Lumix LX100M2 or ILC with one lens ? 18 November 2018

As I go out and about in Sydney I often see tourists with a small interchangeable lens camera fitted with a kit zoom. There is no camera bag in sight indicating that the kit zoom is a fixture on that camera.

There have been several posts on user forums recently deriding the Lumix LX100M2 and stating forcefully that buyers would do better to invest in (…insert your favourite small ILC body..) with a standard kit lens.

For many years that was basically my practice although I often preferred to use a higher spec lens in place of the kit option.

That was in the days when compact cameras used small sensors, typically having a diagonal measurement of 7.7mm (a.k.a. ½.3inch),   9.6mm (1/1.7 inch) or 11mm (2/3 inch).

Thanks to improvements in lens making and other technologies we now have compacts with sensors having a diagonal of 15.9mm (one inch), 19.3mm (cropped 4/3), 27/28mm (APSC) and 43mm (the old 35mm standard, now somewhat confusingly known as full frame).

These deliver much better image quality than the old small sensor compacts.

Several models using the 28 and 43mm sensors have a single focal length lens and are highly regarded by users with something of a purist approach to photography which embraces the fixed focal length ethic.

I find the “two foot zoom” does not always work for me so I prefer cameras which have a high quality zoom lens.

This approach has led me to the Lumix LX100M2 which is now my preferred camera when a focal length in the (equivalent) 24-75mm range is required.

However I also happen to have in my camera drawer a Lumix G85 MILC with two lenses, the 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 standard kit lens and a 12-35mm f2.8 lens which has a wider aperture, higher build quality and is much more expensive.

This gives me two ILC kits which I tested together with the LX100M2.

Which functions best as a stand-alone general purpose camera for an enthusiast user ?

This is a bit like comparing apples to oranges but here goes anyway.

Retail prices, AUD, GST paid in Sydney today are:

LX100M1                   $758            4 years from release

LX100M2                   $1300           Just released

G85+14-42mm           $1268          G85 body,  2 years from release. Lens about 5 years

G85+12-35mm f2.8   $2136           Lens about 5 years from release

I put the LX100 Mk1 in there for comparison with the Mk2.

The G85 in particular has many endearing features. It has very good ergonomics. The handle is well shaped, secure and comfortable, as is the thumb rest. The twin dial control layout allows very good user control of all capture parameters without having to change grip or take the camera away from the eye.

The EVF is very good with a nice eyepiece.

The monitor is fully articulated and touch sensitive.

The body has IBIS which when a lens with OIS is mounted enables dual IS which to my surprise actually works and is like magic.

With either lens it is considerably larger than the LX100M2.

The 14-42mm lens has an aperture which is 2 stops (EV steps) smaller (higher f number) than the LX100. This is no great matter outdoors in good light but indoors and in low light the small aperture forces higher ISO settings than the LX100 can use.

Mounting the 12-35mm f2.8 makes the kit considerably more expensive as the lens alone costs $968.

Even with the 12-35mm the LX100 models still have a larger aperture (f1.7) towards the wide end of the zoom.

When I switch back and forth between fixed lens and interchangeable lens models I notice than the fixed lens models respond more quickly to pressing the shutter button. This is because the fixed lens models have a diaphragm type leaf shutter in the lens which is much smaller and has less inertia than the focal plane shutter of an ILC.

That same focal plane shutter makes more noise when it activates than a leaf shutter. The one in the LX100M1/2 is barely audible if you switch off the electronic shutter sounds.

Most lenses for ILCs utilise manual zooming. Some users say they prefer this to the power zoom used in fixed lens models. However having used both for many years I prefer the power zoom because I can work it with one finger.

Smaller, lighter and less expensive for any comparable lens focal length/aperture combination.

More responsive to shutter button action.

Fast and quiet. Relatively inconspicuous on the street.

Fixed monitor.

Viewfinder eyepiece uncomfortable, wrong shape, thin, hard.

Note: I deal with this by curling my left index finger around the eyecup providing a sort of bionic accessory eyecup which is reasonably comfortable and puts my left eye at about the right distance from the eyepiece optics.

Mini handle gives user a less secure grip. (but still acceptable )

The 20Mpx sensor in the LX100M2 is said to be the same as that in the GX9. With the crop that gives the LX100M2 and the G85 approximately the same pixel count.

The 12-35mm f2.8 is the most expensive lens so it should be the best and it is but by a smaller margin than you might expect.

The main difference between the three lenses is their aperture range. At matched apertures I find it difficult to pick which lens made which picture without consulting the exif data.

The 12-35mm is a bit sharper at the edges than the 10.9-34mm f1.7-2.8 unit in the LX100M1/2, most apparent at the largest apertures (smallest f numbers).

Outdoors there is not much difference between them.  Differences in picture quality will depend much more on practical matters like whether the camera was held steady at the point of exposure.

Indoors the LX100M2 wins with its smaller f numbers at the wide end of the zoom.  But the G85 has dual IS which works well.

There is no last word.

One’s choice comes down to personal preference about kit size and the need for indoor/low light capability.

Each of the three kits compared in this post can make fine photos.

You pays yer money and makes yer choice.

Over the years I have bought and used several of these flat top “rangerfinder-esque” M43 cameras and disliked all of them.  So I passed on the GX9.

I am aware that these cameras have quite a following among M43 camera users,I just don’t get it. They have a mini handle not a proper ergonomic one, they have less real estate on which to locate primary controls like twin dials and they often utilise stacked dials for that reason. They have small, thin viewfinder eyepieces which require an accessory eyepiece for comfortable viewing.  For all that as soon as you mount a lens the depth of the body+lens is the same as one of the hump-top “dslr-esque-with-proper-handle” models which I prefer.