Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ40 vs DMC-ZS35: A Detailed Comparative Review for the Discerning Photographer

Choosing the right compact superzoom camera can feel like navigating a jungle of options - especially when models share a brand and a launch date but differ markedly in key attributes. Today, I’m thoroughly comparing two Panasonic cameras that debuted side-by-side in early 2014: the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ40 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS35 (also known as the TZ55 in some regions). Although similar in some respects, these models address quite different photography priorities and user profiles.

I spent many hours rigorously testing both cameras across disciplines ranging from portraiture through nighttime astrophotography, putting their specs and real-world performance under the microscope. This hands-on comparison should help you decide which camera best fits your shooting style and budget.

Size, Ergonomics & Handling: Compact vs Bridge - What Fits You Best?

The LZ40 is a classic "bridge" style camera, larger and more robust, while the ZS35 is a true compact superzoom aimed at portability and discreet shooting.

The LZ40 measures a hefty 126x87x94mm and weighs 524g - noticeably larger and heavier, with a pronounced grip and SLR-like body. Those dimensions favor photographers who want a more substantial feel and better handling with telephoto or macro lenses attached, compensating for the longer zoom range. I appreciated the firm grip during extended handheld shooting, though it can feel bulky for street or casual travel photography.

In contrast, the ZS35 is much smaller and lighter at 107x62x32mm and just 305g. Its compactness and slim profile fit easily into a jacket pocket or small camera bag, lending itself superbly to everyday carry and spontaneous snapshots. Despite the smaller size, it still offers a solid build, thanks to Panasonic's high-quality plastics and thoughtful engineering. I found this model more comfortable for quick, one-handed operation and inconspicuous shooting, particularly in urban environments.

Control Layout and Design: Intuitive Interfaces for User Efficiency

Examining the top control layouts highlights significant philosophy differences. The LZ40, designed like a DSLR, features dedicated buttons and a dial for selecting manual exposure modes. Its larger size allows for a spread-out control scheme, delivering tactile, responsive dials and clearly defined buttons that even firm-handed users will appreciate.

Meanwhile, the ZS35 packs its controls more tightly. Its streamlined interface caters to quick adjustments but the smaller buttons require more deliberate presses. Notably, the ZS35 adds shutter and aperture priority modes, absent on the LZ40, enhancing manual control that advanced users crave. Both cameras offer exposure compensation and white balance bracketing, but the ZS35 edges ahead in usability through these semi-pro features.

For photographers prioritizing manual exposure control and a more tactile shooting experience, the LZ40 is often preferable. Those wanting semi-manual control without sacrificing compactness get better mileage with the ZS35.

Sensor Technology & Image Quality: Myriad Trade-offs Between Resolution and Sensor Design

At the heart, both cameras use a 1/2.3" sensor size, which is standard for superzoom compacts but constrains performance compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors. The LZ40 employs a 20MP CCD sensor, while the ZS35 opts for a 16MP CMOS sensor. This distinction is crucial for image quality and performance characteristics.

CCD sensors, like in the LZ40, can deliver sharp images with pleasing color reproduction but tend to suffer in noise control and dynamic range, especially at higher ISOs. Indeed, during my testing, the LZ40 produced fairly detailed images in bright daylight but struggled with noise and shadow detail beyond ISO 800.

The ZS35’s CMOS sensor, by contrast, though clocking fewer megapixels, manages noise control more effectively, supporting ISO sensitivity up to 3200 natively (versus 1600 on the LZ40). Dynamic range also felt more forgiving - important for landscape and shadow-heavy scenes. Image sharpness was comparable, helped by a slightly more effective anti-alias filter and improved JPEG processing.

Neither camera supports RAW format, limiting post-processing flexibility, but users will benefit from the ZS35's cleaner files under mixed lighting and low-light conditions.

Display and Interface: Articulating Convenience vs Simplicity

Both models sport a 3-inch 460k-dot TFT LCD, but the ZS35’s screen boasts a crucial advantage: it tilts up to 180 degrees. This makes composing difficult angles, including low-to-the-ground macro shots or high-overhead street shots, easier and more versatile. It’s also a bonus for selfie-style captures or vlogging, though neither is marketed as "selfie friendly."

The LZ40’s screen is fixed and non-touch, limiting flexible framing and quick menu access. Although menus are logical and straightforward on both cameras, the ZS35’s screen coating reduces reflections significantly, enhancing viewability outdoors, while the LZ40’s more basic screen struggles in bright light.

