I've printed and sold 24x36 inch prints made with a Ricoh GR Digital III from 2010 which had a similar sensor. I sold the images in 2010 when I made them, and continue to sell those same images today. I think over processing is what killed your images, not the sensor. In the old days we didn't process, we developed. Big difference. People interchange the word develop and process, these are not the same. Developing makes an image based on what was there. Processing pulls out information not viewable in the file or in the physical scene. Best example is astro-photography, you can't see the milky way in most places, but if you process a photo you can "make" it visible, while a developed photo would not show it.
I enjoy shooting my Canon Powershot G5 (5 megapixel). Originally someone paid $800 for it. I got it for $3 at a thrift store. Looks and work perfect. I don’t know how enlarged prints would look, but to me on social media and small prints it takes excellent photos. All the best. Jim from Georgia
I have a Powershot too - and it is actually a decent "macro style" camera. I can get pretty close to subjects with the tiny 28-112 mm lens that's built into it. An internet site looked up just now says that the aperture is around F/5. For years I took most of my blog hobby shots (things like small integrated circuits and whatnot) - with that camera. I have an old Sigma SD-14 I used until very recently when the mirror spring broke. Old stuff can still DO!
I've never tried to print anything from my 5 megapixels Olympus Camedia C 5050, but I love the rendering of the colors and general contrast I can obtain in bw. It has so much character. Ok it's slow, really slow, but it has its tricks to become a bit faster.
I gave my 13 year old Nikon D300 to my daughter . The 12 Megapixel sensor looses just over stop in dynamic range to my now old D800 and about a stop in noise. The build quality is just as good if not better and it does whatever I asked of it in all the years I had it . Clever marketing has us believe that we can not live without this gizmo and that gizmo, endless menus, zillions of auto focus modes, ISO 128000 ( I can write a book about this digital ISO fallacy ) and so on and on. Photography is a different thing though. Great presentation as usual. Thanks and stay Corona free.
I had the LX3 and absolutely loved it. Some of my favourite images came from it, and it was nicely portable. Unfortunately I lost on a particularly energetic days sking in France. Hopefully someone found it in the spring and got to use it. The only drawback was no viewfinder.
Up until 2010 I was only a little interested in photography. I wanted to understand more, I bought the LX5. That camera taught me so much. I still have it but I don't use it any longer because I am spoilt now, I am used to better. I do have a soft spot for the LX5, I can't bring myself to sell it. It was great to see this video. There is one thing I would like to add, that this camera has style and if I think about it, that is part of the reason I enjoyed using it and learnt so much. It looks great, I have the leather half case, it was so old school to use. Also, in this video it was low light, bad weather, I think this camera is still great for travel, especially a sunny holiday.
Love your videos all the time! I have the same camera. It's been a long time I've never use it for photo shooting. Even though it's not longer useful for taking pictures, I usually use it as my 4x5 light meter. Tiny, light weight, full manual control, spot metering. Absolutely perfect for precisely zone system metering.
Thank you for your time in the field. Being a fan of the LX series cameras I was looking forward to your findings. Almost all of my photography has been done on an LX7. A really good knock about and both the lens and the full manual mode make it a great tool. My first Lumix was the LX5 but found the LX7 to be superior. But I will agree with your disappointment as to the A2 prints, it seems to be too much a push.
My Fujifilm X-E1 with its 16-50mm ois-2 - darn sharp @ f6. 4 - is the camera I always use on my walks. I can strongly recommend this combo for landscapes on a budget.
Steve, running out of superlatives to compliment your videos! You are a master of mood and light. The sensor issue reminds me of old film days - technology produced better and better films as time went on - better grain structures, better color rendition, etc. Likewise film size - 110, (can't even bring myself to think long about Disc!), 126, 135, 120, 4x5 etc. So many parallels, really. Fortunately we have reached a point where the capabilities and quality allow us to shoot pictures in many different forms and styles as you demonstrate so well each week. Cheers, and godspeed to you and your family.
You make a good point, those tiny film formats have many parallels with early digicams. The harsh look I ended up with felt like Velvia when there was too much dynamic range for it to handle - not pleasant.
I've got a 2001 Olympus E-10N with a 5MP sensor that I still like shooting with because of the unique look it can achieve. The autofocus went out on it, but I can still manually focus. I can't enlarge the images much, but it makes smaller prints that are nice. Since it uses AA batteries, I can use it whenever I want as long as I have batteries handy.
Thank you for this. It is so easy to succumb to the siren song of the newest and "greatest." I have a Canon Eos 1100D (Rebel 3 here in the States), and I recently bought a Lumix GF2 and 14-42 Micro 4/3 from Ebay for around $110 USD. I could shoot every day for hours at a time and still not fully exhaust the capabilities of these nearly 10 year old cameras.
Thank you Steve! Folks like you, and others continuing to make great videos, are helping keep us entertained during these difficult times. I hope you and your family/friends avoid the virus and stay safe.
I had a lx3. Best camera ever had. The fun I had with that little camera I never had again. But yeah. The photos are not on par with today's ones. I hope panasonic will learn from his past and from what trends now (I'm talking about the x100v and ricoh grIII).
*Good video and good pictures:* Small, old digital cameras are convenient and fun to use, and the results are good enough for posting images on a web page. The Panasonic LX5 has a 1/1.63" CCD sensor (8.07 x 5.56 mm). Assuming that f/5.6 gives about the optimum balance between diffraction-limited optics and lens aberrations, then a simple calculation based on the theory of optics and Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, suggests the real digital resolution expressed in pixels is about 3.2 megapixels. So, 10 megapixels is a bit optimistic, and probably explains the over-processed appearance of the images. It might be worth scaling the image to, say, 2162 x 1489 pixels, then interpolate back up to a high resolution for printing using a Gaussian basis, followed by a light application of unsharp mask. This will look a bit soft, which is a truer representation of the original, real optical image, but will remove the ugly artificial mess.
f5.6 is optimal for full frame 35mm, but may be well into diffraction territory on a tiny sensor. Micro four thirds has maximum centre sharpness around f3.5 in my experience, quite close to maximum aperture on many lenses. Little sensors don't have much aperture wiggle room for sharpness, at least when printing big.
@@borderlands6606 I have an LX2 converted to infrared. I always shoot wide open at 2.8, only stopping down to f4 if the light is really bright. Any smaller aperture and the resolution suffers badly.
I love that you made such a big impression from a small sensor with only 10 MPX but very decent lens. Logically, looking at such a short distance an A2 enlargement certain problems will appear but that's because you're getting too close to see them. I think there are plenty of cameras well under $100 with M43 sensors that would handle that upscaling to A2 size even better. You are showing that there is no reason to condemn these cameras to the category of "cameras for social media". Thank you Steve.
I still own an LX7 (one generation newer than the LX5) and love it. Only 10MP, but I have a magnificent 24"x36" B&W framed aluminum print of the north shore of Northern Ireland taken with it that is to this day one of my prized images ever.
