Canon PowerShot ELPH 150 IS vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP8: A Hands-On Ultracompact Showdown

In my 15+ years of reviewing cameras, it’s become clear that ultracompacts - while admittedly limited compared to DSLRs and mirrorless systems - still have a unique appeal. They’re perfect for moments when convenience trumps absolute image quality: slip one in your pocket, capture family gatherings, street scenes, or travel snapshots without fuss. Today, I'm comparing two such cameras from different eras and brands: the Canon PowerShot ELPH 150 IS (sometimes known as the IXUS 155), announced in early 2014, versus the older Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP8 from mid-2009.

I’ve spent ample time shooting with both, testing everything from image quality in diverse lighting to ergonomics. My goal here is to cut through marketing specs and present what truly matters for photography enthusiasts and pros considering a compact secondary camera or a simple grab-and-go device. Let’s break down these rivals in detail.

Physical dimensions and ergonomics matter a lot when you’re hunting for everyday pocket companions.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling

Both cameras slot firmly into the ultracompact category, but that doesn’t mean they're identical in hand feel.

• Canon ELPH 150 IS: Measures roughly 95 x 57 x 24 mm, weighing 142 grams with battery. It feels solid for its size, with a smooth, sleek finish. The rounded edges make it comfortable to grip despite the lack of pronounced handgrip. The button layout is minimalist, but thoughtfully placed.

• Panasonic FP8: Slightly larger at 96 x 60 x 20 mm and 151 grams, it’s surprisingly slim with a modest footprint. The body feels a bit more plasticky but light enough for travel. Its flatter design means it slips easily into pockets but sometimes feels fiddly for fast one-handed use.

Both cameras lack weather sealing or rugged features, so they’re best treated gently - clear in their ultracompact intentions.

Personally, I prefer the slight chunkiness of the Canon for more secure handling on the move, though Panasonic’s ultra-slim profile is undeniably convenient for street and travel photography where discretion and weight are key.

Button and Control Layout: Intuitive or Clunky?

I always test how ergonomics affect shooting speed. Both cameras have simple control schemes reflecting their budget, but they diverge in execution.

Canon’s top controls feel more tactile; Panasonic’s layout emphasizes minimalism.

• Canon: Its top dials and buttons provide direct access to functions like flash modes and zoom. However, there is no dedicated mode dial - exposure modes are limited by design. The rear LCD is fixed and small but functional.

• Panasonic: Also sports a fixed 2.7-inch LCD but adds a handy HDMI port - rare on cameras at this price point. The shutter and zoom buttons respond well and Panasonic’s Venus Engine processor promises smoother image processing.

Neither model offers touchscreen or advanced customization, understandable limitations for ultracompacts intended for straightforward operation.

Sensor Tech and Image Quality: What’s Under the Hood?

Both cameras feature 1/2.3” CCD sensors, the common size for compact cameras, but their resolutions and processors differ - a big factor for image quality.

The 20MP Canon sensor aims for detail, while the 12MP Panasonic prioritizes sensitivity.

• Canon ELPH 150 IS: 20MP resolution with a DIGIC 4+ processor. The sensor size is about 6.17 x 4.55 mm, yielding roughly 28 mm². It maxes out at ISO 1600, though noise becomes noticeable above 400 ISO in my tests. The CCD sensor provides decent color rendition and sharpness for this class, especially in bright conditions.

• Panasonic FP8: Lower 12MP resolution but with a slightly older Venus Engine V processor and max ISO of 6400, which is impressive on paper. The sensor area is close to Canon’s but with a bit larger pixel pitch, helping low light performance. However, I noticed more visible noise at higher ISOs and a softer image overall compared to Canon.

In my side-by-side image comparisons, Canon pushes sharper photos with more defined edges and fine detail. Panasonic, with its lower resolution, tends to produce softer images but fares slightly better when the light dips, thanks to higher ISO capability.

Real-World Portrait Photography: Skin Tones & Bokeh

Portraits reveal a lot about a camera’s color science and lens quality. Let me share my hands-on observations.

• Canon: Its 10x zoom lens (24–240mm equivalent) has a max aperture of f/3-6.9, with decent optical image stabilization. This helps produce tight headshots with pleasant background separation at longer focal lengths. Skin tones render quite naturally - warm but not oversaturated - and the contrast is balanced, giving faces a pleasing look.

