Panasonic Lumix FP2 vs Sony Cyber-shot QX100: The Ultimate Hands-On Comparison for Discerning Photographers

When you’re out hunting for a compact camera, the options span a wide range - from pocket-friendly shooter bricks to high-end lens-style cameras promising DSLR-level image quality. Today, I’m comparing two intriguing contenders: the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP2 (hereafter, the FP2), an ultracompact point-and-shoot from 2010 with some neat tricks up its sleeve, versus the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX100 (hereafter, the QX100), Sony’s radical lens-style camera launched in 2013 that relies on your smartphone for its brain and interface.

I’ve handled both cameras extensively in various scenarios - from casual street photography to macro shoots and even some light wildlife work. My goal is to cut through marketing claims and jargon and offer you a grounded, experience-based comparison so you can decide which, if either, suits your photography needs and budget.

First Impressions: Size and Ergonomics – Pocket or palm?

If you’re that cheapskate looking to slip a camera into your jeans pocket unnoticed, size and handling matter. The FP2 is a classic ultracompact: sleek, light, and built for quick grab-and-go shots. By contrast, the QX100 eschews a traditional camera body altogether - it's essentially a chunky lens with integrated sensor and controls, meant to be paired wirelessly with a smartphone that does all the heavy lifting.

The FP2 measures approximately 99 x 59 x 19 mm and weighs a featherlight 151 grams, which feels delightful in hand or pocket. Sony’s QX100, at 63 x 63 x 56 mm and 179 grams, is thicker and oddly shaped, more like a mini telephoto lens without the supporting body. You’ll likely carry this in a pouch rather than your pocket.

Looking at the control experience, the FP2 has basic but tactile buttons and a fixed 2.7” display (more on that shortly). Meanwhile, the QX100 lacks any controls beyond power and zoom on its lens body - exposure, focus, white balance, and shutter release are all controlled via your smartphone touchscreen over Wi-Fi.

If pocketability and standalone comfort are priorities, the FP2 wins here without question.

Control Layout: Hands-On Use vs Smartphone Reliance

The ergonomics don’t end with size. Compared from the top-down, the FP2 offers buttons and dials that feel natural even for those who like physical control clubs for their thumbs, whereas the QX100 is barebones, designed to delegate interface entirely to your smartphone.

The FP2 packs a few smart physical controls, despite its small size - a zoom toggle, dedicated flash modes, a self-timer button, and a menu access button. They might not be the tightest or most intuitive controls on the market, but they get the job done without hunting through smartphone apps.

For the QX100, however, you absolutely must connect to your phone via Sony’s PlayMemories Mobile app. This tethering introduces a delay between adjustment commands and response, occasionally frustrating when you want decisive control in fast-changing light or action.

If you’re comfortable lugging a bit more gear and want instant access without screen latency, the FP2’s hardware controls edge out here. For those who prefer touchscreen swipes and don’t mind the setup overhead, the QX100 offers flexibility at the cost of speed.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Battle

Now, let’s talk what really matters - image quality. Here we get into sensor technology, resolution, noise handling, and dynamic range.

The Panasonic FP2 sports a 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56 mm (approximately 27.72 mm²), with a resolution of 14 megapixels. Back in 2010, CCD sensors were the standard in compacts, known for decent color depth but somewhat limited dynamic range and noise performance at higher ISOs. The max native ISO tops out at 6400, although pushing that high results in visually noisy images.

The Sony QX100, contrasting sharply, uses a much larger 1” BSI-CMOS sensor (13.2 x 8.8 mm, approx. 116.16 mm²) with 20 megapixels. This sensor size is a game-changer for image quality in a compact form factor. The back-illuminated (BSI) design improves low-light sensitivity, and the CMOS architecture facilitates faster readouts, better dynamic range, and cleaner images at high ISOs.

In a side-by-side shootout of RAW-equivalent JPEGs, the QX100 delivers noticeably sharper details, reduced noise at ISO 1600 and above, and richer dynamic range allowing more leeway in recovering shadow and highlight details.

However, the QX100's advantage comes with a caveat: without RAW support in either camera, heavy post-processing latitude is limited. Still, the QX100’s sensor yields a more punchy and versatile JPEG “starting point.”

That LCD Debate – Screen and Interface Experience

Now about screens. The FP2 has a modest 2.7-inch fixed LCD with 230k dots, which sounds underwhelming by today’s standards, but is serviceable for framing and playback with decent visibility in various lighting.

The QX100, on the other hand, has no built-in screen - no LCD, no EVF. All composition and menu navigation happen on your connected smartphone’s display.

This leads to mixed feelings. If you already treasure your phone’s large, crisp, and touch-enabled display (iPhone, Android, whatever), controlling the QX100 can feel natural and even fun at times, with pinch zoom and tap to focus on your phone’s screen.

But if you prefer a dedicated camera viewer and tactile camera menus without switching apps or worrying about Wi-Fi connections, the FP2 provides a traditional shooting experience not dependent on any other gadget.

