Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 vs Olympus XZ-1

Winner
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7

52

Olympus XZ-1

42

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/1.4
Wide dynamic range
Dynamic range
11.7 EV
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
120 fps
CMOS Sensor
Sensor type
Better in low light
 

Reasons to buy the Olympus XZ-1

Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
External flash
External flash
Better lighting
Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Olympus XZ-1.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7.

competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100

Boutique

$515 - $798

Sensor size Much larger sensor
Movie format Higher resolution movies
Built-in flash No built-in flash
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Pro digicam

$435 - $448

Sensor size Significantly larger sensor
True resolution Significantly higher true resolution
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10 (Lumix DMC-LX15)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10 (Lumix DMC-LX15)

Pro digicam

Sensor size Significantly larger sensor
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Image stabilization Worse image stabilization

Olympus XZ-1 Competitors

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Pro digicam

$435 - $448

Sensor size Significantly larger sensor
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Olympus XZ-2 iHS

Olympus XZ-2 iHS

Pro digicam

External mic jack Has an external mic jack
Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Olympus PEN-F

Olympus PEN-F

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$999 body only

$1,199 with 14-42mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
Built-in flash No built-in flash

discussion

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7
Lumix DMC-LX7
Panasonic

Report a correction
Olympus XZ-1
XZ-1
Olympus

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments