tomorrow, Momma has to work so Kids and I will go to the Lotus fields for a few shots, and then the camera shop. .... Waiting for the last minute is probably a safe thing to do, you never know what is going to hit the shelves, Christmas suprises may be coming, I kinda expect Sony to get something else out to stay up with Canon's 5D. ... Burst mode works, suprised me, I have never been more than one-at-a-time shooter. Gotta go, chores to do.....

7:36 am - Friday, September 2, 2005

#130 stupidlammer

I just saw the camera @ COMEX today. Its brilliant.

1:35 pm - Friday, September 2, 2005


The LX1 is definitely a smart looking camera. Panasonic did a lot of things right with this one. There are just a couple of little things that keep it from being the "perfect" camera (for my wife). The fact that the lens protrudes a good 3/4 inch past the body is one of those things. The fact that you cannot shoot simultaneous RAW (or TIFF) + Fine JPEG is another. The biggest question mark is still how good the pop-flash is at preventing red-eye, since the LX1 has no in-camera red-eye fix, which is an absolute necessity for my wife's direct-from-camera printing.

To be honest, it was the LX1 that made me realize the many benefits of shooting in 16 x 9 mode. How much my wife will use this mode remains to be seen. A 5x zoom would have been nice. That is why I am still looking at the 5x zoom, HP Photosmart R817, but it does not have the LX1's 28 mm wide lens or 16 x 9 CCD.

The new Nikon Coolpix S4 is still in the running. Its 10x zoom is unprecedented in a near ultra-compact, that size being another absolute necessity for my wife. The fact that it does not have a 16 x 9 CCD or a 28 mm wide lens, are drawbacks, but the 10x zoom is a good equalizer. The fact that it does not have OIS is another story, since that would limit the usefulness of the 10x zoom. I suppose it could be used at faster shutter speeds, and the 1/1.8" CCD should have inherently low noise, which should enable the use of higher ISOs, so it may not be all that bad. It sounds like I am trying to rationalize because of the attractiveness of that 10x zoom.

Nick, have you thought about getting a good paper cutter? And what's this about the LX1's distortion at 28 mm? Just how much distortion are we talking about here?

BTW, I was looking at the pictures of the LX1 in the FotoAparat review (see Mark's link), and it looks like, with the lens cap on, the lens sticks out ONE FULL INCH past the body. Anyone speak Czechoslovakian? :)

7:37 pm - Friday, September 2, 2005

#132 Carsten Ranke

Regarding noise: there is a nice gallery with fullsize test shots:
and a short review of a preproduction LX1:
Still sitting on the fence for the really pocketable wide angle digicam... Maybe the Samsung Digimax L55W, or...

8:41 pm - Friday, September 2, 2005


Thanks, Carsten, that was the best LX1 review, to date. FYI, the 'W' on Samsung's Digimax L55W does not indicate a wide CCD, only a wide LCD (see comment #22 above).

9:16 pm - Friday, September 2, 2005

#134 Nick in Japan

Wonderful reviews, I had in my mind that when the 4x3 or 3x2 mode was selected the picture was mechanically cropped, in other words the pixels at the edges just cut off to form the 4x3, 3x2 shape, BUT, the fella in the review used the word "Resolution" which eludes to an electronic "Fix" that results in the different sizes. In other words, if just the edges were "Cropped" resolution remains constant , just a fewer overall count. I wonder which is correct, I suspect he may have used the wrong word, I hope so! ANYWAY, it appears these 2 reports have a basic equal impression to what I have about this "Nearly-Ultra-Compact". As I zoomed in on those shots in the first review, I realized that they, indeed , will answer alot of your questions Gary, the Grain is non existant, the colors vibrant and overall impressions of the snapshots are much better than usual shots you see. The zooming hang-up you have may be solved with your printer that your wife will be connecting to, some printers will let you preview and do some basic cropping/zooming functions. Alot of pixels to play with in the LX-1 image, without any noticeable loss of quality, just an idea. I felt that the zoom that the LX-1 has is well suited for general shooting, and always remember that even tho optical zooming is the only way to go, there are still problems in resolution that are evident even in quality optics, the more the zoom, the more the problems with light bending, ESPECIALLY with these ultra small cameras, oops!, "nearly-ultra-compact"! I have a good paper-cutter, actually use the one at the camera shop too when I have time. Distortion occurs when the angle gets wider than normal, the general consensus is that wider than 35mm on a standard small format (35mm camera) will cause curving , pronounced to the eye with verticals at the edges, and a bug-eye effect on close-ups. Increased distortion as you get farther and farther away from a horizontal alignment (pointing the camera up or down) Optic advances by makers have reduced this with the introduction of rectilinier lenses a few years ago. Just before I transitioned to digital, I purchased a wonderful camera, Cosina, with a 12mm rectilinier lens, used it just ONCE!! WONDERFUL pictures, good thing I'm a collector, it is now part of my collection, I cant get myself to do film anymore... Anyway, just try and stay horizontal at 28mm, and if you do a face shot, try and zoom out as far as you can for a better effect, at least to around 50mm.

