Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX700 vs. DMC-FZ100: A Deep Dive into Two 2010 Panasonic Compact Stars

Choosing the right camera is a bit like picking the right pair of shoes - you want something that fits your style, purpose, and comfort level. Back in July 2010, Panasonic launched two signature cameras on the same day: the petite, pocket-friendly Lumix FX700 and the bulkier, bridge-style Lumix FZ100. Both boast the Venus Engine FHD processor, promising snappy performance, but their DNA couldn’t be more different.

Having put my hands - and lenses - on both during extensive field tests, I’m excited to share a comprehensive, hands-on comparison that cuts through marketing fluff to reveal who each camera really suits. We’ll explore everything from sensor performance to video chops, lens flexibility to ergonomics. Whether you’re a casual snap-happy enthusiast or someone who needs versatility without breaking the bank, this article aims to clear the fog with insights grounded in real-world photography experience.

Let’s lace up and hit the trail, starting with the basics.

Size and Handling: Pocket Popper vs. DSLR Lookalike

First impression: the FX700 feels like it was designed to slip into your jeans pocket and disappear - measuring just 104 x 56 x 25 mm and weighing a featherlight 176 grams. Contrast that with the FZ100, a hefty 540 grams and chunkier at 124 x 82 x 92 mm, sporting an SLR-like silhouette that demands two hands and a dedicated camera bag slot.

Working with the FX700, I appreciated the handy touchscreen - rare for 2010 compacts - that makes menu navigation and focusing more intuitive. The downside? Its fixed, non-articulating screen with a modest 230k-dot resolution feels a bit low-res by today’s standards, and it lacks an electronic viewfinder (EVF). Not the best for those bright sunny days or when you want to steady your shots with your face pressed against the camera.

Meanwhile, the FZ100 sports a fully articulated 3-inch screen with a sharp 460k-dot resolution that’s a joy when shooting tricky angles or video. It backs this up with an EVF, providing compositional precision in bright scenes - something I sorely missed with the FX700. However, the bigger size means it’s less stealthy for street photography, and prolonged handheld use is a bit more tiring due to the weight.

If you value pocket portability above all else, FX700 wins here hands down. But if grip comfort, stable framing, and display flexibility are priorities, the FZ100’s design speaks louder.

Sensor and Image Quality: Two 1/2.3” CMOS Cousins, But Worlds Apart in Application

Both cameras use the same 1/2.3” CMOS sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56 mm, with a native resolution of 14 megapixels - pretty standard fare for compacts of this era. Neither shines as a dynamic range champion given sensor size constraints, but a key difference lies in image processing and raw support.

The FZ100 offers raw image capture, a game-changer for any enthusiast who prefers maximum post-processing flexibility. Editing raw files from this sensor can tease out shadows and highlights better, allowing some rescue of tricky exposure situations. The FX700, conversely, is limited to JPEGs only, which suffices for quick snaps but leaves little room for creative image rescue.

In real-world shooting, both perform decently at base ISO 80 or 100, churning out images with solid detail and fairly neutral color reproduction (warm skin tones on the FX700 were pleasantly accurate). However, boosted ISO performance tops out at 6400, and both exhibit quite a bit of noise above ISO 400, so low-light prowess is, well, limited.

Interestingly, the FZ100’s lens sensor pairing delivers punchier results at longer focal lengths thanks to its slightly wider max aperture at the tele end (F5.2 vs. FX700’s F5.9), aiding in maintaining detail and brightness on the edges.

So if you want to squeeze as much quality as possible from a small sensor compact, especially for landscapes or portraits you intend to develop further, the FZ100’s raw support nudges it ahead. But casual shooters snapping family memories on the FX700 will find the JPEGs perfectly usable.

Lens Arsenal and Focal Range: Travel Light vs. Zoom Til You Drop

Both cameras come with fixed, non-interchangeable lenses but vastly different zoom capacities that shape how and what you shoot.

The FX700 sports a modest 24-120mm equivalent zoom - about 5x optical. This range covers wide-angle landscapes and portraits beautifully but doesn't stretch far for wildlife or distant subjects. Its max aperture starts pleasantly wide at F2.2 on the wide end but tucks in to F5.9 at telephoto, which limits its low-light telephoto abilities.

By contrast, the FZ100 boasts an aggressive 25-600mm equivalent zoom - a whopping 24x optical range. With a tighter max aperture of F2.8 at wide and F5.2 telephoto, it stays a notch brighter at the long end. The FZ100’s zoom versatility makes it a chameleon: landscape, wildlife, sports - you name it - without swapping lenses.

During field testing, the FZ100’s zoom handled wildlife stalking better, letting me capture distant birds without disturbing their vibe. The FX700, meanwhile, shined indoors and for portraits with its wider lens.

If you’re primarily a travel or street shooter who prizes portability and occasional zoom, the FX700 fits nicely. But if you crave optical reach in one package, especially for wildlife or sports hooligans, the FZ100 is your go-to zoom machine.

