Is the D5000 for me? Follow my logic... or destroy it!

[PaulVI]

I wonder if a cam like the LX3 or D-LUX4 would be good or even great for my standards. That is, I'm sensing that you all are pro or pro-sumer, with standards thus! But I know, you're looking out for my best welfare based on my objectives!

The price of the LX3 is very enticing, and there's a gallery pic at dpreview that's a no-flash indoor shot with LX3 that's sharp and bright enough for me. If I were more liberal on price, I'd consider the Leica if indoor performance was better than the A630, but then I'd be back near the D5000 range.(Although, Adorama has a bundle for the Leica at $750, including an 8GB SD card and a spare battery.)

To be confident of achieving my objectives, I would try to put together a D5000 with the 35mm f/1.8 on top of the 18-55, as Osmosis suggests. Can I spare some zoom reach to get that price down more? How about the D5000 body and only the 35mm lens as an all-around shooter for kid shots?

Summary of my options under consideration at this point, with all respect to sk66! :
A. LX3 for compactness, price, capability "-ish"
B. DLUX4 for compactness and capability versus price
C. D5000 with just the 35mm lens to keep the total price down (if you say that versatility limits are acceptable, or as sk66, keep the A630 as the walkabout camera)
D. D5000, 35mm, 18-55mm if need be. I guess this would be my 'ultimate', but price is scary and size might kill usability (you know, "the camera you carry..." or something like that).

[inkista]

Originally Posted by PaulVI

Inkista, thanks for those suggestions and for the link to the great set of articles on lenses. I never looked at the specs of the S90. But after starting this thread, and getting scared of the escalating cost of a D5000 kit, I tried a feature search at dpreview using only "aperture range" : <=2. Results were 4 cameras, which included the S90! The others were: Ricoh GR Digital III, Leica D-Lux 4, and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3.

All of these go "down" to f/2.0 (Ricoh to 1.9). (Can I say "down" referring to the lower number, or should I say "as fast as", to be in the club? ) The Leica and Panasonic go to 2.8, S90 to 4.9, and the Ricoh to 9.0. Does that mean "forget about zoom"? Are these "snappies for people" or "snappies for artists"?

Both. These are the "serious" P&S cameras---the ones that dSLR owners purchase when they're willing to compromise on functionality for size/weight. The lenses are more limited, and do have max-aperture ranges that get smaller as the lens zooms in, like lower-cost SLR zooms. The LX-3's lens is equivalent to 24mm-60mm. The S90's is equivalent to 28mm-100mm. That's why the max. aperture at the long end for the S90 is smaller--it goes out farther. (FYI: the f-number is the focal length divided by the diameter of the aperture opening. The bigger the focal length, the bigger the f-number, even if the opening stays the same size).

And yeah, the Leica and Panasonic models are the same camera, the Leica one's just rebadged and priced for the prestige of the red dot. The Leica owners argue they can see better image quality, and the image engine may have been tweaked, but nearly everybody went for the Panasonic instead, since any difference was minimal. The biggest problem with the LX-3 is finding it in stock. Panasonic has a serious serious problem with production volume. This is the same reason the GF1 is so damn expensive. The sticker price for the GF1 kit is supposed to be $800. But it's going for more like $1k because Panasonic simply didn't make enough.

The Canon G10 was the closest competitor to the LX-3, until Canon noticed where all the sales were going and they made the G11 and the S90.

With the G11/S90 sensor, they specifically optimized for high iso performance. The pixel count was cut back to 10MP, and as a result, the G11 and the S90 completely blow away the G9 and G10 in terms of high iso performance. As I said, look at the samples that are on line. You can find them just about anywhere. The S90's f/2 really is f/2 and people are using those babies for available light shooting. They are definitely more limited than dSLRs for this purpose, but unlike most P&S cameras, they can actually do it.

I still say the S90 over the LX-3, simply because you can find it, it's nicer to handle with the dual-wheel controls, it has more zoom range, and is $100 cheaper. Canon aimed squarely at the LX-3 when they came up with the S90 design. And the high iso performance, from what I've seen in a G11/LX-3 comparison, anyway, is hecka better. The S90/G11 are one generation ahead of the LX-3.

Then again, that could just be my personal prejudices talking, since I'm waiting for a box with an S90 in it to land on my doorstep.

[PaulVI]

Just wanted to say thanks. I feel properly informed. Still on the fence, though!