Panasonic Lumix FP1 vs Ricoh CX5: In-Depth Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

When diving into the compact, point-and-shoot territory, it’s easy to get lost in a sea of near-identical specs and confusing marketing jargon. Today, we're parsing two distinct 1/2.3" sensor compact cameras with some serious versatility despite their budget-friendly positioning: the Panasonic Lumix FP1 and the Ricoh CX5. Both hail from around the turn of the last decade but offer markedly different takes on the compact zoom camera formula.

Having personally tested thousands of cameras under myriad conditions over 15 years, my goal with this comparison is to give you a clear, no-fluff rundown of what these cameras can really do, their key strengths, and who should consider them today - whether you’re a casual enthusiast, an aspiring content creator on a budget, or an expert looking for a highly specific travel or street option.

Before I dive into the nitty-gritty, let’s set the stage with a quick look at their physical dimensions and ergonomics - because even a great sensor and lens combo can be ruined if the handling is off.

Size, Handling, and Ergonomics: Small Packages, Different Feel

At first glance, the Panasonic FP1 and Ricoh CX5 look like they could comfortably hang out together in your jacket pocket, but a few millimeters here and there tell a different story.

• Panasonic FP1: Ultraportable at 99 x 59 x 19mm and weighing 151 grams, this camera feels almost toy-like, but that compactness is a double-edged sword - it lacks a viewfinder entirely and relies solely on its 2.7-inch, low-res fixed LCD screen (more on that later). Its fixed lens with a 35-140mm (35mm equivalent) zoom range is modest but versatile for casual shooting. The body’s ultra-slim profile may make extended handheld shooting less comfortable, especially for users with bigger hands.

• Ricoh CX5: Slightly chunkier at 102 x 59 x 29mm and 205 grams, the CX5’s beefier grip and slightly larger dimensions contribute to a more confident hold. It packs a 3-inch, high-resolution 920k-dot LCD screen that substantially improves framing and menu navigation. The big draw here is the 28-300mm (35mm equivalent) 10.7x zoom, ideal for telephoto shooting without carrying multiple lenses.

Both cameras lack electronic viewfinders (EVFs), so you’ll be relying on their LCDs exclusively, which inherently limits use in bright daylight scenarios. The CX5’s bigger screen definitely aids in composing and reviewing images.

Overall, for travel and street shooters prioritizing ultra-compactness, the FP1 might charm you; but if you want a more solid grip and viewfinder real estate, the CX5 takes the crown here.

Controls-wise, the FP1 keeps it minimal - no manual focus ring, no direct exposure controls, and no traditional mode dials. This simplicity suits casual users but frustrates enthusiasts who want more camera control. The CX5’s manual focus capability and exposure compensation offer more hands-on creative freedom. Neither has external flash ports or hot shoes, so flash users are relying on built-in solutions exclusively.

Sensor and Image Quality: Modest Sensors, Different Tech

Both cameras use the small but hugely common 1/2.3-inch sensor size, but Panasonic uses a CCD sensor in the FP1, while Ricoh employs a CMOS sensor in the CX5.

Here’s why that matters:

• Panasonic FP1’s CCD sensor: 12MP resolution at 4000x3000 pixels, with a 5.9x crop factor, aiming for decent image quality in daylight. CCD sensors excel at color fidelity but typically lag in noise performance and speed. It offers native ISO range from 80 up to 6400, though expect serious noise at the upper end.

• Ricoh CX5’s CMOS sensor: 10MP at 3648x2736 pixels, crop factor 5.8x. CMOS sensors usually outperform CCDs at higher ISO levels and consume less power. The CX5’s native ISO tops out at 3200, halving the FP1’s max ISO. Still, this usually translates to cleaner images in low light and better burst performance.

Both sensors include an antialiasing filter, which slightly softens details but helps reduce moiré patterns.

From my testing experience, despite the FP1’s higher megapixel count, the CX5 delivers better overall image quality - especially under tricky lighting. CMOS technology’s advantage in dynamic range and noise control shows when shooting indoors or at dusk, where the FP1's images can look less refined.

LCD Screen and Interface: A Tale of Two Screens

This is where the CX5 shines. The Ricoh’s 3-inch, 920k-dot LCD screen provides a crisp, bright canvas for image review and live view framing. The FP1’s 2.7-inch, 230k-dot fixed LCD lags behind, offering less detail and poorer brightness, which can be a struggle under direct sunlight.

Neither camera has touchscreen capabilities or an electronic viewfinder. Both cameras rely solely on contrast-detection AF systems via live view, which is fine but noticeably slower than phase-detection autofocus systems in more modern or higher-end models.

User interface design is fairly straightforward: menus are clean but quite utilitarian on both cameras; the CX5’s additional manual exposure and focus options add more complexity and creative control but also a steeper learning curve.

Lens and Zoom: How Far and How Close?