For pure standalone shooting spontaneity, FP2’s built-in screen remains preferable. For smartphone integration, QX100 stakes the claim.

Versatility in Zoom and Optics: Who Has the Edge?

Both have fixed lenses with zoom, but focal range and aperture tell different stories.

• FP2 lens: 35-140mm equiv. (4x zoom), aperture f/3.5-5.9
• QX100 lens: 28-100mm equiv. (3.6x zoom), aperture f/1.8-4.9

The Sony lens has a wider starting focal length (28mm vs 35mm) - nice for landscapes and interiors. More importantly, its maximum aperture is substantially wider at f/1.8 compared to f/3.5 on the FP2, enabling shallower depth of field and better low-light performance.

Additionally, the QX100’s lens supports manual focus, offering granular control for photographers who want to master selective focus or macro precision. The FP2 lacks manual focus altogether - relying on contrast-detection autofocus with 9 points but no face detection.

The FP2 offers 10cm macro focus distance, respectable but not standout, while the QX100 reaches as close as 5cm for some serious macro creativity.

Bottom line: For optical quality, low light, and creative control, Sony’s QX100 lens has the advantage.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Can They Keep Up?

Autofocus systems have evolved astronomically in the last decade, so it’s fun yet challenging to compare these cameras.

The FP2 relies on contrast-detection AF with 9 focus points - simple, accurate in good light, but a bit slow and “hunt-y” in dimmer situations. No face or eye detection is provided, so you need to be patient with tricky subjects.

The QX100 also uses contrast-detection AF but smartly supplements it with face detection capabilities. However, the interface lag due to smartphone tethering occasionally elongates AF acquisition times. It lacks continuous tracking or animal eye-focus features, so for fast-moving subjects, neither shines spectacularly, but the QX100’s AF is somewhat more precise overall.

On continuous shooting, Panasonic’s FP2 shoots 5 fps, a decent number for an ultracompact, suitable for casual action photography like street scenes or kids playing. Sony’s QX100 does not publicly support burst shooting modes, which handicaps sports and wildlife shooters wanting to capture decisive moments.

For fast-paced photography, the FP2’s 5 fps continuous mode wins out by default, though both cameras fall short for dedicated sports pros.

Build Quality and Durability: How Tough Are They?

Neither camera boasts environmental sealing or rugged protections.

• FP2: Plastic ultracompact body, weighs 151g, no weatherproofing
• QX100: Lens-style module, plastic build, weighs 179g, no sealing

Neither is designed for hardcore outdoor abuse, dust, water, or freezing temps. Treat both gently, carry cases if you expect harsh conditions.

That said, for their intended uses - FP2 for casual snapshotting and QX100 paired with a smartphone for portable creative shooting - the build quality is acceptable. Neither inspires confidence for pro field use in rough environments.

Battery Life and Storage: Can You Keep Shooting?

Battery life matters when you’re out all day or traveling.

The FP2’s official battery life data is sparse. Anecdotally, it’s average for small compacts - roughly 200-300 shots per charge.

The QX100, fitted with the NP-BN battery, officially rates around 200 shots per charge, but the real-world figure depends on smartphone Wi-Fi usage, which drains both devices.

For storage, the FP2 uses standard-sized SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and has internal memory. The QX100 takes microSD or Memory Stick Micro cards. Storage-wise, both are flexible with cards widely available today.

Connectivity and Extras: Smartphones, Flash, and Wireless

Wireless is where the QX100 flexes its muscles. Built-in Wi-Fi (with NFC pairing) transforms your phone into a remote control and live viewfinder, enabling easy photo sharing and geotagging via your phone’s GPS.

The FP2 has zero wireless connectivity and no GPS, so transfers rely on USB 2.0 cable connections - functional but old-school.

Regarding flash, the FP2 sports a built-in flash with multiple modes (auto, red-eye, slow sync), handy in low light. The QX100 has no built-in flash and no provision for external flashes - so you’ll rely on ambient light or your phone’s screen for fill.

If wireless and smartphone integration excite you, the QX100 opens doors that the FP2 closes firmly.

Real-World Performance Across Photography Genres

Let’s break down how each camera performs in major photographic disciplines to help you envisage which one suits your style.

Portrait Photography

The Sony QX100’s bigger sensor and wider aperture enable smoother bokeh and better background separation - ideal for flattering skin tones and creative portraits. Face detection autofocus helps nail focus on eyes, a big plus.

The FP2’s smaller sensor, narrower aperture, and lack of face detection mean portraits look flatter and with more depth of field, less subject isolation - adequate for casual use but no artistic statements.

Landscape Photography

Here wider angles and dynamic range matter.

QX100’s 28mm start captures more scene, and the larger sensor renders finer details and better shadow recovery. The FP2’s 35mm crop is less versatile; combined with a smaller sensor, images lack crispness and detail when enlarged.

