Panasonic FS42 vs Samsung TL240

Choosing Between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS42 and Samsung TL240: A Deep Dive Into Two Ultracompacts

When it comes to ultracompact cameras, the market often teeters between convenience and capability. Both the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS42 and the Samsung TL240 are intriguing options from the late 2000s to early 2010s, aiming at casual shooters who want more than a smartphone can offer but without lugging around professional gear.

Having extensively tested various ultracompacts over a decade, it’s clear that not all cameras in this category are created equal. They offer varying compromises on sensor, lens, ergonomics, and functionality, which directly impact how you shoot across different photography disciplines. This detailed comparison between the FS42 and TL240 draws on hands-on experience, examining technical specs alongside real-world usability, image quality, and value. Plus, I’ll highlight who each camera truly suits and why.

Let’s start by sizing them up - literally.

Pocket Fit and Handling: Size Matters More Than You’d Think

Looking at the Panasonic FS42 and Samsung TL240 side-by-side, the first thing you notice is their sheer portability, a key ultracompact asset. The FS42 measures 98x55x22mm and weighs just 132 grams, while the TL240 is slightly larger at 104x58x20mm with a heavier 160 grams.

That slim profile of the TL240 is deceptive because the longer lens and larger screen (more on that shortly) make it feel a touch more substantial in-hand. I prefer how the FS42's slimmer edges sit when you grip it - resting more comfortably between fingers, partly due to its rounded chassis. The TL240’s flat sides and bigger lens barrel add extra girth, which some might find more stable; others may find it less pocket-friendly.

Neither has a dedicated grip, which is expected for ultracompacts, but weight distribution matters here - the TL240’s front-heavy design can feel a bit unbalanced, especially when zoomed in. The FS42 manages better balance from body to lens, making handheld shooting at telephoto ranges a bit easier.

Later, you’ll see why the TL240 packs a longer zoom lens - but you trade off some ergonomic ease for extended reach.

Control Layout and Top Panel Features: Quick Access in Snappy Shoots

The FS42 opts for a barebones approach - just the standard shutter button and zoom control on top, along with a power switch. The TL240, by contrast, integrates a touchscreen interface on back (more soon), which compensates for fewer physical buttons but adds complexity for quick access.

From personal use, I find the TL240’s touchscreen a double-edged sword. Yes, it’s great for navigating menus and reviewing shots, but it lacks tactile reassurance in fast-paced street or wildlife shooting scenarios. FS42’s physical buttons, while minimal, provide more immediate feedback. But note the FS42’s lack of customizable controls - no manual exposure modes or advanced settings - limiting control for enthusiasts.

Neither camera has a dedicated dial for shutter or aperture priority - both target novice users who appreciate point-and-shoot simplicity. So if you want manual control, neither delivers.

Imaging Powerhouses: Sensor Size and Resolution Face-off

One of the most telling differences is in sensor specification. The FS42 uses a 1/2.5-inch CCD sensor with 10 megapixels. The TL240 upgrades to a slightly larger 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor featuring 14 megapixels.

On paper, the TL240 holds an advantage with greater resolution and a moderately bigger sensor area (28.07mm² vs 24.74mm²). This results in potentially sharper images with finer detail retention, especially noticeable when cropping or printing larger formats.

But I have to emphasize: sensor size alone doesn’t govern image quality. Lens optics, sensor processing, ISO performance, and image pipeline matter greatly too.

In practical tests, the TL240 consistently delivered crisper images with less visible noise at ISO 400 and 800 - thanks partly to its optical image stabilization (more on that next). The FS42, with no stabilization and older processing tech, showed more motion blur and grain creeping in early beyond ISO 200.

Both cameras feature CCD sensors, which traditionally deliver pleasing color palettes, but lag behind modern CMOS in dynamic range and noise control. So in very contrasty scenes, both cameras struggle with blown highlights and shadow detail, although the TL240’s slight sensor improvement helps it edge out the FS42.