10:58 pm - Friday, September 2, 2005


To me, "resolution" means pixels-per-square-inch. Kai uses it to mean total-number-of-pixels-per-image, which can be confusing when comparing different aspect ratios, as with the LX1.

For example:

At 16:9, the LX1's maximum resolution setting is 3840 x 2160 = 8.3 megapixels.
At _3:2, the LX1's maximum resolution setting is 3248 x 2160 = 7.0 megapixels.
At _4:3, the LX1's maximum resolution setting is 2880 x 2160 = 6.2 megapixels.

All three maximum resolution settings have identical resolution, i.e., exactly the same number of pixels-per-square-inch. It is also abundantly clear from the above that the maximum resolutions for the 3:2 and 4:3 aspect ratios are achieved by nothing more than a simple horizontal cropping, which was your original thinking.

It is also interesting to note that, while the LX1's CCD has 8.3 effective megapixels at its 16:9 aspect ratio, the LX1 is "only" a 6.2 effective megapixel camera when used at its 4:3 aspect ratio.

Thanks for the advice on staying horizontal and zooming out to 50mm when shooting portraits with a 28mm lens. Would the same advice apply to shooting portraits with a 38mm lens (just in case I decide to go with the Nikon Coolpix S4 :))?

BTW, did you happen to measure the LX1's depth dimension with its lens cap ON?

8:41 am - Saturday, September 3, 2005


Oh, I forgot to ask. Are you using high speed memory? Apparently, that will make a big difference in burst mode performance, and probably TIFF and RAW, as well.

9:02 am - Saturday, September 3, 2005

#137 Nick in Japan

Thanks for your thoughts on resolution.
Yes, but you won't see "bending" as much.
Right at 2" !
Today I started a project using the Sony Ring Light with it's 67mm adapter, combined with an old Olympus lens hood, to mount on the LX-1. Tomorrow I'll order a shoe mount to screw into the Tripod mount screw hole in the bottom of the camera, the battery pack for the ring light will slip into that, upside-down on the camera. Orders take about a week, so next week-end I should have it done . Gotta go and fix supper!

9:04 am - Saturday, September 3, 2005

#138 Nick in Japan

Dont know if it is high speed or not, a cheapo 512....

9:07 am - Saturday, September 3, 2005


Interesting project. How will you fit it all in your pocket? :)

Cheapo memory is probably not high speed. I wonder if TIFF/RAW modes would be more useable with it.

5:15 pm - Saturday, September 3, 2005

#140 nick

I think any memory with a capacity of 256 or better is considered "High Speed" Manufacturer's terminology sells stuff, I have purchased many CF cards , 256 and 512 capacity, I do not use Tiff / RAW so I cant address your question there, but I do know that they all write and read about the same. Some CF cards were pricey, some were'nt, seem to all work the same. This is the first time I have used the SD card, bought 2 Toshiba cards ( God only knows who made them ), they were cheap, work fine. I dont think there is much difference between cards, altho an expensive card I have has some sort of recovery mode that it claims cam restore data AFTER you have erased it!? Never did figure that one out!
The Ring light components will not fit into pant/shirt pockets, must be put in larger sized pockets like the side pockets on my cut-offs, a shooter's vest , or bag pocket. The Ring light ( Not to be confused with a flash ) has an on/off switch and emits a weak lED light only for close-ups in the macro mode, altho , it puts out an interesting circular 'catch light" for portraits. The attachments will all be "Quick Release" and attached only for a close-up situation. Gotta go and get that screw-on foot on order... Cheers!

12:35 am - Sunday, September 4, 2005

#141 nick

One more thing.... Even if you do a movie on a "High-Speed" card, you will/may have problems reading that movie DIRECTLY from the card, put it in a folder, first ,on the computer and it will, then, read OK!

