Next page: Rewarding work
The LX5 lets the camera preselect which pixels to ignore.
With the X10, you can crop whatever shape you like from all the pixels.
However, a better question might be, why aren't all sensors 1:1? (preferably circular). Then we wouldn't ever need to turn cameras through 90 degrees.
Great sounding camera
Clearly not a snap-shooter camera, but a tool for someone who doesn't want to use an SLR.
However. If only they'd put a bigger sensor in it would seem so much more worthwhile. Yes it would have been even bulkier, but I doubt that will affect target market much.
What I wish is that somebody would cotton on that the sort of person who buys a camera at this level doesn't need a zillion modes, heavy in-camera processing (they'll already have a favourite package) and all the rest. Instead that they'd make a camera in which image quality was paramount, with a small number of modes (the classic 4) to make handling effortless, logically places dials and buttons (like this seems to have) fast & sharp 5X optical zoom and an excellent anti-shake system.
I might wait around until this becomes 'last years model' to try to get one at 1/2 price. Jacket because I'm putting my wallet back again.
Object of beauty? Stylish? I might find myself in a minority given preceding comments but that has to be the most ugly looking camera I've seen in the last year. I know that beauty is entirely subjective but radical examples like this just serve to remind me how different we as human beings can be.
To potential downvoters, don't downvote me just because you think this is a beautiful looking camera because that would be to ignore everything I've just said.
A lovely camera but...
...for a compact it's so darned big!
I've been angsting over a new compact for a while and it was between this and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5. Both are excellent performers for image quality, features/manual control and build quality. I was tempted by the optical viewfinder of the X10 (the lack of which seems to me to be the LX5's only failing) but when you pop it in a moderately robust case to take into the hills, etc. it's enormous. Also the 24mm wideangle of the LX5 is very handy.
p.s. I know you can get a hotshoe optical finder for the LX5 - but it's £170!
For the simple reason that while 16:9 makes for good video, it is often TERRIBLE as an aspect ratio for a photo composition. The vast majority of photos are of people - either their faces, or their bodies - both of which are usually vertical, and narrow. Unless you have a predilection for landscape photos or panoramas, most of your subjects will want a format that is much closer to square than 16:9.