Panasonic L1 versus Panasonic L10
The Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC- L10 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in February 2006 and August 2007. Both are DSLR (Digital Single Lens Reflex) cameras that are equipped with a Four Thirds sensor. The L1 has a resolution of 7.4 megapixel, whereas the L10 provides 10 MP.
The physical size and weight of the Panasonic L1 and the Panasonic L10 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also toggle the display to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the L1 – represents 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Panasonic L10 is somewhat larger (2 percent) than the Panasonic L1. However, the L10 is slightly lighter (8 percent) than the L1. Cameras that are intended for semi-professional or professional use are sometimes a bit bulkier in order to provide them with the necessary ruggedness. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the L1 nor the L10 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. In this particular case, both cameras feature the same lens mount, so that they can use the same lenses. You can find an overview of suitable optics in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Panasonic L1 (⇒ rgt)||5.7 in||3.4 in||2.5 in||21.4 oz||750||no||2006||999||discont.||check|
|Panasonic L10 (⇒ lft)||5.3 in||3.8 in||3.1 in||19.6 oz||450||no||2007||599||discont.||check|
|Leica Digilux 3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.7 in||3.4 in||3.0 in||21.4 oz||750||no||2006||1,499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.5 oz||500||no||2008||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||18.9 oz||750||no||2008||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.3 oz||500||no||2007||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||19.0 oz||750||no||2007||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-330 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.5 in||3.4 in||2.8 in||22.5 oz||750||no||2006||999||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.6 in||2.1 in||15.3 oz||500||no||2006||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.1 in||3.7 in||2.6 in||16.9 oz||750||no||2005||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.8 in||3.3 in||2.5 in||22.0 oz||750||no||2004||799||discont.||check|
|Panasonic FZ2500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||5.4 in||4.0 in||5.3 in||32.3 oz||350||no||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Panasonic LX100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.5 in||2.6 in||2.2 in||13.9 oz||300||no||2014||899||latest||check|
|Panasonic G1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||4.9 in||3.3 in||1.8 in||12.7 oz||410||no||2008||599||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The L10 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 40 percent) than the L1, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tent to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Both cameras under consideration feature a Four Thirds sensor and have a format factor (sometimes also referred to as "crop factor") of 2.0. Within the spectrum of camera sensors, this places the review cameras among the medium-sized sensor cameras that aim to strike a balance between image quality and portability. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
While the two cameras under review share the same sensor size, the L10 offers a higher resolution of 10 megapixel, compared with 7.4 MP of the L1. This megapixel advantage translates into a 16 percent gain in linear resolution. On the other hand, these sensor specs imply that the L10 has a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 4.74μm versus 5.52μm for the L1). However, it should be noted that the L10 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 6 months) than the L1, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of individual pixels.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for most cameras. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
|Panasonic L1 (⇒ rgt)||Four Thirds||7.4||3136||2352||no||-||-||-||-|
|Panasonic L10 (⇒ lft)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.3||10.8||429||55|
|Leica Digilux 3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||7.4||3136||2352||no||-||-||-||-|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.5||10.4||527||56|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.4||10.4||548||55|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.1||10.0||494||51|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||21.2||10.0||442||52|
|Olympus E-330 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||7.4||3136||2352||no||-||-||-||-|
|Olympus E-400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||10.0||3648||2736||no||-||-||-||-|
|Olympus E-500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||8.0||3264||2448||no||-||-||-||-|
|Olympus E-300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||8.0||3264||2448||no||-||-||-||-|
|Panasonic FZ2500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||..||..||..||..|
|Panasonic LX100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.7||4112||3088||4K/30p||22.3||12.5||553||67|
|Panasonic G1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||12.0||4000||3000||no||21.1||10.3||463||53|
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The L1 and the L10 are similar in the sense that both have an optical viewfinder. The latter is useful for getting a clear image for framing even in brightly lit environments. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Panasonic L1, the Panasonic L10, and comparable cameras. If you need more detail on the specs, you can find comprehensive listings, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Panasonic L1 (⇒ rgt)||optical||no||2.5||207||fixed||no||4000||3.0||13||no|
|Panasonic L10 (⇒ lft)||optical||no||2.5||207||swivel||no||4000||3.0||11||no|
|Leica Digilux 3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||207||fixed||no||4000||3.0||13||no|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||no|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.7||215||fixed||no||4000||3.5||12||YES|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||3.0||10||no|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||3.0||12||YES|
|Olympus E-330 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||tilting||no||4000||3.0||13||no|
|Olympus E-400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||3.0||10||no|
|Olympus E-500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||215||fixed||no||4000||2.5||13||no|
|Olympus E-300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||1.8||134||fixed||no||4000||2.5||11||no|
|Panasonic FZ2500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||swivel||YES||4000||12.0||13.2||no|
|Panasonic LX100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2764||no||3.0||921||fixed||no||4000||11.0||7||no|
|Panasonic G1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1440||no||3.0||460||swivel||no||4001||3.0||10.5||no|
Both the L1 and the L10 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The L1 was replaced by the Panasonic L10, while the L10 does not have a direct successor.
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Panasonic L1 or the Panasonic L10 – has the upper hand? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.
Advantages of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1:
- Longer lasting: Can take more shots (750 versus 450) on a single battery charge.
- More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2006).
Reasons to prefer the Panasonic Lumix DMC- L10:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (10 vs 7.4MP), which boosts linear resolution by 16%.
- More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (40 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 6 months) more recently.
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the L10 emerges as the winner of the match-up (4 : 2 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the L1 or the L10 handle or perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable. This is where reviews by experts come in. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites. You can find the full text of the reviews, respectively, at cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Panasonic L1 (⇒ rgt)||85/100||Rec||-||reviewed||3.5/5||2006||999||discont.||check|
|Panasonic L10 (⇒ lft)||85/100||Rec||3.5/5||reviewed||4/5||2007||599||discont.||check|
|Leica Digilux 3 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||-||-||-||2006||1,499||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-420 (⇒ lft | rgt)||85/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2008||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-520 (⇒ lft | rgt)||87/100||HiRec||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2008||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-410 (⇒ lft | rgt)||86/100||HiRec||4/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2007||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-510 (⇒ lft | rgt)||89/100||HiRec||3.5/5||reviewed||4.5/5||2007||799||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-330 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||Rec||reviewed||3.5/5||-||2006||999||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-400 (⇒ lft | rgt)||85/100||-||4/5||-||4/5||2006||699||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||76/100||HiRec||-||-||-||2005||599||discont.||check|
|Olympus E-300 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||Rec||reviewed||reviewed||4.5/5||2004||799||discont.||check|
|Panasonic FZ2500 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||82/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2016||1,199||latest||check|
|Panasonic LX100 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||5/5||4/5||5/5||2014||899||latest||check|
|Panasonic G1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||88/100 HiRec||70/100 HiRec||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2008||599||discont.||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, kindly get in touch, and I will try to update the database with the necessary infos.
- Canon 1300D vs Fujifilm X-A2
- Fujifilm X-A2 vs Fujifilm X-T10
- Fujifilm X-Pro2 vs Olympus E-M10 III
- Fujifilm X-T10 vs Canon T7i
- Leica Digilux 3 vs Olympus E-500
- Leica M Typ 240 vs Sony RX10
- Nikon D500 vs Nikon D5
- Nikon D7200 vs Panasonic GX80
- Panasonic FZ300 vs Canon G9 X
- Panasonic FZ330 vs Sony RX10 II
- Panasonic G2 vs Panasonic G10
- Sony A6500 vs Canon 6D Mark II