Panasonic Lumix FH20 vs. Sony Cyber-shot W690: A Hands-On Comparison of Compact Classics

In the realm of compact point-and-shoot cameras, two models often bring together affordability, portability, and user-friendly features: Panasonic’s Lumix FH20 and Sony’s Cyber-shot W690. While both hail from the small sensor compact category, subtle yet impactful design decisions and feature variations make them worth contrasting. After hours of hands-on evaluation under varied real-world scenarios - from casual travel to close-up macro and low light - this detailed comparison unpacks the nuances that differentiate these two rivals released a couple of years apart.

Whether you’re chasing a budget-friendly compact for simple snapshots, or desire a capable travel companion without the bulk of an interchangeable lens system, this analysis guides you to the best choice by blending technical insight and practical experience. Let’s begin by framing the physical and ergonomic first impressions.

Bodyscape: Handling and Ergonomics – Smaller Is Not Always Easier

Photographers often underestimate the importance of a camera’s physical form factor, but any prolonged use quickly reveals how size, weight, and control layout shape the shooting experience. The Panasonic FH20 sports a boxy, somewhat utilitarian body measuring 100 x 56 x 28 mm and weighing 178 grams. Meanwhile, the Sony W690 is sleeker and lighter, at 94 x 56 x 22 mm and a mere 142 grams.

The slimmer profile and nearly 40 grams weight advantage of the W690 make it noticeably more pocket-friendly - a clear plus for street and travel shooters prioritizing discretion and mobility. However, the FH20’s slightly chunkier grip gives it more reassuring handholds, which benefits photographers with larger hands or those shooting for extended periods.

Looking at the top view, Panasonic opts for a minimalist design with essential controls placed within thumb reach, but the buttons feel a touch cramped. Sony’s top deck showcases a slightly more spacious layout with a more defined mode dial and dedicated zoom lever, aiding swift navigation through menus and settings - a small but meaningful advantage under fast-paced shooting.

In terms of displays, neither camera embraces touchscreen tech, but Sony’s larger 3-inch ClearPhoto TFT LCD - though only 230k dots in resolution - offers a brighter and more vivid preview image compared to the Panasonic’s modest 2.7-inch fixed display. This improves real-time framing and reviewing, especially under daylight conditions.

Sensor and Image Quality: Navigating the Limits of Small 1/2.3-inch CCD Sensors

Both cameras house 1/2.3-inch CCD sensors, a common choice in budget compacts aiming to balance cost with respectable image output. The Panasonic FH20 offers 14 megapixels of resolution on a sensor measuring approximately 6.08 x 4.56 mm, while the Sony W690 steps slightly up with 16 megapixels on a very similarly sized chip (6.17 x 4.55 mm).

In practical terms, that small bump in pixel count for the W690 translates to images running at 4608 x 3456 pixels, offering slightly more cropping latitude. However, higher resolution on such tiny sensors can mean more noise at base and elevated ISOs, due to smaller photosites collecting less light. From real shooting sessions, image noise suppression on both cameras is aggressive, with Sony’s BIONZ processor edging out Panasonic’s older processing pipeline in maintaining cleaner textures at ISO 200 and 400.

Curiously, while the Panasonic supports ISO settings up to 6400, the Sony caps native ISO at 3200 - but I found practical ISO usability limited to 400 on both in well-lit scenes, with degradation becoming visible quickly beyond that. Therefore, neither camera excels in exactly low light, but the W690’s marginally better noise control strategy lets it eke out slightly better night shots with less chroma noise.

Both sensors feature anti-alias filters to reduce moiré, with Panasonic embracing a 4:3, 3:2, and 16:9 aspect ratio versatility versus Sony’s preference for 4:3 and 16:9. This extra flexibility might appeal to photographers who want faster cropping options straight out of the camera.

For color fidelity, Sony’s enhanced white balance bracketing (absent in Panasonic) aids in fine-tuning complex lighting, creating more accurate skin tones in indoor portraiture.

Autofocus and Shooting Speeds: When Every Millisecond Counts

Autofocus on compact cameras is often the Achilles’ heel, especially when contrasted with the swift phase-detect autofocus of DSLRs or mirrorless systems. Both models rely on contrast-detection AF systems. Panasonic limits focus points to a fixed grid of nine, none of which fall into face or eye detection, whereas Sony’s W690 integrates rudimentary face detection and a form of tracking autofocus, a notable advantage for portraits and moving subjects.

However, continuous shooting tells a different story. The FH20’s burst mode hits 5 frames per second (fps), a surprise in such a compact - handy for fleeting street moments or children’s action. The Sony, by contrast, crawls along at a mere 1 fps, making it far less appealing for dynamic shooting scenarios.

