mark, I trust you. Im thinking of buying an small camera that has good low light capabilities. Thats my only need. Low light. And I like doing videos, but I need something for pictures too.
---> In this video the OIS from the LX7 looks waaaay better. Is it true? The angle looks wider too. Do I see more noise on the sony? How do they compare in low light video?
- I read that in another forum, can you please comment on that?
- "The dynamic range seems to be even higher"(on the LX7) than the one from the RX100"
- "Both are very competent cameras. For low light, I'll take the LX7. For cropping,the RX100 is the choice."
- "Well, at least with the LX7 vs RX100 it's pretty easy to compare them because the LX is between 1-2 f-stops faster at most focal lengths so if you have the RX at 400 iso then you'd compare against the LX at 100 and 200 for low light, then compare the 2 cameras at base ISO for situations where there's plenty of light or a tripod is used, etc."
- "The Sony does not resolve better than the LX7 when the Sony is at 2x or 4x higher ISO than the LX7, which will be frequent due to the Sony's much slower lens unless you shoot in bright light or on a tripod all the time."
- ".looking at the new IR extended preview I am pleasantly surprised to see the LX7 better or equal to the competition at low ISO and better that the smaller sensors at the higher."
- "Bottom line - RX100 at 1600 is noticeably better S/N than LX7 at 800, but RX100 at 3200 has fallen behind the ISO800 LX7."
Is that true? It looks to me that at low light the LX7 CAN be better than the RX100 sometimes. I dont need it to be better. Its a lot cheaper. If its almost as good, its good enough for me.
Can it be better or as good as the RX100?
The built in filters are good?
Is the LX7 better for video? As good?