Panasonic LX10 Image Quality Comparison

Below are crops from our laboratory Still Life target comparing the Panasonic LX10's image quality to its aging predecessor's, the LX7, as well as to a more recent sibling, the Panasonic LX100. We also compare it to a few competing compact enthusiast cameras: the Canon G7X Mark II, Canon G9X and Sony RX100 V. All cameras in this comparison use 1"-type sensors except for the Panasonic LX7 which uses a much smaller 1/1.7" sensor, and the Panasonic LX100 which has a larger Four Thirds sensor.

NOTE: These images are from best quality JPEGs straight out of the camera, at default settings including noise reduction and using the camera's actual base ISO (not extended ISO settings). Clicking any crop will take you to a carrier page where you can click once again to access the full resolution image as delivered straight from the camera. For those interested in working with the RAW files involved, click these links to visit each camera's respective sample image thumbnail page: Panasonic LX10, Panasonic LX100, Canon G7X II, Canon G9X , Sony RX100 IV and Sony RX100 V -- links to the RAW files appear beneath those for the JPEG images, wherever we have them. And remember, you can always go to our world-renowned Comparometer to compare the Panasonic LX10 to any camera we've ever tested!

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX7 at Base ISO

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 80
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 80
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 80
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 125
Panasonic LX7 at ISO 80

The resolution advantage of the 20-megapixel LX10 over its aging 10-megapixel predecessor is clearly evident here, with the LX10 easily out-resolving the LX7 in most areas, though the LX7 does a better job at rendering our tricky red-leaf swatch. Noise levels are similar despite the different sensor sizes (the LX7 only has a 1/1.7"-type sensor which has less than half the area of the LX10's 1"-type sensor) and resolutions, however keep in mind the LX7's lower base ISO. Contrast and color are also more pleasing from the LX10, with less of a green tint than the LX7, though saturation is higher from the LX7 in deep reds, greens and blues.

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX100 at Base ISO

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 125
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 200

Here we compare the LX10 to its larger sibling, the LX100. The Panasonic LX100's 16.8-megiapixel Four Thirds sensor has almost twice the total area of the LX10's 1" sensor, however only about 12.7 megapixels is used in its native 4:3 aspect ratio here. Once again, the LX10 easily out-resolves the lower resolution LX100, however the LX100 image shows significantly less noise, even though the base ISO is higher. The LX10's image is sharper with higher contrast and more accurate color, though sharpening halos are more evident, but the LX100 does better with our challenging red-leaf swatch.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G7X Mark II at Base ISO

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 125
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 125
Canon G7X Mark II at ISO 125

Both of these rivals use a 20-megapixel 1"-type sensor, possibly even the same one, so it's no surprise resolving power is nearly identical. The LX10's less heavy-handed noise processing as well as what appears to be a slightly sharper lens does yield a little more detail than G7X Mark II except in the red-leaf fabric, although the Canon image is a bit cleaner with better color and a more pleasing tone curve.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G9X at Base ISO

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 125
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 125
Canon G9X at ISO 125

The Canon G9X also uses a similar if not identical 1"-type 20-megapixel sensor and thus produces image quality very similar to its sibling, the G7X II, so most of previous comparison is applicable here. The G9X's lens however doesn't seem to be perform quite as well, translating to slightly less detail than the G7X II, however the Canon continues to do a better job at rendering our troublesome red-leaf fabric.

Panasonic LX10 vs Sony RX100 V at Base ISO

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 125
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 125
Sony RX100 V at ISO 125

The Sony RX100 V, too, shares the same 1"-type sensor size and 20-megapixel resolution as the Panasonic LX10. Here at base ISO, we have to give the nod to the Sony, although it's pretty close. The Sony image is a bit crisper with more vibrant color and better contrast, however the Panasonic image appears slightly more natural and realistic. It's really a personal preference as to which image is better here.

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX7 at ISO 1600

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX7 at ISO 1600

As you can see here at ISO 1600, the LX10's larger sensor produces a lot less noise while still resolving more high-contrast detail, however default noise reduction has blurred away a lot more subtle detail in our tricky red-leaf swatch than the LX7. The LX10 continues to produce better color and contrast.

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX100 at ISO 1600

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 1600

The LX10's resolution advantage has pretty much disappeared here, with the lower resolution LX100 holding onto to more detail at ISO 1600, however some of that is due to stronger default noise reduction from the LX10 as the LX100's image is a bit noisier.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G7X Mark II at ISO 1600

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 1600
Canon G7X Mark II at ISO 1600

The Canon G7X II leaves behind a bit more noise in flatter areas though detail retention is also slightly better. The Canon continues to produce better color.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G9X at ISO 1600

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 1600
Canon G9X at ISO 1600

The Canon G9X doesn't fare quite as well the G7X Mark II here at ISO 1600 with higher noise levels and less detail, giving the LX10 an edge in this comparison with the exception of our troublesome red-leaf swatch.