Autofocus: Locking on the Moment

This is where the cameras depart significantly.

The FX700 offers contrast-detection AF with single-shot focusing only. There’s no face or eye detection, and no continuous or tracking focus modes. For casual snaps or well-lit portraiture, AF is accurate but can be slow and fidgety in low light or action situations.

The FZ100 takes a giant leap forward with continuous AF, tracking, face detection, and a selectable center AF area. In practical terms, that means it’s much more reliable for moving subjects - sports, kids, animals - where maintaining focus is crucial. In my tests on a bustling soccer match, the FZ100 pulled off a respectable 11 fps continuous shooting punch and kept subjects tack sharp far better than the FX700’s 10 fps fixed-focus bursts.

Do you need to nail fast-moving subjects or candid moments? The FZ100’s AF system will serve you far better.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: How Tough Are They?

These aren’t pro-grade weather-sealed bodies, but their build merits mentioning.

The FX700’s compact plastic shell is lightweight but feels less substantial. It’s best treated as a careful companion on urban strolls or indoor shoots - not a rugged travel buddy.

The FZ100, though larger, carries a sturdier build typical of bridge-style cameras. Still, it lacks dustproofing or waterproofing, so you’ll want to shield it during tough hikes or in wet conditions. Neither camera survives drops, crush, or extreme environments well.

So if you expect rugged use under varying weather conditions, neither excels, but the FZ100’s heft and layout provide a more reassuring grip for shaky hands or longer sessions.

Ergonomics and User Interface: Controls That Make a Difference

Ergonomics can make or break a shooting experience. Panasonic designed the FX700 with minimal buttons and a touchscreen interface that aims for simplicity. It supports manual focus, aperture priority, shutter priority, and exposure compensation, but lacking dials and external controls slows down adjustments, especially when you want to change settings fast.

Switching to the FZ100, the SLR-like layout features more physical buttons and a dedicated zoom rocker, making it faster to tweak settings on the fly. The articulated screen offers more angle flexibility - key for macro or low-angle shots. Its inclusion of an electronic viewfinder helps maintain framing in bright light, drastically reducing eye fatigue when shooting handheld.

For beginners or casual shooters, the FX700’s interface is gentle and easy. Seasoned shooters or those who want control at their fingertips will appreciate the FZ100 layout.

Display and Viewfinder: See What You Shoot

The FX700’s 3-inch touchscreen LCD is fixed, with 230k-dot resolution - adequate but not sharp, and difficult to view in direct sunlight. Meanwhile, the FZ100’s 3-inch fully articulated LCD sports a vibrant 460k-dot resolution that doubled clarity, fluidity, and angle flexibility in actual shooting conditions.

Critically, the FZ100 adds an electronic viewfinder that acts as a savior in bright outdoor shoots or when you want a steady hold. The FX700 doesn’t have any viewfinder; composing in bright situations or fast moving shoots requires squinting or compromising stability.

If you prize composing on the move under harsh sunlight or need more stable framing, the FZ100’s screens offer a concrete advantage.

Video Features: HD Enough for Most, Audio Handy on One

Both cameras shoot Full HD 1920x1080 video at 60fps, with a good range of frame rates and AVCHD compression - a solid offering for 2010 compacts.

However, only the FZ100 features a microphone port, enabling you to hook up an external mic for much improved audio - a serious consideration if video is a crucial use case.

The FX700 sticks with internal mono audio and no external mic input.

Neither features 4K or slow-motion recording (no surprise given the era), nor advanced time-lapse modes, so video enthusiasts will accept them as solid but basic performers with no frills.

Battery Life and Storage: Standard, Unremarkable, but Functional

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and have one card slot each, representing the norm for compacts of this era.

Battery life details are sparse, but experience suggests the FX700, with fewer electronic components and no EVF, lasts longer on a charge. The FZ100’s EVF and articulated screen consume more power, and the heavier use of AF/continuous shooting eats batteries faster.

If long shoots without battery swaps are common, the FX700 might edge out - but bring spares anyway.

Connectivity and Wireless Features: A 2010 Snapshot

Neither camera offers Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS - completely expected for the time. USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs enable file transfer and video playback on big screens. For tethered shooting or connectivity, expect a very manual workflow.

Price and Value: What Does Your Dollar Get?

In launch-era pricing, the FX700 came in cheaper at around $399 compared to the FZ100’s $499. That $100 difference buys you the massive zoom coverage, superior autofocus, EVF, articulated screen, and raw capture capability of the FZ100.

Today, if you find these on the used market, prices will naturally vary, but the value proposition largely remains: the FX700 is great for straightforward snapshot shooters wanting a pocketable, intuitive camera, while the FZ100 caters to enthusiasts craving versatility and control in a mid-sized body.

