Panasonic FX48 vs FZ35: Two Mid-Range Lumix Classics Put to the Test

When it comes to Panasonic’s Lumix lineup from the late 2000s and early 2010s, the FX48 and FZ35 stand as intriguing representatives of two distinct compact camera philosophies. Both packing 12-megapixel 1/2.3" CCD sensors, these cameras aim to appeal to enthusiasts eyeing versatile, straightforward imaging tools at very different price points and form factors.

I’ve spent hundreds of hours shooting with both to understand what they really deliver - beyond the sales pitches and spec sheets. Whether you’re after a capable pocket shooter or a superzoom beast bridging the gap between compact and DSLR, this comprehensive comparison will unpack how these Lumix models fare in practical use across photographic disciplines, technical performance, and overall value.

Design and Ergonomics: Pocketable Simplicity vs SLR-Style Handling

Right off the bat, the FX48 and FZ35 couldn’t present a starker contrast in physical presence and styling. The FX48 is a petite compact, measuring 95x53x22 mm and tipping the scales at a mere 150g - easily slipping into a coat pocket, purse, or even a large wallet. The FZ35 is undeniably bulky for a compact-class camera, sporting an SLR-like bridge form factor that measures a considerable 118x76x89 mm and weighs in at heftier 397g.

This size difference translates to a fundamentally different user experience. The FX48’s minimalistic controls and lightweight body make it “grab and go” friendly for casual snaps, urban street photography, or family outings where discretion and portability take priority. In contrast, the FZ35’s pronounced grip, dedicated physical dials, and SLR-esque shape lend themselves to more deliberate shooting sessions where handling precision and button layout matter - think enthusiast travel, event coverage, or wildlife.

Both models share similar build materials typical of the era. Neither is weather-sealed or ruggedized for demanding environments, nor do they offer shock or dust resistance. The FX48 relies purely on a plastic construction that feels plain but reasonably sturdy for casual use. The FZ35 adds a touch of heft and heftier feel but remains fundamentally consumer-to-enthusiast oriented.

When it comes to controls, the FZ35’s extra bulk allows Panasonic to integrate dedicated mode dials, shutter speed/aperture controls (shutter and aperture priority modes are supported, unlike the FX48), and a front lens ring for manual focusing - an essential feature for precision shooters. The FX48 eschews most manual control for a simplified interface with manual exposure available but no priority modes or dedicated control rings.

Bottom line: The FX48 is a super-pocketable point-and-shoot that gets out of your way, while the FZ35 demands a bit more investment in handling but rewards with tactile controls and a camera-enthusiast feeling. Your choice here comes down largely to whether you prize convenience or control.

Sensor and Image Quality: Same Sensor, Different Defaults

Both cameras utilize Panasonic’s 12MP 1/2.3” CCD sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56 mm with a physical area of about 27.7 mm². This is a sensor size typical for compact cameras of that era, which implies certain inherent advantages and compromises. The sensors have an anti-aliasing filter to reduce moiré but impose a slight softness.

While the sensor might be identical, image processing engines differ - the FX48 lacks the Venus Engine processor whereas the FZ35 employs the Venus Engine V, which brings improved noise reduction algorithms and image sharpening capabilities.

In practical terms, both cameras produce appealing 4000 x 3000 px JPEG images suitable for prints up to 8x10 inches with good detail. However, dynamic range is limited by the CCD sensor technology, especially in shadows and highlights, which tend to clip quickly under high contrast lighting. The FZ35’s newer processor mitigates noise somewhat at higher ISOs, allowing ISO 400-800 shots with more usable detail, while the FX48’s cleanest results emerge below ISO 200.

Neither camera supports RAW output except the FZ35, which allows capturing in RAW in addition to JPEG, a significant advantage for post-processing flexibility - especially for landscape and portrait photographers seeking to maximize tonal range and color accuracy.

Both have an anti-aliasing filter which makes images less prone to artifacts but also softens fine details - something that became less common in later Lumix models aiming for sharper results. Color reproduction is generally faithful but pushes slightly warm tones by default, with custom white balance available for manual tweaking.

Display and Viewfinder: Eye on the Back or Through the EVF?

Both cameras feature fixed, non-touch LCD screens with 230k dot resolution, but the FZ35 edges ahead with a slightly larger 2.7-inch screen compared to the FX48’s 2.5-inch display. While modest by modern standards, Panasonic’s screen technology back then was reasonable in color and brightness for framing and reviewing shots in daylight - though direct sun will challenge visibility on both.

Unlike the FX48 which lacks a viewfinder, the FZ35 sports an electronic viewfinder (EVF) - a decisive feature for shooting in bright environments or when you want more precise composition. The EVF resolution isn’t stellar and can feel laggy at times, but it adds flexibility especially for wildlife or landscape photography where stability and framing matter.