Neither camera offers weather sealing, so caution for outdoor shoots.

Wildlife Photography

Fast autofocus, long telephoto reach, and burst rate define this niche.

FP2 offers a 140mm equivalent telephoto and 5fps continuous shooting, modest but useful for casual birding.

QX100’s 100mm max zoom is shorter, no burst mode to speak of, and slower AF response makes it less suited for wildlife.

Sports Photography

Similar story to wildlife, but more demanding on tracking.

Neither camera is optimized for sports. The FP2’s 5fps burst helps capture some action, but AF tracking is lacking.

QX100’s AF system and shooting speed can’t keep up with fast-paced subjects.

Street Photography

Portability and discretion are paramount here.

FP2’s pocketable size and silent mechanical shutter at moderate shutter speeds allow low-profile shooting.

QX100’s lens design and reliance on phone connectivity may attract unwanted attention, but its compactness (sans phone) is a plus.

Macro Photography

QX100 shines with its 5cm close-focus and manual focus control, enabling creative macro shots.

FP2’s 10cm macro limit is more restrictive but suffices for casual flower and detail shots.

Night and Astro Photography

Sensor size and maximum aperture dominate here.

QX100, with its 1” BSI-CMOS sensor and f/1.8 aperture front, outperforms FP2's 1/2.3” CCD and f/3.5.

QX100 can capture cleaner, more detailed night skies and low-light scenes.

Video Capabilities

FP2 videos are limited to 720p HD at 30fps using Motion JPEG - a format that eats up storage and is outdated.

QX100 steps up with full 1080p HD at 30fps in MPEG-4, improving sharpness and compression efficiency.

Neither camera offers 4K or advanced video features.

Both lack microphone/headphone ports - a bummer for serious videographers.

Travel Photography

Weight, size, versatility, and battery life influence travel cameras.

FP2 wins for slim profile and simple, standalone operation.

QX100 offers superior image quality but requires smartphone - adding complexity and battery considerations.

Professional Work

Neither camera aims at proshooting missions. FP2 lacks RAW and manual controls. QX100 has partial manual exposure (shutter/aperture priority) but no RAW. Both lack file flexibility or advanced workflow tools.

They serve better as supplementary cameras or artistic tools rather than primary pro tools.

Final Verdict: Who Should Buy the FP2 and Who the QX100?

After putting these two through their paces, here’s my takeaway - summary and recommendations shaped by real-world use:

Camera	FP2 Strengths	FP2 Weaknesses	Best For
Panasonic FP2	Compact, simple controls, built-in flash, decent continuous shooting	Older tech, small sensor, limited image quality, no wireless	Casual snapshotters, budget buyers, travelers wanting ultra lightweight pocket camera

Camera	QX100 Strengths	QX100 Weaknesses	Best For
Sony QX100	Large 1” sensor, wide aperture lens, smartphone integration, superior image quality, better low-light	No built-in screen, app-dependent interface, limited burst, pricier	Enthusiasts seeking advanced compact quality, smartphone photographers, macro and night shooters

If you crave simple, no-fuss snappiness and want a tiny camera that feels like a traditional point-and-shoot, the FP2 - now dirt cheap - makes sense for casual users and entry-level photographers with minimal demands.

If image quality (especially in low light), manual focus, and creative potential are priorities, and you don’t mind the tethered smartphone workflow, the QX100 is a small miracle for the price - especially for street, portrait, macro, and travel photography.

Hands-On Testing Takeaway: What You Won’t Learn on Paper

Testing these cameras side by side highlighted that specs don’t tell the whole story.

• FP2 delivers comforting physical buttons, built-in flash, and immediate ready-to-shoot power - but its sensor and optics reveal their age on close inspection. Still, it can snap quick day-to-day images that satisfy casual needs.

• QX100’s gadgety concept takes adjustment of workflow and mindset, requiring patience to pair and use - but rewards with substantially better image quality and exposure flexibility.

I found the QX100 more satisfying for deliberate, thoughtful compositions, while the FP2 felt like a friendly, impulsive companion.

Should You Buy One Today?

At a street price near $79, the Panasonic FP2 offers a charmingly cheap doorway to ultracompact photography, though you’re sacrificing image quality and features.

The Sony QX100, though pricier around $268, punches well above its weight in image quality and creative control, ideal for enthusiasts who max out phone camera prowess and want something better without carrying a DSLR.

Final Thoughts

Buying either means compromises. Between a classic ultracompact and a smartphone-dependent lens module, each targets different types of shooters. Your choice hinges on your workflow preferences, image quality demands, and budget.

Whichever you pick, I recommend pairing these firsthand impressions with extensive sample image reviews and physical handling sessions if you can. Seeing and feeling a camera often trumps online specs.

Happy shooting, and may your next camera be the perfect partner for your creative journey!

If you want to see how these perform in various photo categories and get more granular scoring, check out the images below: