Lumix LX1 vs. Powershot G9?

September 9, 2013 10:00 AM

Small camera enthusiasts: I have had an LX1 as my sole non-cellphone camera for a few years. I like its size. I like its controls. I like shooting in RAW. I don't mind the limited optical zoom, but the dangling loose lens cap is a pain and the low-light performance is abysmal. I have a line on a G9 at a good price. How much of an upgrade would it be?
posted by jon1270 to Technology (12 answers total)

I haven't used the LX1, but the G9 is a solid camera. I've used the G-Series since G5, and was always happy with their performance.
posted by pyro979 at 10:10 AM on September 9, 2013

Wait, is this a used digital camera from 2007? What is a 'good price' on a six year old camera of this caliber? Or was there another Powershot G9 released? So much has changed in the last six years - the specifics of this 'deal' matter more than my experience with the G9 several years ago.
posted by barnone at 10:22 AM on September 9, 2013

Best answer: I currently use a G9, and would caution you on heading in that direction for low light performance. In my experience the camera performs well in bright light, but slow focusing and graininess make it less than ideal in low light situations. Adding a flash (like the 270EX - which might add some significant $ to your package) makes the camera much more flexible but also bulkier. If you shoot moving subjects you might want to look elsewhere -- without the flash attached, I have trouble shooting my speedy 18 month old indoors unless its bright outside and the shades are up. I've had the best luck with this camera on a tripod shooting stationary stuff -- I love it for close up shots outdoors and for landscapes, because the tiny camera needs only a minimal (in weight and cost) tripod that makes for a very portable kit when trekking around.

Don't know anything about the LX1, though. Good luck with your choice -- hope this is helpful
posted by cubby at 10:29 AM on September 9, 2013

Response by poster: Barnone: yes, that G9. The camera is virtually NIB, originally bought as a spare and hardly used. Price is good insofar as its about 30% less than the camera would bring on eBay.

I'm cheap, and only a casual photographer.
posted by jon1270 at 10:34 AM on September 9, 2013

Response by poster: FWIW, the LX1 is a 2005 model. It was an early digital rangefinder sort of thing, with full manual control options and RAW. It uses a Leica lens, which got it a lot of attention, but the sensor isn't great. For its time it was good for outdoor shots, but is very noisy at anything above ISO200 or so. To use the market's judgement, a used G9 is about $100 better than a used LX1.

If I'm being thrifty to a fault here, what benefits might I enjoy in something a bit newer? I don't do enough photography to justify a new camera nice enough to have the options (RAW, manual) I want.
posted by jon1270 at 11:02 AM on September 9, 2013

In the UK looks like they go for £100-£150 on ebay. It would take better photos than new cameras in that price range but will lack other features that are now standard or common such as HD video, quicker shooting, low light, waterproof, small-size. It'll be a fairly decent upgrade on the LX1 (compare G9 to LX1) but perhaps you'd be better putting the money towards a better new camera? Increasingly I think people use a mobile phone for casual photos, and a DSLR / MILC when quality is more important.
posted by JonB at 11:04 AM on September 9, 2013

Anecdote: I used and enjoyed a G5, G9, and G10 before switching over to a LX5. The Canon G series cameras are 'better' on paper, but they're bulkier, and not really pocketable. Although the G cameras are 'more serious', I've had a lot more enjoyment and, surprisingly, better images with the lumixes. (For really nice images I have a fancy SLR).

I do miss the rangefinder, however (even though the G series range finders had pretty serious crops: something like 80%, maybe?).
posted by bumpkin at 11:52 AM on September 9, 2013

Best answer: I wouldn't bother with the G9 at this point, unless it was like $50. A reputable used camera dealer like KEH is selling a copy of the much more recent S100 (which sits right below the top of the line G series) in EX condition for under $200:

http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-Digital-Point-and-Shoots/1/sku-DC059991272190?r=FE
posted by Calloused_Foot at 12:39 PM on September 9, 2013

Best answer: When you say thrifty to a fault -- what does that mean in terms of price ranges? If you already have a functional camera, there's no way I'd spend more than $25, maybe $40, for the G9 at this point. I'd rather save up for a newer model, but if you're not willing to spend more than $150 for a camera, that changes the equation a bit.
posted by barnone at 12:49 PM on September 9, 2013

Response by poster: ~$150 is the price point I'd like to hit if I can. $200 is kind of a squeal point for this.

Interestingly, there's a Olympus PEN E-PL1 available near me for $200 OBO. I know less about the Micro 4/3 stuff, except that they're bulkier and lenses are interchangeable. Since I'm cheap, I'd be stuck with the standard 14-42mm for the foreseeable future...
posted by jon1270 at 1:13 PM on September 9, 2013

Response by poster: Thanks, everyone. I see that Canon's s120 will be released in three weeks, at which point prices for the s95 & s100 will probably drop even further. I'll wait for a better option than the g9.
posted by jon1270 at 11:05 AM on September 10, 2013

Response by poster: For posterity, I traded in my LX1 on an LX5, and am very happy with it. Once nice thing about waiting so long to upgrade is that the newer technology seems almost like magic by comparison to the old.
posted by jon1270 at 3:49 PM on September 25, 2013