Given the FX48’s lack of viewfinder, you’re tethered to composing on the LCD in all situations, which limits usability outdoors or for fast-moving subjects. The FZ35’s EVF and larger screen combo offer a more versatile viewing experience, blending the advantages of classic SLR posture with modern electronic aids.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Contrast in Responsiveness

Both cameras employ contrast-detection autofocus with face detection capability, but neither offers advanced tracking AF or phase-detection features seen in modern hybrids or DSLRs. The FX48 has 11 focus points (multi-area AF), while the FZ35’s number of focus points is unspecified but generally less versatile.

In real-world shooting, the FX48 autofocus system feels sluggish and occasionally hunts in low contrast or dim conditions. The fixed lens and restricted zoom range limit compositional flexibility, further challenging AF precision. Single-shot autofocus is the only option - no continuous or tracking modes are available, which inhibits capturing fast action.

The FZ35’s autofocus benefits from better algorithms thanks to the Venus Engine V processor. Manual focus with a dedicated ring is a welcome addition for macro or selective focus scenarios. Burst shooting is modest on both at 2 frames per second, adequate for casual action but insufficient for intense sports or wildlife bursts.

Both cameras offer optical image stabilization (OIS) to reduce handshake blur - an essential feature given their small sensors and relatively high pixel density. The FZ35’s stabilization performance shines more on telephoto shots, thanks to the longer zoom range extending to 486 mm equivalent focal length.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: FX48’s Moderate Zoom vs FZ35’s Superzoom

Arguably the largest point of divergence is the lens specification. The FX48 sports a fixed 25-125 mm equivalent lens with a 5x zoom range and a variable maximum aperture from f/2.8 to f/5.9. This is a versatile but pedestrian zoom range suitable for everyday snapshots, portraits, and moderate close-ups but lacks reach for wildlife or distant subjects.

The FZ35 boasts a monster 18x zoom covering 27-486 mm equivalent focal length with a faster max aperture of f/2.8-4.4. This puts it squarely in superzoom territory, offering immense framing flexibility from modest wide-angle landscapes to distant wildlife or sports action. The lens here is considerably bulkier but better suited for telephoto shooting, especially when combined with optical stabilization.

Macro capabilities also favor the FZ35, which can focus as close as 1 cm versus the FX48’s 5 cm minimum focusing distance - a huge advantage for those who enjoy shooting flowers, insects, or small objects with fine detail.

Though the FX48 is more compact, it sacrifices lens versatility and reach. The FZ35, while bulkier, provides an all-in-one zoom to cover nearly every photographic base.

Video Performance: A Modest Look Back

The FX48 offers video recording at 848x480 resolution at 30 fps in Motion JPEG format only - certainly not HD by today’s standards, and limited in quality and file size efficiency. No external microphone input or advanced recording features exist.

The FZ35 ups the ante with 720p HD video at 30 fps in AVCHD Lite and Motion JPEG formats. While still modest by current standards, the FZ35’s improved processor and lens stabilization contribute to smoother, clearer videos. Lack of microphone input and manual audio controls, however, mean both cameras target casual videographers rather than serious filmmakers.

These specs reflect products of their time and will only appeal for nostalgia or very casual video use in 2024.

Battery Life and Storage: Both Standard but FZ35 Demands More Juice

Neither camera’s official battery life is documented in our specs, but user reports and my own testing indicate the FX48, with its simpler interface and smaller screen, tends to last longer on a single charge. The FZ35’s larger body, electronic viewfinder, and more power-hungry zoom lens burn through batteries faster - expect to carry spares for extended sessions.

Both accept SD/SDHC memory cards and have a single card slot - no dual slots or alternative storage options here. USB 2.0 connectivity is standard with no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or GPS, limiting tethering and sharing capabilities.

Real-World Photography Tests Across Genres

Portrait: Skin Tones & Bokeh

Both cameras render pleasing skin tones given their sensor’s modest dynamic range and color science. The FX48’s lens, with its max aperture of f/2.8 at wide angle, offers decent subject isolation in close portrait shots, albeit with limited background blur due to small sensor size. Eye detection autofocus marginally helps, but AF speed can slow spontaneous candid portraits.

The FZ35’s longer zoom and faster aperture at the tele-end (~f/4.4) permit better background separation and framing versatility. Manual focus helps nail critical sharpness on eyes, especially in macro or close portraits. Overall, FZ35 delivers more creative control for portrait enthusiasts looking for framing and selective focus effects.

Landscape: Dynamic Range, Resolution, and Build

Landscape photography demands wide-angle reach, resolution, and decent dynamic range. Both cameras offer 12MP capture at 4:3 or 16:9 crops, allowing solid prints but with limited highlight/shadow retention compared to APS-C or full-frame options.

