LX3 - REVIEW BY USA TODAY
Note: This review is full of weird statements. (Can you really compare the LX3's 720p HD24p video with the G10's 640 x 480 (30 fps). Since when is a RAW file an uncompressed jpeg?)
Labels:
LX3 REVIEWS,
LX3 VIDEOS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Canon superior in low light? O_o
USA Today review fail.
The G10 is better in low light? What is this idiot smoking? ISO for ISO, the LX3 is better... Plus: The LX3's f2.0 lens lets you shoot at ISO 200 where the G10 would have to be at 400.
Epic Fail.
An utterly useless review by someone who has absolutely no idea what he's jabbering about.
I haven't personally compared the cameras side by side, but it seems so obvious by every review I've ever read ( which is a lot) that even g10 fans consider the lx3 superior in low light. I can only guess that he is being paid off . . .
G10 has the consumer look - heavy noise reduction, mushy details.
If the guy (who btw. underexposed the lx3 image, duh, lx3 auto exposure is not bad, just tuned as to avoid blown highlights man, learn your exposure stuff) thinks that more visible grain = worse low-light performance, then let him and all the auto-mode P&Shooters with him think so. All the better for us with our smaller, cuter and better low-light shooting lx3 :). Panasonic's sales will be ok, people who care about quality know what's good.
I totally agree with you all. I am happy to see that you reacted :)
He forgot to mention the G10 is a big fat beast, not really suitable as a "compact".
what a stupid review.
Post a Comment