Panasonic LX10 vs Sony RX100 V at ISO 1600

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 1600
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 1600100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 1600
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 1600
Sony RX100 V at ISO 1600

While the Sony RX100 V's image is crisper with better contrast, noise levels are higher in flatter areas, and there are more visible noise reduction artifacts as well, giving the image a slightly more processed looked than the LX10's. That's not to say the LX10 doesn't have noise reduction artifacts and even more blurring from what appears to be more aggressive noise reduction, however the end result don't appear quite as processed. The Sony appears to do better in our red-leaf swatch, however much of the apparent detail is false.

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX7 at ISO 3200

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX7 at ISO 3200

There's no contest here at ISO 3200, with the LX7 producing much higher luminance noise levels along with some nasty noise reduction and sharpening artifacts, as well as chroma blotching. The LX10 image on the other hand is much cleaner with more detail, but the camera is clearly working hard to suppress noise, blurring and smearing away a lot of fine detail.

Panasonic LX10 vs Panasonic LX100 at ISO 3200

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX100 at ISO 3200

Once again, the LX100 comes out on top here at ISO 3200, with better detail as well as lower noise, however color is still better from the LX10.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G7X Mark II at ISO 3200

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 3200
Canon G7X Mark II at ISO 3200

This is another tough call with one camera doing slightly better than the other depending on the subject matter. Overall, we give the Canon the nod here, for retaining slightly better detail with fewer noise reduction artifacts in the mosaic crop, as well as better color and contrast, even though luminance noise in flatter areas is noticeably higher.

Panasonic LX10 vs Canon G9X at ISO 3200

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 3200
Canon G9X at ISO 3200

It goes the other way here at ISO 3200 against the G9X, with the LX10 producing a better overall image with much lower noise levels and better detail.

Panasonic LX10 vs Sony RX100 V at ISO 3200

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 3200
Panasonic LX10 at ISO 3200
Sony RX100 V at ISO 3200

Panasonic's more aggressive noise reduction shows itself again here at ISO 3200. In the bottle crops, the LX10's image is noticeably less noisy. However, the Sony RX100 V's mosaic label, while itself rather mottled, is noticeably better than the blotchy, muddy label in the LX10's rendering. Sony still does better with the hue of the pink swatch, but in other respects the fabric swatches are pretty much a wash between the two cameras.

Panasonic LX10 vs. Panasonic LX7, Panasonic LX100, Canon G7X Mark II, Canon G9X, Sony RX100 V

100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 80100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 200100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 125100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 125
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 3200100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 3200
100% crop from Panasonic LX10 test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Panasonic LX7 test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Panasonic LX100 test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Canon G7X Mark II test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Canon G9X test image taken at ISO 6400100% crop from Sony RX100 V test image taken at ISO 6400
Panasonic
LX10
ISO 125
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Panasonic
LX7
ISO 80
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Panasonic
LX100
ISO 200
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Canon
G7X Mark II
ISO 125
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Canon
G9X
ISO 125
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Sony
RX100 V
ISO 125
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
Detail comparison. High-contrast detail is also important, pushing the camera in different ways, so we like to look at it too. Here, we can see the LX10 is a massive upgrade over the LX7 in all respects and especially as ISO climbs. It also does noticeably better than the Canon G9X despite having similar sensors. It compares well against the Canon G7X Mark II with similar detail though contrast is somewhat lower and sharpening halos are more evident, at least at base ISO. The LX100 doesn't have the resolution to compete at base ISO, but because of its larger pixels, it does noticeably better at high ISOs. The Sony RX100 V bests the LX10 at base ISO by offering the same resolution, better contrast and less obvious sharpening halos, but the LX10 isn't far behind, especially as ISO rises.

 

Panasonic LX10 Print Quality Analysis

Nice, large 24 x 36 inch prints up to ISO 200; Pleasing mid-range ISO prints up to 13 x 19 inches until ISO 800; Usable 5 x 7 inch prints up to ISO 6400.

Canon PRO-1000 Printer ImageISO 80 prints look very nice up to an impressive 24 x 36 inches, with a lot of fine detail and pleasing colors. Upon close inspection, you can see some minor pixelation since we're pushing the limits of a 20-megapixel sensor here. However, it's very minor, and at the typical viewing distance for a print of this size, it doesn't affect the overall print quality.

ISO 100 images, much like ISO 80, look nice up to 24 x 36 inches. We couldn't see much discernible difference in print quality between this and the lower ISO level.

ISO 125 prints look practically identical to ISO 80. There's a very, very subtle increase in shadow noise, but it's so minor that it has no impact on print quality. Prints up to 24 x 36 are therefore very good at this base ISO, with prints showing lots of detail and nice colors.