• Panasonic: The 4.6x zoom (28–128mm equivalent) is somewhat slower at f/3.3-5.9. Images at wide aperture can isolate subjects gently but the background blur (bokeh) is less pronounced due to shorter zoom reach and optical design. Skin tones here tend toward a cooler cast, with a slight greenish tint in fluorescent lighting that I had to correct post-processing.

Neither camera supports advanced autofocus features like eye detection or face tracking, making manual composition even more critical. Canon's slightly faster lens quality and image processing give it an edge for casual portrait snaps.

Landscape Photography: Dynamic Range and Resolution Matter

Shooting landscapes challenges sensor dynamic range and resolution - two areas where ultracompacts traditionally struggle.

The Canon’s 20MP sensor theoretically offers higher resolution for cropping large prints or framing expansive vistas. It handles highlights gracefully, preserving sky details better in harsh sunlight. Yet, its limited dynamic range makes shadowed areas appear quite compressed and sometimes noisy.

Panasonic’s 12MP sensor falls behind for large-scale landscapes but compensates with slightly better ISO sensitivity. Highlights tend to blow out more quickly, however, and overall image contrast is flatter.

Neither camera offers RAW file capture - a disappointment for landscape photographers wanting post-processing latitude. JPG output is decent considering the class but displays compression artifacts visible under close viewing.

Weather sealing is nonexistent on both, so limit use in adverse conditions.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus, Burst Speed, and Zoom Reach

For action and wildlife, speed and accuracy are king. Here both models reveal their budget compact roots.

• Canon ELPH 150 IS: While boasting a generous 10x zoom, its CCD sensor and DIGIC 4+ processor limit burst shooting to a sluggish 1 fps with a modest 9 autofocus points. Contrast-detection AF is slow to lock, causing frustration with moving subjects. However, optical IS helps steady shots at telephoto lengths.

• Panasonic FP8: Slightly better burst rate at 2 fps with 11 focus points and contrast detection AF employing live view autofocus. It responds faster to subject shifts in good light but struggles overall with erratic or distant animals. Its shorter zoom (4.6x) limits reach for wildlife framing.

Neither camera presents hybrid phase-detection autofocus or continuous tracking found in more advanced models, a factor serious wildlife and sports photographers must weigh. I found chasing birds or fast sports moments difficult with either, so these cameras suit casual use only.

Street Photography: Discreet, Lightweight, and Ready to Go

Here ultracompacts shine brightest, providing inconspicuous shooting companions.

• Both cameras’ quiet shutters, small size, and minimal button noise make them ideal for unobtrusive street photography.
• Panasonic’s slimmer profile aids pocketability; Canon’s rounded grip provides more confidence for quick shots.
• Low-light sensitivity is fairly similar - Canon’s max ISO 1600 vs Panasonic’s ISO 6400 - but noise distracts above ISO 400, so street scenes in dim conditions encourage flash use or available light only.
• Neither camera has an electronic viewfinder or tilt/swivel LCD screens, a limitation for shooting from unusual angles or nighttime candid snaps.

The simple interface and focus-by-half-press system works well in fast-paced shooting, but in tricky lighting, predictable AF lag can frustrate quick captures.

Macro Photography: Close-Up Details Without Extra Gear

Close focusing reveals lens sharpness and focusing precision.

• Canon: Macro mode kicks in at 1 cm, which is exceptional, letting you get really close to subjects like flowers and textures. The 10x zoom helps isolate tiny details. Optical IS reduces blur - a real advantage at close range.

• Panasonic: Macro minimum focus distance around 5 cm means less intimate close-ups; detail is softer and less vibrant due to lower resolution.

If macro shots are key, Canon’s lens construction yields better handheld close-ups without additional equipment.

Night and Astro: Low Light and Long Exposure Potential

Ultracompacts are rarely considered astro-friendly, but long exposures and ISO performance matter in low light.

• Canon’s minimum shutter speed is 15 seconds - a plus - enabling some star trails or night landscape shots. ISO tops out at 1600, but noise suppression smears fine detail at high ISO. Optical stabilization helps handheld twilight shots but cannot replace tripod use for true astrophotography.

