Which is better for me, Ricoh GRD2, Panasonic LX3 or Canon G10

The most impressive parameters:

LX3: 24mm wide-angle 2x optical zoom (remember correctly), Leica lens with large aperture.

G10: 28mm wide-angle 5x optical zoom.

Let's not mention the picture quality (I think they are half a pound and eight taels, both are good, but the imaging style of canon and Panasonic is different, Panasonic is more gorgeous, canon is more simple, it depends on what you like).

It's all machines with more than 10 million pixels, G10 is a little higher, I forgot how much it is, but to be honest, the pixel is not the most critical thing for a good camera, I think it's almost enough, and it's completely enough.

If you still plan to buy a DSLR in the future, buy the LX3, which has an advantage in sweeping the streets. If you don't plan to buy a DSLR, buy the G10, the advantages and disadvantages are relatively modest, because the G10 has more comprehensive functions and a simple appearance, although I personally think it is not as good as the LX3. LX3 24mm's large wide angle and Leica large aperture are still very attractive,But its optical zoom is too small,G10The use of a little wider,I also hesitated for a long time in these two options before,Finally, I bought G10 (mainly because I think I shouldn't buy a DSLR anymore,Play that follow-up investment is too big,And it's not portable)The picture quality of these two is actually equal,I have carefully studied the comparison of image quality on the Internet,After magnifying many, many times,LX3The sharpness will be better, Although the discoloration is also very serious, but the details are not lost, G10's internal noise reduction program may mistake the details for noise to remove, but in fact, such small details, for ordinary people who love photography, can also be ignored (anyway, I ignored it, and I don't engage in criminal investigation, what are such small details for).

In addition, the LX3 scenery is very beautiful, 24mm's large wide angle, coupled with Panasonic's oil painting imaging style (I like this style very much, but it seems that many people in the online forum don't like it), I feel that it is easy to be amazing if I take a good shot, which is also the feeling that I just got the G10 at that time: it is not easy to shoot amazing**, maybe because the camera I used before was also a 28mm wide angle, and I have been used to this specification. If you also like to shoot people, the portrait of the G10 is a little better.

In addition, the G10 is larger and thicker than the LX3, but it is not much different, in terms of portability, the LX3 is a little better, but the G10 is not much inconvenient, almost.

To sum up, my opinion is:

1. If you still plan to buy a DSLR in the future, buy LX3. If you don't plan to buy a DSLR, buy the G10.

2. If you love the scenery, you will buy LX3, and you will love the portrait of G10

3. According to the digital camera you already have, if your camera can already meet your usual needs for shooting (the image quality is okay, and the telephoto is enough), buy the LX3, it is indeed very classic, whether it is the shape or the Leica lens with a large aperture (the flash still pops out, haha).

The scenery must be LX3 is good, but taking portraits is not as ideal as G10 All things considered, buy G10 directly, and have the strongest comprehensive performance.

From the perspective of the CCD of these machines alone, the CCD of Canon G11 and Ricoh GRD3 is slightly smaller, which is 1 inch, and the two models of Panasonic are 1 inch, which has a slight advantage and is very helpful for clarity.

Ricoh's GRD3 aperture is the largest,,Supposedly, it can achieve the background blur effect you said,But his lens only has a double optical zoom,Can't change the focal length,It's a bit stretched.。

The Canon G11 has a maximum aperture of 5x optical zoom and the possibility of bokeh.

I am still optimistic about Panasonic's LX5, which has a large CCD size, the largest aperture, and a light zoom, which is an ideal choice.

Of course, I chose Canon, 60D is good, this machine is a good choice for photography enthusiasts, enthusiasts, and travelers

I like the 60D megapixel resolution rotating LCD screen, the new control dial, as well as in-camera RAW processing, creative filters and other features, all of which are the first to appear on the EOS series of devices, which can make users more comfortable and can increase the flexibility of creativity

The configuration is cost-effective, and it is recommended to buy

The G12 and GXR are completely different camera types.

The G12 is a quasi-professional consumer camera, which is the highest-performing type of card player--- but it is still a card player.

The GXR is an unprecedented special type, which can be replaced with a "module", which consists of a lens and an image sensor, which means that the lens and image sensor of the GXR can be replaced at any time. By replacing the module, you can achieve the portability of the card machine, and you can also get the image quality of the SLR. Of course, each mod is expensive.

In terms of the fuselage, the G12 is partially metal, and the GXR is all-metal.

Basically, among quasi-professional consumer cameras, Canon's G12 is not bad, but it is not very cost-effective. I recommend Panasonic's LX5 or Olympus' XZ1, both of which are better. The performance of Nikon's P7000 is similar to that of the G12 (even the appearance is similar), but it is much cheaper.

The GXR is supposed to be a lot of fun, and it is said that the M module has been developed, which can be equipped with Leica lenses, and theoretically Ricoh can develop a module ...... that uses any brand of SLR lens as long as it is authorizedBut obviously, playing GXR requires a lot of money, no more than SLR.

I have been using it since G10, and G12 is now in use, and I feel that the Canon G is still relatively good for home consumer cameras, and the cost performance is still high.

The LX3 is suitable, and the 24mm wide angle is a huge advantage in the first place. Moreover, the lx3 has a higher contrast ratio by default, and the colors tend to be gorgeous. In comparison, G11 is very light, and you don't need to spend too much energy on the later stage with LX3.

And the size of the LX3 is much smaller than the G11, and in terms of portability, the G11 is relatively too large.

The G11LCD is small because of the rangefinder on it, and for the most part, I'm more happy to use the rangefinder. The LCD equipment of the LX3 is indeed high, but the color is a little different from the reality. In fact, the above LCD is sufficient.

As for rotating LCD, as long as it is not a design congenital problem, as well as external forces, it is not easy to break. After all, it's not the G11 that uses the rotating screen, and Canon has been used on previous generations of G.

You're right for the LX3.

The disadvantage of the LX3 is that the focal length is too short, and the equivalent telephoto is only 60mm, but I don't dare to say it if I usually play it. Basically,In addition to the crowd,Buy LX3 are all aware of what they need,For those who play photography,A lens of more than 100mm must have,At this timeLX3 can fully meet the needs of the standby,Too far to use SLR + telephoto,So LX3The limit is relatively large。 On the other hand, the focal length of the G11 can basically meet 99% of the daily shooting environment, so if you are not a photography enthusiast, the G11 is a more balanced choice, and it will not make you feel that there are obvious deficiencies in some aspects.

As for the lens problem, in real shots, the lens level of the LX3 should be significantly better than that of the G11, and the backlight that tests the coating and design level is the most, and the purple edge is much less than that of the G11. This is also the biggest selling point of the LX3. As for the high ISO said on the first floor, LX3 is a machine of '08 compared to using Sony

ICX685, the latest CCD G11, no longer has any advantages. Even at extreme ISO1600, the noise is more than that of G11. But in my opinion, DC itself is not used to spell high ISO, high ISO is just an effective supplement, and the gap between these two levels is at most half a grade, so the difference can be ignored.