Reviews written by Paolobucci

JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).

By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.

OK, I confirm

You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept Cookies

Customize

Refuse Cookies

Paolobucci
www.juzaphoto.com/p/Paolobucci2

Reviews of cameras, lenses, tripods, heads and other accessories written by Paolobucci

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator.

Panasonic Lumix LX100

Pros: Quite compact and light, bright optics and very good at all focal lengths and even at full aperture, true manual controls.

Cons: The tropicalization is missing and dust can easily enter the sensor. The flash is not incorporated. JPG files have poor complexion colors.

Opinion: I bought the LX100 in 2015 and still have it, as a compact machine to use when the camera is too heavy.rnThe car I always liked very much for two aspects: 1) the performance of Leica optics, really satisfying at all focal lengths and all the openings (there are differences, but they are minimal) and so bright that they can be used in full night freehand; 2) the camera body fascinating and equipped with all the manual controls you want.rnOther point of merit is that the minimum focal length (10.9 mm) RAW files (and only these) have a framed angle much wider than 24 mm equiv. declared; the machine automatically trims the frame to produce its JPG, but if opened with DXO PhotoLab the RAWs have an angle that is estimated to be equal to a 21 mm (obviously in this case we accept some compromise on the sharpness of the corners, which however falls a good) .rnNon I have ever endured the color rendering in JPG files: if the landscapes have saturated colors, a little 'tending to cold tones, the faces show a dominant magenta thatmakes the lips purple. Unwatchable. With development from RAW the problem does not exist.rnSomodo the external flash, even if the brightness of the optics allows you to do without it on many occasions.rnAlso the yield at high ISO is not the strong point of the sesore: 800 ISO are the threshold beyond which the quality starts to expire significantly and ISO 1600 should represent the maximum limit for this machine. Even in this case, however, the brightness of the optics allows, at least to the minimum focal length, to remain on low sensitivity even with little light.rnrnThe most serious defect and in my opinion hardly forgivable is the ease with which the dust reaches the sensor . The problem is not the lack of tropicalization, as a real design flaw. The objective in the re-entry phase (above all the wandering) drags with it the dust that is accumulated on it and nothing prevents it from spilling onto the sensor. It is even enough to suffice on the ste objectiveSo to risk that the dust filters between the double barrel of the optics. Evidently, there is no gasket or flange at all. The cleaning can not be performed by the user, if not at serious risk of producing damage to the electronics.rnConsider this a very serious flaw, because in all the previous machines in the LX series that I had (from LX3 onwards) I never found nothing of the kind. For the moment the problem can be solved in post production, but with the passage of time it is destined to get worse.

sent on January 14, 2018