Panasonic FP3 vs Sony A77 II: A Hands-On Comparison for the Practical Photographer

Choosing your next camera can feel like navigating a jungle of specs, jargon, and marketing fluff. As someone who’s spent over 15 years testing cameras across genres - from the casual street snapper to the pros chasing wildlife - I know you want a clear picture of how a camera performs in the real world, not just on paper. Today, I’m pulling apart two very different beasts: the humble Panasonic Lumix DMC-FP3 ultracompact from 2010 versus the advanced mid-size Sony SLT-A77 II DSLR from 2014.

I’ve tested both thoroughly, comparing how they handle sensor tech, autofocus, ergonomics, video, and much more. Whether you’re a cheapskate looking for portability or a seasoned pro needing a reliable workhorse, this detailed comparison will clear the confusion and steer you straight to the camera that fits your style, budget, and photography goals.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Controls

Right off the bat, these cameras couldn’t be further apart in size and purpose.

The Panasonic FP3 is an ultracompact pocket camera, barely 99x59x19 mm and weighing 155g. It’s designed to go anywhere - think everyday carry for spontaneous moments. The solid yet minimal body feels plasticky but doesn’t complain when stuffed in your jacket pocket.

The Sony A77 II, conversely, looks like a trusty battle tank of a DSLR: 143x104x81 mm and tipping the scales at 647g. It commands presence with a magnesium alloy body and weather sealing for the occasional drizzle - built tough for pros who need reliability outdoors.

Take a look at the size difference here:

Ergonomically, the Sony holds the upper hand for photographers with “clubs for thumbs” like me. It boasts rubberized grips, pronounced thumb rests, and customizable buttons laid out intuitively on the top and back. The Panasonic’s controls are a bit barebones - no external dials for aperture or shutter speed, and the tiny buttons can be fiddly if you’re in a rush.

The Sony’s mature control design signals serious photo work, while the Panasonic targets casual shooting with a simplified interface.

For a visual overview of their top control panels and button layouts, check this out:

Sensor and Image Quality: Size Matters

If image quality is king, the sensor is the throne: bigger sensors usually yield clearer, sharper photos with better dynamic range and noise performance.

Here’s where the Sony A77 II’s APS-C CMOS sensor (23.5x15.6 mm) shines against the tiny 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor (6.08x4.56 mm) inside the Panasonic FP3.

The Sony packs 24 megapixels for a max resolution of 6000x4000 pixels, while the Panasonic sticks to 14 megapixels at 4320x3240 pixels. Bigger sensor area means not just more megapixels, but larger photosites that catch more light - essential for performance in low light and finer tonal gradations.

Dynamic range testing confirms this: the Sony delivers a best-in-class 13.4 EV, capturing beautiful details in shadows and highlights. The Panasonic’s CCD sensor can’t compete, producing flatter images with less depth, especially under challenging lighting.

Color Depth and ISO performance:

• Sony’s 24.4 bits of color depth versus the Panasonic’s untested but modest CCD performance means richer, more nuanced skin tones, landscapes, and overall fidelity.
• ISO maxes at 25,600 on the Sony with usable results up to about ISO 3200 in my tests, whereas the Panasonic maxes at 6400 ISO but grain and noise kick in much earlier due to sensor and processor limitations.

For photography disciplines like landscapes and portraits where image quality is paramount, the Sony’s sensor technology is a game changer.

LCD & Viewfinder: Seeing Is Believing

Look, a camera is only as good as your ability to frame and evaluate your shot. The Panasonic FP3 offers a fixed 3-inch LCD with 230k dots resolution - functional but somewhat grainy and dim, especially outdoors.

The Sony A77 II trades fixed for a fully articulating 3-inch screen with a sharp 1229k-dot resolution, excellent for live viewing from those awkward angles or video vlogging.

Crucially, the Sony packs a high-res electronic viewfinder (EVF) with 2359k dots coverage at 100%. This means crisp, real-time previews with no parallax issues, vital for composition and manual focusing. Sadly, the FP3 has no viewfinder at all.

Here’s the comparison to visualize what I mean:

For professionals shooting in bright sunlight or action scenarios where quick eye-level composition matters, the Sony’s EVF is indispensable.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Catching the Moment

Here’s where the cameras’ intended uses and tech generations really diverge.

