Just window shopping for tiny cameras (tiny-er than the GX85) and realised I don't really care that much about the size of the camera with the lens turned off, I care about the size when I'm waving it around actually shooting footage.
Comparing the LX10 with GX850+12-32mm kit lens, I think the LX10 might be longer??
The zoom ratio is only 3.0 compared to 2.66 for the 12-32, so they're almost identical lenses too.
Obviously, it's smaller when closed:
BUT, the LX10 lens really really extends (at least for some of its zoom range)...
and (as far as I can tell) the 12-32 doesn't extend nearly as much? These are the best images I could find of the lens extended:
Also, the 14-42 doesn't look much larger either:
Does anyone have all these bits and can give a more definite answer?
If the incognito factor is important then it might be that the GX850 and 12-32mm might be better.
In fact, the LX10 might not even have much of size advantage over the GX85 with the 12-32 lens, when both are fully extended... I got a direct size comparison image and superimposed the best quality images of the two lenses extended that I could fine (the lens images are transparent so you can see the overlays - the size match is almost perfect on both).
Obviously lens extension isn't everything, but in use it's potentially a factor. Members of the public are aware that the longer the lens the more zoomed it is, so anyone who is uncomfortable with the idea of being filmed from a distance might really notice such a thing.