Panasonic FX700 vs Panasonic GF3: A Hands-On Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

Choosing a camera is about more than just specs on paper - it’s about how those numbers translate into your creative workflow, the kinds of images you want to capture, and your style behind the lens. I’ve spent over 15 years field-testing hundreds of cameras, from compact point-and-shoots to professional DSLRs and mirrorless systems. Today, we dive deep into two Panasonic models that might be overlooked in the shadow of more hyped releases but still pack some unique qualities:

• The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX700, a small sensor compact from 2010, designed for straightforward portability and ease of use.

• The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3, an entry-level mirrorless from 2011, offering a Micro Four Thirds sensor and interchangeable lenses.

These two cameras sit in very different categories - one is a pocketable compact, the other a mirrorless with a much bigger sensor and lens ecosystem. So, is it worth stepping up to the GF3, or does the FX700 hold its own? Let’s take a seasoned look at their real-world performance across photography styles, tech specs, and usability.

First Impressions: Size, Weight, and Handling

Starting with the physicals because, well, you’ll be holding this camera a lot - so ergonomics matter. The FX700 is truly compact and sleek, measuring a mere 104 x 56 x 25 mm and weighing in at just 176 grams. The GF3 is bigger and chunkier, clocking at 108 x 67 x 32 mm and 264 grams on its own. That’s roughly 50% heavier - not bad, but you certainly notice the difference in a pocket or quick grab-‘n-go scenario.

In practice, the FX700 fits comfortably in almost any pocket or small bag, making it ideal for quick street shots or as a backup camera during travel. But don’t expect giant rubberized grips or heavy-duty durability - that slimness trades off ruggedness.

The GF3 feels more substantial and has a bit more heft without being overbearing. Its rangefinder-style mirrorless body offers a somewhat sturdier grip, though the plastic construction keeps it light overall. For sticking longer lenses on and moving around thoughtfully, I find the GF3 more satisfying to hold for extended sessions.

Ergonomically, neither has a dedicated viewfinder, leaning on LCD use for framing (more on that later). Button layouts and dials are simple and straightforward on both, but the GF3 pulls ahead with a slightly larger body to accommodate more tactile controls.

Viewing and Interface: What You See Is What You Get

Screens make a huge difference, especially when there’s no optical or electronic viewfinder (EVF) in play. Both have 3-inch LCDs, but the FX700’s screen clocks in at 230k dots resolution and the GF3 doubles this with 460k dots plus improved viewing angles.

The GF3’s display is noticeably sharper and brighter, which means easier focusing and menu navigation outdoors. The FX700’s screen feels a bit dim and washed-out under direct sunlight, forcing you to hunt for shading or rely on experience when manual focusing.

Both support touchscreen functionality, but the GF3’s implementation is generally more responsive and fluid, letting you set focus points or navigate menus quicker. The FX700’s touchscreen can feel a little sluggish or unrefined by comparison.

On the software side, the GF3 includes more customizable settings, thanks to its interchangeable lens system and advanced shooting modes. The FX700 opts for simplicity - good for beginners, maybe frustrating for experienced shooters wanting deeper control.

Sensor and Image Quality: Size Matters More Than Ever

This is where the battle gets interesting. The FX700 is equipped with a 1/2.3" CMOS sensor, measuring roughly 6.08 x 4.56 mm, delivering 14 megapixels. Meanwhile, the GF3 sports a much larger Micro Four Thirds sensor (17.3 x 13 mm) with 12 megapixels.

From over a decade of testing, I can confidently say that sensor size is often THE biggest factor influencing image quality. Larger sensors collect more light, deliver better dynamic range, and handle noise at high ISO settings more gracefully. Let’s break down what that means here:

• Dynamic range: The GF3’s sensor catches around 10.1 EV stops, while the FX700’s smaller sensor can’t match that breadth. This gap plays out in shadow and highlight retention - especially in challenging lighting like sunsets, landscape scenes, and high-contrast portraits.

• Noise performance: At low ISOs, both deliver clean images. But pushing beyond ISO 800, the FX700’s image quality quickly degrades with noticeable noise and detail loss. The GF3 maintains usable images well up to ISO 1600 or even ISO 3200 depending on shooting conditions.

• Resolution: Ironically, the FX700 edges out on pixel count by a tiny margin - 14MP vs. 12MP. However, more pixels on a smaller sensor often mean smaller photosites, which can increase noise and reduce low-light performance despite higher nominal resolution.

