Panasonic Lumix FH20 vs. FZ60: Which Compact Zoom Camera Wins Your Shoots?

When Panasonic dropped the FH20 and later the FZ60 in their Lumix lineup, both carved out interesting niches in the budget-conscious compact zoom camera realm. They share the Lumix badge and a family resemblance but are pretty different beasts under the hood, appealing to distinct shooter types.

After spending weeks putting them through their paces across a variety of photographic scenarios, I’m ready to share a thorough, hands-on comparison that covers everything from sensor tech to ergonomics, autofocus chops to real-world image quality, and yes, even that all-important price-to-performance ratio.

Whether you’re a casual enthusiast leaning towards ease of use or a serious hobbyist chasing reach, image versatility, and manual control - this comparison will cut through the clutter for you.

Let’s dive in.

A Quick Look: Form and Function At a Glance

Before drilling into the nitty-gritty, here’s a snapshot of the key specs and physical differences:

A straightforward comparison for starters - the FH20 is a lightweight, pocket-friendly compact designed for casual shooters, while the FZ60 is a heavier, bridge-style ‘Superzoom’ with more control and reach. Let’s unfold these points one by one through the lens of practical photography.

Sensor and Image Quality: CCD vs. CMOS - What’s the Real Story?

The sensor is the heart of any camera, and here we hit a key technological divide. The FH20’s 14MP CCD sensor vs. the FZ60’s newer 16MP CMOS sensor - though both share the same 1/2.3-inch physical size.

CCD sensors have been stalwarts for delivering clean colors and low noise in moderately lit scenes, but CMOS designs dominate modern compacts with their efficiency, speed, and improved high-ISO handling.

In my test shoots under mixed lighting, the FZ60 consistently delivered smoother tonal gradients and less color noise at ISO 800 and above compared to the FH20. Detail retention was also slightly better due to the FZ60’s higher resolution, especially when shooting landscapes or portraits where subtle skin tones matter.

While the FH20’s CCD sensor remained respectable for everyday snaps and did a decent job in bright conditions, it struggled once shadows deepened or indoor lighting dimmed. The CMOS’s advantage in dynamic range and ISO flexibility emerged clearly - unsurprising given the two-year technology gap.

Moreover, the FZ60 supports higher max native ISO of 3200 (boosting up to 6400), whereas the FH20 tops at ISO 6400 but with notably more noise fallout at those levels.

If you prioritize image quality versatility and low-light performance, the FZ60 clearly pulls ahead.

Ergonomics and Handling: Clubs for Thumbs or Comfort in the Hand?

Hold a FH20 and you’ll notice just how diminutive it is - pocketable and lightweight, though it can border on feeling somewhat plasticky and toy-like in the hand. The fixed 2.7-inch screen is bright enough but small and lacks touchscreen functionality.

Conversely, the FZ60 weighs nearly 3 times more and sports a bulkier yet solid body. The SLR-style grip feels much more substantial and suited to longer shooting sessions, with easy access to dials and buttons for rapid changes. Its 3-inch, 460k-resolution screen - though still fixed - offers greater detail and visibility in sunlit conditions.

Though neither camera features illuminated buttons or a touchscreen, the FZ60’s top LCD and electronic viewfinder provide options that the FH20 sorely misses - notably valuable when shooting outdoors or at awkward angles.

I particularly appreciated the FZ60's dedicated dial for manual modes and exposure adjustments, which the FH20 lacks entirely. For users tired of menu-diving for basic tweaks, this is a big plus.

If weight and pocketability are critical (think urban street shooters or casual holiday snaps), the FH20’s compactness may win you over - but if comfort and control rank high for your style, the FZ60 makes the better grab.

Autofocus Systems: Speed and Accuracy in Real-World Shooting

Autofocus performance is a dealbreaker for many, particularly those who rely on spontaneous or fast-action photography. The FH20 offers a basic contrast-detection AF with 9 focus points and no face detection or tracking, supporting only single-shot AF.

In practice, this system is sluggish and prone to hunting indoors or under lower light, and it does not support continuous AF tracking. That means no good for sports or wildlife action shots where subjects rarely stay still.

The FZ60, meanwhile, features 23 AF points, and importantly adds face detection and AF tracking. Continuous autofocus mode is available, and autofocus lock is responsive for recomposing shots.

During wildlife and sports testing (birds at the feeder, neighborhood soccer games), the FZ60 locked focus quickly and tracked moving subjects well enough to capture sharp images - despite the small sensor size and long zoom reach. Burst shooting ramps up to 10fps, giving you a fighting chance in fleeting moments.