Thanks for your video! I love your honesty. I myself shot tons of foto's on a LX3 way back, loved that camera quite a lot, especially the quality of the lens. After that one broke down I bought myself a LX7 an went on taking foto's. Even now in 2021 I'm impressed by the sharpness of the lens and the possibilities the f1,4 gives me. As your video proves it it not suitable for large prints or extreme crops due to the small sensor. But I will keep on using it ocasionally!
Hiya Steve, hope you're keeping well. When our old cameras weren't old we thought they were superb. Now we compare their results to our latest tech gear and the 'limitations' can disappoint. I love working with my latest DSLR or CSC - megapixels coming out of my ears - but I also enjoy using my old Canon G10 compact from day to day. It fits my pocket, has simple controls and provides me with RAW files that are converted to JPGs for emailing to family and friends or publishing on Facebook. Your video has inspired me to try making an A3 print from the G10 - a mini project to stop me banging my head against the wall in these frustrating times. Take care, my friend, and stay safe.
Thanks for your professional and realistic valuation of the picture quality. Good contrast to many other UA-cam‘ers which actually just producing content without real understanding!
Another really compelling video Steve. I still have my LX-7 I bought new for a trip. Never really bonded with mine for some reason and used it very little. I was looking forward to the macro feature which was easy to use, but honestly my old Canon APS-C camera with the cheap 24mm pancake lens was much better for me. .
Thanks for this videos! I still use my Sigma DP2 (2009) frequently. Love his sharp images. You probably have one of those Sigma gems, but if you don't, you must try it. I think you gone a love it.
Hey man, I really enjoy your delivery. Its so obvious that you are deeply interested in the craft and it is never about you as a youtuber. The pace of the videos is also very natural which makes it super engaging. Subscribed.
Always enjoy your videos and this was no exception. I do, however, miss your images and discussions with your 4x5. Those were what got me hooked in the first place. Being "hooked" there's no going back, but I do hope you revisit LF sometime soon.
Thanks Jim, I’m missing the 4x5 too but it’s not been possible to take it out for the past few months due to the awful weather we’ve experienced. It’s been such a shame that the last 7 days have been absolutely glorious here but since we are locked down I’m stuck with editing together older material for now 😕. Someone else has suggested I do a quick video on how I pack my 4x5 for carrying and also what a really minimal kit would look like - I might film that this week 🙂
My LX7 is still one of my favorite cameras. So much so that I bought a second one when they discontinued them just in case. It's in my pocket all the time. I believe the LX5 has CCD sensor rather than CMOS. Wonder if that has anything to do with the image quality you was getting? One thing I've noticed is that the build quality of the older LX7 and GF1 is better than the newer Panasonic compacts. The LVF2 optional viewfinder for the LX7 is much better than the LVF1 for the LX5 and the lens on the LX7 is a 1.4 to 2.3 . Really enjoy your videos. Thanks.
I’ve also found the build quality has dropped, the LX5 is better made than my G9. I think you are right about the sensor, it’s not as good as other small compacts I had 6 or 7 years ago.
I'm still looking at pictures my father made in 1947. Black and white and beautifully contrast and definition absolutely sharp. Taken from a tripod. I suspect it's up to the photographer. He at one time used a plate camera and the negative would make a positive print. Miss those days, there was pride in what we did.
Great subject and well executed.... I had wondered the same thing but pretty much analog now. Really good capture. Very smart have some vlogs in the can before being shut in. Godd luck and stay safe
This was a great video on a subject I have been wondering about for some time now. I have taken out my 2009 vintage Ricoh GRD III small sensor, 10 MP camera lately and have been pleasantly surprised at the sharpness of the images and by how much the noise in it's pictures looks like film grain. On the other hand, I spent this morning looking through my old Canon Supershot G9 images and found myself somewhat surprised at how bad many of them look, although there were some good ones I had overlooked back in the day. I haven't tried to print anything but relatively small prints from either lately but since many shots look good at social media size but fall apart on pixel peeping, I suspect most would look good as small prints but make terrible big ones. I intend to use the Ricoh around the house and when I want something in my pocket when out and about. And when I want the final image to be black and white because you are right - the colors also are not great on these older small sensor cameras, even if I shot them in RAW. Anyhow, thanks for another interesting, and for me at least, very timely. video.
The colours are pretty bad Jeffrey but providing you stick to A3 the prints aren’t too bad. Technology has definitely moved on with these small sensors and I won’t be going back.
Love this idea Steve. They're just as good as they were when they were the best thing on the market. [And having got to the end...] That B&W shot was a very nice scene, but I see what you're saying. I wouldn't even have thought of trying to go for A2. The LX5 is similar tech to my GF1 M43 camera, and I think most of my favourite photos were shot on that before I upgraded a couple of years later. RAW images are great for online use and A4 or 16" prints though, particularly when dynamic range isn't too high.
Thanks Graham. To be fair to the LX5 it held up quite well when the dynamic range was low and I had optimum apertures. That B&W scene was just too contrasty.
I have the same camera, the Leica D-Lux 5 version and I’ve found it works extremely well. Simply work within its limits and you can create some beautiful images with it.
Just an fyi stopping down to f5.6 is a no go and puts you well into diffraction. In realistic terms with the small sensor wide open at f2 is ffe f8-9 with a similar depth of field. Best setting for prints is stay at f2-2.8 and don’t venture above iso 400. For super harsh conditions a filter tube is still sold that can screw on the camera and accept 52mm filters, throw on a cpl and it’s amazing what you can get out of this camera. I have printed pictures at 16x20 that are every bit as good as 35mm film or 26mp apsc sensor shots, a touch soft for sure but very pleasing on a quality matte paper to the point that I have displayed them on multiple occasions.
Diffraction effects are overrated in my own experience although they are noticeable if you look for them. I’d rather get the depth of field I need so if a small aperture is required so be it. On that little digicam the smaller apertures held up very well and it was the sheer lack of resolution that held it back.
You had me there. I really liked my LX5. Lovely camera. Sold it in 2016 I think. For the first half of the video you had me regretting it! Still a nice camera for family snaps so I hope whoever got it is still enjoying it. Certainly good enough for really nice Instagram/Facebook photos.
I’ll be honest Bryan the images looked awful in print, that camera never got used again. I recently compared an original model Sony RX10 with the 1” sensor against my iPhone 14 Pro and that is yet another camera that’s now redundant.
I bought ton of new cameras over the years but something about 4meg Casio QV4000 with canon lens resonated with me since I took gorgeous pictures of my sons and family.Out of nostalgia I bought again same camera from ebay.Sure its slow clunky but still creates gorgeous photos.
I have a similar affection for images made with my first digital camera, a 4mp Canon compact. They are sharper and more pleasing than those from the next generation cameras that packed in too many pixels.
Great video, I like you was pulling for the little camera to deliver better results and as you honestly indicated, it is perhaps too limited to make the cut for many uses. I found your comparison of the images to the performance of film quite useful. One may not always consider the nature of dynamic range in film when using an older digital camera and the possible better choice, given a choice. Thanks for the video!
You’re welcome John. I honestly expected more but I think I had the rose tinted glasses on. I recall a friend making some excellent A3 prints from his after a lot of skilful processing and I automatically assumed A2 would be fine with any scene.