Viewing Your Shots: Screens and Interface Ease

Here is where the TL240 shines with a 3.5-inch touchscreen LCD at 230k dots, significantly larger and more resolute than the FS42’s fixed 2.5-inch, 230k dot non-touch screen.

I especially appreciate the TL240’s touchscreen design for quick menu navigation and tap-to-focus during live view shooting. For newcomers or casual shooters, this modern interface feels intuitive. It also allows some brushing up of exposure tweaks without diving deep into buttons.

The FS42’s smaller screen, though lower resolution, remains functional and flush within the compact body. But no touchscreen means slower menu adjustments and more button mashing.

Neither has an electronic viewfinder (EVF), which is typical at this category and price point.

Lens Versatility: Zoom Ranges and Aperture Realities

The FS42 sports a 33-132mm equivalent zoom range (4x optical zoom) with a maximum aperture of f/2.8 at wide angle, narrowing to f/5.9 telephoto. The TL240 pushes this further with 31-217mm (7x optical zoom), but with a slower f/3.3-5.5 aperture.

Longer reach on the TL240 makes it attractive for wildlife or sports shooters needing a slight telephoto advantage in a pocketable form. On the flip side, the FS42’s faster wide aperture makes it a tad better in low light or for background separation in portraits.

Neither lens features optical manual control or exceptional sharpness beyond the center, but the TL240’s built-in optical stabilization counters handshake at longer focal lengths effectively - a lasting boon for shooting without a tripod.

Autofocus: Getting Your Subject in Sharp Focus

Both cameras rely on contrast-detection autofocus, which is standard for compact cameras. However, the TL240 includes face detection plus basic AF tracking and multi-area focus, while FS42 only has simple single-area AF.

I found the TL240 more reliable at acquiring and holding focus on moving subjects in daylight conditions, thanks not only to AF tracking but also its larger sensor and faster lens. The FS42’s autofocus can feel sluggish and hunts more, which sometimes results in missed shots, especially in dynamic scenes like sports or wildlife.

Neither camera offers phase detection autofocus or continuous AF with high burst modes, limiting use for professional-speed photography.

Shooting Speeds and Buffer Limits

The FS42 manages just 2 frames per second burst shooting max, while the TL240 doesn’t specify continuous speed well but is comparable if not slightly faster.

Given their modest buffers and image processing, neither camera suits rapid-fire sports photography. They’re really designed for casual shooting rather than pro-speed capture.

Flash Performance and Modes

Both models include built-in flashes with multiple modes. The FS42 offers Flash range up to 6.3 meters, slightly better than TL240’s 5 meters. The TL240, however, provides a richer flash mode palette with fill-in and slow-sync besides standard auto and red-eye reduction.

This gives TL240 some creative flash flexibility, useful for challenging lighting like portraits or ambient fills.

Video Capabilities: Limitations and Potential

Neither camera is a video powerhouse. The FS42 caps video at 848x480 at 30 fps, while the TL240 improves on that with 1280 x 720 HD at 30 fps.

Both record in the dated Motion JPEG format, generating large files, and lack external mic or headphone jacks - so audio quality is compromised.

Stabilization in the TL240 helps handheld videos appear smoother, a small but meaningful advantage when shooting on the go. Expect basic, entry-level video quality suitable for casual snaps or social media sharing.

Practical Usability: Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Battery details aren’t explicitly published for the FS42, but it relies on proprietary lithium-ion batteries. Similarly, the TL240 uses its SLB-11A model. Both are rated reasonably for typical day shoots but can be limiting for extended travel or event coverage.

Storage-wise, the FS42 accommodates SD/SDHC cards; the TL240 uses MicroSD/MicroSDHC - this might affect your choice if you already own memory cards. Neither supports dual slots or USB 3.0, which feels dated by today’s standards.

On connectivity, both rely on USB 2.0 for image transfer; no wireless features, Bluetooth, or GPS exist, so no remote shooting or geotagging is possible natively.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Going Into Challenging Environments

Neither camera offers weatherproofing, dustproofing, or shock resistance. That means you should keep them dry and treat them delicately outdoors.

