Fujifilm S9200 vs Panasonic FZ80

Bridging the Gap in Superzoom Cameras: FujiFilm S9200 vs Panasonic FZ80

Having spent well over a decade putting cameras through their paces across the globe - wildlife in the Serengeti, bustling city streets of Tokyo, star-studded mountain peaks, and intimate portrait sessions - I find bridge cameras to be an intriguing niche. They promise portability with gigantic zoom ranges and a hint of DSLR styling without the baggage of multiple lenses. But how do older models like the Fujifilm FinePix S9200 fare against newer entrants like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ80? I sat down, lens caps off, to answer that. Let me walk you through the vital aspects that matter to photographers of all stripes.

Size, Build, and Handling: A Tale of Two Superzooms

At first glance, both the Fuji S9200 and Panasonic FZ80 show that unmistakable bridge camera form: chunky grips, a steep zoom barrel, and a layout mimicking DSLR ergonomics. The S9200 tips the scales at 670g with dimensions of 123x87x116mm, while the FZ80 is slightly lighter at 616g and a bit bulkier at 130x94x119mm. While the Panasonic adds modest heft, its grip feels more secure in my hand during those long wildlife shoots where steady handling is paramount.

Neither camera boasts environmental sealing, which is customary in their category. I've tested in moderately dusty conditions and light drizzle - with both faring adequately, but I’d advise caution for serious weather resistance demands.

The ergonomics reveal some meaningful differences. The Fujifilm's control layout is straightforward but somewhat dated - its buttons are small and not illuminated, lacking touchscreen support. In contrast, the FZ80 offers a crisper, more modern interface including a responsive touchscreen, boosting ease of use during quick composition adjustments - a feature that had me appreciating Panasonic’s attention to intuitive design.

Sensor and Image Quality: Pixels, Noise, and Dynamic Range

Both cameras employ 1/2.3” sensors common to superzooms yet diverge noticeably in fundamentals. Fujifilm’s S9200 carries a 16MP CMOS sensor, capped at ISO 12800, although in practical terms, usable image quality diminishes well before that ceiling. Panasonic steps things up a notch with an 18MP BSI-CMOS sensor, notable for its backside illumination tech, which improves light gathering - a crucial advantage for low-light shooters.

Pixel resolution-wise, the Panasonic’s 4896x3672 pixels offer a slight edge over Fuji’s 4608x3456, translating into better defined prints and cropping flexibility. Yet, with their similar small sensor sizes (28.07 mm² effective area), dynamic range remains limited, as you’d expect in this category.

From my lab tests and field sessions, the FZ80 demonstrates superior high ISO performance - less noise and cleaner shadow recovery at ISO 1600 and 3200. The S9200's images get grainy beyond ISO 800, which constricts its utility under dim conditions like indoor sports or twilight landscapes. Dynamic range differences are marginal but Panasonic's sensor edges forward in preserving highlight detail in tricky exposures.

Color reproduction between the two leans on distinct character: Fuji's color science traditionally favors warmer tones and pleasing skin colors, which shines in portraits. Panasonic adopts a more neutral palette, easier to tweak in post but less immediately eye-catching.

LCD and Viewfinder: Composing Your Shots with Precision

Having clear framing aids is pivotal when chasing fleeting moments or intricate details. Both cameras offer a 3-inch rear display; however, Panasonic’s 1040k-dot resolution absolutely outperforms Fuji's modest 460k dots - this means sharper image review and easier menu reading on the FZ80. Furthermore, the Panasonic screen supports touchscreen operation, enabling more intuitive focus point selection, playback zoom, and menu navigation - a boon for beginners and fast-paced shooters alike.

On electronic viewfinders (EVFs), the story deepens. The Fuji S9200 EVF ticks in at 0.2MP with 97% frame coverage, rather low by today’s standards and sometimes causing lag or a slightly pixelated preview in low light. Panasonic’s EVF is much improved at 1.166MP, delivering 100% coverage and a real-time, crisp preview that makes a tangible difference during bright outdoor shoots.

Autofocus and Shooting Modes: Tracking Life at Speed

Autofocus architecture often makes or breaks a superzoom. Both cameras employ contrast-detection AF without any phase-detection pixels, imposing some inherent speed limits.

The Fujifilm features face detection, center/autofocus modes with continuous tracking, but lacks touch AF or face+eye detection enhancements. During my wildlife trials, it occasionally hunted in dense foliage or in fast action (bird-in-flight, erratic mammals).

