| Author |
Message |
chiyacat
Joined: 09 Jul 2007
Posts: 157
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2012 6:40 pm
|  |
Just wondering if anyone has the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 camera. I read some very nice reviews of it. I wonder if I can get any photos taken with this camera accepted here at SS or elsewhere. I am not a beginner and do have a couple of Nikon DSLRs. I am planning a trip to Chile. I was told that it is not a good idea to carry a big camera in Santiago. So, I am thinking I'll get a point and shoot which would be less noticeable, but, I would still like to be able to make images that are stock worthy. Any comments on the choice of camera? I don't really want to spend more than $500. This one is selling in Canada at Henrys for $419 before tax. By the way, I am bringing my big cameras for the Atacama Desert:-) Thanks!
|
|
markrhiggins
Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
|
|
Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2012 12:38 am
| |
great for travel snaps but not for stock.
|
|
kenny123
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 6079
Location: Masterton,Wairarapa, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2012 2:55 am
| |
Success with a compact camera depends on your photographic knowledge and experience-I have Nikon and Panasonic Dslrs,but I still get alot of images approved here with a lumix F2; the cheapest ($90.00) camera produced by Panasonic-these were made with the F2:
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
96.4 KB |
| Viewed: |
3357 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
95.75 KB |
| Viewed: |
3357 Time(s) |
|
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
72.47 KB |
| Viewed: |
3357 Time(s) |
|
|
|
biketourist
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 172
Location: Central California
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:55 am
| |
| markrhiggins wrote: | | great for travel snaps but not for stock. |
I use the LX5 frequently. It's especially good for travel or for taking along on my bicycle trips. I don't do isolations on white, nor do I set up studio shots. It therefor suits me just fine.
I am old-school, not liking to frame shots with the back panel, so I use the VF1 viewfinder.
I have had plenty of SS acceptances with the LX5, so must disagree with the post above. Perhaps the poster doesn't actually have an LX5.
|
|
markrhiggins
Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:01 pm
| |
no I don't have an lx5. I could not stand the reject rate and missed shots. Use what you want but if you are serious get serious glass and camera. Note that editorial shots do not generally the same standard.
|
|
biketourist
Joined: 31 Mar 2006
Posts: 172
Location: Central California
|
|
Posted: Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:59 am
| |
"I could not stand the reject rate and missed shots."
You are begging the question, assuming knowledge about a camera with which you have no experience. The original poster's question was whether it is possible for LX5 images to be accepted. The LX5 is capable of producing images that meet Shutterstock's technical requirements, so the answer is "yes".
I use a D7000 the most. But when appropriate or convenient I have no qualms about using the LX5.
|
|
markrhiggins
Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Posts: 1996
Location: Australia
|
|
kenny123
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 6079
Location: Masterton,Wairarapa, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 2:09 pm
| |
What it all comes down to is if you understand how light affects a scene,and how to manipulate that light;basics of composition-and most important of all-knowing and understanding the limitations of your camera;and have at least 5 megapixels to play with,you are able to produce photos of quality for approval here.
|
|
akatz
Joined: 25 Jan 2012
Posts: 188
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:40 pm
| |
I bought my LX3 more than three years ago, after I got tired of having to replace other compacts every year when they'd simply stop working.
The 3 is essentially the same as the 5, the latter I understand has more sophisticated metering & exposure, but the same, 10 mp max resolution.
I picked only 'cause it looked like a tank compared to the others. I still have mine--a bit battered, but works fine. Can shoot in any mode pretty much (& I do use manual quite a lot). This is the camera that got me interested enough in photography to try to resume my career in it after it was interrupted in the mid-90s.
Very heartened to learn that folks have had pix accepted done with LX2/3/5.
andy
|
|
chbaum
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
Posts: 386
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:01 am
| |
Just for comparison:
- When I started here, I had my DSLR for two months. First ten consisted of DSLR only, 4 rejected, had to wait 30 days.
- Second batch got me in with 50% images from my personal "camera history": Canon A520 (3.9 MP upsized to 4.0 ;-), Canon A710, both P&S.
- Since then, I almost always submitted a big mix of DSLR and P&S photos of old. Many P&S got accepted and helped build my port.
- My most popular image for more than a year came out of the A710 (see below).
- For my next vacation I added a Panasonic FT3 to be ready for underwater and beach scenes. My first few test shots got accepted here.
... and I'm not even a good photographer (still don't have "the eye" to see the really spectacular things a colleague of mine always finds wherever he walks).
Best regards,
Christian
 [/img]
|
|
kenny123
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 6079
Location: Masterton,Wairarapa, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 10:56 pm
| |
| markrhiggins wrote: | | no I don't have an lx5. I could not stand the reject rate and missed shots. Use what you want but if you are serious get serious glass and camera. Note that editorial shots do not generally the same standard. |
If you understand what you are doing, you won't get rejections,no matter what camera you use.
|
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39182
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2012 11:28 pm
| |
Agree. and I wonder How may 1000's of times I've said that.
|
|
kenny123
Joined: 13 Aug 2005
Posts: 6079
Location: Masterton,Wairarapa, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2012 11:30 am
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | Agree. and I wonder How may 1000's of times I've said that. |
Yes Laurin, and how many times more until they realize "photography is between the ears"-the camera type,size,number of carburettors it has,etc.,is irrelevant.
|
|
| |
|
Log in