Steve, I have an old Canon G2, bought from a pawn shop, for $50. I love it, it's inconspicuous, works incredibly well, and I prefer it's 4 megapixel images to any other digital camera I own. It's flexible, manual when I want or need it to be, has a very fast zoom lens, and it never attracts attention!
Interesting point. My first digicam was a 4mp canon and when it died the replacement 8mp model didn’t make as nice images. There’s often something in lower resolution images that seems to click.
What a thoughful video, thank you so much for sharing it. I still often use an even older small sensor camera, a Fuji S9600 with its 28-300mm lens. However it really does need to be kept at ISO80 to keep in line noise-wise with modern image quality, and that means a tripod and self-timer in winter or early mornings and evenings when the light is interesting so that manual control can be used. OK, a beanbag on a rock will sometimes suffice. I even got it a filter ring so that it could share the ones that go with the DSLR. For social media those small sensor cameras are fine.
Thank you so much for your videos. They're absolutely inspiring. About giving the honors to old cameras, I still have in use a 6Mp Nikon D40 making some beautiful macros and portraits combined with vintage 50mm 1.8 Nikkor and macro rings. Love the experience, because that was my first dslr and she has allowed me to earn some money to update my gear.
I purchased a Panasonic Lumix LX5 on Amazon this year and love it. It is as lightweight as the much lauded Ricoh GR III and just as easy to handle. The age of a camera makes absolutely no difference in the shots one can achieve. Just look at the photos that some of the greatest photographers took with analog cameras. I also purchased a Canon G12 and love it too. The Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, took some beautiful family photos with her Canon G12.
I have to disagree unfortunately, the LX5 has a practical limit beyond which the prints take on an unnatural look. This isn’t just down to megapixels but the actual sensor which is lacking in comparison with later generations.
Nice honest and accurate review. I own a 2014 LX-100 which I love for street and macro photography but when cropping/enlarging a MFT it deteriorates quickly. I bought a 2016 gx85 with a few lenses and a f mount adapter thinking that I'll just use the proper lens to avoid cropping and I was right. Although, putting a large lens on a MFT camera defeats the purpose of using a small camera. Yes, they have their place. It would be totally unfair to even think of comparing them to any of my full frame cameras, especially my Nikon Z7.
Difficult to compete with a modern full frame sensor Tom, my G80 and especially the G9 are good at A2 but above that a bigger sensor would show visible differences.
It always cracks me up when someone compares image quality they zoom in 100% and try to see the differences. I got 1100d and d5300 and they take absolutley fine photos, I bet 90% couldn't tell the difference not only between them, but comparing to the "holy grail" full frame ones.
Excellent! Originally, I want to sell my LX-5 on ebay, but I think I would change my mind after watching your video. Nice photo always comes from nice photographer rather than advanced technology.Thank you!
For big prints from a 10 meg camera interpolate up to 20 meg. Everybody seems to shy away from interpolation but with the right algorithm it works well. To double the megapixels only requires a 1.4 increase in horizontal and vertical pixel count. In other words the algorithm only "invents" 0.4 of a pixel in addition to each existing pixel. I use the Lanczos2 algorithm in Faststone Image Viewer (free download) and then apply a little sharpening. The results are really good and avoid the grainy, digital look you were talking about with the A2 print.
A great, informative video. So nice to see others out there using older equipment to get quality photographs! New subscriber........”keep em coming”. Regards, Jimp
Thanks for sharing your knowledge Steve you make it look so easy and it isn't i went out the other day and out of a 24 roll i only liked 5 of my composition some i thought were very good turn out to be just pictures
I have a 20 megapixel Nikon point and shoot. It's very convenient. But even though the megapixel count should be good, the sensor is just too small to get a good photo. I might as well just use my phone camera. My stepson just brought me 4 older cameras yesterday, including a Canon XT and 3 point and shoot cameras, the highest megapixels was 14.4. I offered him $20 for the lot (I could use a point and shoot on my rifle scope). He left with them. Thanks for the demonstration.
Excellent video. I enjoy purchasing used point and shoots for $20 in 2020 that cost $500 in 2008. On another note, watching your video, it surprises me how a country that's been settled for over 12,000 years still manages to have sprawling undeveloped countryside with absolutely nobody around. Extraordinary scenery.
Thanks Steven. The look of Our countryside is largely a result of intensive usage over many thousands of years. Even out rugged mountains would have been tree covered and quite different before man arrived after the last ice age. That said we are very lucky that we have so many national parks and the right to roam. .
@@SteveONions That's an interesting point and makes complete sense. Thanks for taking the time to reply to me Steve. If you have any Canon Powershots laying around, check out the CHDK hacks. The modified firmware opens up quite a lot of features. My favorite being time lapse and RAW functionality. I haven't come across anything for Lumix or Sony cameras yet but most of the Poweshots can be modified.
Thanks for the video, Steve! It’s amazing how cameras have gotten better over recent years. I have some older cameras too. From time to time I pull them out of the drawer, but there just isn’t much comparison. I enjoyed your video.
I still have an LX3 kicking around somewhere - though the battery doesn't hold much charge these days. It's a fun little piece of kit that I have a lot of affection for, but I'd concur with the results of your experiment. I had thoughts of getting an aftermarket replacement battery, but after trying it out again I'm happy just to hang onto it for nostalgia's sake.
I hasitated to buy a new digital camera the last years. I still use my old sigma foveon Merrill DP2 and 3. Although they are slow and quirky, if used properly and taken time they still deliver beautiful shots...
Hi Steve, thank you for you effort to make that video, in my opinion picture with house and trees is best of all in video. Of course there are imperfections, but it has a magic! I would really like to be there. have great journeys. Jacek
Love it. I had an LX3 that I loved, then upgraded to an LX5, I might still have the LX5 in a closet somewhere. I never thought about enlarging any of my shots, I just loved it as my pocket camera that I could take anywhere when I didn’t want to lug my canon DSLR around. I may have sold the LX5 because I have a Sony RX100 Mk2 (?) that was smaller and became my pocket camera. However, with the lockdown, I have time to go search through my closets. I might even break out my Hasselblad.
I’ve got the RX100 Mk1 and it’s a step up from the LX5. If you find the Blad and don’t want it then feel free to send it to me - I’ll even pay the postage 😀
Steve O'Nions oh I know right where the Blad is, I pieced together an awesome kit , complete with Hasselblad filters. Unfortunately, the camera bag is so big, I don’t use it enough now,
gsansoucie I bought my first LX5 as a companion to my 501CM so I could use the 1:1 mode for previewing. After a while I was using the LX5 for some final images and the Blad got jealous. PS - my Blad bag also got too heavy in the same way my SQAi kit has ‘filled out’.
I shoot with a 5 MP camera from 2005 and it still delivers good quality images up to A3 prints. I've a 24 MP full frame too and you can't compare these two cameras, but for the web, the 5 MP camera is useable still. Anyway, a thumbs up for your review.
I think in the black and white photo there was quite complex lighting (in terms of light), which did not allow us to reveal the detail. on the other hand, artistic photography has little to do with detail. here sometimes outlines or silhouettes are even possible. It seems to me that, given the capabilities of modern technology, efforts are aimed at “deteriorating” rather the picture. using a monocle, diffusers, adding effects when processing a frame, etc.