12:39 am - Sunday, September 4, 2005

#142 Carsten Ranke

Another review, for those speaking french

10:48 am - Sunday, September 4, 2005

#143 Nick in Japan

Good review! Before I forget it, I want to warn everyone about the Ring Light I mentioned, It is the most underpowered light I have ever seen! I used it for some macro shots with my F828 and was very displeased with the amount of light it emits, as I mentioned, rings of light as a "Catch Light" are kinda interesting, as far as working as a primary source of light for anything other than REAL, REAL close, forget it.

11:39 am - Sunday, September 4, 2005

#144 carte di credito

nick, it gave me the same problem, thank to you now I've solved !

3:30 pm - Sunday, September 4, 2005


Deleting an image from memory does not actually erase the data. It just marks the memory as unused, making it available for writing new data. Recovery mode scans the available memory for old image data that has not yet been overwritten, and then recovers it.

I did not realize that the Sony Ring Light uses LEDs. Have you tried any fluorescent ring lights. I would imagine them to throw more light for the same amount of power.

10:12 pm - Sunday, September 4, 2005

#146 Nick Pecukonis

Thank you for your explanation on that, evidently some cards have the ability to re-view the data once it is erased, must be a cost factor that prevents all cards from doing it. I always wanted the Ring Flash, but never got a level of need great enough to spring for one. I may someday if prices get better on them, dedicated ones, that is.

10:25 pm - Sunday, September 4, 2005


I tried Mark's suggestion (from another thread) and ran the French review's conclusion through an English translator. I had never tried this before, and to my surprise, it actually worked !!!

It seems to be panning the LX1 for not having an optical viewfinder, but it also points out that, besides being the only compact camera with a 16:9 CCD, and in addition to its manual and semi-automatic capabilities, the LX1 has many advanced features not often found even on top-of-the-line cameras, features such as its wide-angle lens, precision white balance adjustment, AE/AF lock, TIFF and RAW formats, and pop-up flash, and even though the LX1 has so many advanced features, it is still easy to use. It also liked the LX1 "pro" feel, and the way its features were easily accessible by key presses. It would give the highest recommendation to the LX1, if price were not an issue.

Here is the complete translation.

Lumix DMC-LX1 is an atypical apparatus, would be this only by its sensor without known equivalent. But beyond this obvious characteristic, it is pointed out by many characteristics which make us say that it is compact which tends towards the bridge. In more of all the handbook modes and semi-automatic, it has advanced functions which one often does not find (and even not always) that on the top-of-the-range apparatuses, namely: a wide-angle lens, a precision adjustment of the balance of the white, a key for locking AE/AF, formats tiff and Raw, a pop-up flash. But the bringing together also makes it possible to show the limits of this apparatus: the LX1 is deprived of sight, and in spite of the excellent legibility of its screen, it is an unquestionable lack!

The LX1 is characterized by a very good versatility, that of the formats almost summarizing that of the uses: posting, impression and video as we suggested it in the higher part. Although pointed, it is possible to make a very simple use, and to benefit from it fully from the tempting format 16/9e to give a blow of young person to the photograph of landscape of holidays. For most demanding, we said it, the LX1 offers about all the advanced functions which one can wish. Its character "pro" feels in particular by the whole of the accessible adjustments since the case. Thus, with several keys sheltering up to 3 adjustments accessible by successive pressures, with 2 pre-programmable scenes modes plus small a fast configuration, the least which one can say is that the LX1 is intended there to put all the good tools directly within reach to us!

Pointed and ludic, one would want to advise it with all. Only its price makes reflect.

1:05 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#148 Nick Pecukonis

Price as I see it is low/ reasonable for all these smiles! I just finished the Flash Ring Light project, pictures of it will be sent to anyone that gives me a mail address..

1:20 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#149 stupidlammer

send it to me please, email add is on post 103. Thanks. Full resolution pics would be greatly appreciated.

3:25 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


For me, neither price nor lack of optical viewfinder are negatives. Nick, I do not think you meant to say "flash" ring light, did you?

4:54 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#151 Nick Pecukonis

Nope! Sorry 'bout that, force of habit, who ever said Ring-Light before in their lives? (Besides Sony)

5:01 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#152 Nick Pecukonis

In my haste, I failed to clarify a statement I made about light-fall off. I attached commentary to the pictures I took of the Ring flash adaptation.... The LEDs are, indeed all around the circumference of the ring, a fall off of light occurs only when you select the lights on either side, for a Rembrant effect, it's there that you can tweak the light in that mode, by sliding the ring to position the angle of light on the subject. Sorry 'bout that, busy day...

