Well, in less than bright light one pays the price for using a tiny sensor.
Even when going from ISO 80 to ISO 160 there is a noticeable increase in grain
and reduction in vibrancy. The highest usable ISO is 400.
However, since I bought the LX3 primarily to have with me while cycling, that
is OK. I cycle during daylight hours (for the most part).
Cheers,
Nathan
Nathan Wajsman
Alicante, Spain
http://www.frozenlight.eu
http://www.greatpix.eu
http://www.nathanfoto.com
Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
On Dec 9, 2009, at 5:15 AM, Moose wrote:
> Nathan Wajsman wrote:
>> I don't think the pics I have been showing, made with the LX3, are THAT bad!
>>
>
> Well, Andrew is one of those here who has been known to exaggerate when
> stirring the shoot.
>
> In fact, they aren't "bad", but you the Oly DSLRs and the Leica have set
> a high bar. I'm sure modified processing of the LX3 files could
> alleviate the modest deficiency. It seems fine in bright light, as in
> many of your cycling images, but loses oomph a bit in other situations.
>
> Moose
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|