I know, I know - my ears are burning 🙂. Biggest problem is making the inside of my garage darkroom look good on video, I’ve filmed a quick intro tour but lighting is a nightmare!
I found a Lumix TZ4, a couple years back, at a sale. I'm still amazed at the quality of the photos, from this tiny camera. I'm sure the Leica lens makes a difference. I'm not sure if there are manual adjustments available. I've only used it in auto. I'd buy another, if I found one. :)
I think the enlargements and over processing was too much for the Panny. According to DXOMark the LX5 has 11 stops of dynamic range. Not good today but close to the Canon DSLRs of the time. I am getting back to using mine with the optional EVF. One trick I like is if you know you are going to print at a smaller size, turn iZoom on and get longer optical reach. Set for a 5x7 shot, you have 24-213mm range.This is not digital zoom thou the camera offers that if you want it.
Hi Leonard. I found the later model digicams with similar sized sensors much better than the LX5. Examples are the Canon S120 and Olympus Stylus 1. Both allowed greater flexibility on processing and A2 enlargements were excellent.
It all depends about subject of your photo/print. If you do not need to see fine details, resolution is not that important, but if you do (potrait, small bird) it´s a different game.
My favorite digital camera is my fujifilm X-pro 1 from 2012 it’s what I grab 90% of the time. I have a much newer fujifilm Xt4, and have had the X-pro 2 but recently sold it. There’s lots of good older cameras.
Lovely work, Steve! Great video too. Kinda miss the bitter cold, gloomy english weather. Planning to get one of these cameras for street photography. Hope I’m making a good decision 🤞🏼
@@SteveONions True... And I don't feel the need to replace it any time soon. And after the Olympus E-100RS and the Canon 5D it is just my third digital Camera in nearly 20 years...
You mentioned micro four thirds in comparison. I also have an old Lumix, in this case the FZ200, also with Leica lens. Slightly larger sensor than the LX5 and 12Mp. The results are not nearly as good as MFT, even my old friend the elderly Lumix G5. The photoreceptors used on the 16Mp MFT sensors are 3.75µ, so they're slightly larger than those used in APS-C, so they can produce prints to poster size 2-ft x 3-ft (>A1). As always the best camera is the one you have in your hand.
It was a good experiment, or re-visit. I like your honesty about it all. Seems a good camera, still, for travel where the trip is not actually about photography, but you want something along that is compact and light. On the other hand, these days, even if you had that LX5 in your possession, is your modern phone going to be just as good or better when your travel is not about photography? Perhaps it boils down to personal preference. Another good video, Steve.
Hi love the videos you are one of the reasons I started to re-shoot large format again. where do sell your equipment as like most film photographers you end up with to many and only realy use one for each format.
Hi Chris. Nearly all my sales are made through eBay unless it is a high value item (like a Hasselblad kit) which I’d then ask Ffordes to do a commission sale for me.
I never make frames but do have a mount cuter and plenty of board. Sadly I’ve not made a mount for a number of years so I’d need to practice a lot before making a video 😕
I not long bought the leica d-lux4. 10MP little powerhouse. +1 only in the highlights otherwise it will explode... 🤯 Impressive for a sensor smaller then my pinky nail tho. Love it.
I've printed and sold 24x36 inch prints made with a Ricoh GR Digital III from 2010 which had a similar sensor. I sold the images in 2010 when I made them, and continue to sell those same images today. I think over processing is what killed your images, not the sensor. In the old days we didn't process, we developed. Big difference. People interchange the word develop and process, these are not the same. Developing makes an image based on what was there. Processing pulls out information not viewable in the file or in the physical scene. Best example is astro-photography, you can't see the milky way in most places, but if you process a photo you can "make" it visible, while a developed photo would not show it.
I’m (also) curious how the ‘little house’ photo would look without processing.
I enjoy shooting my Canon Powershot G5 (5 megapixel). Originally someone paid $800 for it. I got it for $3 at a thrift store. Looks and work perfect. I don’t know how enlarged prints would look, but to me on social media and small prints it takes excellent photos. All the best. Jim from Georgia
Definetly! Social media and 6x4 prints look brilliant on those. They shot media work in the early days on digital with only a couple of megapixels
I used to have a 4mp Canon and at base ISO the A4 prints looked pretty good. It fell apart at bigger sizes.
I have a Powershot too - and it is actually a decent "macro style" camera. I can get pretty close to subjects with the tiny 28-112 mm lens that's built into it. An internet site looked up just now says that the aperture is around F/5. For years I took most of my blog hobby shots (things like small integrated circuits and whatnot) - with that camera. I have an old Sigma SD-14 I used until very recently when the mirror spring broke. Old stuff can still DO!
The G5 was epic. I've still got mine. and an A20.
I've never tried to print anything from my 5 megapixels Olympus Camedia C 5050, but I love the rendering of the colors and general contrast I can obtain in bw. It has so much character. Ok it's slow, really slow, but it has its tricks to become a bit faster.
I gave my 13 year old Nikon D300 to my daughter . The 12 Megapixel sensor looses just over stop in dynamic range to my now old D800 and about a stop in noise. The build quality is just as good if not better and it does whatever I asked of it in all the years I had it . Clever marketing has us believe that we can not live without this gizmo and that gizmo, endless menus, zillions of auto focus modes, ISO 128000 ( I can write a book about this digital ISO fallacy ) and so on and on. Photography is a different thing though. Great presentation as usual. Thanks and stay Corona free.
I had the LX3 and absolutely loved it. Some of my favourite images came from it, and it was nicely portable. Unfortunately I lost on a particularly energetic days sking in France. Hopefully someone found it in the spring and got to use it. The only drawback was no viewfinder.
Up until 2010 I was only a little interested in photography. I wanted to understand more, I bought the LX5. That camera taught me so much. I still have it but I don't use it any longer because I am spoilt now, I am used to better. I do have a soft spot for the LX5, I can't bring myself to sell it. It was great to see this video. There is one thing I would like to add, that this camera has style and if I think about it, that is part of the reason I enjoyed using it and learnt so much. It looks great, I have the leather half case, it was so old school to use. Also, in this video it was low light, bad weather, I think this camera is still great for travel, especially a sunny holiday.
I agree Michael, it works a lot better in good light and as for build quality it is top notch.
Love where you’re coming from, you did give it your best shot, so well done, and thanks for the analysis, pretty fair and honest.
Thanks Gary.
Love your videos all the time! I have the same camera. It's been a long time I've never use it for photo shooting. Even though it's not longer useful for taking pictures, I usually use it as my 4x5 light meter. Tiny, light weight, full manual control, spot metering. Absolutely perfect for precisely zone system metering.
Mike Lau Thank you for that I’ll give it a go. Appreciate the tip
What a great idea, it would make an excellent light meter 👍
Thank you for your time in the field. Being a fan of the LX series cameras I was looking forward to your findings. Almost all of my photography has been done on an LX7. A really good knock about and both the lens and the full manual mode make it a great tool. My first Lumix was the LX5 but found the LX7 to be superior. But I will agree with your disappointment as to the A2 prints, it seems to be too much a push.