5:25 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


Did I miss something? It's a "continuous" light, not a "flash", correct?

5:54 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#154 Nick in Japan

Nope, I'm Lithuanian, takes me a LONG time to break a habit, took me 50 years to quit biting my fingernails!!! It is a continuous light emitting ring of LEDs. It has a high/ low setting and ability to light just one side at a time , or the entire circle of LEDs, GOMEN! ( I'm Sorry)

6:05 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


Interesting. How did you mount the lens hood to the LX1?

6:41 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#156 nick

Around the lens there is flange, just wide enough to slip the old Olympus lens hood on and , just enough roon to turn the screw that pushes a metal strip in contact with the said flange. E-Mail me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and I will reyurn those pix I took this morning...

6:57 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


Having previously seen pictures of the Sony HVL-RLA Ring Light and Olympus LH-1 Lens Hood on the Internet, and then after reading your excellent descriptions, I now have a very good idea of what the finished product looks like. However, since these photos are technical, not personal, you should consider posting them. BTW, how do you feel about collect calls? :)

8:06 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#158 nick

You seem to be the ONLY person interested ! Why would you want me to call you collect? Get a Yahoo account, just for pictures, and your e-mail you use will stay secret...I have no interest in posting anything, once I start doing that, I'd probably get carried away, not a habit I want to start.

8:19 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


I meant to ask how you feel about "accepting" collect calls, but you turned it around quite nicely. :)

It has been a pleasure chatting with you. I will submit one last question to you, and then I am out of here. Why do you not like shooting in TIFF or RAW? I would have expected otherwise from anyone interested in the LX1. Catch you later.

9:06 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#160 stupidlammer

Has anyone managed to mount a filter onto the LX1? Please share your ideas.

9:43 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#161 nick

There are absolutely no reasons to shoot in RAW or TIFF. I am very easy to please, JPEG is/ has been very kind to me. Does your Mother know you are using her computer?

9:43 am - Monday, September 5, 2005

#162 nick

That filter thing has been on my mind, I think I will go thru ny collection of old Lens-Hoods and find one that will slide OVER/IN the lens hood I mounted the Adapter and Ring LIGHT on, then screw a PL filter on it's end, REVERSED. That will allow the filter to be extended out enough to compensate for the zooming action of the collapsible lens function, and be wide enoudh to cover the angle of view at 28mm. A good project while this typhoon is attacking us.

9:51 am - Monday, September 5, 2005


Obvious reasons for using TIFF/RAW are, no compression artifacts or generation degradation, and RAW's flexibility to change your initial image settings after the fact.

I did a quick check of some cameras that advertise "Super Fine" JPEG, and they do not seem to offer any less compression than the LX1's "Fine", which is about 7 to 1 compared to TIFF. I also noticed, in terms of compression, the LX1's "Fine" and "Normal" JPEG are very similar to the "Fine" and "Standard" JPEG of your F828.

When your F828 shoots TIFF/RAW, it also captures a JPEG with the quality of your choosing, unlike the LX1 which only captures "Normal" quality JPEG with TIFF/RAW. This TIFF/RAW + JPEG combination seems like the ideal shooting mode, since you can capture both an uncompressed image for posterity, and a compressed image for printing. At least I thought that until I read that the F828 locks up for 9 seconds when shooting TIFF, and 13 seconds when shooting RAW.

Any interest in checking how well the LX1 does in this regard?

8:41 pm - Monday, September 5, 2005

#164 Nick Pecukonis

The ability to capture in RAW and JPEG is really a wonderful ability for those that desire to work with RAW ( work programs and the time involved are kinda time restrictive to some of us ) JPEG must be considered by alot of folks as just a toy / e-mail mode , I'm just assuming that because alot of folks like yourself have RAW on your mind all the time!. I do know that, as I have stated before, JPEG has, and is, doing what I need. I have, actually , stored some images in the TIFF format, doing the conversion in Photoshop to make a huge file. I, sometimes, will draw out a CD that I stored images on, from a few years ago , and run them in the new Photoshop program to interpolate them and improve their look . Even the 2-3mp pixures work well in this process and renew my attraction to "JUST JPEG". I store EVERYTHING on DVD now, and if I decided to store at RAW/TIFF I would need ALOT of DVDs! Gary, my routine , daily, involves at least 20+ pictures , 500-800 when I do a nude shoot ( 5-10 a year) I cannot wait for the camera to write a large file while I am shooting, that would result in missing lottsa shots. I usually use 3-4 + cameras at a shoot, and it takes time to be switching cameras because one is busy writing a burst.... JPEG has done me good! I gave up RAW like cigarettes, I dont even know it's there anymore....If the LX-1 does both JPEG and RAW, I'm sure it does it just like all other cameras, there are lottsa folks that do RAW, I just dont. GOMENASAI!