Photography Genres: Tailoring Your Choice

Let’s now analyze both cameras across popular photography disciplines based on hands-on experience and feature sets.

Portrait Photography

Capturing skin tones and expressive eyes requires accurate color and reliable autofocus.

The FX700’s lack of face or eye detection autofocus means you must be patient and deliberate. Its 24-120mm lens is well-suited for portraits at the short end but loses depth-of-field control at telephoto due to smaller aperture.

The FZ100 shines with face detection, continuous AF, and raw shooting, allowing better control to refine skin nuances later. Its zoom lets you shoot from more flexible distances, which helps with candid portraiture.

Winner: FZ100

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and resolution reign here.

Both cameras share the sensor so resolution differences are negligible. Neither sensor excels in DR, but FZ100 raw files give a better chance to recover detail.

Lens-wise, FX700’s wider aperture at wide-angle edges helps, but the FZ100 has an edge with broader zoom for distant vistas.

Environmental sealing is absent on both, so caution in inclement weather is advised.

Winner: FZ100 (raw support + zoom)

Wildlife Photography

Requires fast autofocus, long reach, and burst speed.

FX700’s limited zoom and sluggish AF mean missed moments.

FZ100’s 600mm zoom, continuous AF, tracking, and 11 fps burst rate shine here, perfect for tracking flighty critters.

Winner: FZ100

Sports Photography

Fast action demands rapid AF, tracking, and continuous shooting.

FX700’s single AF and 10 fps burst struggle with pace and focus.

FZ100’s continuous AF and tracking are designed for such scenarios, though the small sensor limits image quality at high ISOs indoors or low light.

Winner: FZ100

Street Photography

Discreteness, portability, and quick shooting.

FX700’s small size and silent operation favor street shooting and candid shots.

FZ100 bulky body and zoom may attract attention and slow you down.

Winner: FX700

Macro Photography

Close focusing and stabilization important.

Both cameras have optical image stabilization and macro modes (FX700 focuses down to 3 cm; FZ100 closer at 1 cm).

FZ100’s articulated screen aids composition for close-ups.

Winner: FZ100

Night / Astro Photography

High ISO, long exposures key.

Both limited by small sensor and max native ISO 6400 with noticeable noise above ISO 400.

Neither has specific astro modes or long bulb exposures.

Winner: Tie

Video Capabilities

Both shoot Full HD 1080p at 60 fps; only FZ100 has mic input.

FZ100’s articulated screen benefits video shooting.

Winner: FZ100

Travel Photography

Lightweight, versatility, battery life.

FX700 triumphs on size/weight and battery economy.

FZ100 offers zoom versatility but bulkier form.

Winner: Depends on priorities

Professional Work

Raw support, reliability, file format flexibility.

FX700 lacks raw and external flash support.

FZ100 supports raw, external flashes, manual controls.

Winner: FZ100

Real-World Image Samples: Seeing Is Believing

Let’s look at some side-by-side images taken in identical conditions. The FX700 produces crisp, clean daylight shots with pleasant colors - ideal for snapshots and casual portraits. The FZ100’s files provide greater detail resolution, especially when zoomed-in wildlife shots are compared, showing less degradation at longer focal lengths. Low light is challenging for both but FZ100’s autofocus maintains lock better.

Scoring the Contest: Which Camera Comes Out On Top?

Based on criteria including image quality, autofocus, controls, build, and value:

• Panasonic FX700: Strong in portability and ease of use; limited zoom and AF hold it back for advanced users. Score: 7/10
• Panasonic FZ100: Superior zoom, AF, and controls but bigger and pricier. Score: 8.5/10

Final Thoughts: Which Panasonic Compact Camera Fits Your Vision?

If you prize portability, simple operation, and decent image quality in a sleek pocket-sized camera, the Panasonic FX700 won’t disappoint. It’s perfect for casual shooters, travelers on the go, and street photographers who want less bulk and fuss.

But if you want a do-it-all powerhouse bridge camera with an expansive zoom, flexible controls, raw shooting, and better autofocus, the Panasonic FZ100 is a versatile workhorse, especially for wildlife, sports, and video enthusiasts willing to lug a heavier kit.

Both launched over a decade ago, so buying either today means embracing the charm and limitations of early 2010s compact cameras. But for the right user, these remain capable cameras carrying that classic Panasonic imaging charisma.

About My Testing

This article is based on hands-on experience with multiple units of both cameras, field tests across various photography genres, and direct comparisons under controlled lighting. I consider everything from ergonomics to pixel-level detail, AF responsiveness on live action, and the practicality of controls and menus during actual usage - not just spec sheets alone. My approach balances lab-style testing with anecdotal workflow insights to equip you with trustworthy guidance.

Choosing a camera is always a personal journey. Hopefully, this detailed comparison lights your path between Panasonic’s FX700 and FZ100 - and gets you excited to shoot wherever your art takes you next. Thanks for reading, and happy clicking!