ISO 200 images are, again, very similar to the previous ISO, yet with just the faintest hint of increased shadow noise. Still, prints look great up to 24 x 36 inches.

ISO 400 prints top out at 20 x 30 inches. Background and shadow noise are a bit stronger now, and we see a slight drop in overall fine detail. Prints up to this maximum size, however, are crisp with lots of detail and noise is well-controlled.

ISO 800 images start to display a more noticeable drop in detail due to noise and noise reduction processing. While 16 x 20-inch prints might work for less critical applications or with careful post processing, we'll play it safe and call it at 13 x 19 inches here.

ISO 1600 prints display quite a bit of softening due to noise reduction, though the camera does a nice job of removing visible noise and grain, at the expense of fine detail, unfortunately. Colors also start to look a bit on the blander side at this sensitivity. Therefore, at this ISO, we're calling it at 8 x 10 inches for the maximum print size.

ISO 3200 images show an even further reduction in fine detail due to noise and NR processing, keeping us from calling a good print larger than 5 x 7 inches.

ISO 6400 prints should also be kept at 5 x 7 inches at maximum. Noise is quite apparent and really hurts fine detail at larger sizes.

ISO 12,800 / 25,600 images, unfortunately, are too soft and lacking in detail for us to comfortably consider usable for prints.

Competing against the wildly popular Sony RX100-series and Canon G7X-series, the LX10 is Panasonic's take on the premium compact camera. Also sporting a 20-megapixel 1-inch-type CMOS sensor, the Panasonic LX10 has a similar showing to the RX100 IV, for example, with comparable print sizes up to ISO 800. At extended low ISOs and through ISO 200, the LX10 offers nice, high-resolution prints up to 24 x 36 inches, which is quite impressive even though they are pushing the limits of its sensor. At ISO 800, the LX10 offers pleasing prints at up to 13 x 19 inches. However, past that ISO level, the LX10 begins to show some noticeable print quality degradation due to strong noise reduction processing, which does a good job of removing noise but at the expense of fine detail and color saturation. ISO 1600 prints top out at 8 x 10 inches, while ISO 3200 and 6400 are limited to 5 x 7 inches. At the maximum native ISO of 12,800 and extended ISO 25,600, the LX10's prints are too noisy and lacking in detail for usable prints.

About our print-quality testing: Our "Reference Printer"

Canon PRO-1000 Printer ImageTesting hundreds of digital cameras, we've found that you can only tell so much about a camera's image quality by viewing its images on-screen. Ultimately, there's no substitute for printing a lot of images and examining them closely. For this reason, we routinely print sample images from the cameras we test on our Canon imagePROGRAF PRO-1000 printer, which we named our "Printer of the Year" in our 2015 COTY awards.

The Canon PRO-1000 has a lot of characteristics that make it a natural to use for our "reference printer." When it comes to judging how well a camera's photos print, resolution and precise rendering are paramount. The PRO-1000's more than 18,000 individual nozzles combine with an air feeding system that provides exceptional droplet-placement accuracy. Its 11-color LUCIA PRO ink system delivers a wide color gamut and dense blacks, giving us a true sense of the cameras' image quality. To best see fine details, we've always printed on glossy paper, so the PRO-1000's "Chroma Optimizer" overcoat that minimizes "bronzing" or gloss differential is important to us. (Prior to the PRO-1000, we've always used dye-based printers, in part to avoid the bronzing problems with pigment-based inks.) Finally, we just don't have time to deal with clogged inkjet heads, and the PRO-1000 does better in that respect than any printer we've ever used. If you don't run them every day or two, inkjet printers tend to clog. Canon's thermal-inkjet technology is inherently less clog-prone than other approaches, but the PRO-1000 takes this a step further, with sensors that monitor every inkjet nozzle. If one clogs, it will assign another to take over its duties. In exchange for a tiny amount of print speed, this lets you defer cleaning cycles, which translates into significant ink savings. In our normal workflow, we'll often crank out a hundred or more letter-size prints in a session, but then leave the printer to sit for anywhere from days to weeks before the next camera comes along. In over a year of use, we've never had to run a nozzle-cleaning cycle on our PRO-1000.

See our Canon PRO-1000 review for a full overview of the printer from the viewpoint of a fine-art photographer.

*Disclosure: Canon provided us with the PRO-1000 and a supply of ink to use in our testing, and we receive advertising consideration for including this mention when we talk about camera print quality. Our decision to use the PRO-1000 was driven by the printer itself, though, prior to any discussion with Canon on the topic. (We'd actually been using an old Pixma PRO 9500II dye-based printer for years previously, and paying for our own ink, until we decided that the PRO-1000 was the next-generation printer we'd been waiting for.)

 



Enter this month to win:

1 $300 Adorama Gift Certificate

2 $200 Adorama Gift Certificate

3 $100 Adorama Gift Certificate