Yes, up to A3 they are excellent. I have found later sensors quite a bit better, a 2014 Olympus Stylus 1 makes good A2’s.
My Fujifilm X-E1 with its 16-50mm ois-2 - darn sharp @ f6. 4 - is the camera I always use on my walks. I can strongly recommend this combo for landscapes on a budget.
I was shooting with my LX5 this past weekend. Fun little digicam!
Steve, running out of superlatives to compliment your videos! You are a master of mood and light. The sensor issue reminds me of old film days - technology produced better and better films as time went on - better grain structures, better color rendition, etc. Likewise film size - 110, (can't even bring myself to think long about Disc!), 126, 135, 120, 4x5 etc. So many parallels, really. Fortunately we have reached a point where the capabilities and quality allow us to shoot pictures in many different forms and styles as you demonstrate so well each week. Cheers, and godspeed to you and your family.
You make a good point, those tiny film formats have many parallels with early digicams. The harsh look I ended up with felt like Velvia when there was too much dynamic range for it to handle - not pleasant.
I've got a 2001 Olympus E-10N with a 5MP sensor that I still like shooting with because of the unique look it can achieve. The autofocus went out on it, but I can still manually focus. I can't enlarge the images much, but it makes smaller prints that are nice. Since it uses AA batteries, I can use it whenever I want as long as I have batteries handy.
That really is retro digital John 👍
Thank you for this. It is so easy to succumb to the siren song of the newest and "greatest." I have a Canon Eos 1100D (Rebel 3 here in the States), and I recently bought a Lumix GF2 and 14-42 Micro 4/3 from Ebay for around $110 USD. I could shoot every day for hours at a time and still not fully exhaust the capabilities of these nearly 10 year old cameras.
Very true. Let’s be honest, a M43 camera is easily comparable with 120 roll film.
Thank you Steve! Folks like you, and others continuing to make great videos, are helping keep us entertained during these difficult times. I hope you and your family/friends avoid the virus and stay safe.
I’m a public service 😀👍
Loved the Lx-5 and the 7. Great for on my motorcycle trips.
Panasonic always do their best. The sensor and the color science of lumix is excellent.
I had a lx3. Best camera ever had. The fun I had with that little camera I never had again. But yeah. The photos are not on par with today's ones. I hope panasonic will learn from his past and from what trends now (I'm talking about the x100v and ricoh grIII).
Thank you Steve, I have an LX5 and I still use it and get good shots with it
*Good video and good pictures:* Small, old digital cameras are convenient and fun to use, and the results are good enough for posting images on a web page. The Panasonic LX5 has a 1/1.63" CCD sensor (8.07 x 5.56 mm). Assuming that f/5.6 gives about the optimum balance between diffraction-limited optics and lens aberrations, then a simple calculation based on the theory of optics and Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, suggests the real digital resolution expressed in pixels is about 3.2 megapixels. So, 10 megapixels is a bit optimistic, and probably explains the over-processed appearance of the images. It might be worth scaling the image to, say, 2162 x 1489 pixels, then interpolate back up to a high resolution for printing using a Gaussian basis, followed by a light application of unsharp mask. This will look a bit soft, which is a truer representation of the original, real optical image, but will remove the ugly artificial mess.
Very interesting and detailed information, I must try those settings and do a comparison, thank you 👍
f5.6 is optimal for full frame 35mm, but may be well into diffraction territory on a tiny sensor. Micro four thirds has maximum centre sharpness around f3.5 in my experience, quite close to maximum aperture on many lenses. Little sensors don't have much aperture wiggle room for sharpness, at least when printing big.
@@borderlands6606 I have an LX2 converted to infrared. I always shoot wide open at 2.8, only stopping down to f4 if the light is really bright. Any smaller aperture and the resolution suffers badly.
I love that you made such a big impression from a small sensor with only 10 MPX but very decent lens. Logically, looking at such a short distance an A2 enlargement certain problems will appear but that's because you're getting too close to see them. I think there are plenty of cameras well under $100 with M43 sensors that would handle that upscaling to A2 size even better. You are showing that there is no reason to condemn these cameras to the category of "cameras for social media". Thank you Steve.
The later small sensors made a better job of big enlargements, certainly M43 is more than capable of big prints.
I still own an LX7 (one generation newer than the LX5) and love it. Only 10MP, but I have a magnificent 24"x36" B&W framed aluminum print of the north shore of Northern Ireland taken with it that is to this day one of my prized images ever.
They are very capable Keith in the right light and I believe the LX7 has a much improved sensor.
@@SteveONions Here's the image on my Flickr post: www.flickr.com/photos/keithp136/49709399887/in/dateposted-public/
Lovely tones Keith and I am a big fan of dune photography 👍
Hello from Canada! Love your videos and your landscape photography Steve! Keep healthy!!!
Thank you 🙂
Thanks for your video! I love your honesty. I myself shot tons of foto's on a LX3 way back, loved that camera quite a lot, especially the quality of the lens. After that one broke down I bought myself a LX7 an went on taking foto's. Even now in 2021 I'm impressed by the sharpness of the lens and the possibilities the f1,4 gives me. As your video proves it it not suitable for large prints or extreme crops due to the small sensor. But I will keep on using it ocasionally!
Good point about the LX3 and LX7, both excellent performers and top notch lenses.
Thank You Steve. I enjoyed your composition hence it does not matter what camera you used.
Thank you.
Hiya Steve, hope you're keeping well. When our old cameras weren't old we thought they were superb. Now we compare their results to our latest tech gear and the 'limitations' can disappoint. I love working with my latest DSLR or CSC - megapixels coming out of my ears - but I also enjoy using my old Canon G10 compact from day to day. It fits my pocket, has simple controls and provides me with RAW files that are converted to JPGs for emailing to family and friends or publishing on Facebook. Your video has inspired me to try making an A3 print from the G10 - a mini project to stop me banging my head against the wall in these frustrating times. Take care, my friend, and stay safe.
Hope you have fun with the G10 Ray, I’ve got an infrared converted G15 and still love using it.
Thanks for your professional and realistic valuation of the picture quality. Good contrast to many other UA-cam‘ers which actually just producing content without real understanding!
Thank you 🙂
Another really compelling video Steve. I still have my LX-7 I bought new for a trip. Never really bonded with mine for some reason and used it very little. I was looking forward to the macro feature which was easy to use, but honestly my old Canon APS-C camera with the cheap 24mm pancake lens was much better for me. .
A friend of mine traded his LX5 for an LX7 and also hated it Jon. Funny how some cameras just don’t work out for us.
Love the grain from the old CCD small sensors. Thanks I watched this just recently as I’m planning to buy this camera.
Hope you find a good one Neil, they were built to a very high standard and have a real quality feel.
Thanks for this videos! I still use my Sigma DP2 (2009) frequently. Love his sharp images. You probably have one of those Sigma gems, but if you don't, you must try it. I think you gone a love it.
I’ve always wanted to try a Sigma 🤔
Thought about these older digital cameras myself, thanks won't go that route.
