Head to head · Panasonic Lumix LX series

Panasonic Lumix LX3 vs LX5: is the longer zoom worth the upgrade?

The LX5 is the LX3 with a longer zoom (24-90 mm instead of 24-60 mm), a movie button, SDXC support and a thicker grip, at the same US launch price. Expert Reviews called the LX5 a natural upgrade if you wanted better high-ISO quality, better video or a wider zoom range, and said an LX3 was otherwise a reasonable thing to keep.¹ The headline high-ISO gain is less than it looks, because reviewers called ISO 6400 and 12800 on the LX5 essentially unusable. Choose the LX5 for the reach, the card support and the video; choose the LX3 if it is clearly cheaper and 60 mm is enough.

By the Digicam Atlas team · Last updated 20 October 2026 · Built only from our sourced reviews and the sources they cite · We have not tested these cameras ourselves

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3: full review · Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5: full review

What you will not find in any single review

Is the longer lens worth what it costs in light?
Is the LX5 better at high ISO?
Controls, video and viewfinders
What did each cost, and what about the Leica twins?

Side by side

	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3	Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5
Announced	21 July 2008; shipments from August²	21 July 2010; sales from late August³
Sensor	10.1 MP CCD, 1/1.63 inch²	10.1 MP CCD, 1/1.63 inch³
Processor	Venus IV⁴	Venus Engine FHD (three cores)³
Lens (35 mm equivalent)	24-60 mm, 2.5x, f/2.0-2.8, stabilised^2,5	24-90 mm, 3.8x, f/2.0-3.3, stabilised^3,1
ISO	100 to 3200; 6400 in High Sensitivity mode²	80 to 3200 at full size; 6400 and 12800 at reduced size^3,6
Screen	3.0 inch, 460,000 dots; optional optical viewfinder⁴	3.0 inch, 460,000 dots; optional electronic viewfinder (DMW-LVF1)³
Video	720p, 24 fps; no zoom while filming^5,4	720p, AVCHD Lite or Motion JPEG; movie button³
Battery	3.7 V, 1150 mAh, about 380 shots (CIPA)²	DMW-BCJ13, 3.6 V, 1250 mAh, about 400 shots (CIPA)⁷
Card and built-in memory	SD, SDHC; 50 MB²	SD, SDHC, SDXC; 40 MB⁷
Largest card (maker's words)	SD 8 MB-2 GB; SDHC 4, 8, 16 and 32 GB. No SDXC listed.⁸	SD 8 MB-2 GB; SDHC 4-32 GB; SDXC 48 GB and 64 GB listed. Larger SDXC not listed.⁹
Size and weight	108.7 x 59.5 x 27.1 mm; about 265 g²	110 x 66 x 43 mm; about 271 g⁷
Launch price	About $500 ($499.95); about 300 pounds in Britain^4,5	$499.95; 449.99 pounds in Britain^3,10

The two size lines come from different Imaging Resource pages and may be measured differently.

What actually changed between the LX3 and the LX5?

The formula stayed put: a 1/1.63-inch, 10.1-megapixel CCD behind a fast Leica-branded lens that starts at 24 mm and f/2.0, in a metal body with a hot shoe, a pop-up flash, a lens-barrel aspect-ratio switch and raw files.^2,4,5,3,10,1 Imaging Resource said that Panasonic enlarged the LX5's microlenses, shrank the gaps between them and deepened the wells for better dynamic range and less high-ISO noise, and fitted a three-core Venus Engine FHD processor in place of the LX3's Venus IV.^4,3

The visible changes were the zoom, which grew from 3x to 3.8x, or 24-60 mm to 24-90 mm equivalent;^2,1,3 a thicker grip with a turn-and-push jog dial where the LX3 had a joystick, plus dedicated movie and playback buttons;³ a 1:1 option on the aspect-ratio switch;¹⁰ SDXC support;⁷ and an electronic viewfinder option, which we explain below. Panasonic announced the LX5 on 21 July 2010 and the LX3 on 21 July 2008, exactly two years earlier.^2,3

Is the longer lens worth what it costs in light?

