DavidWEGS wrote:
I think the second is the RX100, but with up/down res work, you can make them similar too.
I find the files from LX5 still to be a great looking file even when compared to the RX, but fine details and richness are better from the RX IMO.
when comparing I\'d rather be looking at them from at printing POV and when you get quality 11x14 prints from a P&S, things are looking good which ever one you pick.
Precisely. If you added 15 to 20 points sharpness on the LX5 file and a touch more saturation in the orange dirt / red bridge details, the files would be very, very difficult to tell apart.
Top file is the LX5, bottom is the RX100.
To other comments - there is no argument, the RX100\'s sensor performs better in challenging circumstances. I was just impressed that I could make a LX5 file fairly similar to a RX100 file in good light. For the $160 or so this fetches on the used market, I\'d rather keep it around since I can extract good results from it.
Feb 01, 2013 at 08:28 PM
Previous versions of edl415's message #11317518 « RX100 versus LX7 - quick test. »
