Nikon Coolpix P610 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ60: The Ultimate Superzoom Showdown

When it comes to superzoom cameras, the appeal is obvious - those wild focal ranges pack a ton of creative potential into a single, affordable package. But how do you decide between models that look similar on paper yet promise quite different experiences? Today, I’m diving deep into the Nikon Coolpix P610 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ60 - two popular bridge cameras in the small sensor superzoom category - with over a decade of combined design evolution between them.

I’ve spent plenty of time shooting with both in varying conditions, from wildlife safaris (trying to grab shots of restless creatures) to casual urban strolls and even some amateur night sky attempts. I aim to share not only specs but real-world usability, performance, and insight that only hands-on experience can deliver. Let’s unpack everything from sensor tech to ergonomics and find the right match for your photography adventures.

Size and Handling: The Feel Factor First

Both the Nikon P610 and Panasonic FZ60 adopt the classic DSLR-inspired design language - chunkier than point-and-shoots but not quite as hefty as full-fledged DSLRs or mirrorless setups. If you’ve used bridge cameras before, you’ll feel right at home here - but subtle design choices matter, especially when extended shooting sessions come into play.

Looking side-by-side (see the photo above), the Nikon P610 is a touch larger and heavier, tipping the scales at 565 grams and measuring 125x85x107 mm, whereas the Panasonic FZ60 is a bit more compact at 493 grams and 120x81x92 mm. This difference isn’t huge but definitely noticeable if you’re packing light for travel or lengthy shoots. The Nikon’s bigger grip offers better handling comfort, especially with bigger hands or when using longer lenses - a frequent scenario given the P610’s staggering 60x zoom.

In practice, I found the Nikon’s physical heft lends itself well to stability, reducing hand shake, which becomes endearing reassurance when you’re zooming way in. The Panasonic, being lighter and slightly smaller, is easier to toss in a day bag and carry for street or travel photography, but you sacrifice just a bit of that confident grip.

Control Layout and Top-Down Usability

Beyond size, how a camera feels under your fingers really affects shooting spontaneity. Buttons should be intuitively placed, dials responsive, and menus navigable without constant referencing.

The Nikon P610 impresses with a traditional DSLR-style top plate that positions its mode dial and command wheels where you expect - making quick exposure or focus adjustments a delight. It packs fully articulated 3-inch screens with 921k-dot resolution, which means you can flip out the screen for awkward angles or selfies without losing much sharpness.

The Panasonic FZ60, meanwhile, offers a simpler fixed 3-inch TFT LCD with only 460k dots, noticeably less crisp in bright daylight. This fixed screen means you sacrifice compositional flexibility - a disadvantage for macro or street shooters keen on low-angle or overhead shots.

While the Nikon’s controls strike a nice balance with direct access to common settings, Panasonic’s interface feels a little more dated and menu-driven, in line with its older 2012 vintage. The FZ60’s faster continuous shooting (10 fps vs Nikon’s 7 fps) tries to appeal to action shooters, but ergonomics sometimes limit how well you can leverage that speed under pressure.

Imaging Heart: Sensor Specifications and Quality

Here is where things start to get particularly interesting. Bridge cameras operate under glaring limitations due to their small sensors - both the P610 and FZ60 share a 1/2.3” CMOS sensor size, roughly 6.1 x 4.5 mm in dimensions - but subtle advances can affect variation in image quality.

Both cameras pack a 16-megapixel resolution, enough for good quality prints and cropping flexibility. However, the P610 features a BSI-CMOS sensor, a back-illuminated design that essentially captures more light per pixel versus the traditional CMOS in the Panasonic. In side-by-side shooting, Nikon’s sensor pushes better high ISO results and slightly improved dynamic range - critical for shadows in landscapes and skin tone nuances in portraits.

That said, neither camera is a champ in low light, thanks to the crop sensor form factor and small pixel pitch. The Panasonic peaks at ISO 3200 natively (with a boost to 6400), versus Nikon's top native ISO 6400. But in practice, images above ISO 800 in either camera start showing noticeable noise and loss of sharpness.

The Nikon’s sensor pairing with a newer image processor provides more aggressive noise reduction algorithms, which can sometimes feel a bit heavy-handed, softening fine detail but delivering cleaner images in dim scenarios. The Panasonic leans toward preserving texture at the cost of more visible grain.

Lens: Reach, Speed, and Optical Smarts

Superzoom cameras live or die by their lens capabilities. What focal range you can achieve and the corresponding aperture sizes dictate creative versatility.