The FZ80 pushes ahead with 49 AF points, touch-based AF selection, and reliable continuous autofocus tracking, augmented by Panasonic's 'Depth From Defocus' algorithm. In sports and wildlife shooting, the Panasonic felt markedly snappier on focus lock and more persistent in tracking moving subjects, a critical advantage when capturing decisive moments.

Both cameras offer a continuous burst mode capped at 10fps - but in real conditions, buffer limits and autofocus performance influence how long you can sustain high-speed shooting.

Zoom Range, Lens Quality, and Macro Capabilities: Versatility for Every Situation

Telephoto reach is a hallmark for these cameras. The Fuji's 24-1200mm (50x optical zoom) contrasts slightly with Panasonic’s 20-1200mm (60x optical zoom). While Panasonic offers a wider maximum aperture at its tele-end (F5.9 vs. F6.5), the difference mostly matters in dim lighting.

Both lenses start wide enough for landscapes and street photography, with a 1cm macro focus capability letting you explore close-up details - great when no extra macro lens is on hand. Panasonic's lens design incorporates advanced optics that deliver marginally superior sharpness and edge-to-edge clarity, especially in the middle focal lengths where Fuji’s photos showed slightly more softness.

Image Stabilization: Fighting Camera Shake Hands-On

Both systems rely on optical image stabilization (OIS). In practice, the Panasonic’s stability appeared a touch more effective in my hand-held penalty shootout and birdwatching tests, reducing blur and enabling lower shutter speeds without loss of detail. It’s worth emphasizing this given the extreme telephoto reach - camera shake can ruin shots at 1200mm!

The Fuji’s system is adequate but less refined, and combined with its slower maximum aperture at tele-end, it demands more light or a higher ISO setting to compensate.

Video Capabilities: Beyond Photos

Video shooters will find the Panasonic FZ80 leaves Fuji’s S9200 in the dust. Fuji caps at 1920x1080 60i with basic H.264 encoding, lacking contemporary features such as higher bit rates or 4K support.

The Panasonic boasts true 4K UHD (3840x2160 at 30fps) up to 100 Mbps bitrate, opening doors for high-quality video projects. Its 4K Photo mode enables snapping 8MP stills from 4K footage - a nifty feature for event or wildlife photographers.

Steady video capture is enhanced by Panasonic’s hybrid OIS and electronic stabilization modes. Fuji’s video stabilization is purely optical and less sophisticated, leading to more noticeable shake.

Neither camera includes microphone or headphone ports, so expect relying on built-in audio, which is serviceable but limiting for professional work.

Battery Life and Storage: Ready for the Long Haul?

A critical aspect often overlooked - battery endurance. Fuji’s S9200 runs on 4 x AA batteries and claims roughly 500 shots per charge. While convenient for travelers who can easily find replacements worldwide, AA cells result in added weight and inconsistent power delivery if not highly rated.

Panasonic uses a proprietary rechargeable Li-ion battery delivering around 330 shots per charge, which feels more economical in practice and is lighter.

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards in a single slot. No dual slots reflect their consumer orientation, so backing up during long shoots is wise.

Connectivity and Extras: Staying Connected and Creative

Connectivity-wise, Fuji offers none - no Wi-Fi, no Bluetooth, which feels dated now. Panasonic builds in Wi-Fi (though no Bluetooth), enabling remote control and wireless image transfer through Lumix's app - a real convenience when shooting on the go.

Panasonic adds focus bracketing, focus stacking, and post-focus capabilities - features Fujifilm omits entirely. These are helpful for macro, product, or landscape photographers requiring meticulous depth of field control.

Putting the Cameras Through the Photography Genres

To provide a balanced, people-first view, let’s explore how these models perform across key photography genres I've encountered on my photographic journeys.

Portrait Photography: Capturing Skin Tones and Expression

Fujifilm’s excellent color science shows its strength here, delivering warm, pleasing skin tones that minimize post-processing. However, the limited sensor performance at high ISO means indoor or low-light portraits suffer.

Panasonic’s superior sensor and autofocus with touch and face detection aids eye-level focus accuracy, critical to sharp portraits. Image quality is better in mixed lighting, although skin rendering is more neutral and may require slight color grading for creative looks.

Both cameras deliver bokeh typical for small sensors - background blur is modest given aperture and sensor size constraints.

Landscape Photography: Dynamic Range and Detail

Here, the Panasonic shines with its higher resolution sensor and better dynamic range. Sharpness across the zoom is slightly better, critical when printing large or cropping images. The Fuji's sensor struggles to retrieve shadow detail in high-contrast scenes.

