Panasonic DMC G3 versus Sony RX100 (1 Viewer)

Today I compared (digiscoping) my Panasonic DMC G3 with a Sony RX100 from someone living not far away from me. We tested with my Swarovski ATM 80HD and his Swarovski 95 (don't know the exact name, but it is a new type angled 95 mm Swarovski). We took shots on real birds (tits, sparrows, finch and a pigeon), on black on white text and on a fixed bird feather about 15 meter away from us. I photographed through my own scope and through the 95 mm scope and on different tripods. In all cases and no matter which one of us did the focusing (manually and auto), the Panasonic performed much worse then the Sony. Contrast was less but especially image sharpness was less with the Panasonic. The images of the Sony could be magnified 8 times and more, almost without noticable loss in sharpness, while the image quality of the Panasonic already started to break down noticable at a 4 x magnification. At first I thought the problem was in my tripod (more prone to vibration), but this turned out not to be the case.

Before the test I had already noticed, that the views with my Panasonic setup were nice and sharp when looking through the view finder right after focusing. After taking a photograph, the image is visible in the view finder for 3 seconds and the image is than noticably blurred as compared to the view through the view finder before taking the shot. After 3 seconds the image 'pops' away and the image of the live focused object is sharp again. Also on my computer the images are not sharp. When I don't need to crop some images are OK, but the more I need to crop, the less sharp they become. Which is not ore (very) much less the case with the Sony. I used a Panasonic 20 mm pancake lens and a Sigma 30 mm lens on my Panasonic. There was not much difference in image quality. The 20 mm Panasonic is a little better color corrected, but the Sigma showed a little more contrat.

So now I am thinking about buying a new camera. I think I prefer the Sony RX100 II to the RX 100, because it has a rotatable screen and the possibility of using a remote control. I read that the Sony RX 100 II has another sensor then the older RX 100, so I don't know irf the RX 100 II is as good a performer as the RX 100. If anyone on the list has tried both, I would apreciate his/her comments very much. Also other comments are welcome.

Thanks for reading this long story.

The smaller and lighter Sony RX100 may indeed be a better choice for digiscoping. But comparing the image quality of the Panasonic G3 with the Sony RX100 at DPReview at

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg3/16

...it looks like the G3 has much better resolution and image quality. Certainly the RX100 is no slouch with its 1" sensor, but that's still smaller than the micro 4/3 sensor in the G3. You can see the sensor size comparison here (scroll down a bit):

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-dsc-rx100

Of course I do not argue with your results - go with what gives you the best image quality. You are aware that the Panasonic 20mm lens does not have any image stabilization? I get very good and sharp results with my G3 and the Panasonic 100-300mm lens at all focal lengths (but not digiscoping), but that lens does have image stabilization which I generally use anytime the shutter speed is going to be 1/500 second or more - which is much of the time since I am often shooting at f/5.6 or longer...

I agree with OsageArcher that there's probably something else going on in your comparison apart from camera quality. You should get comparable image quality from the cameras. The RX100 is certainly an impressive camera though, and considerably newer than the G3. Here's a sensor comparison with G3 from DxOMark:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Ca...nd)/Sony/(appareil2)/701|0/(brand2)/Panasonic

G3 is clearly better in low light capability, which is very important for bird photography of course, but the RX100 bests it slightly on the other two scores.

Best,
Jim

Thanks everyone for taking the time to comment.
Your comments made spending some some more time in trying to find the problem this morning and probably I found it. Untill nowI always shot in 'single' mode. The camera gave a 'click' with every shot. This morning I tried 'burst' mode, in which 10-20 shots are taken per second. There's no click at all, not even a tiny one. And the images are much sharper now. Attached are photo's of a magpie, taken at about 72 meters distance and a collared dove at 100 meters (the birds didn't come closer to my garden this morning). Never made a sharp photograph like these, not even on closer distances. So I think the 'click' I heard when taken only one shot at a time made the camera vibrate, causing the images to be unsharp. Almost no post-processing necessary any more now.

Hi, I too have a Panny G3 and have tried using the TLS APO adapter with my Swaro 80 HD + 30X SW and find the focus to not be very satisfactory. I do find the focus with video to be much better. Initially I attributed the marginal focus to being new to owning a scope and digiscoping. I think the G3 may have a noisy shutter causing camera shake. The newer models have the option of an electronic shutter thereby eliminating the camera shake. I do not have a source to try one of the newer models such as the G5 or G6. The new GX7 has in body stabilization along with focus peaking and electronic shutter.

John

The G3 also had an electronic shutter, in SHB (super high burst). I do use this option now, but it is only possible to shoot small JPEG's. I am still not sure if G5 and/or G6 also have an electronic shutter for slower bursts and or single shot and fine JPEG or RAW.

I believe they both do. Look at DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-g6/3 near the bottom of the page, it says electronic shutter as being something you can apply to the fn buttoms. there is much more discussion of this topic in the forums at DPreveiw