The LX3's short zoom was its main weakness. Imaging Resource said the 60 mm limit fell well short of the more common 105 mm and made the camera a difficult choice for an all-round tool, though a great second camera beside an SLR;⁴ DPReview agreed it might restrict the camera's appeal.¹¹ The LX5 answers that with a 90 mm limit, at f/3.3 instead of f/2.8.^2,3 By our arithmetic that is about half a stop less light at the long end, in exchange for 50 percent more reach. PhotographyBLOG still found the range modest next to Panasonic's own TZ and FZ100 models.¹⁰

Both cameras keep f/2.0 at 24 mm, which is the part reviewers valued most. DPReview said the LX3's lens let you shoot at lower ISOs than competitors,¹¹ and Photo Review described it as a full stop brighter than the LX2's.¹² The wide end did not change: 24 mm at f/2.0 on both.^2,3 If you mostly shoot rooms, streets and landscapes at 24 mm, the LX5's longer zoom buys you nothing.

Is the LX5 better at high ISO?

On the spec sheet, hugely: the LX3 topped out at ISO 3200, with 6400 in a High Sensitivity mode, while the LX5 offers 3200 at full size and 6400 and 12800 at reduced size.^2,3,6 In the reviews, barely. Expert Reviews called the LX5's 6400 and 12800 modes essentially unusable, with resolution falling to 3 megapixels and no RAW option there;¹ PhotographyBLOG likewise reported a drop to roughly 3 megapixels at those settings.⁶

Where reviewers drew the line for useful pictures is almost the same for both cameras. For the LX3, Imaging Resource called ISO 800 the limit, DPReview listed decent performance up to ISO 1600, and Trusted Reviews said ISO 1600 still made a decent print and ISO 3200 was shabby but usable for small images.^4,11,5 For the LX5, PhotographyBLOG found images clean up to ISO 1600 with noise noticeable at 3200, Expert Reviews found them noisy from ISO 800 before noise reduction, and Neocamera called ISO 1600 usable for small prints and 3200 borderline.^10,1,13 The one direct comparison is Expert Reviews' remark that the LX5's RAW files beat the LX3's by at least a stop below the extreme settings.¹ Our reading: the real gain is about one stop in RAW, not the doubling and redoubling printed on the box.

Controls, video and viewfinders

Both cameras drew complaints about their controls, just different ones. Imaging Resource found the LX3's joystick nearly as useful as a command dial and Trusted Reviews found it very quick once familiar, yet Trusted Reviews also listed slightly fiddly controls and DPReview found them awkward for large fingers.^4,5,11 On the LX5, Expert Reviews liked the thicker grip and clickable jog dial but lost the thumb rest, PhotographyBLOG found the mode dial slightly loose on its sample, and Neocamera called the modal control dial fiddly.^1,10,13

Video moved from a footnote to a feature. The LX3 shot 720p at 24 frames a second, which Trusted Reviews called very good, but Imaging Resource noted there was no zoom while filming and Trusted Reviews listed limited video modes among its cons.^5,4 The LX5 added a one-touch movie button, AVCHD Lite or Motion JPEG, and a Creative Movie mode with manual exposure; Expert Reviews rated its video very good but disliked the mono microphone, and the two reviewers disagreed on whether the zoom was audible while filming.^3,10,1

The optional viewfinders differ in type. The LX3 could take an optional aluminium optical viewfinder that slid into the hot shoe;⁴ the LX5 takes the optional DMW-LVF1 electronic viewfinder, the same one Panasonic offered for the GF1.³ PhotographyBLOG noted that the LX5's screen was hard to see in bright sun,¹⁰ which is when you would want one.

What did each cost, and what about the Leica twins?

