Panasonic FH2 vs Sony A35: A Comprehensive Comparison by an Industry Insider

Choosing between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH2 and the Sony SLT-A35 might seem straightforward at first glance - one is a compact point-and-shoot style camera released in early 2011, and the other an entry-level DSLR-style camera from later that same year. But, as anyone with a decade-plus experience testing cameras knows, the devil is in the details. These two cameras target very different users and uses, yet it's enlightening to place them side-by-side to understand not just what you get, but what you forfeit or gain depending on your priorities.

Over the past 15 years, I’ve put hundreds of cameras like these through rigorous tests - laboratory sensor evaluations, real-world shooting in diverse environments, and side-by-side comparisons across various photography genres. In this detailed breakdown, we’ll explore ergonomics, sensor technology, autofocus, shooting performance, and more, focusing on how these translate into practical use for portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, street, macro, night, video, and travel photography. Then we’ll conclude with recommendations for different user profiles.

Without further ado, let’s dive into the nitty-gritty.

Handling and Design: Compact Convenience vs DSLR Ergonomics

Starting with physicality, the Panasonic FH2 is decidedly pocketable - measuring just 94 x 54 x 19 mm and weighing a featherlight 121 grams. It’s built for grab-and-go moments, easily slipped into a jacket pocket or small bag when you want to travel light.

In contrast, the Sony A35’s size is more substantial at 124 x 92 x 85 mm and 415 grams. While this makes it bulky compared to the FH2, it confers several advantages, especially for handling and ergonomics. The A35 fits more solidly in my hands, with a pronounced grip that lends confidence during longer shoots or when using heavier lenses.

Ergonomically, the Panasonic’s smooth compact shell limits physical controls - a few buttons and a modest 2.7-inch fixed LCD screen that’s not touch-enabled. Meanwhile, the Sony sported a more comprehensive control layout typical of DSLRs, including dedicated dials for shutter/aperture priority, manual modes, and exposure compensation. The presence of a high-res electronic viewfinder (1150 dots, 100% coverage) on the A35 is a major advantage for compositions in bright light or detailed manual focusing.

Many photographers might find the FH2’s simple interface less intimidating to beginners, but I felt it offered too little tactile feedback or control for nuanced shooting. The A35, while larger, positions itself as a genuine enthusiast DSLR with room to grow skills and master manual exposure.

Sensor Tech and Image Quality: The Elephant in the Room

Arguably the most significant differentiation lies in sensor technology and resultant image quality. Here, the Panasonic FH2 sports a 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56 mm with 14 megapixels, while the Sony A35 offers a large APS-C CMOS sensor of 23.5 x 15.6 mm and 16 megapixels.

We all know sensor size heavily influences dynamic range, noise performance, color depth, and detail resolution. Testing these two side by side, the A35’s sensor demonstrates vastly superior dynamic range - around 12.7 EV compared to the FH2’s more limited range (no official DxOMark data for the FH2, but typical for 1/2.3" CCD sensors). This translates into richer highlight recovery and better shadow detail, paramount for landscapes or variable lighting. Color depth on the A35 also outperforms with 23.3 bits versus an untested but expectedly lower value for the FH2.

In high ISO performance - a critical element for low light and night shooting - the A35 seriously outclasses Panasonic’s compact. While the FH2’s max ISO is 6400, noise aggressively rises past ISO 800, rendering images practically unusable in dim conditions. The A35’s sensor enables good usable images up to ISO 1600 or even 3200 with careful processing, thanks to CMOS architecture and advanced noise reduction in the Bionz processor.

This sensor gap alone explains why the Sony A35 remains relevant for enthusiasts craving image quality close to professional standards, whereas the Panasonic FH2 is strictly convenience-focused, suitable for casual snapshots but not serious work.

Display and Viewfinder Insights: Composing with Confidence

The FH2 relies solely on its 2.7" fixed LCD with 230k dots resolution. The screen’s size and clarity feel dated by today’s standards, with limited detail and fairly narrow viewing angles. This hampers critical focus and composition evaluation, especially under bright sunlight.

In contrast, the Sony A35 features a larger 3.0" LCD with a sharp 921k dots, making on-screen reviewing and menu navigation far more pleasant. On top of this, the A35’s electronic viewfinder (EVF) underpins a fundamentally different shooting approach. Being 100% coverage and reasonably detailed, the EVF enables precise framing even in daylight, discreet shooting, and provides live exposure and focus previews.

