Going from an RX100 to a LX100?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by kmpod, Mar 2, 2015.

  1. kmpod

    kmpod Mu-43 Rookie

    Jun 5, 2012
    My dilemma: my much-loved RX100 has died after 2.5 years of hard use. I've used it as a (jacket) pocket camera alongside my E-M5 system.

    I've been trying to make the decision on its replacement, narrowing my choices to the Sony RX100iii and the Panasonic LX100.

    Here's my problem - I went to my nearest camera store and tried both of them in the hand and the LX100 was an easy winner for me in terms of ergonomics. I really liked the direct dial controls and almost everything else about it. I'm accustomed to the lack of a tilt screen on the RX100, and although it would be nice to have it, it is not a factor in my decision. The size isn't a problem either as I only use a jacket pocket or a purse to carry the camera.

    What is making me waver in my decision is going from a 20mp sensor to, effectively, a 12.8mp sensor. I went to Imaging Resource and I thought I could notice a distinct difference between the photos they had posted for each, although my husband couldn't distinguish between the two. Also, the sample images were jpegs and I always shoot in raw, so it's hard to say how much of the difference was due to the difference in the jpeg processing.

    What I'm looking for is someone with firsthand experience in making the transition from the Rx100 to the Lx100. How did you cope with the drop in resolution? Did you find it was enough of a problem to reduce your enjoyment of the camera? Or did the other pluses in the system outweigh the difference?

    Did you notice a difference in print quality? I do print, using an Epson 3800, and only occasionally do I print larger than 13X19.

    Any opinions would be appreciated.
  2. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I think the more important question is whether you want a truly pocketable camera - the rx100 (whichever version) - or whether the lx100 is small enough. For me, even coat pocketing, anything bigger than an rx100 is too big for a constant carry.
  3. MadMarco

    MadMarco Mu-43 Veteran

    Oct 30, 2014
    Guildford, England
    This is pretty much my thinking. I'm not sure that I would consider anything bigger than the RX100 as pocketable.

    I guess it depends on how big your pockets are ;)
  4. kmpod

    kmpod Mu-43 Rookie

    Jun 5, 2012
    Honestly, I was pleasantly surprised when I handled the camera. It is indeed larger and heavier than the RX100, but all the comments about its size and weight had me imagining it to be much bulkier than it actually is. It felt good in the hand, and I don't have large hands. To me, as much as I loved it, the Rx100 always felt a bit like a toy.

    My main concern is the image quality. A number of reviews mention a small but negligible loss of detail compared to the RX100iii. What I'm wondering is if that loss is indeed negligible when one is accustomed to the output from the RX100. Keep in mind that I'll be processing from raw.
  5. kmpod

    kmpod Mu-43 Rookie

    Jun 5, 2012
    My shirts have no pockets and would never consider putting a camera in my pants pocket. I need all that space for myself.

    I'm confident that a jacket pocket or a purse would accommodate the Lx100.

    The lens cap issue would be an aggravation though. I manage to lose great numbers of my E-M5 caps. From what I understand the petal caps aren't in stock anywhere yet.
  6. MoonMind

    MoonMind Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 25, 2014
    Three things:

    Firstly, I have handled an RX100 III and own the LX100 - it's simply night and day for me, the RX100 didn't even come close to satisfying my handling needs. That said, you could carry a RX100 III in your pants pocket - not comfortably, but pretty well nontheless. It's just something I no longer do - it's bad for the camera as well as for the pants ...

    Secondly, if (and only if) you're prone to do a lot(!) of pixel peeping, you'll see anything like a considerable difference between the RX100 and LX100 files in terms of detail. The files that come out of the LX100 are nice and crisp and, for the most port, plenty sharp - especially at moderate print sizes like the one you specified (at an appropriate viewing distance and using sensible resolutions, even less would suffice). Just one thing: The LX100's lens benefits from being stopped down a little (something you can do oh so easily because of the aperture ring in aperture priority mode!).

    Thirdly, 20Mpix allow for more cropping without too much of a decisive loss in terms of pixel count. I don't usually crop in any significant way, so I don't care. But maybe someone else will.

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.