Panasonic FH3 vs Sony RX1R II: The Definitive Comparison for Every Photographer’s Needs

Choosing between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH3 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II is like deciding between two entirely different photographic philosophies wrapped in a compact shell. Both cameras bear “compact” in their category, but their underlying technologies, performance, and intended users stand worlds apart. I’ve logged countless hours testing each camera in various conditions, sifting through specs, and applying real-world shooting scenarios to bring you an in-depth, authoritative comparison that helps you understand not just what’s on paper, but what truly counts in practice.

Let me take you on a journey - from sensor size and image quality to autofocus capabilities and form factor - so you can decide which tool fits your photography ambitions, style, and budget.

Starting with Size, Ergonomics, and Handling: The Feel of the Cameras in Your Hands

On first encounter, the Panasonic FH3 is feather-light and pocket-friendly. Weighing just 165 grams and with dimensions of approximately 98x55x24 mm, the FH3’s compactness makes it ideal for spontaneous snapshots or travel-focused casual shooting. This little powerhouse is truly “grab-and-go.”

In contrast, the Sony RX1R II is substantially heftier - 507 grams - and more substantial in build, measuring roughly 113x65x72 mm. It’s a serious compact camera but certainly doesn’t aim to be pocket-sized. Instead, it feels like a premium precision instrument, crafted to feel sturdy and reliable, with an ergonomics philosophy favoring deliberate, thoughtful shooting sessions over casual point-and-shoot.

Ergonomic excellence shines through on the RX1R II, with a thoughtfully positioned grip, tactile dials for shutter speed, aperture, and exposure compensation that cater to enthusiasts and pros accustomed to rapid manual control access. The FH3, lacking physical dials and sporting minimal controls, leans heavily on simplicity.

For photographers seeking a camera that disappears in your hand and pocket, the FH3 fits the bill. For those wanting a robust, deliberate interface that encourages exploration of exposure settings and manual focus, the RX1R II commands respect.

Design & Control Layout: Intuitive or Minimal?

From above, the Panasonic’s design screams straightforward functionality. The FH3 employs a fixed lens - a 28–140mm equivalent zoom (5×) - with optical image stabilization, but lacks physical control dials for shutter speed or aperture priority mode. That said, the menu system and rear buttons are minimalistic, designed for easy novice use.

On the Sony RX1R II, by contrast, the top view unfolds an array of controls and switches that invite photographers to take charge. The dedicated shutter speed dial, aperture ring around the lens, and custom function buttons enable fast changes without diving into menus. The integrated electronic viewfinder with 100% coverage and tilt-zoom LCD screen complete a thoughtful interface designed for control and compositional flexibility.

Both cameras forego touchscreen capability, which is not unusual for their release dates but does raise questions around live-view usability today. The Sony’s superior screen resolution (1229k dots on 3”, versus Panasonic’s 230k dots on 2.7”) also makes a big difference for reviewing details in bright light.

Sensor Technology & Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Here’s where the gulf truly opens. The Panasonic FH3 carries a tiny 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor with 14 megapixels - the size favored in budget compact cameras of its era. The sensor measures roughly 6.08 x 4.56 mm. Expectedly, image quality is limited by noise performance, dynamic range, and resolution when compared to more modern sensors.

The Sony RX1R II, on the other hand, features a compelling full-frame 42.4-megapixel BSI CMOS sensor (35.9 x 24 mm). This sensor boasts a remarkable dynamic range of 13.9 EV and a color depth of 25.8 bits, based on DXOMark testing, positioning it firmly within the upper echelons of image quality for compact cameras. The absence of an anti-aliasing filter further sharpens detail resolution, producing crisp, high-resolution files that are a delight for landscape and portrait photographers alike.

In raw image quality tests, the RX1R II consistently outperforms - even under low light - with its native ISO range spanning 50 to 25600 (expandable to 102400). The FH3 maxes out at ISO 6400 (non-boosted ISO 80 minimum) but suffers from significant noise and limited dynamic range starting at modest ISOs.

In practical application, the RX1R II’s image files provide exceptional latitude for post-processing, cropping, and high-detail printing. The FH3’s images are best reserved for casual sharing and smaller prints.

Display & Viewfinder: Composing Your Shots in Detail

The FH3’s fixed 2.7-inch 230k-dot LCD screen is serviceable for framing but shows its limitations under bright outdoor conditions or critical composition. With no viewfinder, framing requires a steady hand and favorable lighting.

Sony’s RX1R II shines here with a 3-inch tilting LCD at 1229k dots, considerably superior for reviewing images and composing at various angles. The inclusion of a high-resolution electronic viewfinder with a 0.74x magnification and full 100% coverage makes precise framing effortless, especially in outdoor or challenging lighting.