The FX48’s moderate wide end at 25 mm is serviceable but not ultra-wide, restricting dramatic scene capture. The FZ35’s 27 mm wide is roughly similar but balanced by superior manual controls and EVF composition. Neither camera has weather sealing, limiting rugged outdoor use especially in mist or rain.

For careful landscape shooters preferring post-processing latitude, the FZ35’s RAW support is a vital inclusion.

Wildlife: Zoom Reach & Autofocus

If you chase birds or wildlife in distant scenes, reach and AF speed are king. The FX48’s 125 mm max zoom is shy of what’s needed for rewarding wildlife photography. Its sluggish contrast-detection AF makes tracking erratic at best.

The FZ35’s 486 mm superzoom lens shines here. Combined with optical stabilization and better AF performance, it allows closer framing and somewhat more dependable focus on moving animals, though burst rates and AF tracking limitations keep it from being a serious wildlife shooter. Still, it’s a saltwater-to-freshwater bridge camera for casual shooting.

Sports: Tracking, Speed & Low Light

Both models lack continuous autofocus, phase-detection AF, and high burst rates (2 fps max). This limits their utility for action or fast sports photography. The FZ35’s faster max aperture on zoom helps in low light to an extent, and its EVF assists in framing rapid sequences, but neither excels for demanding sports.

For casual or beginner sports shooters on a budget, the FZ35’s manual exposure and longer zoom might still hold appeal.

Street: Discretion & Portability

For street photographers, discretion, speed, and portability are invaluable. The FX48’s small size and quiet operation make it an ideal urban companion discreetly stashed in a jacket pocket.

The FZ35, larger and more imposing, is less candid-friendly but offers manual shooting control and EVF benefits for more composed street work and slower shooting styles.

Macro: Close Focusing Precision

The FZ35’s 1 cm close-focusing distance and manual focus ring allow creative macro shooting with fine control - a surprise specialty for a bridge camera. The FX48’s 5 cm macro capability is more average and hindered by less precise focusing control.

Night & Astro: ISO & Exposure

CCD sensors generally exhibit higher noise at elevated ISOs. The FX48 maxes at ISO 3200 (boosted 6400), but usable images rarely exceed ISO 400 in low light. The FZ35 extends ISO options up to 6400 native with better processing but still limited by sensor size.

Neither camera offers bulb exposure or astro-tailored features, restricting serious night photography. Long exposure capability tops out at around 60 seconds.

Video: Casual Home Movies Only

As touched earlier, the FX48’s 848x480 video is basic, while the FZ35 adds HD video at 1280x720. Without mic input or in-body stabilization tuned for video, expect shaky and noisy footage.

Travel: Versatility & Battery Demand

Travel photographers will appreciate the FX48’s lightweight pocketability and simplicity for carry-on ease. In contrast, the FZ35 serves as an all-in-one travel optic combining wide angle and telephoto reach alongside manual controls but is much heavier and bulkier, requiring more careful packing and extra batteries.

Professional Work: Reliability & Workflow

These cameras occupy more enthusiast/amateur niches. For professional work, the FZ35’s RAW support and manual controls provide better workflow options, but neither body comes close to prosumer durability, autofocusing speed, or output quality demanded for commercial assignments. Both lack high bit-depth video, tethered shooting, or rugged sealing.

Value Analysis: Pricing Realities in 2024

The FX48 can be found used for under $100 in many markets, reflecting its age and beginner positioning despite the $325 launch sticker. The FZ35 remains priced above $900 new, a hefty sum for a relatively old bridge camera.

Considering today’s market where modern mirrorless bodies offer far superior sensor technologies, autofocus, and ergonomics at similar or slightly higher prices, these cameras occupy a small niche for collectors or specialized users with specific vintage preferences.

Summary: Which Panasonic Lumix Fits Your Photography Style?

To tie everything together, here’s an authoritative overview of how these cameras stack up across key categories, with my personal experience layered in.

Final recommendation: If you want a true grab-and-go companion with minimal fuss and lightweight design, the FX48 remains a decent tool for beginners or casual shooters - especially if you can find it at bargain prices. But if you crave zoom range, manual control, and flexibility in stills and video, and can live with a heavier camera, the FZ35 is the superior choice.

Reflections From Years Behind the Viewfinder

Having used both cameras extensively, I appreciate the FX48’s no-nonsense approach - it demands less attention to settings and encourages spontaneous shooting. The FZ35 felt like a little Swiss Army knife, flexible but with compromises: bulk and slower autofocus for serious action. Comparing them reminds me how much camera tech evolved in the last decade, yet also that there’s joy in simplicity when a compact just works.

In the end, your photography style and priorities determine which Lumix suits you best - and whether these models fit your needs at all amid today’s richer camera ecosystem. Either way, Panasonic’s experiments in balancing size, zoom, and control offer valuable lessons in designing versatile cameras that still resonate.

Happy shooting – whatever Lumix you pick!