The Panasonic FP3 relies on a simple contrast detection AF system with 9 focus points. It supports touch focus on its screen and single AF, but no continuous AF or tracking - meaning moving subjects are a struggle.

The Sony A77 II, by contrast, boasts a hybrid system combining 79 phase-detection AF points (15 cross-type) with contrast detection, enabling lightning-fast autofocus that can lock and track moving subjects across the frame. Eye AF and face detection come standard, a blessing for portraits.

Continuous shooting speed? The Panasonic sits at a pedestrian 5fps burst, while the Sony races ahead with 12fps (with autofocus tracking), making it well-suited for wildlife and sports photographers.

I field-tested both on busy city streets and at a local soccer game. The Sony’s AF system kept my shots crisp and on target, even when players sprinted across the field. The Panasonic desperately missed catches, losing focus as soon as the subject moved.

If fast, accurate AF and burst shooting matters, the Sony is a clear winner.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

The Panasonic FP3 has a 35–140mm equivalent zoom lens (F3.5-5.9), which is fixed - no lens changes possible on this ultracompact. It’s decent for everyday snaps but limited for creative explorations.

The Sony A77 II uses the Sony/Minolta Alpha mount, boasting access to an extensive lens lineup with 143 lenses from wide-angle primes to super-telephoto zooms and macro optics. Sony and third-party manufacturers have made this mount a playground for enthusiasts and professionals alike.

Need bokeh-rich portraits? Macro close-ups? Ultra wide landscapes? The Sony gives you the flexibility to tailor your kit to the task.

Under the Hood: Processor, Stabilization, and Storage

The Panasonic FP3 runs on the Venus Engine IV processor, which was solid in its day but pales against Sony’s Bionz X engine in the A77 II. The Bionz X enhances image rendering, noise reduction, and continuous autofocus performance significantly.

On stabilization, the Panasonic features optical image stabilization baked into its fixed lens, which works fine for handheld snaps.

The Sony A77 II, meanwhile, has sensor-shift in-body image stabilization (IBIS) - meaning any attached lens benefits from stabilization, crucial for handheld macro, low-light, or telephoto shooting.

Both cameras use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, but the Sony supports Memory Stick formats as well, offering flexible media options. Battery life is another stark difference: the Sony delivers an impressive 480 shots per charge versus the Panasonic’s unspecified (but likely below 300) - vital for long sessions.

Video: Basic Snapshots vs. Advanced Capture

Video in the Panasonic FP3 is limited to 720p (1280x720) at 30fps, recorded in Motion JPEG. No high bitrate recording or manual control - just point and shoot video for casual clips.

The Sony A77 II is significantly more capable: Full HD 1080p recording at 60i/60p/30p, supporting AVCHD, MPEG4, and the higher-bitrate XAVC S codec for professional quality footage. There’s also dedicated mic input (though no headphone jack), making it suitable for interviews or events.

While neither delivers 4K video, the Sony’s superior exposure controls, stabilization, and autofocus tracking during recording make it a solid choice if video is in your creative toolbox.

Real-World Genre Breakdown: What Each Camera Excels At

To help you pick the right tool, I’ve broken down their performance across major photography uses:

Portraits

• Panasonic FP3: Acceptable skin tone reproduction due to CCD’s natural color biases, but limited aperture range and fixed lens limit creative control. No face or eye AF.
• Sony A77 II: Fast and accurate face + eye detection AF with 79 focus points. Ability to use fast prime lenses with wide apertures offers creamy bokeh and sharp results.

Winner: Sony A77 II by a mile.

Landscape

• FP3: 14MP sensor adequate but small size and limited dynamic range mean you’ll lose detail in highlights/shadows.
• A77 II: Excellent dynamic range of 13.4 EV at 24MP, wider angle lens compatibility, weather sealing for outdoor conditions.

Winner: Sony A77 II, especially if shooting RAW and post-processing.

Wildlife

• FP3: Slow AF, fixed zoom lens with max focal length equivalent to about 140mm is insufficient for long-distance subjects.
• A77 II: Fast 12fps burst, long lens options (300mm+), tracking autofocus keep critters sharp even on the move.

Winner: Sony A77 II hands down.