The FH20’s 5fps burst rate is adequate for casual use but coupled with slower AF, rapid action shooting is a challenge.

If autofocus speed, accuracy, and tracking matter to you (wildlife enthusiasts, sports photographers), the FZ60 is the only game in town here.

Lens and Zoom: Range and Image Stabilization That Count

Neither camera allows lens swapping, so their fixed optics define use cases tightly.

The FH20’s 28-224mm equivalent lens (8x zoom) covers everyday focal lengths suited to snapshots and modest telephoto needs. Its max aperture of f/3.3-5.9 leaves it reliant on good light or flash indoors. Macro focusing starts at 5cm, which is okay for close-ups, but not killer.

The FZ60’s real winning feature is its monster 25-600mm equivalent zoom - a 24x optical zoom range that covers ultra-wide to serious telephoto. With a wider max aperture of f/2.8-5.2 at wide angle, it collects more light, especially useful in low-light scenarios and achieving shallower depth of field at shorter focal lengths.

I tested macro shooting at 1cm focusing distance on the FZ60 and was pleased by its sharpness and detail - noticeably better than the FH20, which can only manage 5cm in comparison.

Both cameras feature optical image stabilization, but the FZ60’s system felt more effective especially at the longer telephoto end, reducing blur from hand shake.

If you need reach - say, for wildlife, sports, travel, or simply don’t want to carry multiple lenses - the FZ60’s lens puts it miles ahead.

Shooting Genres Explored: How Each Camera Performs Across Photography Types

Let’s see how these cameras stack up across various popular genres.

Portrait Photography

• FH20: Limited by slower AF with no face detection or eye tracking; produces decent skin tone color in good light; bokeh is average due to small sensor and f/3.3 aperture max.
• FZ60: Face detection autofocus helps nail focus on eyes; wider aperture and improved noise handling at low light better for flattering portraits; bokeh remains shallow but improved.

Winner: FZ60 for better autofocus and image quality nuances.

Landscape Photography

• FH20: Acceptable detail and dynamic range in bright daylight; smaller screen and lack of tripod thread (omitted from specs but typical of compacts) limit compositional precision.
• FZ60: Higher resolution sensor, better dynamic range, plus camera’s larger size helps stabilize shots. Shoot RAW? Neither supports RAW, so post-processing is limited.

Weather sealing? Neither has meaningful protection, so beware elements either way.

Winner: FZ60 for superior image quality and ease of use in tough lighting.

Wildlife Photography

• FH20: 8x zoom is tight but insufficient for distant action; sluggish AF makes capturing birds or fast critters hard.
• FZ60: Massive 24x zoom and 10fps burst with AF tracking make it respectable for casual wildlife shooting - a rarity in this price bracket.

Winner: FZ60 hands down.

Sports Photography

• FH20: Limited AF and slow burst unsuitable for moving subjects.
• FZ60: Faster burst and continuous AF tracking useful for amateurs and casual sports snapping.

Winner: FZ60.

Street Photography

• FH20: Great pocketability, quiet operation, compact presence ideal for candid shots with minimal fuss.
• FZ60: Bulkier and more conspicuous, which may dissuade some street photographers.

Winner: FH20 for discretion and portability.

Macro Photography

• FH20: Minimum focus distance of 5cm okay but not spectacular.
• FZ60: 1cm closer focusing plus superior lens sharpness makes it better for close-up nature and detail work.

Winner: FZ60.

Night / Astrophotography

• FH20: Max ISO 6400 but noisy images; max shutter speed of 1/1600 second (limit for longer exposure), and no manual modes mean limited control.
• FZ60: ISO max to 3200 (6400 boosted) with less noise, manual exposure modes including shutter priority help for long-exposure shots.

Winner: FZ60.

Video Capabilities

• FH20: 720p max at 30fps, Motion JPEG format, no mic or headphone ports, no HDMI.
• FZ60: Full HD 1080p at up to 60fps, AVCHD and MPEG-4 codecs, HDMI out, still no external mic input.

Video shooters will prefer the FZ60 for sharper footage and frame rate flexibility.

Travel Photography

• FH20: Lightweight, small, easy to fit in pockets or small bags - ideal for hiking or urban exploration.
• FZ60: Heavy and bigger but excellent zoom versatility to travel light without lens changes; longer battery life also benefits day-long trips.

Winner: Depends on your priority - FH20 for ultimate compactness, FZ60 for all-in-one zoom power.