Both bodies are plastic with standard finishes typical for consumer ultracompacts. I’ve tested drops from pocket height and typical daily wear - they survive light bumps but are not rugged.

Cementing Your Choice: Practical Examples Across Photography Types

Panasonic FS42 front Panasonic FS42 screen back Samsung TL240 screen back

Portrait Photography

In close-up portrait situations, the FS42’s faster aperture at wide angle and modest zoom works well for softly separating skin tones with a subtle background blur. But the smaller sensor can struggle with noise at indoor lighting beyond ISO 100.

The TL240’s longer zoom enables flattering head-to-shoulders framing from a distance and its optical stabilization keeps shots sharp. However, slower aperture means less bokeh. Face detection autofocus helps nail eye sharpness in daylight.

Landscape Photography

Both cameras compete fairly on landscape with sensor resolutions giving moderate detail. The TL240’s better dynamic range helps preserve clouds and shadows a bit better, and larger screen helps in composing.

Neither delivers serious weather sealing or RAW output, so editing control is limited. If shooting outdoors, carry a lens hood or shade due to flare susceptibility.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Here, the TL240’s 7x zoom and stabilization win hands-down, helping capture distant subjects steadier. Autofocus tracking capabilities, though basic, are better than the FS42’s.

The FS42 lags on burst speed, AF tracking, and zoom reach, limiting use for action shooters.

Street Photography

If discretion and pocketability are your priorities, the FS42’s lighter, more compact design edges it on. Both are quiet, with minimal shutter noise.

The TL240’s touchscreen can slow reaction times in fast street moments, but better autofocus accuracy is a plus for capturing spontaneous shots.

Macro Photography

Both offer macro focussing, but the TL240 reaches down to 1cm, much closer than FS42’s 5cm minimum. This advantage yields sharper, more detailed close-ups, essential for flowers, insects, or product shots.

Night and Astro Photography

High ISO performance is weak on both given their sensor generation. The TL240’s optical stabilization aids longer handheld exposures, but neither is ideal for astro shots or low light creative work.

Video

The TL240 supports 720p HD video, whereas the FS42 only records VGA resolution. If video quality and stability matter, TL240 is the better pick.

Wrapping Up Performance Ratings and Genre Analysis

Bringing it all together, the TL240 scores higher overall due to superior sensor specs, longer zoom, stabilized optics, touch interface, and HD video. It is more versatile for wildlife, sports, macro, and casual video shooters.

The FS42 trades some of these for smaller size, slightly better aperture at wide angle, and simpler controls - suited for casual portraits, landscape, and easy street shooting where pocketability wins.

Final Verdict: Who Should Buy Which?

Choose Panasonic FS42 if you want:

• The absolute smallest and lightest camera to fit in any pocket
• A slightly brighter lens for easier indoor or portrait photography
• Simpler physical controls without a touchscreen interface
• Basic image quality without zoom obsession
• A beginner-friendly, casual point-and-shoot focused on ease

Choose Samsung TL240 if you want:

• Longer zoom reach for wildlife and sports-like shots in a pocket camera
• Optical image stabilization for sharper photos and steadier videos
• Higher resolution sensor for more detailed images and prints
• Touchscreen interface and extra flash modes for creative control
• HD video recording capabilities

Closing Reflections From My Experience

Though both ultracompacts feel a bit dated compared to modern smartphones and mirrorless cameras, understanding their strengths and weaknesses is vital for collectors, casual photographers on a budget, or those seeking a simple lightweight second camera.

I’ve put both through various scenarios, using standardized tests like ISO noise evaluation, autofocus tracking sample sequences, and real-world shooting in parks and urban settings. The TL240’s improvements in sensor and optics stand out clearly, but the FS42 still captures the charm of pure simplicity and compactness.

Ultimately, your choice hinges on the trade-offs you accept: longer zoom and stabilization versus smaller body and faster lens.

Feel free to drop me questions about specific shooting scenarios you care about, and happy camera hunting!

For detailed specs, sample images, and more side-by-side shots, refer to the included image gallery above to see how these two stack up in frame quality and user interface.