[Leica] LC1 vs 20D comparison

[simon.ogilvie at gmail.com (Simon Ogilvie)]

I had an interesting chance to do an in-depth comparison between a
friend's Panasonic LC1 (with Leica lens of course!) with my Canon 20D.
 Said friend wanted to sell the LC1 and I was seriously considering
buying it.

In use the LC1 is really nice - I loved the solid feel, the manual
zoom, focus and aperture rings and control dials etc. and the 2.5"
screen is very nice.  I didn't like the EVF though - the time lag
annoyed me giving the feeling of not being "in-touch" with the
subject.

However, the big decider for me was the image quality.  Doubtless the
LC1 is better than most if not all digital P&S cameras, but it's a
long way behind the 20D in image quality.  OK, so the 20D is higher
resolution which I expected to be noticable, but the images are also
much smoother and more life-like.  Any uniform coloured area is
rendered by the Canon as a uniform colour, but on the LC1 it's a
mosaic of different colours mixed to get the correct overall hue. 
This seems to be typical of CCD-sensor cameras, and the Canon's
rendering is simply nicer in my opinion.  I got some nice looking
photos from the LC1, including portraits of my children using the
bounce flash (which is another nice feature), and the Leica SF20 flash
I use (rarely) on my M6TTL seemed to work nicely with it as well.  The
lens is very nice, although there's barrel distortion at the wide end.

I may be being unfair in comparing dissimilar equipment, but the LC1
is almost as big and heavy as the 20D with a small lens, so I thought
it not an unreasonable thing to want to do.  I would just feel that if
I carried the LC1 and left the 20D at home I would be getting inferior
pictures, so there's no point in buying it.

Anyone else have similar or oposing opinions?

Simon.