So for those who value framing versatility, especially on the move, the ZS35 edges ahead in user interface comfort.

Lens Performance and Zoom Range: Ultra-Long Reach Vs Balanced Versatility

Both cameras come with extensive built-in zoom lenses but differ drastically in focal length coverage and maximum aperture.

• LZ40: 22-924mm equivalent (42x zoom), aperture F3.0-6.5
• ZS35: 24-480mm equivalent (20x zoom), aperture F3.3-6.4

The LZ40’s 42x zoom is impressive on paper and in practice, granting extreme telephoto reach useful for distant wildlife or surveillance-style photography. During field testing, I found this zoom useful but somewhat hampered by the narrower aperture at the longest telephoto range, which decreased light gathering and necessitated a steadier tripod or IS reliance.

Conversely, the ZS35’s 20x zoom covers a slightly shorter range but with a generally brighter and faster lens at telephoto, yielding sharper images especially noticeable at mid and long focal lengths. The ZS35's lens is also better suited for travel photographers who appreciate quality across a more practical zoom range rather than extreme reach.

Neither lens excels in macro beyond their minimum focus distances (1 cm for LZ40, 3 cm for ZS35), but the LZ40’s extremely close focusing capability can yield some interesting detail shots if carefully executed.

Autofocus System: Precision For Fast Action or Casual Shooting?

Autofocus (AF) systems on both rely on contrast detection with no phase detection support, limiting speed and tracking accuracy compared to modern hybrids.

The LZ40 offers 9 AF points, while the ZS35 extends this to 21 points. This difference translates to more precise area selection and better subject tracking on the ZS35. Both cameras include face detection and continuous AF for video and stills, but the ZS35’s improved processing enables more reliable continuous tracking in moderately challenging lighting.

Shot to shot, the ZS35 can sustain continuous burst shooting at 10 fps, though buffer depth limits sustained continuous shooting - much preferred for sports or wildlife. The LZ40 felt lethargic here, with just 1 fps continuous shooting, suitable only for still subjects.

For wildlife, sports, or active street photography, the ZS35 is the stronger choice. For casual or landscape work where AF speed is less critical, the LZ40 suffices.

Image Stabilization and Shutter Performance: Keeping Shots Sharp

Both cameras rely on optical image stabilization, essential given their ultra-zoom ranges and modest sensor sizes.

In my hands-on tests, stabilization effectively reduced blur from slight hand shakes up to mid-zoom focal lengths, but obviously, long tele settings on the LZ40 still greatly benefitted from tripod use. The ZS35’s stabilization system felt a bit more refined, integrated tightly with the faster burst shooting, resulting in generally sharper images handheld especially in low light.

Shutter speed range varies: LZ40 offers between 15 seconds and 1/1500 second max, whereas ZS35 has a range of 4 to 1/2000 second. The extended slow shutter on LZ40 is helpful for night or creative long exposures, while the ZS35’s faster max shutter aids in freezing action.

Video Capabilities: HD Resolution with Different Strengths

Both cameras offer at least HD video modes, but notable differences exist:

• LZ40: 720p at 30 fps (Motion JPEG format), external microphone port included
• ZS35: Full HD 1080p at 30 fps (MPEG-4 format), no external mic input but includes HDMI output for external monitors/recorders

The LZ40’s ability to connect an external microphone is a rare feature in this class, providing better sound control for video-focused shooters, though the 720p resolution feels dated today. The ZS35 offers higher resolution video with smoother compression, making it more practical for casual HD footage.

Neither camera supports 4K options. Video stabilization is acceptable but not on par with current standards. Overall, ZS35 is more versatile for everyday video, LZ40 better suited to users who value audio quality in video.

Battery Life and Storage: Extended Shooting or Frequent Charges?

The LZ40 uses a dedicated battery pack with an estimated life of 320 shots per charge - respectable but not exceptional for a bridge camera with power-hungry zoom.

The ZS35 specs don’t specify battery life explicitly, but Panasonic usually optimizes battery usage better in compact cameras; estimate is around 350-380 shots, slightly better due to efficiency on CMOS sensor and smaller body size.

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and have a single storage slot; no internal memory is noteworthy.

Connectivity: Basic to Moderate with No Bells and Whistles

The ZS35 includes built-in wireless connectivity, enabling remote control and image transfer via Panasonic apps, an advantageous feature for mobile workflow and modern sharing habits.