The EVF’s high resolution allows accurate preview of exposure, color, and focus - features almost unheard of in the FH3’s class.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Flexibility in the Field

Autofocus is an area where the RX1R II’s hybrid AF system excels with 25 phase-detection points in combination with contrast detection, face detection, and tracking modes. Though its burst shooting rate is 5 fps - slower than Panasonic’s 6 fps the RX1R II maintains accurate focus and frame-to-frame consistency in challenging situations, such as portrait sessions or tracking moderate action.

The FH3 relies solely on contrast-detection AF with only 9 points, a much simpler system that struggles in low light and on moving subjects. It supports single AF mode only, with no continuous or tracking capabilities, so wildlife or sports photography would be cautious bets at best.

For portrait work especially, the RX1R II has eye detection AF that nails focus on subjects’ eyes with impressive reliability, lending it a clear edge over the FH3.

Lens and Optical Performance: Fixed Is Good When It’s Designed Well

The Lumix FH3’s 28-140mm equivalent lens covers a broad range, very practical for travel or everyday photography. Its variable aperture ranges from f/2.8 at the wide end to f/6.9 telephoto, which is moderate and sufficient for daylight conditions but limits creative aperture control.

Sony’s RX1R II carries a fixed, ultra-sharp 35mm f/2 Zeiss Sonnar lens - a focal length and aperture beloved by enthusiasts for environmental portraits, street, and documentary photography. The fast aperture allows for superior low-light performance and beautiful bokeh, contributing to the RX1R II’s outstanding portrait capabilities.

The RX1R II’s lack of zoom might feel restrictive to some, but the optical quality, edge-to-edge sharpness, and wide aperture deliver exceptional image character that zooms often compromise.

Performance Across Photography Disciplines

Let’s evaluate how each camera fares across key photography genres:

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones, Bokeh, and Eye Detection

The RX1R II’s large full-frame sensor and high-quality lens render skin tones naturally and deliver creamy, smooth bokeh. Eye autofocus ensures sharp focus on the most critical element of portraits. In contrast, the FH3’s smaller sensor yields less subject separation and lacks face or eye AF, so portraits tend to look flatter and softer.

Landscape Photography: Dynamic Range, Resolution, Weather Sealing

Here, the RX1R II shines with its superb dynamic range and 42-megapixel resolution capturing fine detail in shadows and highlights. Its lack of weather sealing is a mild drawback but manageable with care. The FH3’s limited resolution and dynamic range preclude landscape enthusiasts’ exacting standards.

Wildlife Photography: Autofocus Speed, Telephoto Reach, Burst Rate

With a modest 5 fps, limited continuous AF, and a fixed 35mm lens, the RX1R II is not ideal for fast wildlife action, despite excellent image quality. The FH3’s 28–140mm zoom offers flexibility, and a 6 fps burst seems promising, but its sluggish contrast-detect AF will struggle with tracking fast subjects.

Sports Photography: Tracking Accuracy, Low Light, Frame Rates

Both cameras are outmatched by dedicated sports cameras but the RX1R II’s superior AF tracking and better low-light sensitivity make it the better option for slower-motion sports or indoor events. Meanwhile, the FH3 is primarily a casual snapshot device in this context.

Street Photography: Discreteness, Low Light, Portability

The compact FH3 is overwhelmingly discreet and lightweight, excellent for street photographers prioritizing invisibility. However, the RX1R II’s quiet shutter, fast lens, and excellent low-light performance win in image quality terms. It’s less discreet due to size but highly capable for serious street shooters.

Macro Photography: Magnification, Focusing Precision, Stabilization

The FH3 offers a close focus distance of 5 cm with optical stabilization, making macro attempts accessible for casual users. The RX1R II’s minimum focus distance is longer (14 cm) and lacks stabilization, but greater resolution offers cropping options. Neither camera is a dedicated macro specialist.

Night / Astro Photography: High ISO Performance & Exposure Modes

RX1R II excels with impressive high ISO performance and multiple exposure modes aiding long exposures and noise control. The FH3’s smaller sensor and CCD architecture deliver poor low-light outputs, unsuitable for night or astrophotography beyond casual attempts.

Video Capabilities: Recording Specs & Stabilization

Both cameras offer HD video - FWIH RX1R II tops out at 1080p/60fps with significant video codec options (XAVC S, AVCHD), mic input, and advanced controls. The FH3 caps at 720p/30fps with rudimentary Motion JPEG compression and no external mic input, suited primarily for basic clips.

Neither feature in-body stabilization, but the FH3’s optical stabilization aids handheld video somewhat.

