Questioning my LX100

[50orsohours]

Is the camera handheld or on a tripod?

Here is the Flickr group for the LX100

https://www.flickr.com/photos/camer...G2-oKiEHX-pojCXd-poko7Z-oHYat8-pogYLD-pFSwii/

 

[Dayam]

I would assume you may have a defective unit. Considering you've done all the focusing tests that have been suggested.

Looking at the pictures from the LX100 thread (https://www.mu-43.com/threads/70418/), they seem quite sharp compared to the pictures you've posted.

I'd suggest to have it exchanged if under warranty.

 

[Halaking]

Lx100 crop the M43 sensor to 12.5 mp, all the pictures I see are shot in over cast day and focused at the tree leaves, even full frame is difficult to get a good sharp shot at this situation.

You need much higher MP to see sharp shot when you enlarge it.

 

[DennisC]

None of the images look good to me.
I would return it and try another copy.

 

[Desert_B]

Can't return it since it's been too long. Will have to send it to Panasonic, which I don't mind except that my trip is coming up.

Could another LX100 user take similar shots and see how they turn out?

My unit does fine (acceptable) under *other* circumstances -- like when the subject is nearer to the camera (really close, or mid-distance). RAW to LR, SOOC.

34 mm, ISO 1000, f 4.0, 1/500sec

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Desert_B]

Lx100 crop the M43 sensor to 12.5 mp, all the pictures I see are shot in over cast day and focused at the tree leaves, even full frame is difficult to get a good sharp shot at this situation.

You need much higher MP to see sharp shot when you enlarge it.

FWIW, the first few pics are from a sunny day, either mid-day or a a few hours before golden hour.
But, I appreciate very much your perspective here.

 

[Desert_B]

Close to 100% crop. RAW, no PP. This kind of image has been quite satisfactory, especially after PP.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Desert_B]

Browsing Flickr, I see *very* few shots of, well, trees. Mainly urban environments, or nature shots where subject is up close.
https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=lx100

 

[Desert_B]

Is the camera handheld or on a tripod?

Here is the Flickr group for the LX100

https://www.flickr.com/photos/camer...G2-oKiEHX-pojCXd-poko7Z-oHYat8-pogYLD-pFSwii/

Handheld.

 

[cputeq]

If you have any sort of filter on the camera, remove it and test.
It could just be, though, that the camera's not very sharp when shooting high-detail, distant subjects.

 

[Desert_B]

If you have any sort of filter on the camera, remove it and test.
It could just be, though, that the camera's not very sharp when shooting high-detail, distant subjects.

No filter.
I do think you may be on to something here. When I see people's pics from the LX100, the pics are not of the genre I've been struggling with here.

 

[Desert_B]

More testing.

Manual focus, handheld, ISO 200, 17mm, f5.0, 1/500sec

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

iA mode (tried to get focus points to cooperate), ISO 200, 24mm, f5.6, 1/500sec

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Desert_B]

Autofocus, ISO 200, 24 mm, f5.0, 1/500 sec. SOOC.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Desert_B]

I'm feeling a bit better today about how my LX100 is performing, though I cant fully explain some of the truly crummy results I've gotten in the past. Will keep testing and possibly send the camera to Panasonic if I get more unexplained crummy results. Meanwhile, I have an EM10 on the way and may take that or my G5 on my upcoming trip.

 

[b_rubenstein]

To test sharpness, the camera needs to be mounted on a tripod, and some sort of resolution target needs to be used. There are lots of places to download the USAF target. Hand held shots of stuff is so random with a near infinite number of variable so as to be virtually pointless.

 

[tkbslc]

To test sharpness, the camera needs to be mounted on a tripod, and some sort of resolution target needs to be used. There are lots of places to download the USAF target. Hand held shots of stuff is so random with a near infinite number of variable so as to be virtually pointless.

If I had to do that to decide if my camera/lens was sharp, I'd give up photography. Low ISO, good light, medium aperture, easy AF target, and you will have sharp pictures if the camera is capable of them.

 

[Halaking]

Since you have other M43 cameras, can you try to shoot M43 + prime VS LX100 at the same scene and using the same setting?

 

[Desert_B]

Since you have other M43 cameras, can you try to shoot M43 + prime VS LX100 at the same scene and using the same setting?

Yesterday I did some quick & dirty comparison shots between the LX100 and an EPL3 + kit lens. (I had read somewhere that it's more fair to compare the LX100 to a zoom of some type rather than a prime.) I left one kid at an appointment and one kid in the waiting room while I ran across the road to a green area, to do my test shots. Parent of the year, I am.

Still need to examine the results of those shots. While not a perfect test by any means, it does give me *some* perspective. I do spend a fair amount of time pixel peeping images from my Canon 6D+decent glass, so it's easy to lose perspective on what my expectations should be.

 

[Halaking]

I"m sorry to see this, I really want to get the LX100 as do it all small package camera when it came out, but I have both Olympus and Panasonic cameras, since I have GX7 with some M43 lenses, so I didn't jump in for G.A.S..

There are many LX100 owners in our forum, I wish they give more comments about it.

 

[Theo]

The biggest selling point of LX100 is the bright integrated zoom lens in a compact package. We can't expect it to beat an ILC with a similar bright lens.