The US launch price did not move: about $500 for the LX3 ($499.95 list in Imaging Resource's review) and $499.95 for the LX5.^4,3 In Britain it did. Trusted Reviews put the LX3 at about 300 pounds in November 2008,⁵ while PhotographyBLOG gave the LX5's UK launch price as 449.99 pounds and Expert Reviews found it at about 400 against a recommended 480, with most shops out of stock.^10,1 Expert Reviews added that the LX3 was still on sale for under 315 pounds, and PhotographyBLOG's reviewer would not pay the launch price and advised waiting for about 400.^1,10

Both cameras have Leica twins, and the premium for the badge was large. Trusted Reviews said the essentially identical Leica D-Lux 4 cost nearly twice the LX3, at about 570 pounds;⁵ Imaging Resource listed the rebadged D-LUX 5 at about $800, some $300 above the LX5, and noted it lacked the slightly raised front grip.¹⁴ If you are searching, include the Leica names, and check whether you are paying for a red dot. We do not print used prices (eBay's licence forbids deriving them); the sold-listing links below show what each fetches.

Battery, memory and size

The batteries are different packs: a 3.7-volt, 1150 mAh cell rated at about 380 shots in the LX3, and a 3.6-volt, 1250 mAh DMW-BCJ13 rated at about 400 shots in the LX5.^2,7 The LX3 takes SD and SDHC cards and has 50 MB built in; the LX5 adds SDXC and has 40 MB. Panasonic's manuals list SDHC cards up to 32 GB for the LX3 and no SDXC, and SDXC cards of 48 GB and 64 GB for the LX5, with larger ones not listed.^8,9 Size figures differ in Imaging Resource's tables, about 27 mm deep for the LX3 and 43 mm for the LX5, but they may be measured differently, so check a unit in hand.^2,7 Weight is within a few grams: about 265 g against 271 g.^2,7

Who should buy which?

Choose the LX5 if you want reach beyond 60 mm, a movie button, the option of an electronic viewfinder, or the ability to use a 48 GB or 64 GB SDXC card. PhotographyBLOG would not pay the launch price,¹⁰ so find one at a sensible price and ask for the lens cap, since there is no automatic cover.¹⁰

Choose the LX3 if it is clearly cheaper and you shoot mainly at 24-60 mm, which Imaging Resource described as great for rooms, landscapes and portraits.⁴ It has the same f/2.0 wide end, the same sensor size and a joystick some reviewers loved, and Expert Reviews said an LX3 was a reasonable thing to keep.¹ Our coverage of the LX5 rests on three reviews, one written a year after launch, while the LX3 has four outlets. We have not tested either camera ourselves.

What the reviewers said at the time

Outlet	Camera	Date	Verdict, in our words
Imaging Resource	LX3	20 Oct 2008	Five-star Dave's Pick: image quality an unqualified joy, a short zoom and slow start-up the drawbacks.⁴
DPReview	LX3	2008 (undated)	A compact photographers can get excited about, one of the best high-ISO compacts it had seen; the short zoom the main concern.¹¹
Trusted Reviews	LX3	13 Nov 2008	Exceptional image quality, a fast lens and manual controls; limited zoom and a high price.⁵
Expert Reviews	LX5	25 Aug 2010	Surpasses the LX3 on RAW quality, video and zoom range; the top ISO modes essentially unusable and the launch price high.¹
PhotographyBLOG	LX5	6 Sep 2010	Highly Recommended at 4.5 stars, held back on value; the reviewer advised waiting for about 400 pounds.¹⁰
Neocamera	LX5	7 Oct 2011	Excellent for creative photography with strong RAW files, marked down for JPEG colour, white balance and a slow, fiddly feel.¹³

What to check before you bid

LX3. The lens should extend and retract cleanly with its cap or replacement present; the aspect-ratio switch, mode dial and joystick should respond properly.^4,5
LX5. There is no automatic lens cover, so check the cap is included; the mode dial should click firmly, and the battery door is worth a look.^10,13

Looking for one?

Affiliate links: we may earn a commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. We print no used-camera prices; the sold listings show what these actually fetch.

New to the jargon (CCD, ISO, xD cards, IXUS vs ELPH)? Read our plain-English digicam glossary. Card questions: memory card guide. All comparisons.

Sources

These are the original sources our reviews were built from. We have not tested these cameras ourselves; where we do arithmetic or draw a reading of our own, the text says so.