Panasonic FX700 vs Sony HX9V: A Detailed Head-to-Head of Two Compact Powerhouses from the Early 2010s

When it comes to early-2010s compact cameras, it’s easy to dismiss them as relics before the mirrorless boom, but these models tell a fascinating story about the evolutionary period of small sensor compacts pushing versatility in tiny packages. I’ve spent a good handful of hours side-by-side with Panasonic’s Lumix DMC-FX700 (hereafter, FX700) and Sony’s Cyber-shot DSC-HX9V (just HX9V) - two cameras that arguably aimed to bridge casual shooting convenience and creative manual control while packing respectable zoom ranges.

This comparison pulls back the curtain - from sensor technology to ergonomics, autofocus quirks to video chops - to help you decide if one of these compact champs deserves a spot in your bag or collection today. Whether you’re an enthusiast looking for a capable second camera or just curious about these vintage marvels, I’ll share hands-on experience balanced with tech insights for meaningful judgment.

Let’s dive in.

Getting a Feel for It: Design, Size & Handling in Real Life

At first glance, both the FX700 and HX9V embrace the classic compact DNA, but the differences become clear once you hold them.

The FX700, measuring a neat 104 x 56 x 25 mm and weighing a lightweight 176 grams, feels exceptionally pocketable - no awkward bulges, just a slim, easy-to-tuck body. This makes it an attractive choice for street photography or travel where discretion and portability are essential. Its minimalist, almost square shape is a bit old-school but charmingly practical.

The HX9V doesn’t try to shy away from its slightly heftier stature at 105 x 59 x 34 mm, weighing 245 grams. It’s notably thicker, partly because of the superzoom mechanism. That added bulk translates to a more substantial grip, which I found reassuring during longer handheld sessions, especially when using the 16x zoom extended. If you appreciate a commanding hold, HX9V delivers even if it means sacrificing slipperiness in jacket pockets.

Looking at controls, both share a relatively straightforward button layout. However, Panasonic’s FX700 benefits from a touchscreen-enabled 3-inch LCD (albeit modest 230k dots). This touch feature simplifies focus point selection and menu navigation - a modern convenience even today. In contrast, the HX9V sports Sony’s renowned 3-inch XtraFine LCD with TruBlack technology, boasting a sharp 921k dot resolution, resulting in visibly crisper previews and easier menu readability in bright conditions. Unfortunately, Sony sticks with a more traditional button interface without touchscreen support - fine for seasoned shooters, but novices might miss the FX700’s interactive flair.

Overall, these differences already hint at who might prefer which: portability and touchscreen ease versus robust feel and crystal-clear display.

Underneath the Hood: Sensor and Image Quality Deep Dive

Image sensors are the beating heart of any camera, and here both models house a tightly matched 1/2.3-inch sensor, but with some nuances:

• Panasonic FX700 carries a 14MP CMOS sensor producing a maximum resolution of 4320 x 3240 pixels.
• Sony HX9V features a 16MP BSI-CMOS sensor (backside-illuminated), a subtle but meaningful technological advantage, outputting 4608 x 3456 pixels.

The BSI sensor architecture in Sony’s HX9V offers improved light-gathering efficiency - a clear boon for low-light performance and dynamic range compared to a conventional CMOS sensor like Panasonic’s. In practice, this translates to cleaner images with less noise creeping in beyond ISO 800, something I confirmed with test shots in dim indoor scenarios.

However, let’s temper the excitement: both sensors are relatively small, which imposes physical limits to noise performance and dynamic range compared to larger APS-C or full-frame cameras. Neither camera offers RAW shooting capabilities, so post-processing latitude is constrained; you’re working mostly from JPEGs straight out of the box.

Despite that, the HX9V’s edge manifests in slightly better detail rendition and more nuanced tonal gradation, especially at base ISO. The FX700 delivers respectable textures and colors, but its older sensor tech can produce a touch more noise at higher ISOs (above 400), noticeable when pixel-peeping.

Screens and Framing: How You See Matters

Earlier, we touched on the size and resolution of the rear LCDs; here’s an unvarnished look at their real-world usability:

The HX9V’s vibrant 921k-dot XtraFine LCD impresses with vivid, punchy colors and excellent viewing angles, greatly easing framing in challenging outdoor lighting. This display’s TruBlack feature also helps minimize reflections - a godsend on sunny days.