The Panasonic FP1 sports a 35-140mm (4x zoom) lens at f/3.5-5.9 max aperture, while the Ricoh CX5 boasts an impressive 28-300mm (10.7x zoom) f/3.5-5.6 lens.

Here’s what I liked in real-world use:

• Panasonic FP1: Its more modest zoom range still covers popular focal lengths for everyday use, from normal portraits to moderate telephoto shots. However, the tighter max aperture at the telephoto end (f/5.9) means less light gathering capability, which affects low-light and creative depth-of-field control.

• Ricoh CX5: The superzoom capability to 300mm equivalent opens up wildlife and sports photography possibilities generally unavailable on compacts at this price point. Its macro focus range down to 1 cm is fantastic for closeup work, letting you explore fine details without additional gear. The sensor-shift image stabilization complements the long zoom, helping reduce blur from camera shake.

If zoom reach and macro are priorities, CX5 is the clear winner, though the FP1’s smaller lens size helps keep weight and bulk down.

Autofocus, Burst, and Shooting Performance

Both cameras employ contrast-detection AF systems, which are the standard for compact cameras of their era but noticeably slower than mirrorless phase-detection systems.

• The Panasonic FP1 offers 9 focus points but lacks face detection and continuous AF tracking, limiting its effectiveness for fast-moving subjects.

• The Ricoh CX5 lists “multi-area” AF but no reliable face or subject tracking features, though it compensates somewhat with manual focus options for critical focus needs.

Burst rates stand at 6 fps for the FP1 and 5 fps for the CX5. Personally, I found both adequate for casual shooting but inadequate for serious sports or wildlife shooting. Autofocus lag is a bigger bottleneck, slowing down subsequent frames.

Minimum shutter speeds differ as well; the FP1’s minimum shutter speed is capped at 1/1600s, while the CX5 tops out at 1/2000s, which is negligible to most but indicates slightly faster shutter capabilities for freezing action.

Video Capabilities: Basic but Serviceable

Both cameras offer HD video recording at 1280x720 @ 30fps using the Motion JPEG codec, which is considered outdated and storage-heavy by today’s standards.

• The Panasonic FP1 can record 720p but offers no external mic input or headphone jack, no 4K or higher frame rate options, and no in-body stabilization improvements beyond basic optical stabilization in video mode.

• The Ricoh CX5 matches Panasonic’s max video resolution and frame rate but adds timelapse video recording and sensor-shift stabilization, which helps produce smoother footage handheld.

Neither is a serious video tool by today’s standards, but for casual clips or quick social media shares, they do the job.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Neither the Panasonic FP1 nor the Ricoh CX5 offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or ruggedization features. Neither is waterproof or freeze-proof.

Their compact builds emphasize portability over durability. The CX5’s thicker body means slightly more robust construction, but don’t expect to take either camera into harsh environments without extra care.

Considering price points (~$150 for FP1, ~ $400 for CX5 used market value), adding weather sealing would have significantly pushed their cost beyond the target audience.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Both cameras use proprietary lithium-ion battery packs (Ricoh’s DB-100 model well documented) and support SD/SDHC storage cards. They have only one card slot each.

Battery life specifics are not provided in their official specs, but from hands-on experience with similar models, the Ricoh CX5 tends to edge out on longevity, likely thanks to its CMOS sensor’s power efficiency and slightly larger battery.

Connectivity options are limited for both: USB 2.0 is the only wired option, with no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS available. So, transferring images means plugging the camera into a PC or removing your card.

Performance in Different Photography Genres

Let’s break down how these cameras perform across popular genres, focusing on real-world usability and image output quality.

Portrait Photography

• Panasonic FP1: The moderate zoom reaches a comfortable portrait focal length (around 85mm equivalent). However, the smaller aperture and lack of manual exposure controls limit background blur capabilities. Skin tone reproduction is decent thanks to the CCD sensor’s color science but can struggle in indoor/artificial light.

• Ricoh CX5: The wider zoom range allows experimental framing, and the 1 cm macro mode offers unusual closeups. Manual focus adds control over eye sharpness - key for portraits. Skin tones look natural, with less noise in dim light than FP1, making it preferable for portrait work.

Neither camera has face-detection autofocus, a notable limitation by today’s standards but expected for their era.

Landscape Photography

• FP1: The 12MP sensor offers slightly higher resolution, advantageous for large prints or cropping. However, limited dynamic range and poorer high-ISO performance restrict low-light or shadow recovery capabilities. Fixed lens limits wide-angle reach somewhat.

• CX5: Lower resolution but wider focal range starting at 28mm makes broader landscape scenes easier to capture. Better noise control and wider ISO usability help in challenging light. The lens is less sharp at longest focal lengths but excellent for casual landscape shooters.

Both lack weather sealing, which reduces reliability in harsh outdoor conditions.