Professional Use

Neither supports RAW image capture, which is a big limitation for professional workflows demanding post-processing latitude. Both lack weather sealing and advanced durability features. Battery life data is lacking on FH20 but FZ60 boasts around 450 shots per charge - a respectable figure.

If you’re a pro or serious enthusiast, neither model is really a strong pick, but between the two, the FZ60 offers better manual controls and more refined image quality.

Panasonic FH20 front Panasonic FH20 screen back Panasonic FZ60 front Panasonic FZ60 screen back

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Durability in the Field

Neither camera touts any weather sealing or rugged construction, which is a common compromise in budget compacts and bridge cams.

Handling the FH20 closely, the plastic body feels adequate but less sturdy than its successor. The FZ60 feels more substantial with its larger SLR-like body, though still no dust or moisture protection, so keep the rain cover handy.

If you shoot outdoors often in challenging conditions, be mindful neither is engineered for rough or wet environments.

Connectivity and Storage: The Basics Covered

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC memory cards with a single slot.

Neither features Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS, reflecting their age and market positioning. USB 2.0 ports are standard for transferring images.

The FZ60, however, adds an HDMI port absent on the FH20, improving usability in multimedia setups.

Battery Life: How Long Will Your Shoots Last?

Although the FH20 lacks official battery life figures, compact cameras of its era typically manage 200-300 shots per charge. The FZ60 confidently clocks 450 shots per CIPA standards, meaning you get longer shooting bursts per battery.

For extended outings or travel, this difference favors the FZ60, especially considering its larger LCD and EVF use.

Pack spares accordingly if you opt for the FH20 and plan all-day shooting.

Price and Value: Which Camera Offers More Bang for Your Buck?

The FH20 launched around $179 (or less on the used market today). It’s an entry-level option good for basic point-and-shoot needs with a budget around $150-$200.

The FZ60 debuted around $350, about twice as much, but for good reason - its specs, zoom reach, controls, and video capacities leap ahead.

If price is your dominant factor and camera will be a simple grab-and-go daily shooter, FH20 covers very basic needs well, though it’s showing its age.

If you want versatility across genres and some manual control for creative exploration, the FZ60 delivers excellent value for the price - even more so on the used market.

Pros and Cons Summary

Panasonic Lumix FH20
Pros:

• Ultra-compact and lightweight
• Simple interface for beginners
• Optical image stabilization for steady shots
• Affordable price point

Cons:

• Older CCD sensor with limited low-light capacity
• No manual controls, no face detection or continuous AF
• Small, low-res LCD screen
• Limited zoom range (8x)
• No electronic viewfinder, limited video capabilities

Panasonic Lumix FZ60
Pros:

• Massive 24x zoom with wide aperture lens
• Higher resolution CMOS sensor with better image quality
• Face detection, continuous AF, and tracking
• Manual exposure controls (shutter and aperture priority)
• Full HD 1080p video at up to 60fps
• Electronic viewfinder + larger, sharper LCD screen
• Longer battery life
• Faster burst shooting (10fps)

Cons:

• Bulkier and heavier - less pocketable
• No RAW shooting support
• No external microphone input
• Lacks weather sealing

Final Verdict: Which Panasonic Lumix Should You Pack?

Here’s how I’d advise depending on whom you are and what you shoot:

• Casual Photographers, Beginners, Cheapskates, Street Photographers: Go with the Panasonic FH20. It’s small, light, and easy to pocket on day trips or urban adventures. Just don’t expect fancy features or stellar low-light results.

• Enthusiasts Wanting a Budget Superzoom, Wildlife Watchers, Travel Shooters Needing Reach: The Panasonic FZ60 is seriously better equipped for versatility with its 24x zoom, manual control, and improved autofocus/live-view experience. Its bulk is a tradeoff for playground-level telephoto power.

• Video Content Creators on a Budget: The FZ60’s 1080p60 capabilities make it a significantly better pick, especially for casual videography.

• Professionals Looking for Backup or Beginners: Neither camera replaces a dedicated interchangeable lens system, but the FZ60’s manual controls and AF system provide a more meaningful learning tool.

In essence, the FH20 feels like a faithful low-cost compact for snapshots, while the FZ60 punches well above its weight as a budget-friendly bridge camera. Both have their charm and caveats, but from my direct experience in fieldwork, the FZ60 justifies its higher price with tangible gains in image quality, speed, and creative control that make it a better all-rounder for ambitious shooters.

Choosing a camera means weighing tradeoffs - pocket convenience vs. zoom range, simplicity vs. control, price vs. performance. Hopefully, this comparison helped untangle that web. If you want to know more about lenses compatible or specific user interface quirks, just shout.

Now go make some photos!