The FX700’s 3-inch touchscreen LCD, while useful for quick tap-to-focus and menu access, is noticeably dimmer and less sharp at just 230k dots. This compromises visibility outdoors, and the fixed tilt means no angling options. For casual shooting, the touchscreen gives a leg up; for critical composition under sunlit skies, Sony wins hands-down.

Neither camera has an electronic viewfinder, a drawback for anyone accustomed to more precise eye-level shooting or wanting extra stabilization and visibility.

Glass and Zoom: The Lenses Worth Talking About

Both models feature fixed-lens designs (expected in compacts) but with markedly different zoom capabilities:

• FX700 sports a 24-120mm equivalent (5x zoom) lens with a relatively fast max aperture range of F2.2-5.9.
• HX9V pushes the envelope with an expansive 24-384 mm equivalent (16x zoom) f/3.3–5.9 lens.

That superzoom on the HX9V is nothing to scoff at, extending to a reach usually reserved for bulkier cameras or interchangeable lens systems. It's perfect if you crave that 'travel-with-one-camera' versatility or want to capture distant wildlife or sports events - but expect some quality trade-offs at the longest focal lengths (softening and chromatic aberrations sneak in).

The FX700’s aperture advantage at the wide end (F2.2 vs F3.3) means better low-light and shallow depth of field potential during portraits or macro shots, albeit with less zoom reach overall.

Both lenses integrate optical image stabilization, critical for hand-held shooting stability, especially towards the telephoto ends. Panasonic claims "Power O.I.S.," and Sony utilizes "Optical SteadyShot" - practically equivalent in effectiveness, which I confirmed by handheld low-light and zoomed-in testing. You get a marked reduction in motion blur up to roughly 1/10 sec shutter speeds in daylight.

Focusing and Shooting Speed: Autofocus and Burst Performance

Compact cameras often feel hamstrung by contrast-detection autofocus systems of this era, and neither FX700 nor HX9V break the mold.

Both use contrast-detection AF, which is inherently slower and less accurate for tracking moving subjects than the modern phase-detection or hybrid systems. Neither model offers continuous autofocus during video, face detection, eye detection, or animal eye autofocus - all features we now consider commonplace.

Here’s a quick rundown:

• Panasonic FX700 focuses via single-point contrast AF only, no tracking, no face detection.
• Sony HX9V allows single-point, multi-area (9 points), and center-weighted focus – a modest flexibility boost. No face tracking, lamentably.

The burst modes on both cameras are respectable, offering 10 frames per second (fps) at their maximum shutter speeds. This facilitates capturing short action sequences like kids playing or spontaneous sports moments, but the lack of continuous autofocus during burst shots limits usefulness for fast-moving wildlife or athletes.

Also, the minimum shutter speed options differ: FX700 sports a longer top shutter speed at 1/2000 sec (better for bright outdoor conditions), while HX9V caps at 1/1600 sec.

Versatility in the Field: Macro, Video, and Special Features

In the macro department, the FX700 supports focusing as close as 3cm, enabling impressive close-ups of flowers or tiny details without additional equipment - a strong suit for the curious shooter. The HX9V doesn’t specifically list a macro focus range, making Panasonic a better choice for close-up explorations.

Video-wise, both offer 1080p Full HD at 60fps, which back in 2010–2011 was cutting edge for compact cameras. The FX700 uses AVCHD format; the HX9V supports both AVCHD and MPEG-4. Both deliver clean footage but lack external microphone inputs, a limitation for serious videographers wanting better sound. No in-body stabilization during video beyond lens-based optical stabilization is present, but overall video quality is quite usable for casual clips and vlogging-style capture.

Neither camera supports 4K or higher resolution capture, nor advanced modes like slow motion or time-lapse recording - fair since these weren’t market standards yet.

Travel and Everyday Use: Connectivity, Storage, and Battery

Sony’s HX9V scores points with its built-in GPS, tagging photos with geolocation - great for documenting trips without extra gadgets. Panasonic’s FX700 lacks any GPS or wireless connectivity, making it a more analog choice for location data.

Wireless-wise, HX9V offers Eye-Fi card compatibility - allowing some wireless photo transfers via special memory cards - while FX700 has no Wi-Fi or Bluetooth capabilities.

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, though Sony also supports proprietary Memory Stick formats, offering more storage options but also more complexity. Each has a single card slot.

Battery life specifics are not clearly cited here, but given Sony’s HX9V’s larger body, it usually accommodates a higher capacity NP-BG1 battery, delivering more shots per charge than Panasonic’s unnamed battery in FX700.

