Panasonic LUMIX LX100 II vs Ricoh GR IIIx

These sit in different sensor classes, and that decides most of it. The Ricoh GR IIIx is APS-C (262g (9.2 oz), $999) — larger sensor, shallower depth-of-field and cleaner high-ISO. The Panasonic LUMIX LX100 II is Micro Four Thirds (392g (13.8 oz), $997), trading some of that for a lighter, cheaper body and extra effective reach from lenses. Pick the format that matches how you shoot before splitting hairs on features.

Choose the Panasonic LUMIX LX100 II if you need extra telephoto reach in a compact kit — the smaller Micro Four Thirds sensor effectively extends your lenses and keeps the whole system lighter.

Choose the Ricoh GR IIIx if you want maximum detail for landscapes, studio or large prints — 24.2MP resolves noticeably more than 17MP and gives more cropping latitude. Choose it if you prioritise shallow depth-of-field and clean high-ISO — its APS-C sensor is larger than the Micro Four Thirds one, so backgrounds blur more and noise stays lower in dim light. Choose it if you shoot handheld — in-body stabilisation lets you use slower shutter speeds and steadies video, which the other body can't do without a stabilised lens. Choose it if you shoot in low light or indoors — a higher native ISO ceiling (102,400) gives it the edge after dark.

Stabilisation: only the Ricoh GR IIIx has in-body IS — slower handheld shutter speeds and steadier video without relying on stabilised lenses.