• Color depth and rendering: The GF3, thanks to its mature sensor and Venus Engine FHD processor, produces richer colors with more natural skin tones. The FX700 sometimes leans towards oversaturated or punchy hues in JPEGs, which beginners might enjoy but pros often correct in post.

Real-world tip: If you shoot mostly daylight or well-lit scenes, the FX700’s image quality is respectable - particularly given its compact size. But if you need versatility or expect to shoot in dim or variable lighting, the GF3’s sensor advantage becomes very noticeable.

Lens and Focusing: The Heart of the System

Now here’s the fundamental difference: The FX700 sports a fixed lens with a 5x zoom range from 24-120mm (35mm equivalent), aperture F2.2-5.9, while the GF3 uses the Micro Four Thirds mount, compatible with over 100 lenses ranging from ultra-wide primes to super-tele zooms.

If you crave flexibility and optical quality, the GF3 wins hands down. I’ve mounted primes like the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 on it and been blown away by sharpness, bokeh, and low-light capabilities that the fixed zoom on the FX700 simply can’t compete with.

Regarding autofocus (AF), the FX700 uses contrast-detection AF with a single focus point (no face or eye detection, unfortunately) and AF speed is modest - adequate for casual snapshots but frustrating for fast-moving subjects. Continuous AF and tracking aren’t supported.

The GF3, on the other hand, features 23 focus points with contrast-detection AF, plus face detection and AF tracking, which impresses in real-life shooting. It’s not blisteringly fast by recent standards but more than sufficient for portraits, street, and even casual wildlife photography at moderate distances.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speed: Catching The Moment

Burst shooting speed matters if you’re shooting sports, animals, or kids - anything with unpredictable movement. The FX700 offers a rapid 10 frames per second continuous shooting mode, but it's limited by buffer size and autofocus capabilities. Also, it lacks continuous AF in burst, so the focus locks on the first frame, which can result in missed shots.

The GF3 provides a slower 3 fps burst mode, but with continuous autofocus and tracking. This slower frame rate is a tradeoff, yet you get better-focused shots over multiple frames, which can be more valuable than quantity for many users.

Regarding shutter speed, the FX700 maxes out at a fairly slow 1/2000 sec, which limits action freezing and shooting wide-open in bright daylight. The GF3 improves on this with a maximum 1/4000 sec shutter speed, allowing better control over exposure and motion capture.

Flash and Low-Light Capability

Both cameras come with built-in flashes - the FX700’s flash reaches around 7.4 meters, while the GF3’s is rated a little lower (6.3 meters). Both offer common flash modes (Auto, On, Off, Red-eye reduction, Slow Sync), but no external flash support, limiting professional flash setups.

In practical low-light shooting, the GF3’s larger sensor and use of fast prime lenses can dramatically outperform the FX700, despite the smaller flash range. The FX700’s built-in image stabilization helps a bit, but since it’s a small sensor with a slower lens at telephoto, noise is an issue in dim scenarios.

Video Capabilities: HD Done Smooth

Both cameras provide Full HD video at 1080p/60fps and AVCHD encoding. The GF3 additionally supports Motion JPEG format, offering a bit more flexibility for editing.

Neither supports 4K or advanced video features like external microphone input, focus peaking, or zebras - unsurprising for cameras in this price and era.

Image stabilization in video mode only exists in the FX700 - its optical stabilization provides smoother handheld footage. The GF3 relies on lens stabilization if available, but bodies don’t have IBIS (in-body image stabilization).

If casual HD video is your goal, the FX700’s built-in stabilization gives it a slight edge for run-and-gun shooting, but the GF3's larger sensor enables better background separation and low-light video quality.

Battery Life and Storage

Here, the GF3 is a clear winner, rated for around 300 shots per charge, thanks to its dedicated rechargeable lithium-ion battery. The FX700’s official battery life isn’t specified, but compact compacts generally hover around 200-250 shots on equivalent batteries.

Both use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and offer single card slots. The GF3's dedicated battery design means you can easily swap extras for longer shoots, whereas the FX700’s smaller battery size limits endurance.

Connectivity and Build

Both cameras lack Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC - common for their generation. HDMI out and USB 2.0 are standard for image transfer and video output.

Build-wise, neither offer weather sealing or rugged features. They should be handled with care, especially when shooting outdoors.

Real-World Performance Across Photography Disciplines

To give practical flavor to these specs, here’s how each camera stacks up in major photography genres, based on hands-on shooting and field testing.