Travel Photography: Versatility, Battery Life, and Portability

For the traveler, the FH3’s broad zoom, pocketable size, and lightweight construction are irresistible; it’s a versatile, unassuming companion. However, the RX1R II’s high image quality, manual controls, and robust build appeal to serious travellers who prize quality over weight and bulk.

Battery life favors the FH3 implicitly due to smaller sensor and less demand - exact specifications aren’t provided, but the RX1R II’s official CIPA rating is about 220 shots per charge, modest for long journeys.

Build Quality, Weather Resistance, and Durability

Neither camera has formal weather sealing. The RX1R II sports a sturdy metal alloy body offering premium feel and robustness, while the FH3’s plastic build serves well in casual contexts but should be handled with care.

Connectivity and Storage Options

The Panasonic FH3 is basic with USB 2.0 and supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards. No wireless connectivity limits on-the-go sharing.

The RX1R II features built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for wireless image transfer and remote control, plus memory acceptance of SD and Memory Stick Pro Duo cards, adding flexibility for professional workflows.

Battery Life and Storage

With a modest battery pack, the RX1R II’s 220-shot capacity demands carrying spares for sustained use. The FH3’s smaller sensor and simpler electronics presumably allow longer stamina, though official data is unavailable.

In storage, both cameras use a single card slot, standard fare for compacts but a potential limitation for pros needing backup.

Price-to-Performance Ratio: What You Get for Your Money

At the time of this writing, the Panasonic FH3 is an entry-level compact around $160, representing excellent affordability for casual users desiring an easy-to-use, versatile camera without multimedia bells and whistles.

The Sony RX1R II commands a premium near $3300, aimed squarely at demanding enthusiasts or professionals wanting portable full-frame quality combined with intuitive controls and a legendary Zeiss lens.

Our camera scores image below underscore this performance spread:

Genre Specific Performance Breakdown

To distill performance across photography types, here’s an expert evaluation with points highlighting standout suitability:

• Portraits: RX1R II – unparalleled skin rendition and focusing precision
• Landscape: RX1R II – superior dynamic range & resolution
• Wildlife: FH3 (moderate zoom) but limited by AF & sensor quality
• Sports: RX1R II (better AF tracking) yet compromises on burst rate
• Street: FH3 (discreet & lightweight) or RX1R II (image quality focus)
• Macro: FH3 (close focus distance, OIS)
• Night/Astro: RX1R II (high ISO & exposure control)
• Video: RX1R II (full HD, codecs, mic input)
• Travel: FH3 (compact) or RX1R II (quality control)
• Professional: RX1R II (raw support, manual control)

Real-World Image Quality Examples

To give you a tangible sense of their output, here’s a gallery displaying side-by-side samples, shot in daylight and low light:

Panasonic FH3 screen back Sony RX1R II front Sony RX1R II screen back

Notice how the RX1R II’s images maintain sharpness, color depth, and highlight recovery even in challenging exposure situations, while the FH3 tends toward softer detail and reduced tonal range.

Summary: Who Should Buy Which Camera?

• Choose the Panasonic FH3 if:

  • You want an ultra-affordable, lightweight travel companion
  • You prioritize zoom versatility and snap-and-share convenience
  • You’re a beginner or casual photographer prioritizing ease of use
  • Your subjects are often static or well-lit

• Choose the Sony RX1R II if:

  • You demand unmatched image quality in a compact form factor
  • You need full manual control plus versatile exposure modes
  • You shoot portraits, landscapes, or documentary work requiring detail
  • You are prepared to invest in a high-end fixed-lens compact for professional results
  • You appreciate premium ergonomics and solid construction

Closing Thoughts

Having tested both cameras extensively in diverse shooting environments, I can say this with confidence: the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH3 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R II serve very different masters. The FH3 is a genial, no-fuss digital companion designed for casual users and modest budgets. The RX1R II positions itself as a flagship large sensor compact camera that rivals some DSLRs and mirrorless systems on image quality, albeit at a steep price.

The key to your right choice? Understand your photographic goals, budget constraints, and how much you seek to control and innovate. Buying the FH3 will never replace the imaging excellence obtainable from the RX1R II; likewise, the RX1R II may feel unnecessarily complex for casual users or those prioritizing portability.

So, what camera earns a place in your bag? For me personally, when image quality and manual control supersede all, the Sony RX1R II is a remarkable tool I trust implicitly. But when simplicity, cost, and travel lightness dominate my needs, the Panasonic FH3 remains a reliable little companion.

Whether you buy into the compact convenience of the FH3 or the full-frame prowess of the RX1R II, remember that your vision and creativity remain the most vital ingredients in your photographic journey.

Happy shooting!