• Nikon P610: A jaw-dropping 24–1440 mm equivalent zoom range (60x optical)
• Panasonic FZ60: A respectable 25–600 mm equivalent (24x zoom)

The Nikon’s hyper-telephoto reach astonishes - it lets you stalk wildlife from far away, capture details on distant buildings, or even attempt some quasi-super-telephoto shots without changing gear. The trade-off? The aperture shrinks from f/3.3 at wide angle to f/6.5 at full zoom, so low light gets trickier at the long end.

Panasonic’s lens is faster with a wider max aperture of f/2.8–5.2, meaning you get more light in without pushing ISO too much, which suits indoor scenes or dimmer settings better. However, you sacrifice focal length versatility - 600 mm max limits your ability to really reach distant subjects, which matters for birders or certain wildlife photographers.

Despite the monstrous zoom on the Nikon, optical image stabilization (OIS) helps manage hand shake, adding a vital tool for telephoto clarity. Both cameras claim optical stabilization, but I found Nikon’s system smoother and more effective in practice, especially when zoomed in beyond 800 mm.

Autofocus: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus technology shapes how well a camera keeps up with dynamic scenes, especially in wildlife and sports photography.

Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus systems, standard for fixed-lens superzooms. Neither offers phase detection, meaning initial focus can feel slightly slower compared to modern mirrorless or DSLRs with hybrid AF.

• Nikon P610 supports face detection AF and a form of tracking autofocus but lacks continuous AF during burst shooting (only single AF per shot).
• Panasonic FZ60 steps it up with 23 AF points, including center-weighted and multi-area options, with continuous AF support during bursts at 10 fps.

This means the Panasonic will likely maintain focus better on moving subjects in continuous shooting, a vital advantage for sports and wildlife photographers wanting to nail fleeting moments.

In practical use, Nikon’s AF was reliable for portraits and static subjects but struggled tracking unpredictable motion beyond 20 meters. Panasonic’s multi-point AF system fared better for mid-distance moving subjects, aided by its faster burst rate.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

As bridge cameras intended for casual to enthusiast photographers, ruggedness is rarely a headline feature - and both these models reflect that.

Neither offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or freezeproofing, limiting their use in harsh or wet environments without protective gear. However, their sturdy plastic and metal chassis build will withstand typical outdoor conditions well enough with a bit of care.

Screen and Viewfinder Realities

Electronic viewfinders on bridge cameras often make or break the shooting experience when bright outdoor light flaunts rear LCD visibility.

• Nikon P610 features a high-res 3-inch fully articulated LCD (921k dots). This screen is arguably the best in its class, with accurate color rendering and sharpness, plus the flexibility of articulation for creative framing angles.
• Panasonic FZ60 offers a fixed 3-inch TFT LCD with 460k dots, significantly less detailed and a fixed position.

The Nikon also boasts an EVF, though official resolution details aren’t clear. Panasonic’s EVF has 202k dots and 100% coverage, which is serviceable but lacks clarity.

The Nikon’s articulated screen clearly wins for usability in varied shooting postures, macro, and video recording.

Video Capabilities: Ready for Full HD Action?

Both cameras deliver Full HD 1080p video recording, but codec and frame rate options differ.

• Nikon P610 shoots Full HD at 30 or 25 fps using MPEG-4 or H.264, plus 720p and lower resolutions.
• Panasonic FZ60 offers Full HD at a smoother 60, 50, 30, and 25 fps options using MPEG-4 and AVCHD formats, which professionals tend to prefer for better compression efficiency.

Neither camera offers 4K video or advanced audio input options - no microphone or headphone jacks, meaning audio quality is average and dependent on built-in mics.

In real-world use, Panasonic’s smoother 60 fps recording and AVCHD support offer better slow-motion and editing flexibility, making it the preferred option for video enthusiasts on a budget.

Battery Life and Connectivity

Battery life can impact your day’s shooting, especially in remote locations.

• Panasonic FZ60 shines here with around 450 shots per charge, likely benefiting from its simpler electronics and fixed screen.
• Nikon P610 gives approximately 330 shots per charge, a standard figure for articulated-screen models with higher-quality displays.

Connectivity-wise, the Nikon includes built-in GPS for geotagging and NFC for quick phone pairing, conveniences that add value for travel photographers documenting their adventures. Panasonic lacks wireless features entirely.

Price-to-Performance: What’s Your Money Buying?

At current prices, these cameras fall into the affordable superzoom category:

• Nikon P610 lands around $430, closer to a mid-range bridge camera pricing.
• Panasonic FZ60 retails for about $350, providing a budget-friendly alternative.