The LZ40 has no wireless features, only USB 2.0 for tethered transfers.

Neither supports GPS, NFC, or Bluetooth, which is understandable for 2014 models but may deter those wanting advanced connectivity.

Performance Scores and Overall Ratings: Where Do They Stand?

Here’s a high-level summary based on our comprehensive bench tests and real-world shooting sessions:

• ZS35 scores higher in autofocus speed, image quality, video capabilities, and battery efficiency.
• LZ40 performs strongly in zoom reach and shutter range, with acceptable image quality for daylight use.

Specialty Photography Genres: Which Camera Excels Where?

Let’s break down how each camera stacks up in specific photography disciplines:

Portrait Photography

• ZS35: Better skin tone rendering and bokeh effects thanks to CMOS sensor and improved AF face detection with 21 points.
• LZ40: Sufficient for casual portraits, but noisier images in lower light; no phase detection AF slows acquisition of sharp eye focus.

Landscape Photography

• Both cameras have similar sensor sizes limiting resolution and dynamic range, but ZS35 edges unit thanks to CMOS active sensor.
• Lack of weather sealing on both limits rugged field use.
• Fixing on the ZS35’s compact design favors travel landscapes, though LZ40’s long exposure shutter slows low-light handheld captures.

Wildlife Photography

• LZ40’s 42x zoom is advantageous for long-distance shooting from hides or blinds.
• ZS35 offers faster continuous shooting and better AF for tracking moving animals.

Sports Photography

• ZS35's 10fps and faster shutter make it more capable in freezing fast action.
• LZ40’s slow 1fps continuous falls short.

Street Photography

• ZS35’s small size and silent-ish operation make it far superior for candid shooting.
• LZ40 is a bit conspicuous.

Macro Photography

• LZ40’s 1cm macro focus distance offers creative close-up potential.
• ZS35’s 3cm minimum works well but less dramatic.

Night and Astro Photography

• LZ40 offers 15-second shutter speeds, good for long exposures.
• Both cameras limited by small sensor noise; ZS35’s ISO boost helps but astro not a strong suit for either.

Video

• ZS35’s Full HD 1080p and HDMI output offer more flexibility.
• LZ40 wins for audio input options despite lower video resolution.

Travel Photography

• ZS35 is a standout for packing light and versatility.
• LZ40 better for those valuing long zoom over portability.

Professional Work

• Neither supports RAW or delivers professional-grade files.
• Both can serve as affordable backup or casual cameras.

Price-to-Performance Summary: What’s Your Best Investment?

At the time of their release, the Panasonic LZ40 was priced around $219, with the ZS35 costing closer to $300.

Given the performance differences, I find the ZS35’s price premium justified for photographers needing versatility, speed, and better image quality. The LZ40 remains viable for users prioritizing ultra-zoom reach on a tight budget and those who value simplified manual controls.

Final Thoughts: Which Panasonic Superzoom Should You Choose?

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ40 is your choice if:

• You want the longest possible zoom reach in a bridge-style camera
• You prefer an SLR-like handling experience with dedicated manual controls
• You shoot mostly in good lighting and want long exposure shutter options
• You are okay with limited video resolution but want mic input

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS35 is preferable if:

• You seek a compact, lightweight, and travel-friendly camera
• You want better autofocus, faster continuous shooting, and richer video options
• You need a tilting LCD to compose creatively in varied scenarios
• You value improved low-light performance and cleaner images

Neither camera is designed for professionals demanding RAW capture or rugged weather sealing, yet both cater to general enthusiasts and casual photographers with distinct needs.

Sample Gallery: Real-World Output Comparison

Let me show you how these technical specs translate to real shots:

Panasonic LZ40 front Panasonic LZ40 screen back Panasonic ZS35 front Panasonic ZS35 screen back

• Observe the ZS35’s cleaner shadows and color consistency.
• LZ40’s superzoom captures distant telephoto subjects but with slightly softer details and more noise.
• Both produce pleasing JPEGs straight out of the camera in daylight.

The choice between the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LZ40 and Lumix DMC-ZS35 essentially boils down to weighing zoom reach versus operational speed and compactness. I encourage readers to handle and test these models physically when possible, since tactile comfort and user interface preferences often tip the balance in everyday shooting.

Hopefully, this extensive comparison, bringing together technical breakdowns and practical field results, will support your decision-making confidently and clearly.

Happy shooting!