Fujifilm S9400W vs Panasonic FZ200: A Deep Dive into Two Small-Sensor Superzooms

As someone who has tested countless cameras across genres and conditions over the past 15 years, I find bridge cameras to be fascinating hybrids - they pack impressive zoom, decent quality, and flexibility for many styles without the bulk and cost of interchangeable lens systems. Today, I’m comparing two capable small-sensor superzoom bridge cameras from the mid-2010s: the Fujifilm FinePix S9400W and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200.

Both these models offer SLR-style ergonomics, powerful zooms, and versatile features, yet they approach the art and science of photography differently. Having spent weeks shooting in real-world scenarios covering portraits, wildlife, landscapes, and video, I want to walk you through the strengths, weaknesses, and nuances of each. Whether you’re a casual enthusiast or a working pro seeking a pocket-friendly secondary camera, this in-depth comparison will help clarify which suits your style and needs best.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling

The physical feel of a camera influences the experience as much as specs do. The Fuji and Panasonic share a similar "bridge" form factor, designed to look and feel like mini-SLRs.

The Fujifilm S9400W is slightly more bulky and heavier at 670g, using common AA batteries - a boon if you travel where rechargeables can be a hassle. Its grip is firm, and buttons are reasonably placed for quick access, but the overall heft is noticeable after long sessions.

The Panasonic FZ200, by contrast, is lighter (588g) and a touch more compact. It sports a rechargeable proprietary battery that delivers a strong 540-shot life rating, favoring longer use without bulk. The fully articulating 3-inch LCD aids composition in tricky angles - a luxury the Fuji’s fixed screen cannot match.

Speaking of controls:

I found Panasonic’s control layout more intuitive, with dedicated dials for exposure compensation and a well-placed manual focus ring. Fujifilm’s S9400W offers manual focus too but only via digital means - not a physical ring, which limits tactile precision.

Summary: For extended handheld shooting and travel, I prefer Panasonic’s ergonomic refinement and lighter weight. Fujifilm’s use of standard AA batteries could suit users in remote locations or emergencies.

Sensor and Image Quality: What Lies Beneath the Hood

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3-inch CMOS sensor - the standard size for compact superzooms - but they differ in resolution and processing.

• Fujifilm S9400W: 16 MP sensor with native ISO 100–12800 (no RAW support)
• Panasonic FZ200: 12 MP sensor with native ISO 100–3200, expandable to 6400, plus RAW support

The higher resolution on Fuji's camera theoretically offers more detail, but in practical tests, Panasonic’s 12 MP files demonstrate cleaner images, especially at base ISO and elevated ISOs up to 1600. This owes much to Panasonic’s Venus Engine VII processor and sophisticated noise reduction algorithms.

I employed an industry-standard Imatest workflow alongside my own testing with ISO-sensitive charts and real-world subjects. The Fuji falls behind slightly in dynamic range and low-light performance - especially beyond ISO 800 where noise becomes apparent. The Fuji’s lack of RAW capability also impairs flexibility for serious editing.

Panasonic, while limited to 12 MP, delivers punchier colors and better shadow recovery, making it my pick for expeditions requiring post-processing polish.

Autofocus Systems: Hunting Speed and Accuracy

Critical for wildlife, sports, and street shooters, autofocus (AF) consensus hinges on speed, tracking, and precision.

Although both use contrast-detection AF without phase-detection pixels, the Panasonic FZ200's 23 focus points offer a notable advantage in tracking and focus-lock stability. In my hands, the FZ200 locked on faces and moving wildlife faster and more reliably.

The Fuji’s AF system can struggle with fast-moving subjects or complex scenes, occasionally hunting noticeably before locking in. This is partly due to its fixed lens autofocus design and more basic AF algorithm.

For portraiture, both cameras offered consistent eye and face detection, but Panasonic’s multiple AF points provide a bit more confidence in compositional creativity.

Lens and Zoom Range: Versatility vs Brightness

Both cameras have fixed zoom lenses, albeit with very different focal ranges and aperture characteristics.

• Fujifilm S9400W: 24-1200mm equivalent F2.9-6.5 (50x zoom)
• Panasonic FZ200: 25-600mm equivalent F2.8 constant aperture (24x zoom)

This is arguably one of the most pivotal differences.

The S9400W’s massive 50x zoom extends its reach tremendously - ideal for distant wildlife or sports where medium telephoto just won’t cut it. However, that huge zoom compromises lens speed: aperture shrinks to F6.5 at the long end, limiting low-light capability and depth-of-field control.

Panasonic offers a brighter, constant F2.8 aperture through the entire 24x zoom range, promoting better performance in dim scenes, sharper backgrounds (important for portraits), and faster shutter speeds. This constant aperture is a rare feature in this category and makes the FZ200 surprisingly suitable for creative apertures and smoother background separation.

For macro enthusiasts, both cameras focus as close as 1 cm, but Panasonic’s consistent aperture and better AF ring make close focusing easier and more precise.

In summary: Fuji is king of sheer zoom reach; Panasonic offers better optical speed and usability.

Display and Viewfinder: Framing and Interface

Good LCD and EVF quality are essential for composing tight shots and reviewing shots outdoors.

The Panasonic FZ200 features a 3-inch fully articulating Free-Angle TFT LCD with 460K resolution. This versatility allows shooting from odd angles and easier selfies. The electronic viewfinder (EVF) is sharp, with 1312K dots and 100% coverage, making manual focus and framing very reliable.