10:46 pm - Monday, September 5, 2005

#165 Amazingly Amazed

Hey Nick in Japan -

sounds like you're having WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much fun with the camera! Hehehehe.....

How's the battery life?
You're shooting JPEGs just as I would most of the time, and I was wondering how many shots you've been able to shoot on a single charge? 300? 400? If it can shoot around these numbers, I think I would be happy. Of course, I would probably keep a back-up battery......

12:52 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#166 nick

Thank you for reminding me of something that I really Must do, soon. We are awaiting a large typhoon to roll thru and my schedule will start again tomorrow or the next day. I will shoot until the battery expires at that time and report it. I did have batteries in mind when I bought the camera and purchased an extra, as well as SD card. I read a report on the Beautiful Panasonic LC-1, and noted that it's battery life seems pretty POOR! I hope I can get 150 fine images in the 16x9 mode, and, if so, I'll be happy. The camera is small, the camera is ALSO capable of professional photo competition, thought must be given to an attached battery pack, could be project #3 as the filter attachment is almost done...

2:04 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#167 stupidlammer

anyone knows anything about richo GX8, it claims to be "SLR like". I wonder how true it is, it sells for about 700Usd

2:24 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005


In case you have not already seen them, here are links to DPReview's GX8 Spec Sheet and 6 Owners Opinions.

Personally, I would not buy a camera with a 1.8" LCD, unless the camera had some other feature that I wanted bad enough to overlook that fact. Examples would be the GX8's expandability of its 28mm lens with a 22mm wide-angle conversion lens, and its hookup to a telescope for astrophotography, as well as to an external flash via its hot shoe. On the negative side, the GX8 does not have the LX1's 4x optical zoom, RAW mode, or pop-up flash.

One big advantage of the GX8, if you want to call it that, is its 8.2 megapixel CCD, as compared to the 6.2 megapixel CCD of the LX1 (at 4:3), but that is a lot of pixels to squeeze into a 1/1.8" CCD, so noise might be a problem. Other advantages over the LX1 would be the GX8's optical viewfinder, its use of AA or Lithium-Ion batteries, and its more pocketable dimensions, if those things are important to you.

Of course, the GX8 does not have a 4:3 aspect ratio, and if that feature is important to you, you really have no other choice but the LX1. The name Ricoh is synonymous with quality, and not so much for Panasonic, though all indications are Panasonic did many things right with the LX1.

It all comes down to your intended use of the camera, which dictates what features are important to you. Most importantly, I would not make any purchases until after reading at least one review, and preferably two or three.

7:22 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#169 Nick in Japan

You got it backwards Gary, Ricoh made a couple quality cameras, and are maybe the oldest maker in Japan, but the junk they made for the past 25 years just flooded the camera shops with repair requests and throw-aways! On the other hand Panasonic has been dedicated to excellence, and Leica thought enough of them to get into bed with them years ago , not only for the lenses, but, the camera itself, I have a Leica II with the panasonic stamp on it. About this GX8 camera, the ONLY thing it has going for it is a 2 second 16 image burst ( Not sure of the compression level for that tho ) and a flash that is effective at less than an inch in the macro mode. Sony has made all the 8mp sensors for the top makers till recently, I wonder if Ricoh bought up a bunch of old sensors for this model?

7:46 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#170 stupidlammer

i read some reviews about the Ricoh, seems to be quite noisy indeed, noiser than the LX1 i would think.

8:28 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005


All other things being equal, more pixels per square inch => less light per pixel => lower output signal per pixel => lower signal to noise ratio => higher noise. I would check those reviews to see at what ISO rating the noise occurred, since the GX8's maximum ISO is 1600, compared to 400 for the LX1, which could be like comparing apples and oranges.

Nick, we could debate the name quality issue ad infinitem, but that would not be of any value to stupidlammer. Suffice it to say, quality should not be an issue.

