1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Panasonic GM5 or Panasonic lx100

Discussion in 'Panasonic Cameras' started by microfourthirdsnut, May 24, 2015.

  1. microfourthirdsnut

    microfourthirdsnut Mu-43 Regular

    72
    Oct 8, 2012
    Thinking of selling my GM5 and getting the lx100 I did look at the lx100 image thread and noticed most are shooting raw. I hate spending to much time on my computer so I shoot jpegs. The lx100 would be used mostly for vacations.
    Any thoughts? Only thing I would be limited by the lens with the lx100...
     
  2. Palmguy

    Palmguy Mu-43 Regular

    60
    Mar 3, 2013
    Orlando, FL
    Why do you want to switch?
     
  3. tyrphoto

    tyrphoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2014
    Seoul | NYC
    ㅇtㅈyㅅr
    I'm curious as to why you would want switch and what you would gain in the process.
     
  4. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    The only difference I can see from GM5 with the 12-32 and the LX-100 is the faster lens (two stops). But with the GM5 you can use a 40-150 or a 35-100 pancake to cover all the rest.
    I do not think there are problems with the jpeg once you tune the parameters (sharpness, denoise, saturation, etc.) to your liking.
     
  5. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    If you don't like to shoot RAW, you might not be happy with the out-of-camera JPEGs from the LX100. They have a lot more noise reduction than I typically like and I'm not sure they do the lens justice. I would say just make sure that you enjoy the output from LX100's JPEGs.

    I was going to add that I don't really like the JPEGs out of Panasonics generally, but I suppose I need to expand that by saying "I don't like JPEGs, generally," since Olympus, Fuji, and Sony all have their own problems.
     
  6. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I'm considering the same two currently. I like the idea of the LX100 with the fast glass, it's like having the 12-35 or 12-40. But I've heard the same thing as Turbo. The LX100 can take work to get things they way you like them. Whether it's more in camera settings work or post I'm not sure. But I don't mind post work so it's not really an issue for me.

    What's actually more of a question for me is do I need that level of control? I'm probably going to be in "P" mode with exposure comp, occasionally in "A" for macro stuff on this camera. My main goal is to add a viewfinder in something to replace my GM1. I've even considered the RX100m3 since I have other another m4/3 body + other systems.
     
  7. microfourthirdsnut

    microfourthirdsnut Mu-43 Regular

    72
    Oct 8, 2012
    Well I went and looked at a lot of pics from my GM5 and I don't know what I was thinking looking at the LX100 the pics out of my GM5 are great. Maybe it was a touch of G.A.S. that had me looking at the lx100. Now if I was shooting video maybe it would be worth it but I decided to keep my GM5
    I have the 12-32mm and the tiny 35-100mm and the panny 15mm would be dumb selling the camera because the lenses really make the camera almost perfect for vacations were the EM1 might be to much to lug around.
    Only reason I don't mess with raw I hate spending to much of my free time on the computer, since retiring I have less free time now then when I was working.
     
  8. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    Without knowing what other glass you have I'm not sure I'd sell the 15mm. The little zooms are great but I would want at least something fast to pair with them just in case.

    I agree on the 12-50, though I would rather 12-60. It would be nice to have something with that range in a much smaller package.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    One wonders what the largest zoom range that can be pancaked is...the Panasonic 14-42 isn't much bigger, but they obviously felt that cutting the long end short in exchange for a wider 12mm was necessary. Whether that was dictated by image quality or size requirements, who knows?