Just processed some 35mm B&W film which looks great 👍🙂
Hey man, I really enjoy your delivery. Its so obvious that you are deeply interested in the craft and it is never about you as a youtuber. The pace of the videos is also very natural which makes it super engaging. Subscribed.
Thank you very much 😊
Always enjoy your videos and this was no exception. I do, however, miss your images and discussions with your 4x5. Those were what got me hooked in the first place. Being "hooked" there's no going back, but I do hope you revisit LF sometime soon.
Thanks Jim, I’m missing the 4x5 too but it’s not been possible to take it out for the past few months due to the awful weather we’ve experienced. It’s been such a shame that the last 7 days have been absolutely glorious here but since we are locked down I’m stuck with editing together older material for now 😕. Someone else has suggested I do a quick video on how I pack my 4x5 for carrying and also what a really minimal kit would look like - I might film that this week 🙂
Understand. Look forward to whatever videos you can produce. Be safe.
Thanks Jim.
Terrible conditions, beautiful images. Inspirational ❗️
I seem to get my best shots in this sort of weather Bill 🙂
So refreshing to find this video, so many UA-camr are pushing buying the latest and greatest in hope of getting sponsors and views. 😊
I can’t imagine any camera manufacturer wanting to sponsor me (maybe Holga?)
My LX7 is still one of my favorite cameras. So much so that I bought a second one when they discontinued them just in case. It's in my pocket all the time. I believe the LX5 has CCD sensor rather than CMOS. Wonder if that has anything to do with the image quality you was getting? One thing I've noticed is that the build quality of the older LX7 and GF1 is better than the newer Panasonic compacts. The LVF2 optional viewfinder for the LX7 is much better than the LVF1 for the LX5 and the lens on the LX7 is a 1.4 to 2.3 . Really enjoy your videos. Thanks.
I’ve also found the build quality has dropped, the LX5 is better made than my G9. I think you are right about the sensor, it’s not as good as other small compacts I had 6 or 7 years ago.
I still have the Lumix LX2. It was a good one way back. A very interesting video for me, thank you! The landscape is looking so nice there! Take care!
Thanks Andreas.
I'm still looking at pictures my father made in 1947. Black and white and beautifully contrast and definition absolutely sharp. Taken from a tripod. I suspect it's up to the photographer. He at one time used a plate camera and the negative would make a positive print. Miss those days, there was pride in what we did.
Real craftsmanship Theodore, when pictures were treasured.
Great subject and well executed.... I had wondered the same thing but pretty much analog now. Really good capture. Very smart have some vlogs in the can before being shut in. Godd luck and stay safe
Cheers Randy, all the best 👍
Hey I've been shooting an LX3 for a while as my little digital I take with me when shooting my 4x5 and other film cams. I love it!
Love the honesty here. Awesome content, regardless of it not going how you planned.
Thanks Datman 👍
This was a great video on a subject I have been wondering about for some time now. I have taken out my 2009 vintage Ricoh GRD III small sensor, 10 MP camera lately and have been pleasantly surprised at the sharpness of the images and by how much the noise in it's pictures looks like film grain. On the other hand, I spent this morning looking through my old Canon Supershot G9 images and found myself somewhat surprised at how bad many of them look, although there were some good ones I had overlooked back in the day. I haven't tried to print anything but relatively small prints from either lately but since many shots look good at social media size but fall apart on pixel peeping, I suspect most would look good as small prints but make terrible big ones. I intend to use the Ricoh around the house and when I want something in my pocket when out and about. And when I want the final image to be black and white because you are right - the colors also are not great on these older small sensor cameras, even if I shot them in RAW. Anyhow, thanks for another interesting, and for me at least, very timely. video.
The colours are pretty bad Jeffrey but providing you stick to A3 the prints aren’t too bad. Technology has definitely moved on with these small sensors and I won’t be going back.
Love this idea Steve. They're just as good as they were when they were the best thing on the market. [And having got to the end...] That B&W shot was a very nice scene, but I see what you're saying. I wouldn't even have thought of trying to go for A2. The LX5 is similar tech to my GF1 M43 camera, and I think most of my favourite photos were shot on that before I upgraded a couple of years later. RAW images are great for online use and A4 or 16" prints though, particularly when dynamic range isn't too high.
Thanks Graham. To be fair to the LX5 it held up quite well when the dynamic range was low and I had optimum apertures. That B&W scene was just too contrasty.
Lumix-LX7 is still a very good camera. Especially in dark scenarios.
I have the same camera, the Leica D-Lux 5 version and I’ve found it works extremely well. Simply work within its limits and you can create some beautiful images with it.
It’s such a great lens isn’t it 🙂
Just an fyi stopping down to f5.6 is a no go and puts you well into diffraction. In realistic terms with the small sensor wide open at f2 is ffe f8-9 with a similar depth of field. Best setting for prints is stay at f2-2.8 and don’t venture above iso 400. For super harsh conditions a filter tube is still sold that can screw on the camera and accept 52mm filters, throw on a cpl and it’s amazing what you can get out of this camera. I have printed pictures at 16x20 that are every bit as good as 35mm film or 26mp apsc sensor shots, a touch soft for sure but very pleasing on a quality matte paper to the point that I have displayed them on multiple occasions.
Diffraction effects are overrated in my own experience although they are noticeable if you look for them. I’d rather get the depth of field I need so if a small aperture is required so be it. On that little digicam the smaller apertures held up very well and it was the sheer lack of resolution that held it back.
You had me there. I really liked my LX5. Lovely camera. Sold it in 2016 I think. For the first half of the video you had me regretting it! Still a nice camera for family snaps so I hope whoever got it is still enjoying it. Certainly good enough for really nice Instagram/Facebook photos.
It’s still a good camera Roger just not as good as it was 10 years ago sadly. Technology marches on (unless you use mainly film like me 😀).
@@SteveONions I use mainly film like you.
I really like the black and white image. Maybe in person it would be different. I may look for one of these.
I’ll be honest Bryan the images looked awful in print, that camera never got used again. I recently compared an original model Sony RX10 with the 1” sensor against my iPhone 14 Pro and that is yet another camera that’s now redundant.
I bought ton of new cameras over the years but something about 4meg Casio QV4000 with canon lens resonated with me since I took gorgeous pictures of my sons and family.Out of nostalgia I bought again same camera from ebay.Sure its slow clunky but still creates gorgeous photos.
I have a similar affection for images made with my first digital camera, a 4mp Canon compact. They are sharper and more pleasing than those from the next generation cameras that packed in too many pixels.
Great video, I like you was pulling for the little camera to deliver better results and as you honestly indicated, it is perhaps too limited to make the cut for many uses. I found your comparison of the images to the performance of film quite useful. One may not always consider the nature of dynamic range in film when using an older digital camera and the possible better choice, given a choice. Thanks for the video!
You’re welcome John. I honestly expected more but I think I had the rose tinted glasses on. I recall a friend making some excellent A3 prints from his after a lot of skilful processing and I automatically assumed A2 would be fine with any scene.
Well done Steve, an honest review. You win some, you loose some. Thanks for the content.