Good points about the GX8's high speed burst mode and macro compatible flash. I thought you would have been more impressed with its 22mm wide-angle conversion lens, but you have probably already figured out a way to attach one to the LX1. :)

8:53 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#172 nick

IMHO I think we should watch what Panasonic is doing, they have things going for them now with the IS , the super zooms, and the 16x9, 8.4 sensor, I expect them to put them all together soon, they better, if they want a piece of the pie! The FZ-20 and 30 platform with the accessory 1.4x lens extender ( a beautiful hunk of glass with a super quality tripod adapter that blew me away!) is the future. I wouldn't be suprised to see more than 8mp soon.

8:56 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#173 Nick in Japan

22mm adapter on a Ricoh is like earrings on a pig

8:58 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005


I can only go by what I read. I have had no first hand experience with Ricoh ,,, or pigs. :)

9:23 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#175 nick

I may have been too critical of Ricoh, I have alot of them in my collection. There were quite a few duds produced, but quite a few inovations. They may have had the very first AF system interlocked with auto exposure evaluation. My prize is a Model 1 of 1946 in mint condition. Ricoh made a couple pro-quality cameras in the 90's too.
I used the expression to express that I dont think this GX8 has enough going for it to be an investment for anyone except... well I'll just leave it there...

9:40 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#176 Carsten Ranke

Ricoh made kind of an announcement of an announcement for a digital version of the legendary GR1 to come, to be announced @ Sept 13.
Some rumours about the features, but will be a really compact wide angle.
For me, a pocketable size AND wide angle are mandatory, I look for a backup cam for my Canon 300D, and my good old G1 is still too large, IMO.
I will wait for a review of the Ricoh GR1, for sure, and more reviews of the LX1. Canon´s new S80 is on my list, too - ok, no RAW but I have learnt about jpeg and RAW, this would be no buy-stopper if image quality is excellent.

10:56 am - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#177 Nick in Japan

This is very interesting, the GR series were all a tad over one inch thick, with the GR-1 being exactly 1 inch. It would be great if they continued their GR series reputation and got a big sensor too. The GR-21 had a 9 element lens in 6 groups and still kept it 26.5 mm thick !!, I remember almost buying one, and the MF model too, then I started collecting Half-frames and went another direction. We will be up to our ears in little 8mp cameras soon! Decisions, decisions.....

12:02 pm - Tuesday, September 6, 2005


I hope all are available, and reviewed, by end of January.

Nick, I was going to ask you what cameras you have owned, but I think it would be easier to ask what cameras you have NOT owned.

Carsten, I thought you were more interested in the S70 over the S80 because of its RAW mode. What was it about the S80 that won you over, its extra megapixel, its larger LCD, its slight performance increase, or its slightly smaller dimensions? My guess would be the larger LCD. In case it makes any difference, the S80's 2.5" LCD has fewer pixels than the S70's 1.8" LCD. That's not good.

Some more fuel for the fire. The S70's RAW mode simultaneously capture's a JPEG with your choice of quality. Based solely on part numbering, it appears that the S80's new wide-converter will also work on the S70, in addition to the S70's tele-converter. Are you sure you would want to step up to the S80? :)

7:20 pm - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#179 Carsten Ranke

Gary, now I am undecided again ;-)
It was a rumor that the S80 has better image quality, that let me tend towards the S80. Image quality is the main issue, I dont want a toy camera... Ok, the S70 is no toy at all, but the S80 is smaller and faster, and a grid overlay is a nice feature for landscapers like me.
But... If the GR1 is really alike its film ancestor, I divorce Canon and marry Ricoh, for sure ! A really small, fast P&S with a 28 mm prime, and superior handling, a dream ! Waiting for Sep 13....