Neither camera has weather sealing, so cautious outdoor use is essential. The Panasonic’s wider lens capability at 20mm provides a broader view for sweeping vistas.

Wildlife Photography: Speed and Reach

Decisive moments in wildlife require fast, reliable AF and long lenses. Both offer similar 1200mm reach - impressive for casual observation without the bulk of DSLR lenses.

Panasonic’s faster, more accurate autofocus, better image stabilization, and quicker burst shooting deliver tangible benefits spotting and capturing animals in movement.

Sports Photography: Tracking and Low Light

Both cameras reach 10fps, but Panasonic’s improved AF tracking and better high ISO performance mean it copes with indoor sports or early evening action more confidently. The Fuji may lag behind in fast-paced environments.

Street Photography: Discretion and Mobility

Neither camera is subtle, but Fuji’s lighter weight and less bulky profile make it slightly more pocketable. Still, the Panasonic’s superior screen, faster AF, and better low-light sensitivity compensate well.

Macro Photography: Focus Precision and Detail

Panasonic’s focus bracketing and stacking surpass Fuji’s fixed macro capabilities, offering creative depth of field control. Both can focus as close as 1cm, but Panasonic’s optics yield sharper close-ups.

Night and Astro Photography: High ISO and Exposure Modes

With limited sensor size and absence of RAW on the Fuji, night sky captures are better on Panasonic, which supports RAW and can push ISO 6400 with manageable noise.

Neither camera is designed for extensive astro use, but Panasonic’s longer shutter speeds and focus stacking help achieve decent results.

Video: Versatile Recording on the Go

Panasonic’s 4K video at 30p with Hybrid OIS stands out as a clear winner for vloggers and casual filmmakers. Fuji's full HD 60i lags behind in both resolution and video codec modernity.

Travel Photography: Versatility and Battery Endurance

Fuji’s AA battery system offers peace of mind for extended treks in remote regions where charging is difficult, but the Panasonic's lighter body, better image quality, and wireless features make it my choice for most travel scenarios.

Professional Use: Workflow and Reliability

Neither camera aims squarely at pro-grade performance - a fair assessment given their sensor sizes - but Panasonic’s RAW support and advanced focus modes lend slightly more credibility for casual professional workflows.

Fujifilm S9200 front Fujifilm S9200 screen back Panasonic FZ80 front Panasonic FZ80 screen back

Above: The Fuji exhibits warmer tones and decent detail at base ISO, while Panasonic excels with sharper edges and better shadow retention in the same lighting.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

After thorough hands-on use, I see the Fujifilm FinePix S9200 as a capable entry-level superzoom with user-friendly handling and solid zoom range. Its strengths lie in portability, battery flexibility, and color rendition favorable to portraiture and general snapshots. However, it shows its age in image quality, AF speed, and video capabilities.

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ80, introduced a few years later, leverages sensor improvements, advanced AF, stabilization, and 4K video to offer a more versatile package for enthusiasts willing to spend a bit more. The addition of RAW output, touch interface, and Wi-Fi enhances workflow, especially for hybrid shooters.

Who Should Consider the Fujifilm S9200?

• Budget-conscious photographers seeking a wide zoom range without fuss
• Travel photographers valuing easy-to-replace AA batteries
• Casual shooters where video and advanced AF are not priorities

Who Should Opt for the Panasonic FZ80?

• Enthusiasts and hobbyists wanting better image quality and autofocus speed
• Videographers needing 4K and stable video in a compact body
• Macro and nature photographers benefiting from focus bracketing/stacking
• Those embracing smartphone-inspired connectivity and touchscreen controls

Putting it plainly, the Panasonic FZ80 is my recommended pick if image quality, modern functionality, and video matter to you. The Fujifilm S9200 still holds charm for simple superzoom needs at an attractive price point, but it’s showing its chronological cracks compared to newer rivals.

If you are serious about photography yet constrained by budget or prefer tried-and-true handling, Fuji remains a worthy contender. For most others, the FZ80 represents a better all-around choice with future-proof features.

Disclosure: I have no financial affiliation with either manufacturer. All testing was conducted using production units in diverse real-world settings to provide genuine user experience insights.

I hope this comprehensive comparison aids you in choosing the right camera that fits your photographic aspirations best. If you’re considering either model or have questions about superzooms in general, feel free to reach out - I’m always eager to share experience and spark photographic curiosity. Happy shooting!