Panasonic FX700 front Panasonic FX700 screen back Panasonic GF3 front Panasonic GF3 screen back

Portrait Photography

The GF3’s larger sensor and interchangeable lens system (particularly with fast primes) provide creamy bokeh, excellent skin tone reproduction, and precision focusing with face detection. The FX700’s 5x zoom is convenient but limited by slower aperture and lack of face/eye AF. Skin tones can appear flat under mixed lighting.

Landscape Photography

The GF3 shines with dynamic range and crisp detail, ideal for sweeping vistas and varied light conditions. RAW capture means you can squeeze more out in post-processing. The FX700's JPEG-only output and restricted dynamic range limit post-crop tweaks. Its smaller sensor also results in less fine detail capture.

Wildlife Photography

Neither camera targets high-speed wildlife shooters. The FX700’s burst speed (10fps) is intriguing but limited by slow AF and fixed lens reach. The GF3, paired with a telezoom, offers better autofocus tracking but slower burst rate. For serious wildlife, larger sensor systems with fast phase-detect AF are better.

Sports Photography

Again, the GF3’s continuous AF and manual exposure controls give a better chance at capturing fast action, despite a modest 3 fps burst. The FX700’s fast 10 fps burst is hamstrung by locked focus on the first frame.

Street Photography

FX700’s pocketability and discreetness win points here - easy to whip out quickly. However, the GF3’s silent electronic shutter (available on some MFT lenses) can be quieter, and faster burst with AF tracking aids spontaneity.

Macro Photography

The FX700 offers macro focus down to 3 cm, which is respectable for a compact. The GF3 relies on lenses for close-focus capability, but the MFT lens ecosystem includes options with extreme macro capabilities, as well as better manual focusing aids.

Night and Astro Photography

The GF3’s superior ISO performance and RAW support make shooting stars and night scenes more rewarding. The FX700’s limited ISO ceiling, smaller sensor, and no RAW limit its astro use.

Video Use

For HD video, both can shoot 1080p at 60fps, but FX700’s in-camera image stabilization helps handheld shakers. The GF3’s larger sensor offers shallower DOF for creative video, albeit without IBIS.

Travel Photography

FX700's compact size appeals strongly to travelers prioritizing light carry. The GF3 brings versatility through lenses but at the cost of more gear and weight.

Professional Work

Neither camera targets professional use, with no weather sealing, limited file flexibility (only GF3 supports RAW), and modest durability.

Build Quality and Controls Detail

Both cameras have minimalist layouts, but the GF3 offers a bit more flexibility with custom buttons and easier access to settings via touch. The FX700 keeps things simple - great for beginners but restrictive for advanced users.

Sensor and Image Quality Summary with Benchmarks

Despite specs some might find intimidating, the GF3 scores better in nearly every quality metric from color depth to low-light ISO capability. The FX700 trails as expected from a small sensor compact.

Genre-specific Strengths and Weaknesses at a Glance

This visual sums it well: GF3 leads in portrait, landscape, and low-light performance; FX700 holds a niche in portability and casual daylight snapshots.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

So, which Panasonic deserves your wallet and keeps your creative juices flowing? Here’s my take distilled from extensive real-world testing:

Choose the Panasonic FX700 if…

• You want a truly pocketable, easy-to-use compact for casual shooting and travel.

• Portability and simplicity are paramount over image quality or interchangeable lens flexibility.

• You mostly shoot in good lighting and value fast zoom range handy for snapshots.

• Your budget is around $400, and you want an all-in-one solution without fuss.

Choose the Panasonic GF3 if…

• You want to step into mirrorless photography with a large, versatile lens ecosystem.

• You care about image quality, RAW capture, and better low-light performance.

• You want more manual control, face detection autofocus, and customizable features.

• You’re willing to carry a bit more weight for creative flexibility and plan to grow your kit.

Closing Note

Remember that both of these cameras debuted over a decade ago. If budget allows, exploring newer Panasonic Lumix models or competing mirrorless systems - many now with EVFs, faster AF, and 4K video - might serve you better for longevity and versatility.

Still, the FX700 remains a charming little pocket shooter, while the GF3 can be a fine entry point into creative photography, especially equipped with sharp primes.

I hope this comparison gives you grounded insights, stripped of hype, to find your perfect fit behind the lens.

Happy shooting!

• • Article by a lifelong camera tester and photography storyteller, with lens cap always off.*