• Panasonic offers a minimum shutter of 60 seconds, a surprise advantage for night work, and ISO 6400 max. However, noise is heavy at maximum ISO, limiting usable image quality. The Motion JPEG video format caps further possibilities.

Neither camera supports manual exposure modes or bulb mode, restricting creative control under stars or city nights.

Video Capabilities: Basic but Functional

Even simple ultracompacts serve as handy point-and-shoot video devices.

• Canon: Records 1280x720 (HD) at 25 fps using efficient H.264 compression. No external mic support limits audio fidelity. Electronic stabilization is optical and decent for walk-and-shoot.

• Panasonic: Also captures 720p HD but at 30 fps using the older Motion JPEG codec, resulting in larger files and less efficient compression. It includes HDMI output for playback, a bonus for casual viewing.

Neither camera supports 4K, microphone inputs, or advanced video tools found on modern mirrorless or DSLRs. For casual home video or travel snippets, either will suffice.

Travel Photography: Versatility, Battery Life, and Portability

Travel photographers demand compact gear with reliable battery life.

• Battery data is sparse, but the Canon claims 230 shots per charge using an NB-11LH battery. This is modest, meaning I recommend carrying spares on longer outings.

• Panasonic lacks published battery life figures, but expect similar range given similar sensor and processor sizes.

• Both accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with single slots - standard, but no redundancy for pros.

Connectivity is minimal: no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or GPS on either camera. USB 2.0 ports provide basic tethered transfer, Panasonic alone features an HDMI port.

For lightweight travel kits, I found Canon’s lens versatility (24-240mm equivalence) makes it more adaptable to varied scenes - from wide landmarks to faraway details - without swapping lenses or carrying bulk.

Professional Work: Workflow Integration and Reliability

These cameras target casual amateurs, but can they fit into a professional’s secondary kit?

• Both lack RAW support, limiting post-processing flexibility - a dealbreaker for many professionals.

• No advanced AF, manual modes, or high frame rates reduce creative control.

• Their fixed lenses, limited ISO ranges, and absence of weather sealing restrain their use as professional tools.

However, they can serve as convenient travel backups, disposable cameras, or discreet street shooting devices for quick shots not worth risking expensive glass.

Canon ELPH 150 IS front Canon ELPH 150 IS screen back Panasonic FP8 front Panasonic FP8 screen back

Technical Deep-Dive: Sensor and Processor Insights

I ran side-by-side resolution charts and ISO test scenes under controlled lighting. The results:

CCD sensors tend to produce pleasing color gradients and less rolling shutter compared to CMOS in budget compacts, but suffer faster noise buildup. Canon’s newer DIGIC 4+ clearly handles detail better at base ISO.

Both cameras sport 2.7” fixed LCDs with modest 230k pixel resolution - adequate for framing but not critiquing.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

If you’ve read this far, you’ve got a solid picture of what these ultracompacts bring to the table. Here’s my breakdown for different users:

• For the casual everyday photographer seeking a small camera with decent zoom/stretch flexibility, Canon ELPH 150 IS is the stronger pick. Its 10x zoom, better sensor resolution, and natural color reproduction make it a more versatile daily shooter. Slightly better macro capabilities expand creative options too.

• If you want a pocket-sized camera with longer shutter options and slightly better high ISO ceiling for night shots, the Panasonic FP8 has some appeal, especially if HDMI out is a must. However, expect softer images and slower autofocus.

• Travelers prioritizing a lightweight, all-in-one solution with solid zoom reach would appreciate the Canon for framing varied scenes without lens changes.

• Photography enthusiasts wanting manual control, RAW support, or faster AF should look beyond these compacts to mirrorless or advanced compacts like Canon’s G-series or Panasonic’s LX100 line.

Ultimately, both are "point-and-shoot" cameras that provide simplicity, portability, and convenience. The Canon’s advantages in optics and resolution make it more deserving of recommendation today, with the Panasonic a niche alternative for budget shoppers focused on casual use under mixed lighting.

Selecting your next camera is always a balance of priorities. I hope this detailed comparison, grounded in my hands-on testing and technical expertise, helps you choose the best compact companion for your creative vision.

Happy shooting!