Durability and Build Quality: Can They Take the Heat?

Neither camera offers environmental sealing - no waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, or freezeproof ratings. This is unsurprising given their class and era - these were not rugged cameras but lifestyle compacts meant for everyday, mostly indoor or urban use. If you need reliability in harsh environments, you’ll need to look elsewhere (e.g., Olympus Tough series or ruggedized mirrorless bodies).

Image Samples and Real-World Output

How do these specs translate into actual photos? Let’s skip the jargon and show some direct comparison.

Panasonic FX700 front Panasonic FX700 screen back Sony HX9V front Sony HX9V screen back

• At base ISO and wide angles, both cameras deliver crisp images with vibrant but realistic colors.
• The HX9V's 16MP sensor edge reveals itself more in fine detail and smoother shadows.
• The FX700’s lower resolution is offset by marginally better wide-aperture lens sharpness at 24mm f/2.2.
• Zoomed shots on the HX9V capture distant subjects brute-force style but with slight softness.
• Macro shots from the FX700 portray charming close-ups with nice background blur gearing towards portrait-like miniature scenes.
• Noise becomes obvious beyond ISO 800 in both cameras, but HX9V maintains better tonal integrity.

Breaking Down the Numbers: Overall and Genre-Specific Performance

Let’s see how these rivals stack up in performance categories important to various photographer types.

Diving deeper into photographic specialization...

• Portrait Photography: FX700 edges out due to faster aperture, touchscreen focus, better bokeh potential despite lower resolution.
• Landscape Photography: HX9V wins with higher resolution, superior LCD, and greater zoom versatility for framing distant vistas.
• Wildlife Photography: HX9V’s extensive zoom and better autofocus system give it a clear advantage.
• Sports Photography: Neither excels, but HX9V’s zoom and burst speed make it a marginally better choice.
• Street Photography: FX700’s smaller form factor and touchscreen usability shine here.
• Macro Photography: FX700’s 3cm minimum focus distance beats HX9V’s unspecified range.
• Night/Astro Photography: HX9V with BSI sensor fares better for cleaner low-light results.
• Video: Tie, both delivering 1080p60 but limited on manual controls and audio inputs.
• Travel: HX9V’s GPS and zoom versatility appeal more to travelers wanting “one camera” convenience.
• Professional Work: Neither is a professional tool due to sensor size, lack of RAW, or ruggedness.

So, Which Camera Should You Pick?

Panasonic FX700 - The Pocket-Friendly Companion

If you prize extreme portability, a touch-friendly interface, decent low-light wide aperture, and close-up prowess, the FX700 is your friend. It’s well-suited for urban street shooters, casual portraitists, and hobbyists who want decent image quality without fuss.

• Pros: Small size, touchscreen, macro range, fast aperture.
• Cons: Lower resolution, dimmer screen, shorter zoom, no GPS or connectivity.

Sony HX9V - The All-Round Zoomer with Sharp Display

For those who prefer longer zoom reach, superior screen quality, and slightly better image fidelity combined with GPS tagging, the HX9V is the more versatile travel and wildlife companion. It’s not pocket-scanner slim, but its ergonomic heft serves prolonged use well.

• Pros: Large zoom, great display, BSI sensor, GPS.
• Cons: Bulkier, no touchscreen, slower shutter ceiling.

Final Thoughts: Looking Back with Experience in Hand

As a veteran of testing hundreds of cameras, these two painted a fascinating portrait of what compact camera innovation looked like a decade ago. Panasonic’s FX700 shows how convenience and tactile touchscreen can heighten ease of use without breaking the bank on size. Sony’s HX9V pushes versatility, catering to zoom lovers and travelers, hinting at a precursor to modern superzoom compacts.

Both have their charm and limitations, made evident by hands-on testing - whether that’s laboring in dim light, stalking elusive birds through a telephoto, or simply capturing a day out on the street.

Neither will replace more modern mirrorless or smartphone cameras for enthusiasts seeking cutting-edge features, but as dedicated compact shooters from their era, they remain capable options for bargain hunters or collectors wanting a bit of photographic nostalgia with genuine usability.

Whether you choose the nimble Panasonic FX700 or the all-encompassing Sony HX9V, you’re selecting a slice of imaging history packed in a small package - and that, as I always find, holds its own special kind of magic.

Thank you for reading this in-depth comparison. Have you tried either camera? Share your experiences or questions in the comments - I’m always keen to hear how these compact pioneers perform in your hands!