8:28 pm - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#180 nick

Gary, I own lottsa film cameras, small, medium and large format, and a collection of half-frame small format (35mm), a few being Ricoh models. 20+ different twin lens models, but, as you Know there are thousands of companies that have made cameras, going back 150+ years. I have a large collection of Kodak cameras, alot being the Canadian models, as well as the old box looking cameras from the begining of the century. Alot of the early digital cameras show up at flea markets now, are are kinda unique, someday they will be collectible. I've always wanted a Hasselblad and Linhof, too pricey for this old retiree. My attraction to Mamiya, a few years ago, because I was shooting in the 80's with the 645 1000S and Press Universal, culminated with finding 2, mint 645 1000S "Golden Lizard" models, one with the 80mm 1.9 lens. I hooked up with a dealer, long ago, and purchased a few brand new Nikomats and a new, black, Olympus OM-1, of course I never used them. A few days before I transitioned to Digital 100 %, I purchased a mint, 645 Pro set, even with the 35mm back, I never used it, got too tied up with digital. The old 500 mirror lens and 120 macro that I did use and dearly loved were gonna get a work-out, but then digital came along and my life changed dramatically! I used to shoot film and slides, I boxed countless thousands of slides and negatives in hopes that someday I will get a great scanner and copy them before they fade away. I feel we can really develop our ceative side alot easier with digital because of the lack of having to wait to see what you did, it stimulates me more to know I can go and shoot hundreds of pictures, hundreds of variations and experiments with light, and it doesn't cost anything, and it's right there to look at and evaluate and enjoy, and, share. Life is just a memory, gotta get out there and capture it, appreciate it, 'cause, someday we will forget... and then, we can recall it all with our precious memories we made. One of the greatest decisions I've made in my life other than quiting smoking, drinking and fooling around , was to photo my children , EVERY day. I have 6, and I started with my last child, Little Joe, while my wife was pregnant, from then, the birth and nearly every day, I have recorded his life along with his older sister. Joe is almost 10, I cant tell you how much enjoyment going back and pulling out early albums is, for him too!... OOPS! there I go again, built you a watch when you only asked me "what time is it?" Sorry 'bout that!!!!

10:39 pm - Tuesday, September 6, 2005

#181 stupidlammer

nick, if you could, could u take some night shots w e Lx1 hand held with exposure of 1s, 1/40s, 1/60s @ iso 80, 100 and 200?

10:35 am - Wednesday, September 7, 2005

#182 stupidlammer

i realised that 1/40 and 1/60 aint much of a challenge, maby you should try 1/8s,1s, 2s or 3s instead. Do let me know how it goes if u try it out.

10:41 am - Wednesday, September 7, 2005

#183 Nick Pecukonis

Okay, we are going to Kyushu on vacation later this month, I plan on doing some sunsets, perfect time for a IS test at some slow speeds, and ASA tests too....I'll e-mail the results to you...

11:57 am - Wednesday, September 7, 2005

#184 Amazingly Amazed

Battery life, Nick, battery life!

I need to know how many shots you can take at High-JPEG 16x9 on a single charge........! Please......
No one seems to have this data yet......


5:08 pm - Wednesday, September 7, 2005


Good thing, for Nick, he is retired.:)

Nick, impressive camera collection you have there. The fact that once you converted to digital, you never looked back, says volumes about the fate of film.

Carsten and S'lammer, I'll bet you're drooling over Ricoh's R3 announcement today. If the fact that the flash and lens are at diagonally opposite ends of the camera is an effective prevention against red-eye, this could be the camera for my wife.

8:04 pm - Wednesday, September 7, 2005

#186 Carsten Ranke

Gary, it is all in the sensor... The R3 is based upon an 1/2.5" sized sensor, and the LX1 is 1/1.65" sensor size. That matters. Not the pixel count. I will have to wait until Sep 13, to see if the rumors of an APS sized sensor for the Ricoh GR1 come true - this would be a camera I would have under my pillow ;-)

9:53 pm - Wednesday, September 7, 2005

#187 Nick in Japan

When I go on our trip, I will , surely exhaust a battery, I'll be able to give you more data then... Till then, I hope this will assist you..All the following data is with IS mode 1 "On", ASA 80, in fine 16x9 mode, flash (Forced) for 1/4 total pix...
1. Normal daylight shooting yields 120 images on a 512 card.
2. Low light/ inside shooting yields 150 images on a 512 card.
3. After shooting 270 images, battery level was still on "Full"
When I get on the vacation shooting, I'll note how many pictures remain after I start getting "Low Battery" warnings.