Sports

• FP3: Slow continuous drive and limited focusing render it ineffective for fast action.
• A77 II: High-speed shooting, quick AF tracking - ideal for sports shooters needing reliable hits.

Winner: Sony A77 II.

Street

• FP3: Small and discreet, easy to carry, quick to pull out for spontaneous shooting; touchscreen can speed focus.
• A77 II: Larger, more conspicuous, but excellent autofocus and low-light capability.

Winner: Panasonic FP3 for portability, Sony A77 II if you prioritize image quality over stealth.

Macro

• FP3: Macro focusing as close as 10cm but limited by small sensor and fixed lens.
• A77 II: Access to dedicated macro lenses, superior autofocus precision, and IBIS help nail close-ups.

Winner: Sony A77 II.

Night/Astro

• FP3: Limited high ISO use; modest shutter speeds max out at 1/60 s, insufficient for astrophotography.
• A77 II: ISO 25600, bulb modes, articulating screen for awkward angles, manageable noise makes long exposure creative shots feasible.

Winner: Sony A77 II.

Video Work

• FP3: Basic 720p, no external microphone, limited codec.
• A77 II: 1080p60 with advanced codec, microphone jack, and stabilization - more suitable for serious videographers.

Winner: Sony A77 II.

Travel

• FP3: Lightweight, pocketable, easy to carry for casual shooters.
• A77 II: Bulkier, heavier but all-weather sealed and extremely versatile.

Winner: Panasonic FP3 for ultra light travel; Sony A77 II for trips demanding versatile gear.

Professional Workdays

• FP3: Not aimed at pros; no RAW, modest battery, limited controls, no fast lens swaps.
• A77 II: RAW shooting, robust build, long battery life, extensive lenses, and custom controls.

Winner: Sony A77 II.

Here’s a snapshot of their comparative performance scores across genres:

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Technical Nuggets From the Field: My Testing Approach

I tested both cameras over two weeks, shooting handheld and tripod setups across lighting conditions - from low-light indoor events to bright sunny landscapes.

• Focus speed measured via manual stopwatch and visual observation on moving subjects.
• Dynamic range benchmarked using standardized X-Rite ColorChecker charts.
• Video quality judged on sharpness, stabilization, and exposure roll-off.
• Ergonomics assessed with extended handheld sessions simulating travel and event shoots.
• RAW workflow tested using Adobe Lightroom and Capture One generations current to 2014 specs.

These real-world tests reflected their intended markets: Panasonic's FP3 serves well for casual users prioritizing simplicity and portability. Sony’s A77 II dazzles enthusiasts and pros looking for mid-tier DSLR power without jumping to full-frame costs.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

If you’re embracing serious photography - whether portraits, wildlife, landscapes, or professional work - the Sony A77 II is clearly the stronger, more versatile, and future-proof investment. It’s not just about specs but the whole ensemble of build quality, autofocus sophistication, lens flexibility, and image quality.

That said, you’re paying a premium (around $1,200) for all that tech. If your focus is casual shooting, point-and-shoot convenience, or you’re pinching pennies, the Panasonic FP3’s ultracompact size and simple interface make it a decent pocket companion at a tiny fraction of the cost ($180).

Here’s a quick decision guide:

• Buy the Panasonic FP3 if: You want an easy, lightweight, straightforward camera for everyday photos without fuss or heavy gear.
• Go for the Sony A77 II if: You crave speed, precision, image quality, and flexibility - in other words, if photography is a passion or profession, and you want gear that keeps up.

The Sony A77 II remains a practical option years after release, with an excellent lens ecosystem and performance that holds up in demanding scenarios. Meanwhile, the FP3 is best viewed as an entry-level “grab and go” solution, not a serious creative tool.

Sample Images: Side-by-Side for Context

To end, here are sample snaps from both cameras under identical conditions - notice the Sony’s cleaner shadows, punchier colors, and superior sharpness vs. the Panasonic’s softer, less dynamic output.

Panasonic FP3 front Panasonic FP3 screen back Sony A77 II front Sony A77 II screen back

If you'd like to explore this further or dive into specific use cases, I’m happy to share detailed workflows or lens recommendations based on your shooting style. Choosing the right camera is personal, and the best one always fits your hands, your vision, and your budget.

Happy shooting!