That’s not to say Panasonic locks you out of focus accuracy; it uses contrast-detection tactfully for stills, but slower acquisition in low contrast or dim environments is inevitable. The Sony’s face detection compensates well for casual portraits, though its continuous AF in live view is not implemented, which reduces tracking reliability once the moment is captured.

Lenses and Focal Reach: Extra Zoom or Extra Speed?

Zoom versatility is a key consideration for travel and wildlife shooters. The Panasonic FH20 offers an 8x optical zoom at 28-224mm (35mm equivalent) with max apertures loosening from F3.3 at wide-angle to F5.9 telephoto. The Sony W690 ups that ante with a 10x zoom spanning 25-250mm, the same aperture spread.

While the extended telephoto range gives the W690 a clear advantage for distant subjects - whether wildlife or sports - it’s important to remember these lenses are slow, which negatively impacts autofocus speed and low-light shooting at telephoto extremes.

Close focus is commendably similar: both hit around 5cm macro range, which makes them handy for casual close-ups and flower shots. Neither, however, offers advanced focus stacking or bracketing, which limits their appeal to serious macro enthusiasts. Optical stabilization is implemented on both bodies, with Panasonic’s system doing a good job countering hand shake for photos, while Sony’s system is standard but less aggressive.

Real-World Photography Tests Across Genres

Let me walk you through how both fared in various photography disciplines based on rigorous field testing.

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones and Background Blur

Portraits rely heavily on accurate skin tone rendition, eye detection, and bokeh quality. Given their compact sensors and fixed lenses, neither camera achieves the dreamy shallow depth of field large-sensor cameras deliver, but the Sony W690 edges Panasonic slightly by virtue of face detection ensuring focus locks properly on subjects’ eyes more often without manual fiddling.

Skin tones look natural on both, with Sony’s white balance bracketing helping in tricky lighting. Indoors under incandescent lighting, Panasonic’s colors come off a little warmer and less accurate, occasionally leaning toward reddish hues.

Bokeh is unremarkable on both, with busy backgrounds seldom smoothly blurred. The Panasonic’s lens tends to create more diffuse out-of-focus areas compared to the Sony’s a bit harsher blur, but neither’s optical design caters to artists craving creamy separation.

Landscape Photography: Dynamics and Resolution

Landscape shooters demand wide-angle reach, sharpness, consistent color, and decent dynamic range. Both cameras start around 25-28mm equivalent but ultimately fall short in dynamic range typical of larger sensors.

At base ISO 80, the Panasonic produces images with acceptable sharpness and contrast, though it struggles with deep shadow detail recovery. The Sony W690, benefiting from its slightly newer processor and sensor design, pulls up highlights and shadows modestly better, though neither can hold a candle to advanced compacts or mirrorless bodies.

Resolution advantages of the W690’s 16MP translate into slightly crisper prints up to 8x10 inches, but the difference is subtle. Neither sports weather sealing, making these both less ideal in harsh outdoor conditions.

Wildlife Photography: Autofocus Speed and Telephoto Reach

Here, the ability to capture fast-moving subjects at a distance becomes critical. Panasonic’s 5 fps burst rate theoretically sounds promising, but sluggish autofocus and minimal tracking capability limit practical usefulness in fast action. The Sony’s 10x zoom extends reach but paired with a 1 fps frame rate and slow AF, it’s not a particularly trustworthy hunter’s tool.

In dim forest shade, both cameras’ focusing hunts and shutter lag increase. Neither offers raw shooting for advanced post-processing, which constrains exposure flexibility for challenging lighting conditions pervasive in wildlife photography.

Sports Photography: Tracking and Burst Performance Under Pressure

Fast-moving athletes demand cameras with rapid autofocus and high frame rates. Panasonic’s FH20 might catch your eye with 5 fps shooting, but lack of autofocus tracking and small buffer sizes reduce actual bursts to just a few frames before slowdown.

Sony’s 1 fps performance thwarts any serious sports use. Neither supports shutter or aperture priority modes, nor manual controls, limiting creative exposure control - a key frustration for enthusiasts stepping up from smartphones.

Street Photography: Discreet, Fast, and Ready at a Moment’s Notice

For street shooters valuing portability and stealth, the Sony W690’s slimmer form, faster lens zoom range, and built-in face detection serve well. Its silent shutter is non-existent, unsurprisingly for compacts, but the camera’s light weight and crisp display encourage quick candid shots.

Panasonic’s bulkier size and noisier shutter make it slightly less street-friendly. Neither camera offers silent electronic shutter modes.

Macro and Night Photography: How Close and How Dark Can You Go?

Both cameras focus comfortably down to 5cm, adequate for casual macro shots like flowers, insects, and textures. However, absence of focus bracketing or stacking means detailed focus control is limited.

Night and astro photography unveil the deficiencies of small sensors. Both struggle beyond ISO 400 due to noise - Panasonic’s higher ISO ceiling is more theoretical than practical. Neither camera has bulb or long exposure modes, and their limited shutter speed maximums (1/1600 s minimums) restrict creative control under starry skies.

Neither offers interval timers or timelapse modes, removing options popular with nightscape photographers.

Video Capabilities: Basic HD with No Bells or Whistles

Video specs are similar: both offer 720p HD recording at 30fps (Motion JPEG format on Panasonic; MPEG-4 on Sony). The Sony’s sharper sensor and processor yield slightly cleaner footage, but the lack of microphone and headphone audio ports significantly limits serious videography.

Neither supports 4K, slow motion, or advanced stabilization in video mode. Video autofocus is basic and prone to hunting, suitable only for casual recording.

Travel and Workflow: Battery, Storage, and Connectivity

Battery life marks a clear difference: Sony’s official rating of about 220 shots per charge edges out the unlisted Panasonic’s less than stellar endurance. Sophisticated USB charging exteriors are absent - both rely on proprietary batteries with no USB power option.

Storage-wise, both support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, but Sony also supports proprietary Memory Stick formats, somewhat diminishing universality.

In connectivity, neither camera offers Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS. USB 2.0 is the sole data interface - painfully slow for large image transfers by today’s standards.

Durability and Build Quality: No Weather Sealing, No Ruggedness

For adventurous photographers, robustness matters. Both models lack environmental sealing, dustproofing, shockproofing, or waterproofing claims. Their plastic construction is lightweight but not indestructible - routine care required.

Pricing and Value Analysis: Budget Options with Not-So-Budget Limitations

At the time of listing, the Panasonic FH20’s population-competitive price (around $179) makes it an affordable entry point for users prioritizing zoom flexibility and burst shooting. The Sony W690’s premium (~$297) is justified by a sharper sensor, a more versatile zoom lens, face detection AF, and better battery life.

Though neither model excels in high-performance demands, their prices and feature sets reflect a compromise.

Summary Scores and Genre-Specific Performance

Synthesizing our extensive testing and analysis into digestible scores offers clarity on their strengths. Panasonic’s superior burst rate earns points in sports, while Sony’s face detection and zoom range push it ahead for portraits and wildlife.

Panasonic FH20 front Panasonic FH20 screen back Sony W690 front Sony W690 screen back

Final Verdict: Which Compact Champion is Right for You?

Selecting between the Panasonic Lumix FH20 and Sony Cyber-shot W690 boils down to what aspects of compact shooting you prioritize:

• Choose the Panasonic FH20 if you want:

  • Fast 5 fps shooting for kids, pets, or casual action
  • Slightly better optical stabilization
  • Budget entry with good zoom range and simple handling
  • A solid “grab and shoot” camera without complex features

• Choose the Sony W690 if you want:

  • Better image resolution and slightly improved image quality
  • Face detection autofocus for portraits and social shooting
  • Longer zoom for travel snaps needing extra reach
  • More compact, lighter form for carry-everywhere convenience
  • Longer battery life and slightly better white balance control

Neither is a contender for professional photographic work, but as pocketable, user-friendly compacts for everyday memories, they each have merits within their price brackets.

My Personal Experience and Recommendations

Having thoroughly tested both cameras in urban street environments, family gatherings, and modest nature outings, I favor the Sony W690 for the average enthusiast due to its versatile zoom, improved battery life, and touch of smarter autofocus tech - critical for capturing fleeting smiles or landscapes without fuss.

That said, if you’re after speedier burst shooting on a tight budget or plan to photograph kids and pets actively, the Panasonic FH20’s 5 fps and robust stabilization offer genuinely useful advantages.

If you can stretch your budget, however, exploring newer compacts with larger sensors (such as 1-inch or APS-C) in Sony’s RX100 or Panasonic’s Lumix LX series might dramatically elevate image quality and creative control.

Closing Thoughts

The Panasonic Lumix FH20 and Sony Cyber-shot W690 present sensible options for photographers seeking simple, reliable compact cameras with respectable zoom ranges and ease of use. Understanding their strengths, limitations, and target user scenarios arms you with clear expectations before purchase.

In the end, while neither represents a “state-of-the-art” camera even at their launch, both models embody accessible photographic tools tuned for casual everyday shooters and emerging enthusiasts. Your personal shooting style - whether favoring speed, zoom reach, or portability - should ultimately guide the choice. I hope this dive into their nuances assists you in finding the compact companion best suited to your photographic journey.

Happy shooting!