Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 review

Panasonic says that the redesigned 10.1 megapixel 1/1.63in CCD sensor has better low-light performance than the LX3’s sensor. Combined with the new image processor, Panasonic has been able to increase the sensor’s maximum sensitivity from ISO 3200 to an impressive ISO 12800. However, this does come at a cost: resolution is reduced to just 3 megapixels at ISO 6400 and ISO 12800.

Unfortunately, from our testing, the new high sensitivity modes are essentially unusable. There’s no option to shoot RAW at these settings and so it’s left up to the camera to keep noise at bay. The LX5 does an fair job at processing JPEGs in camera, but it’s by no means brilliant – you’ll get better results by shooting in RAW and making small tweaks yourself.

At both ISO 6400 and ISO 12800, there’s a lot of colour shifting, loss of detail and overall blotchiness to images. At lower sensitivities, things are better because the RAW mode is available. The LX5’s built-in JPEG noise reduction is a little too aggressive for our liking, but in RAW mode, quality manages to outclass the LX3 by at least a stop – if not more.

While images shot at ISO 800 and above are undoubtedly noisy if you don’t apply any noise reduction during processing, they are still bright, full of detail and don’t suffer from the usual problems normally associated with compact cameras. It’s not until ISO 1600 that hints of banding start to appear in fine gradations and finer details start to fall by the wayside. Even then, they’re not noticeable if you’re going to be making relatively small prints or using the images online.

The new lens isn’t bad either. It retains roughly the same maximum aperture at the same zoom setting as the LX3’s 24-60mm f/2.0-2.8 lens, but it expands the zoom range to a 35mm-equivalent 90mm focal length at an aperture of f/3.3, which helps to make the LX5 a more versatile camera than the LX3. The lens-based image stabilisation, based on our tests, is still good for around two stops so doesn’t appear to have undergone any major updates.

There’s a fair amount of barrel distortion at the wide end of the range, but there’s little evidence of any major distortion at the telephoto end. Throughout the focal range, chromatic aberrations are very well controlled and corner sharpness is sufficient, but not perfect. Softness in the corners of the frame seems to be at its worst at wider angles, but it’s by no means bad.

Video quality is also very good, as we’ve already alluded to, but the audio quality did let things down a little. The gain was set too high, meaning background noise was quite obvious in a quiet environment and you could just about hear the zoom motor. Auto-focus continued to work while recording and the focus motor wasn’t audible. It’s disappointing, though, to find only a mono microphone.