12:35 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#188 Nick in Japan

One more thing, my data will vary from others, we all know that the DETAIL in EACH picture will determine the Total size of the picture, thus , a very detailed picture on a lighting situation that exposes alot of shadow detail, may have a size almost TWICE the size of a picture that has dark shadows and washed out whites. Reading a histogram can get you out of alot of trouble before you pull the trigger, luckily , right next to the Grid overlay selection is the histogram selection, when in doubt, a quick check will maybe save that "Once in a life-time" shot from getting washed out, or , enough pixels to work with in Photoshop, or your individual RAW conversion program

12:51 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


Hope you will be taking your computer with you on vacation. :)

1:30 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#190 nick

Yes, I have a Dell True Mobile PCMCIA card, inverter on a truck battery in a picnic cooler, trying to find a good Satellite signal Tracking device so I can get the dish on the Van's roof and tweak it to the signal I am using, one of my projects, cant miss Fox News on the road, Japanese TV is TERRIBLe!!!! I use 2 Sony GRT-170s, one for Photoshop/E-mail, one for Surfing, with Photoshop back-up....... Tech Question for you! Why wont my Sunpak flat panel flashes (Slave operated, they work!) Sync with my LX-1 when I use the camera flash to trigger the flash slaves. I watch the flat panels fire, but there is a darkening of the image taken, and not brightening...???Its like they are there at all.

4:09 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


Wow! That is a very interesting phenomena. It's like the camera is sensing the slave flash and automatically trying to compensate for it by decreasing the exposure, but in trying to do so, it is overcompensating. Have you tried this with all manual settings?

BTW, even though I completely agree with Carsten's comment, I am trying to figure out a good way to explain that comparing a 1/2.5" 4x3 CCD with a 1.65" 16x9 CCD is comparing apples and oranges.

4:51 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


Carsten, I agree with you completely that a bigger sensor is better, but the difference is not as great as the CCD dimensions would indicate, since the 1/2.5" dimension for the R3 is the diagonal of its 4x3 CCD, whereas the 1/6.5" dimension for the LX1 is the diagonal of its 16x9 CCD.

In reality, if you strip off the left and right edge pixels of the LX1's 16x9 CCD, leaving a 12x9=4x3 CCD, the diagonal measurement would be 1.8". So you really should be comparing the R3's 1/2.5" CCD with the LX1's 1/1.8" CCD in 4x3 mode.

But it does not stop there. In 4x3 mode, the LX1 is cramming 6.2 megapixels into its 1/1.8" CCD, whereas the R3 is cramming only 5.0 megapixels into its 1/2.5" CCD. If you do the math you will find that, while the LX1 has the advantage of higher image resolution (i.e., 6.2 vs. 5.0 megapixels, for any given image), the R3 will have slightly larger pixels, which is an advantage with respect to signal to noise ratio (i.e., lower noise).

6:02 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#193 nick

I think I have it figured out, it appears that the flash emitted from the LX-1 is some sort of pulse flash, the initial flash, kinda like the red-eye flash, but much faster, is the one that triggers the slave units on the Flat Panel flashes, THEN, when the second burst emits and evidently the shutter activates, the flat panels have already done their business and , so there is no fill flash recorded. Maybe Panasonic has some kind of pulse system..??? I guess this means slave work with this camera is a no-go!

6:54 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#194 stupidlammer

The ricoh's only gonna be 5Mp?

7:10 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


Nick, try turning OFF the AF assist lamp. No thanks necessary. :)

7:50 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


BTW, AF focus assist lamp is fixed ON in AUTO mode.

8:05 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#197 nick

Thanks but no thanks! Assist lamp is IR in this model, IR has no affect on a slave. The pulse in the flash is evident in all modes, and even in Manual at all speeds. Tech info on the workings of this flash system may have the clue to its "Pulse" I feel there is a reason they incorporated it, why, is the question. If there is a good reason for it, then thats good, but if there is no reason , then they just prevented slave fash assist, BOO!

8:25 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005

#198 Amazingly Amazed

FOX NEWS??? Are you ####### kidding? THE worst kind of enter-news-ment in the world! Completely biased and skewed to the Nth degree in the wrong direction!

You could at least do us all proud by watching the BBC.
If you're going to go through all that trouble just to get shitty news reporting, why Fox News? I know, cos it's entertaining. See? Just the worst.......

Anyways, I look forward to hearing about your battery tests. I'm very much interested in this because so far, I do not own a camera without an optical viewfinder. Having to use the LCD the whole time to make adjustments and then taking the shot, I wonder what the real world results are like.

8:39 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


Nick, so sorry, I gave it my best shot.

8:50 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005


One thing still does not make sense. Even if the flash were pulsing, it would not make sense to pulse it while the shutter is closed (and I assume you do not have red-eye ON). The camera just does not have that kind of battery power to waste. Are you sure the IR AF focus assist lamp is not triggering the slave flash ???

9:00 am - Thursday, September 8, 2005