Wildlife Photography

• FP1: Modest 140mm max focal length (~840mm 35mm equivalent with crop?) is too short for serious wildlife work. Slow AF and no tracking features reduce chances of sharp, decisive shots.

• CX5: The 300mm zoom is better for tight wildlife framing, especially with sensor-shift stabilization. Manual focus facilitates precision but contrast AF is slow to adjust on moving subjects. Burst is limited.

Neither replaces a DSLR or mirrorless with specialized telephoto lenses, but for casual snappers, CX5 gives more telephoto reach.

Sports Photography

Both cameras are extremely limited here:

• Fast AF tracking is missing.
• Burst rates of 5-6 fps are mediocre.
• Small sensors and limited max ISO reduce usable shots under indoor or nighttime sports lighting.

A no-go for sports enthusiasts serious about crisp stop-action images, but okay for casual fans wanting snapshots in good lighting.

Street Photography

Here’s an interesting use case:

• FP1: Super slim body, low noise operation, and simple controls make it an almost pocketable street shooter. The camera’s silence and minimal flash output aid discretion. Reliance on LCD finder only requires working around glare.

• CX5: Bigger and longer zoom lens make it less stealthy, but more flexible zoom means you can capture discreet candids from further away. The superior screen and manual controls assist in tricky scenes.

If you prize portability and subtlety, FP1 wins; want zoom from a discreet distance, consider CX5.

Macro Photography

• FP1: Macro focus down to 10 cm is respectable but doesn’t excel.

• CX5: Down to 1 cm macro focusing is an exceptional feature at this level, paired with manual focus, letting you get detailed closeups unheard of on many compacts.

The CX5 is hands-down better for macro enthusiasts on a budget.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither camera’s sensor or lens excels here:

• Small sensors limit noise control.
• Max ISO tops out at 6400 (FP1) and only 3200 (CX5).
• No bulb or long exposure modes; longest shutter speeds capped under 1 second (FP1) or 1/8 s (CX5).

Thus, astrophotography or long-exposure night shots will be challenging and of limited quality.

Real-World Image Gallery Comparison

Let’s put theory into practice:

Panasonic FP1 front Panasonic FP1 screen back Ricoh CX5 front Ricoh CX5 screen back

In daylight, both produce usable images with decent color and sharpness for web use. Under low light, the Ricoh CX5’s CMOS sensor provides cleaner shots, with less noise and better detail retention.

The CX5’s extended zoom was indispensible for wildlife and macro shots in my tests, while the FP1’s simpler zoom kept things lightweight but less versatile.

Value, Pricing, and Who Should Buy Which?

Here’s where we get pragmatic.

• Panasonic Lumix FP1 (~$150 used price): For cheapskates and minimalist users wanting an ultra-portable, easy-to-use camera with solid color reproduction and straightforward operation. Its limitations mean it’s best suited for casual daylight shooting, travel snapshots where size is critical, and simple street photography.

• Ricoh CX5 (~$400 used price): For budget-interested enthusiasts who want a wider zoom range, manual focusing options, better low-light performance, and macro capabilities. It’s also a better backup or travel option if you want one camera to cover many bases without investing in interchangeable lenses.

Neither camera is a professional tool today - both lack RAW support and many recent innovations. However, for those intrigued by compact cameras with built-in zooms, these remain relevant.

Technical Summary and Camera Scores

How They Rank Across Photography Types

• Portraits: CX5 edges out due to manual focus and low-light ability.
• Landscapes: CX5 wider zoom and noise control favored.
• Wildlife: CX5 by a significant margin.
• Sports: Both weak, CX5 slightly better zoom but slow AF.
• Street: FP1 for minimalism, CX5 for stealth zoom.
• Macro: CX5 dominates with 1cm focusing.
• Night/Astro: Neither ideal, slight edge to CX5.
• Video: Comparable, CX5 adds timelapse.
• Travel: FP1 ultra-portable, CX5 versatile zoom.
• Professional Use: Neither suitable beyond casual or emergency backup.

Final Verdict: Which Compact Fits Your Style?

After hands-on assessment and thorough testing, my takeaway for you is this:

• Pick the Panasonic FP1 if you value sheer pocketability and simplicity - it’s a “grab and go” for daylight shots, street candids, and casual travel photos, especially if you hate clubs for thumbs or giant camera bags. Price is superb if used.

• Opt for the Ricoh CX5 if you want more creative control (manual focus, exposure compensation), a monster zoom range for its class, and generally better image quality under varied conditions. It’s the camera for budget shooters needing versatility across genres, especially macro and telephoto at the point-and-shoot level.

Neither will replace your pro gear but both hold lessons in compact design and user experience circa early 2010s. Their limitations remind us how far camera tech has marched on, but within their niches, they each have loyal fans.

Whichever you choose, now you know exactly what to expect - and how to make the most out of these surprisingly capable compacts.

Happy shooting!