Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3

Panasonic has introduced a new sensor on the LX3. The company says it intentionally limited the megapixels to try and produce better low light scores and dynamic range. However, this bid has failed, as the LX3 produced only average results on those key tests. While it did better in color, manual noise and video capture, the overall impression was mediocre, especially considering the price point of the camera.

Color (12.74)
In this test we measure the camera’s ability to accurately capture and record color. This is to see how close the hue and saturation of the image is to the actual object.
While having over-the-top color can make for dynamic and interesting photos, real life isn't always a richly saturated feast for the senses. What we are looking for is the ability to capture reality accurately.

For this test we shoot the industry standard Gretag Macbeth color chart at 1700 lux, which is about the brightness of a cloudy day. We photograph this chart at all available ISOs, and then run the results through Imatest, an image analysis application. This program can check to see how far the image deviates from the known color values of the Gretag Macbeth chart. The results are shown in the diagram below, where the outer square is the captured color, the inner square is that color corrected for luminance, and the inset rectangle is the ideal color. 

 

This information can also be expressed in the chart below, where the ideal color is represented in the square, the color the camera captured is in the circle, and the difference by the line vector, where the longer the line, the greater the difference.

The LX3 captured color remarkably well

Panasonic cameras tend to have excellent color scores, and the LX3 is no exception. In this test it outperformed the Canon PowerShot G9 and the Nikon Coolpix P5100, both of which are their companies’ respective high-end point-and-shoot cameras. It also scored better than both the Lumix DMC-TZ3 and Samsung NV40, though these are considerably cheaper models.

Resolution (6.17)
Our set of resolution tests are designed to go beyond the number of megapixels on the camera sensor, looking instead at the accuracy of the image in capturing all the little details, and processing it in such a way that it is not under- or over-sharpened. A camera with a good resolution score will show small details accurately, and give you more options for cropping and resizing your photo.

For this test we shoot an industry standard resolution chart, and run the resulting image through Imatest. The application then analyzes the test images to calculate the number of alternating black and white lines the camera captured, measured as line widths per pixel height (lw/ph).  A higher number represents more success at reproducing detail.

 

A section of the industry-standard resolution chart that we use for testing

The low score of the LX3 on this test, which was primarily a result of the camera undersharpening the image, surprised us. While the LX3 doesn't undersharpen the images hugely, it's enough to make a difference, and reduce its score. We would hope for something slightly better from a $500 camera. The LX3 scored worse than all of our comparison cameras in this test, even lower than the Lumix TZ3, a far less expensive model. The LX3 managed to capture 1603 lw/ph horizontally and 1424 lw/ph vertically.

 

White Balance (7.10)
A camera's white balance system adjusts for hues cast by different light sources. Fluorescent bulbs cast a blue green  tint over objects, and incandescent can make things look yellow or orange. Our brains can automatically adjust our perception so that we see white as white, regardless of the light source. A camera, on the other hand, has to compensate electronically. We test white in two ways. In both we shoot the Gretag Macbeth color chart under a variety of light sources, but for the first we use the Auto White Balance function, and for the second we use the camera’s White Balance Presets. The images below show how the captured image deviates from known white, grey and black values. These images are exaggerated to highlight the differences, though -- you would not see this level of inaccuracy in your photos.

Auto White Balance(8.98)
The LX3 scored well in this test, proving it has a competent auto white balance system. It performed admirably while automatically managing fluorescent and tungsten light sources, and above average in the shade. However, it struggled slightly shooting with the flash. The tungsten result is nice to see, as many cameras have difficulty with this light source, even though it is common and found in most homes.

Preset (5.21)
Unfortunately, the LX3 performed less well with the presets, a bad sign for a camera that seems so squarely aimed at a high-end market. First, it doesn't have a preset for fluorescent lighting, a very common source of illumination. Secondly, it has a halogen preset rather than incandescent/tungsten (which is slightly different) and yet it has two levels of custom white balance and a manual Kelvin entry system. The former lets you use a white or grey object to set the white balance, the latter lets you enter in the color value of your light source, represented in degrees Kelvin. Even testing only the presets available, the scores were decidedly average, and the camera really struggled with shaded natural light.

Exaggerated White Balance Errors (Presets)

Flash Preset WB - Flash Illumination

Cloudy Daylight preset WB - Daylight illumination

Tungsten preset WB - Tungsten illumination

The good automatic White Balance score was mitigated heavily by the camera's poor performance using preset white balance settings. This resulted in an overall below-average performance in this section, and scoring lower than the other cameras we are comparing it too. However, if you shoot with the white balance on auto, or use the manual white balance function, you can expect a relatively good performance.