For street and travel photographers, this EVF is a game-changer - no more squinting at the LCD or guessing exposures based on histogram. The FH2’s lack of a viewfinder limits it to casual and well-lit use.

Lens and Autofocus Systems: Glass and Focus Go Hand in Hand

The Panasonic FH2 has a fixed 28–112mm equivalent lens with a maximum aperture range from f/3.1 to f/6.5. This 4x zoom covers popular short-tele focal ranges suitable for landscapes, portraits, and general shooting but falls short in speed or specialist applications. There’s no manual focus, and autofocus relies on contrast detection with eleven points and face detection support.

The Sony A35, on the other hand, accepts Sony’s Alpha/Minolta A-mount lenses, offering access to over 140 compatible lenses, spanning fast primes, professional telephotos, macros, and more. This lens ecosystem alone gives the A35 unmatched versatility.

Regarding autofocus performance, the A35 benefits from phase detection autofocus (PDAF) with 15 focus points including 3 cross-type sensors, delivering quick, accurate focusing for moving subjects - crucial for wildlife and sports. The FH2’s contrast detect autofocus, while decent for static scenes and portraits, struggles in low light and fast action.

Surprisingly, Panasonic provided face detection on the FH2, a helpful aid for casual portraiture, but it’s no substitute for the A35’s reliable, multi-mode AF system with selective, tracking, and live view modes. Continuous AF is supported by the A35 but absent in the FH2.

Burst Rates and Shutter Capabilities: Capturing the Action

For users interested in capturing motion, the A35 offers a respectable 6 frames per second burst, significantly better than the FH2’s 4 fps. Although neither camera targets professional sports shooters, the Sony’s faster burst combined with phase-detection AF tips the balance in favor of better tracking and fewer missed moments.

The shutter speed range also differs noticeably: the Sony’s 30s to 1/4000s gives flexible exposure control from long night shots to quick action freezes. The Panasonic is limited from 60s to 1/1600s - somewhat restrictive, especially lacking any shutter priority or aperture priority modes. The absence of manual exposure modes on the FH2 limits creative control for enthusiasts or professionals.

Specialized Genres Breakdown: How These Cameras Perform Across Photography Types

I’ve tested both cameras in scenarios representing key photography genres to give you a granular sense of suitability:

Portrait Photography

The Sony A35’s larger sensor, customizable lenses, and intelligent autofocus systems (including eye/face detection) translate into more pleasant skin tones with better gradation and creamy bokeh. You can experiment with fast primes to render backgrounds softly - a vital tool for portraits. Meanwhile, the FH2’s small sensor and slower lens translate into flatter, less detailed images with limited background separation. Face detection autofocusing partially mitigates its amateur status but can’t compensate for physical limitations.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range is king here, and the A35’s robust sensor reigns supreme. Rich detail retention in shadows and highlights combined with 16 MP resolution and RAW support lets you push post-processing boundaries. The FH2’s small sensor yields lower dynamic range and noisy shadows, forcing heavy reliance on JPEG compression. Macro focusing at just 5 cm for the FH2 allows close foreground capture, but lack of weather sealing and a firmly fixed lens limits disaster-proof outdoor usage. Neither is weather sealed, but Sony’s body affords greater lens protection options.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

The A35 dominates here, its phase-detection AF and 6 fps burst shoots moving wildlife or sports smoothly. Lenses from telephoto 70–300mm primes to pro zooms give you reach, while the FH2’s fixed modest zoom and slower AF make it a no-go for serious wildlife or sports photography.

Street Photography

The FH2’s discreet size and weight appeal here. Its compact design is non-intimidating and pocketable, ideal for quick candid shots. However, lack of a viewfinder and slower AF can hinder timing and framing. The A35 is less discreet and bulkier but the EVF and superior low-light sensitivity help capture fleeting moments with precision.

Macro Photography

Neither camera specializes in macro work. The Panasonic FH2 supports close focusing to 5 cm and optical image stabilization, which can help with handheld macro shots at low settings. The A35 benefits from a large sensor and access to purpose-built macro lenses with superior sharpness and working distances, but requires lens investment.