Thanks Phillip. .
Very clarifying video, you explained in very pratical terms your conclusions. Thanks for your work, keep up!
Thanks Ricardo.
I recently decided to do the same thing with an even older LX3. Great little cameras and still decent enough.
They were very good cameras John, that lens was so sharp.
Steve, I have an old Canon G2, bought from a pawn shop, for $50. I love it, it's inconspicuous, works incredibly well, and I prefer it's 4 megapixel images to any other digital camera I own. It's flexible, manual when I want or need it to be, has a very fast zoom lens, and it never attracts attention!
Interesting point. My first digicam was a 4mp canon and when it died the replacement 8mp model didn’t make as nice images. There’s often something in lower resolution images that seems to click.
What a thoughful video, thank you so much for sharing it. I still often use an even older small sensor camera, a Fuji S9600 with its 28-300mm lens. However it really does need to be kept at ISO80 to keep in line noise-wise with modern image quality, and that means a tripod and self-timer in winter or early mornings and evenings when the light is interesting so that manual control can be used. OK, a beanbag on a rock will sometimes suffice. I even got it a filter ring so that it could share the ones that go with the DSLR. For social media those small sensor cameras are fine.
My early digicams also needed be shot at ISO 80 to avoid some really awful noise.
Thank you so much for your videos. They're absolutely inspiring. About giving the honors to old cameras, I still have in use a 6Mp Nikon D40 making some beautiful macros and portraits combined with vintage 50mm 1.8 Nikkor and macro rings. Love the experience, because that was my first dslr and she has allowed me to earn some money to update my gear.
I also had a D40 Jose and some of the images it took are my favourites 🙂
Some of my favorite pictures have been taken on the Lx3 (little beast of a camera). It’s the first high end camera I bought and I’ll never sell it.
I purchased a Panasonic Lumix LX5 on Amazon this year and love it. It is as lightweight as the much lauded Ricoh GR III and just as easy to handle. The age of a camera makes absolutely no difference in the shots one can achieve. Just look at the photos that some of the greatest photographers took with analog cameras. I also purchased a Canon G12 and love it too. The Duchess of Cambridge, Kate Middleton, took some beautiful family photos with her Canon G12.
I have to disagree unfortunately, the LX5 has a practical limit beyond which the prints take on an unnatural look. This isn’t just down to megapixels but the actual sensor which is lacking in comparison with later generations.
Nice honest and accurate review. I own a 2014 LX-100 which I love for street and macro photography but when cropping/enlarging a MFT it deteriorates quickly. I bought a 2016 gx85 with a few lenses and a f mount adapter thinking that I'll just use the proper lens to avoid cropping and I was right. Although, putting a large lens on a MFT camera defeats the purpose of using a small camera. Yes, they have their place. It would be totally unfair to even think of comparing them to any of my full frame cameras, especially my Nikon Z7.
Difficult to compete with a modern full frame sensor Tom, my G80 and especially the G9 are good at A2 but above that a bigger sensor would show visible differences.
love this guy, so english and so informative !!!
😊
Unique and interesting yet again!
It always cracks me up when someone compares image quality they zoom in 100% and try to see the differences. I got 1100d and d5300 and they take absolutley fine photos, I bet 90% couldn't tell the difference not only between them, but comparing to the "holy grail" full frame ones.
Up to A3 most cameras or phones are very good. Even bigger images work well but modem sensors are definitely better.
Excellent! Originally, I want to sell my LX-5 on ebay, but I think I would change my mind after watching your video. Nice photo always comes from nice photographer rather than advanced technology.Thank you!
Thank you and I am glad you are keeping the LX5, it is still a very good camera 🙂
Brutal honesty
I still use my old compact cameras quite a lot. they are perfectly good for most things.
For big prints from a 10 meg camera interpolate up to 20 meg. Everybody seems to shy away from interpolation but with the right algorithm it works well. To double the megapixels only requires a 1.4 increase in horizontal and vertical pixel count. In other words the algorithm only "invents" 0.4 of a pixel in addition to each existing pixel. I use the Lanczos2 algorithm in Faststone Image Viewer (free download) and then apply a little sharpening. The results are really good and avoid the grainy, digital look you were talking about with the A2 print.
Thanks Geoffrey, a decent upsizing program could probably make a difference to the print quality.
A great, informative video. So nice to see others out there using older equipment to get quality photographs! New subscriber........”keep em coming”. Regards, Jimp
Thank you 😊
Thanks for sharing your knowledge Steve you make it look so easy and it isn't i went out the other day and out of a 24 roll i only liked 5 of my composition some i thought were very good turn out to be just pictures
5 out of 24 is excellent Isaias, I usually hope for 2 or 3 from a roll of 36 🙂
I used to have that camera and enjoyed it as well. Great video.
Thanks Keefe.
I have a 20 megapixel Nikon point and shoot. It's very convenient. But even though the megapixel count should be good, the sensor is just too small to get a good photo. I might as well just use my phone camera. My stepson just brought me 4 older cameras yesterday, including a Canon XT and 3 point and shoot cameras, the highest megapixels was 14.4. I offered him $20 for the lot (I could use a point and shoot on my rifle scope). He left with them. Thanks for the demonstration.
I think you made the right decision, I bet you would have used them once and consigned them to the bottom of the drawer (like mine).
Excellent video. I enjoy purchasing used point and shoots for $20 in 2020 that cost $500 in 2008. On another note, watching your video, it surprises me how a country that's been settled for over 12,000 years still manages to have sprawling undeveloped countryside with absolutely nobody around. Extraordinary scenery.
Thanks Steven. The look of Our countryside is largely a result of intensive usage over many thousands of years. Even out rugged mountains would have been tree covered and quite different before man arrived after the last ice age.
That said we are very lucky that we have so many national parks and the right to roam. .
@@SteveONions That's an interesting point and makes complete sense. Thanks for taking the time to reply to me Steve. If you have any Canon Powershots laying around, check out the CHDK hacks. The modified firmware opens up quite a lot of features. My favorite being time lapse and RAW functionality. I haven't come across anything for Lumix or Sony cameras yet but most of the Poweshots can be modified.
Enjoyed the video Steve, I need to dig out some of the old cameras and give it a go, thanks for sharing and stay safe.
Thanks John, all the best to you too 👍
Thanks for the video, Steve! It’s amazing how cameras have gotten better over recent years. I have some older cameras too. From time to time I pull them out of the drawer, but there just isn’t much comparison. I enjoyed your video.
Thanks Kent, I get nostalgic from time to time but we really have moved on a lot in the past decade.
I still have my Olympus E-5 with the 12-60 SWD from 2010, still fun to use, makes vary nice photos
And a very nice lens too.
I still have an LX3 kicking around somewhere - though the battery doesn't hold much charge these days. It's a fun little piece of kit that I have a lot of affection for, but I'd concur with the results of your experiment. I had thoughts of getting an aftermarket replacement battery, but after trying it out again I'm happy just to hang onto it for nostalgia's sake.
They were great once but like the cars we all fondly remember the experience isn’t what we remember.