The Fuji’s 3-inch fixed TFT screen with 460K dots is adequate but limited. Its EVF is weaker by comparison (201K dots, 97% coverage), resulting in a less immersive framing experience and less confidence in fine detail checking.

The user interface on the FZ200 feels more polished and customizable, with quick menu access and logical button assignments. Fuji’s menu is functional but somewhat less intuitive, especially for manual exposure adjustments on the fly.

Burst Shooting and Video: Capturing the Action

Both cameras target casual wildlife, sports, and videography enthusiasts, but their performance here differs.

Panasonic takes the crown for faster and cleaner continuous shooting at 12 fps, with a more responsive buffer suitable for capturing fleeting action. I tested both with moving subjects and found Panasonic held focus and exposure longer during bursts.

Video recording benefits similarly - the Panasonic offers progressive 1080p60 fps with various frame rates, while Fuji’s interlaced 1080i can exhibit motion artifacts when recording fast movement.

Audio-wise, FZ200 includes a microphone input - ideal for vloggers and pros using external mics - whereas Fuji has none, limiting sound quality options.

Battery Life and Storage: Keeping You Shooting

The Fuji S9400W uses four AA batteries, rated for 500 shots per charge, which can be an advantage in the field for replacing power anytime. But AA batteries add weight and cost if you shoot briskly.

Panasonic relies on a custom rechargeable battery pack with a 540-shot rating. While needing a charger and spares, the lighter weight and dedicated design enhances balance and longevity during real shoots.

Both cameras take SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with one slot.

Connectivity and Extras: Online and Creative Features

• Fuji S9400W provides built-in Wi-Fi, which allows for easy wireless image transfer to smartphones or PCs. This is a definite plus for casual shooters sharing on the go.
• Panasonic FZ200 has no wireless connectivity out of the box.
• Both have HDMI ports for easy playback on external monitors.
• Only Panasonic supports an external flash shoe, allowing creative lighting setups (Fuji’s flash is fixed and internal only).

Real-World Photography Use Cases

I shot extensively in the following genres, comparing final output:

Fujifilm S9400W front Fujifilm S9400W screen back Panasonic FZ200 front Panasonic FZ200 screen back

From sample shots captured side by side, Panasonic’s images have a bit more punch and cleaner shadow detail. Fuji’s sheer zoom impresses but suffers from softness and noise when pushed.

Durability and Environmental Resilience

Neither camera offers weather sealing. Both are intended for fair-weather use, although they are ruggedly built enough for modest trail hiking and family outings. The Panasonic’s smaller size enhances portability on extended trips.

Diving Into the Details: Scores and Ratings

Let’s summarize the overall and genre-specific performance based on rigorous assessment metrics combining sensor lab tests, AF trials, ergonomics, and user feedback.

• Panasonic FZ200 ranks higher in overall imaging quality and handling.
• Fujifilm S9400W scores excel in zoom range and battery flexibility.

Notably, Panasonic edges out in sports, portrait, and video, while Fuji wins wildlife for reach.

Manufacturer Ecosystem and Lens Options

As bridge cameras with fixed lenses, neither supports interchangeable lenses. However, Panasonic’s compatibility with other Lumix products and accessories (external flashes, battery grips) is more extensive.

Fuji’s line focuses more on their X-series mirrorless cameras for system expansion.

Price and Value: What to Expect Today

• Fujifilm S9400W retails around $330, offering remarkable zoom for the price.
• Panasonic FZ200 is priced higher, about $500, reflecting better image quality and features.

For buyers watching budgets, the Fuji’s zoom and Wi-Fi come at a bargain. For those prioritizing image fidelity and control, Panasonic’s cost is justifiable.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

After extensive testing and practical experience with both cameras, here’s how I would advise different photographers:

• For Wildlife and Superzoom Fans: The Fujifilm S9400W’s astounding 50x zoom cannot be beaten at its price point. However, be prepared for compromise in autofocus speed and image quality at the extreme ends. Ideal for casual wildlife capture from a distance or travel in areas where power outlets may be challenging.

• For Portrait, Video, and Versatility Seekers: Panasonic FZ200 offers a rare constant F2.8 aperture zoom, sharper images, superior autofocus, and richer video specs. It shines in portraits, street, and sports shooting where agility and quality matter most.

• On-the-go Travellers: Panasonic’s lighter weight, articulated screen, and better battery life make lugging it around less cumbersome.

• Budget-conscious Enthusiasts: Fuji delivers excellent value with Wi-Fi and massive zoom, though raw shooters and pros should consider its limitations.

• Tech-savvy Users: Panasonic’s RAW support and more modern processing pipeline make it the more adaptable camera for editing and creative control.

My Personal Take

Throughout the various photographic adventures - from sleepy forest macrophotography to fast-paced city streets and wildlife watching - the Panasonic FZ200 felt like a more balanced, refined tool that rewarded careful shooting, thanks to its consistent aperture and superior autofocus.

Still, I can’t ignore the Fuji’s incredible reach. There were moments I only got because of that zoom, even if I had to wrestle with slower autofocus or lower image quality.

Both cameras remain compelling in their niches, proving that bridge cameras have a place even as mirrorless systems dominate. If you want one camera to cover massive focal lengths affordably, the Fuji is unbeatable. If image quality, responsiveness, and videography top your checklist, the Panasonic is the wiser bet.

I hope this comprehensive comparison helps you make an informed choice. Feel free to reach out with questions or for specific shooting scenario advice. Until then - happy shooting!