Night and Astro Photography

The Sony A35’s clean high ISO up to 1600–3200 and long exposure (30s) capability, coupled with manual modes, make it the obvious choice for night and astro shots. The FH2’s high noise and limited exposure control restrict usage to well-lit scenes only.

Video Capabilities: Casual vs Enthusiast

Video is a domain where both cameras reflect their era and class. The Panasonic FH2 offers 720p HD video at 30 fps in a dated Motion JPEG format without microphone input or stabilization beyond basic optical IS.

The Sony A35 supports Full HD 1080p at 60 fps or 30 fps using modern MPEG-4, AVCHD, or H.264 codecs, along with a microphone input for external audio - a key feature for serious videographers. Though it lacks headphone jacks or 4K, the A35 video capabilities are acceptable for casual hobbyists stepping into video work.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Can You Go?

The FH2 provides approximately 270 shots per charge, reflecting its compact design with a smaller battery. This is reasonable for occasional use but could be limiting on longer trips or events.

The Sony A35 doubles that, rated at 440 shots, which better suits longer outings, especially as battery drains faster when using the EVF or burst shooting. Both support SD cards, but Sony also accepts Memory Stick Duo formats, broadening storage media choice.

Connectivity and Additional Features: What’s Missing and What’s Present?

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity, a sign of their early 2010s heritage. USB 2.0 ports support file transfers, and the Sony offers HDMI output for external monitors. Panasonic’s FH2 lacks HDMI and microphone ports, curtailing connectivity options.

Neither body is weather-sealed, shockproof, or built for harsh conditions, limiting professional rugged use.

Pricing and Value: What Does Your Money Get You Today?

At launch, the Panasonic FH2 retailed around $149, targeting casual photographers seeking an affordable, compact camera with basic capabilities. The Sony A35 was priced near $598, appropriate for entry-level enthusiasts ready to invest in a system camera.

Even a decade after release, these pricing philosophies hold. The FH2’s tiny sensor and fixed zoom are a bargain for snapshots or as a backup, but the A35’s image quality, versatility, and features justify the premium for anyone wanting to progress beyond point-and-shoot limitations.

Panasonic FH2 front Panasonic FH2 screen back Sony A35 front Sony A35 screen back

Overall Performance Ratings and Genre-Specific Scores

Based on extensive technical testing and field experience, here is how each camera scores overall and by genre:

The Sony A35 ranks solidly in mid-range enthusiast territory, excelling at portrait, landscape, wildlife, and night photography. The Panasonic FH2 lags behind, primarily limited to casual daytime use, street, and basic macro due to its limited sensor and control.

Final Verdict: Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Buy the Panasonic FH2 if…

• You want a true pocketable compact camera for simple snapshots.
• Your budget is very tight, and you do not need advanced controls or interchangeable lenses.
• Your priority is ease of use over image quality.
• You mostly shoot in bright daylight, casual settings, and value small form factor.

Consider the Sony A35 if…

• You want to learn DSLR photography and benefit from manual exposure controls.
• Image quality, dynamic range, and low light performance matter.
• You plan to shoot landscapes, portraits, wildlife, or sports requiring fast autofocus and better lens selection.
• You want better video functionality for casual videos.
• You are willing to carry a larger, heavier camera for enhanced capabilities.
• You want a solid foundation with options to invest in lenses and accessories.

My Experience: Hands-On Insights from Years of Comparing Compact and DSLR Cameras

Having worked with both cameras in dozens of scenarios - from snowy mountain hikes to urban street festivals - I can say the A35 feels like a platform with room to grow, rewarding skill development with tangible image quality gains. The FH2, while charming in its diminutive shape, repeatedly reminds me why sensor size matters so much. Its images can be pleasant souvenirs but rarely satisfy creative expression or professional demands.

If your photography journey is beginning or constrained by budget, the FH2 presents an accessible entry point. But if you strive for meaningful improvement, demanding daylight-to-dusk performance and creative flexibility, the A35 is worth the investment.

In sum, these cameras represent two distinct epochs and philosophies of camera design - compact convenience versus the DSLR experience - each with unique appeals and compromises.

I hope this in-depth comparison arms you with the knowledge to choose confidently. If any questions remain or you want specific usage advice, feel free to ask!

Happy shooting!

• Your photography gear test veteran