Thanks, informative and honest - jut what we need in this age of hype!
I hasitated to buy a new digital camera the last years. I still use my old sigma foveon Merrill DP2 and 3.
Although they are slow and quirky, if used properly and taken time they still deliver beautiful shots...
Absolutely, if it works for you then why change, a lot of older digital cameras have a really different look.
Hi Steve, thank you for you effort to make that video, in my opinion picture with house and trees is best of all in video. Of course there are imperfections, but it has a magic! I would really like to be there. have great journeys. Jacek
Thanks Jacek, I'm glad you enjoyed the video.
Love it. I had an LX3 that I loved, then upgraded to an LX5, I might still have the LX5 in a closet somewhere. I never thought about enlarging any of my shots, I just loved it as my pocket camera that I could take anywhere when I didn’t want to lug my canon DSLR around. I may have sold the LX5 because I have a Sony RX100 Mk2 (?) that was smaller and became my pocket camera. However, with the lockdown, I have time to go search through my closets. I might even break out my Hasselblad.
I’ve got the RX100 Mk1 and it’s a step up from the LX5. If you find the Blad and don’t want it then feel free to send it to me - I’ll even pay the postage 😀
Steve O'Nions oh I know right where the Blad is, I pieced together an awesome kit , complete with Hasselblad filters. Unfortunately, the camera bag is so big, I don’t use it enough now,
gsansoucie I bought my first LX5 as a companion to my 501CM so I could use the 1:1 mode for previewing. After a while I was using the LX5 for some final images and the Blad got jealous.
PS - my Blad bag also got too heavy in the same way my SQAi kit has ‘filled out’.
I shoot with a 5 MP camera from 2005 and it still delivers good quality images up to A3 prints. I've a 24 MP full frame too and you can't compare these two cameras, but for the web, the 5 MP camera is useable still. Anyway, a thumbs up for your review.
Thanks Paul.
I think in the black and white photo there was quite complex lighting (in terms of light), which did not allow us to reveal the detail. on the other hand, artistic photography has little to do with detail. here sometimes outlines or silhouettes are even possible. It seems to me that, given the capabilities of modern technology, efforts are aimed at “deteriorating” rather the picture. using a monocle, diffusers, adding effects when processing a frame, etc.
I've got a Fujifilm.S602Zoom camera from 2002 and it is still.awesome. It takes rather good photos even by today's standards.
That does surprise me 🙂
Another great video Steve. Beautiful images even at 10Meg. Now that your inside are you going to print some old negatives? Hint...
I know, I know - my ears are burning 🙂. Biggest problem is making the inside of my garage darkroom look good on video, I’ve filmed a quick intro tour but lighting is a nightmare!
Thanks for the video! I really enjoyed it.
I found a Lumix TZ4, a couple years back, at a sale. I'm still amazed at the quality of the photos, from this tiny camera. I'm sure the Leica lens makes a difference. I'm not sure if there are manual adjustments available. I've only used it in auto. I'd buy another, if I found one. :)
Yes, the lens is critical with such small sensors and Panasonic have some of the best.
Thanks for the video. I have been feeling nostalgic for my old LX3 lately. After watching this video, I think I'll stick with my film cameras.
Wise move 🙂
I think the enlargements and over processing was too much for the Panny. According to DXOMark the LX5 has 11 stops of dynamic range. Not good today but close to the Canon DSLRs of the time. I am getting back to using mine with the optional EVF. One trick I like is if you know you are going to print at a smaller size, turn iZoom on and get longer optical reach. Set for a 5x7 shot, you have 24-213mm range.This is not digital zoom thou the camera offers that if you want it.
Hi Leonard. I found the later model digicams with similar sized sensors much better than the LX5. Examples are the Canon S120 and Olympus Stylus 1. Both allowed greater flexibility on processing and A2 enlargements were excellent.
It all depends about subject of your photo/print. If you do not need to see fine details, resolution is not that important, but if you do (potrait, small bird) it´s a different game.
Very true Ari.
My favorite digital camera is my fujifilm X-pro 1 from 2012 it’s what I grab 90% of the time. I have a much newer fujifilm Xt4, and have had the X-pro 2 but recently sold it. There’s lots of good older cameras.
If it works for you then definitely stick with it 👍
Lovely work, Steve! Great video too. Kinda miss the bitter cold, gloomy english weather. Planning to get one of these cameras for street photography. Hope I’m making a good decision 🤞🏼
Hope it goes well (and don’t miss the gloomy weather here, it’s overrated!).
@@SteveONions haha. Noted. 👍🏻
Really enjoyed this video 👍🏻
Thanks Andrew.
I'm shooting with a Sony RX1 since 8 years. Still love it!
That’s not your average Compact 🙂
@@SteveONions True... And I don't feel the need to replace it any time soon.
And after the Olympus E-100RS and the Canon 5D it is just my third digital Camera in nearly 20 years...
Inspiring! Thank you.
Thanks Phil.
You mentioned micro four thirds in comparison. I also have an old Lumix, in this case the FZ200, also with Leica lens. Slightly larger sensor than the LX5 and 12Mp. The results are not nearly as good as MFT, even my old friend the elderly Lumix G5. The photoreceptors used on the 16Mp MFT sensors are 3.75µ, so they're slightly larger than those used in APS-C, so they can produce prints to poster size 2-ft x 3-ft (>A1). As always the best camera is the one you have in your hand.
I bought one of these for motorcycle trips, got it last year for $90 cad shipped. Great for the price
I have the original Sony RX100 .... AMAZING images for 1 inch sensor ... 20MP packed in a tiny sensor ... also does great B+W !!!!
I’ve also got that camera George and still use it.
It was a good experiment, or re-visit. I like your honesty about it all. Seems a good camera, still, for travel where the trip is not actually about photography, but you want something along that is compact and light. On the other hand, these days, even if you had that LX5 in your possession, is your modern phone going to be just as good or better when your travel is not about photography? Perhaps it boils down to personal preference. Another good video, Steve.
Thanks James but I do tend to think the gap between the LX5 and a top notch smartphone is pretty close now 😕
Hi love the videos you are one of the reasons I started to re-shoot large format again. where do sell your equipment as like most film photographers you end up with to many and only realy use one for each format.
Hi Chris. Nearly all my sales are made through eBay unless it is a high value item (like a Hasselblad kit) which I’d then ask Ffordes to do a commission sale for me.
Hi Steve, thanks for the video. What additional adapters were you using with the LX5?
Hi Cormac. I used the threaded adapter for the LX5 that allows you to attach standard 52mm filters.
Was the A2 print from your Epson? Could you do a series on how you would mount the print? Thanks for the content Steve..
It was indeed the Epson 🙂. When you say mount do you mean cutting the matte etc?
@@SteveONions yes. Do you cut your own mat and make the black frame as well? Thanks again
I never make frames but do have a mount cuter and plenty of board. Sadly I’ve not made a mount for a number of years so I’d need to practice a lot before making a video 😕
I not long bought the leica d-lux4. 10MP little powerhouse.
+1 only in the highlights otherwise it will explode... 🤯 Impressive for a sensor smaller then my pinky nail tho. Love it.