The Nikon’s higher price tags emphasize its vastly longer zoom reach, better display, and wireless connectivity, while Panasonic’s competitive pricing caters to those prioritizing faster lens aperture, continuous AF, and video frame rates.

How They Stack Up Across Photography Genres

Bridge cameras sit at a fun intersection - great all-rounders that won’t replace your pro gear but can surprise with versatility. Here’s how the two fare, based on extended use:

• Portraits: Nikon’s longer zoom lens (meaning more background separation at 1440mm!) and fully articulated LCD help nail flattering angles and bokeh effects, though depth of field is limited by sensor size. Panasonic’s faster lens aperture is advantageous indoors. Both struggle with skin tone nuances due to small sensor quirks.

• Landscapes: Nikon edges out with better dynamic range and articulated screen, enabling fine composition in tricky lighting; Panasonic’s lower resolution LCD hampers previewing detail.

• Wildlife: Nikon’s insane zoom is king here for distant shots, though autofocus speed and tracking favor Panasonic. Reality is you’ll want a faster, bigger sensor camera for serious wildlife pursuits.

• Sports: Panasonic wins with 10 fps continuous shooting and continuous AF, whereas Nikon’s 7 fps and single AF is more leisurely.

• Street: Panasonic’s smaller size and lighter weight offer discreetness and portability, but fixed screen means less compositional freedom outdoors; Nikon’s articulation is a plus but size is a giveaway.

• Macro: Both have minimum focusing distances around 1 cm, but Nikon’s articulated screen improves framing here.

• Night/Astro: Both limited due to sensor size; Nikon may have slight advantage due to BSI sensor and ISO 6400, but noise levels restrict usable range.

• Video: Panasonic’s 1080p at 60fps paired with AVCHD codec outperforms Nikon's capped 30fps, making Panasonic favorable for casual videographers.

• Travel: Nikon’s GPS and NFC connectivity plus zoom range appeal for documenting trips; Panasonic’s battery longevity and compactness seduce minimalist packers.

• Professional Work: Neither supports RAW, limiting post-processing flexibility. Nikon’s superior image quality might serve as a better backup or secondary camera for professionals on a budget.

Sample Shots: Seeing Is Believing

A picture is worth a thousand Nikon and Panasonic menus:

Nikon P610 front Nikon P610 screen back Panasonic FZ60 front Panasonic FZ60 screen back

Much like their specs, image quality is where both excel within their limits - sharpness, exposure, and color fidelity are commendable under optimal light. Expect Nikon’s images to sometimes be slightly cleaner in high ISO shots and Panasonic’s to feel punchier in color, though noise shows up sooner.

Final Scorecard: The Bottom Line

Both cameras cater to different priorities:

• Choose Nikon P610 if you want:

  • The longest zoom range on the block (60x!)
  • Articulated, high-res display for creative framing
  • GPS/NFC for on-the-go connectivity
  • Slightly better sensor performance for varied lighting

• Choose Panasonic FZ60 if you want:

  • Faster lens aperture for low light
  • Higher frame rate continuous shooting with better AF tracking
  • Longer battery life for extended use
  • More affordable price point

To Wrap It Up: Who Should Buy Which?

If your photographic interests lean heavily on wildlife or landscape and you crave absolute reach - or if you enjoy tinkering with every compositional angle thanks to a versatile screen - the Nikon P610’s extra zoom and articulating LCD make it a standout. Just be mindful that it requires patience with its focusing quirks and heavier weight.

On the other hand, the Panasonic FZ60 is a savvy choice for those who prioritize speedy autofocus, burst shots, video frame rates, and overall portability, especially at a modest price. It’s friendly for street photography and casual video blogging, or for travel photographers opting for lighter baggage.

Neither replaces a serious DSLR or mirrorless system, but both offer a compelling stepping stone or complement to more advanced gear thanks to their broad focal lengths and ease of use.

My Testing Methodology Insight

To arrive at these conclusions, I undertook extensive field testing in similar environmental conditions, using both cameras mounted on tripods and handheld at various focal lengths to analyze sharpness, noise, autofocus response times, and ergonomics. Additionally, controlled lab measurements were made using color charts and dynamic range targets. Continuous AF tracking was evaluated using moving subjects under different lighting, while battery life was assessed by repeating standardized cycling of power and shooting tasks.

Only with comprehensive, multi-angle testing like this can we see beyond spec sheets to what truly impacts photographers on location and in the studio.

Have you experienced either of these cameras? What surprised you most about their capabilities or limitations? Drop your thoughts and questions below, and let’s have a conversation!