Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Choosing the right compact camera often boils down to balancing size, zoom range, image quality, and ease of use. Today, I’m diving deep into two small-sensor compacts that have caught attention among casual shooters and enthusiasts seeking a decent zoom range without lugging a bulky DSLR: the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS1 (also known as the Lumix DMC-TZ6) and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W620.

Though both released in the early 2010s and sharing similar class designations, these cameras have distinct philosophies and feature sets. I’ve put these cameras through a rigorous multi-genre review using real-world shooting and detailed technical analysis. By the end, you’ll understand which camera best suits your photography style, needs, and budget.

A Tale of Two Compacts: Size and Handling First Impressions

Before peering through the viewfinder (or, in this case, the LCD screen), physical handling shapes usability massively.

The Panasonic ZS1 is notably chunkier and heavier (229g) compared to Sony’s featherweight W620 (116g). Dimensions show the ZS1 is thicker (33mm to Sony’s 20mm) and a tad taller/wider, mainly due to its longer 12x optical zoom lens versus Sony’s 5x zoom.

In practical terms, the ZS1 feels more substantial, resting firmly in the hands - a boon for stability, especially in telephoto shooting. The W620, with minimal bulk, slips easily in pockets and is perfect for “grab-and-go” street or travel photography where discretion and portability trump brute force specs.

Ergonomically, both cameras lack dedicated grip contours, but the Panasonic’s larger size lets you get a better purchase during longer shoots. Neither has an electronic viewfinder or articulated screen, but we'll dig deeper into the user interface shortly.

Bottom line: If you prioritize pocketability and minimal weight for casual snapshots or travel light, the Sony wins hands down. If you want a camera that’s comfortable to grip and ready for extended zoom use, Panasonic’s slightly heftier build pays off.

Design Details and Control Layout: How Intuitive Are They?

Upon picking these cameras up, it's the button arrangement and control logic that dictate shooting speed and comfort.

The ZS1 attempts to incorporate a smart control dial, facilitating quick zoom adjustments/up-down navigation and basic exposure tweaks - though the latter’s limited by a lack of manual exposure modes (more on that later).

Sony’s W620 is simpler, with few physical buttons and no dedicated control ring. You navigate menus and settings via multi-functional buttons. I often found this setup less fluid, especially when switching between modes or adjusting flash settings on the fly.

Neither has touchscreens or tilting LCDs; both sport a fixed 2.7-inch display of identical resolution (230k dots), which is sufficient under shade but can struggle in bright sunlight.

In summary, Panasonic’s layout caters better to photographers who want slightly more tactile control and faster access to critical functions.

Sensor and Image Quality Breakdown: The Heart of the Matter

Now, what about image quality - the deciding factor for many?

Both cameras feature CCD sensors typical of compact superzooms at their release time, but some nuances matter:

• Panasonic ZS1: 1/2.5" sensor (5.744 x 4.308 mm), 10 megapixels
• Sony W620: Slightly larger 1/2.3" sensor (6.17 x 4.55 mm), 14 megapixels

Though Sony’s sensor is bigger and has a higher pixel count, the minute differences in sensor area and resolution rarely translate to huge image quality gaps given the fixed optics and early sibling age.

Panasonic’s lens offers a versatile 25-300mm equivalent zoom, great for landscapes to wildlife at a pinch, whereas Sony’s 28-140mm is more modest but balances zoom with reasonable sharpness.

In controlled daylight tests, images from the W620 tended to be a touch sharper due to the higher resolution, but Panasonic’s ZS1 had slightly better dynamic range and managed highlights more smoothly. But neither were stellar performers at high ISO due to CCD design limitations.

That said, both cameras cap ISO around 6400 (Panasonic) and 3200 (Sony), with noise creeping in at moderate levels (~800-1600 ISO). So low-light shooting is limited - more suited to bright environments or using flash.

Sharpness across the zoom range on the ZS1 remained impressively crisp through the mid-telephoto reach, benefiting from optical image stabilization, which Sony lacks entirely.

Bottom line, if zoom range and stabilization matter most, Panasonic edges out, but if you prefer slightly higher resolution files in bright light, Sony is a solid pick.

Screen and Interface: Reviewing Your Shots

Let’s take a quick look at the rear LCDs and user interface, an often overlooked but crucial usability factor.

As noted, both cameras have a non-touch, fixed 2.7" 230k dot screen. Sony’s Clear Photo TFT LCD technology delivers a marginally brighter and cleaner image under normal indoor lighting, making menu navigation slightly more pleasant.

Panasonic’s screen shows slightly warmer color tones when reviewing images, which some may find more pleasing for portraits, while Sony’s cooler-white display can skew perception towards underexposure.

Operationally, the Panasonic’s menu design is a tad more modern and responsive, with clearer mode icons and faster access to white balance and ISO settings - though both lack advanced customization options.

Neither screen offers live histogram or focus peaking, which is expected for this class but something to keep in mind if you want critical exposure tools on-screen.

Putting Them Through Their Paces: Sample Gallery Evaluation

Nothing beats seeing the cameras in action. I shot portraits, landscapes, macro details, and a handful of fast-motion scenes to test autofocus and image clarity.

Panasonic ZS1 front Panasonic ZS1 screen back Sony W620 front Sony W620 screen back

Portraits on both cameras delivered respectable skin tones under natural light. Panasonic’s ZS1 achieved smoother bokeh at the longer zoom end due to the wider maximum aperture at telephoto (F4.9 vs. Sony’s F6.5). Face detection was present on both but more confident on Panasonic, leading to slightly better focus locks in my tests.

In landscapes, Sony’s superior resolution produced more detailed renderings, though Panasonic’s wider focal length caught more expansive scenes without needing panorama stitching. The ZS1’s optical stabilization further helped maintain clarity at slower shutter speeds handheld.

Wildlife shots at max zoom favored Panasonic due to the longer reach (300mm equiv.) and stabilization, although autofocus hunting was noticeable on both cameras - not a surprise at this tier.

Sports and fast action? Both struggled here, given their slow burst rates (Panasonic 3fps, Sony 1fps) and lack of phase-detect AF, leading to blurry frames if subjects were moving quickly.

Macro shots: Panasonic again has the advantage with a minimum focusing distance of 3cm versus Sony’s 5cm, letting you get closer for detail shots. Neither offer focus stacking or manual focus, so precision work can be tricky.

Lastly, in low light and night shots, both cameras produce fairly noisy images at anything above ISO 400; however, Panasonic’s lens stabilization gave a slight edge for handheld exposures.

How Do They Fare Across Popular Photography Genres?

Let’s take a closer look at their strengths and weaknesses across different photography disciplines, so you can better match the camera to your interests.

Portraiture: Panasonic’s longer zoom and better face detection yield a slight benefit; Sony’s higher resolution helps for cropping and prints but less control over depth of field.

Landscape: Sony’s sharper sensor files excel, though limited zoom range compared to Panasonic. Both lack weather sealing making outdoor rough use a concern.

Wildlife: Panasonic is preferred due to its longer zoom and stabilization, critical to handheld telephoto shooting.

Sports: Neither camera shines - slow burst rates and focus systems limit performance.

Street: Sony’s smaller size and quiet shutter provide advantages for candid shooting.

Macro: Panasonic’s closer focusing distance and stabilization enhance detail capture.

Night/Astro: Both struggle, but Panasonic’s stabilization aids long exposures handheld.

Video: Neither excels with modest resolutions and no audio input options.

Travel: Sony’s ultra-lightweight appeals for minimalists; Panasonic offers versatility with longer zoom.

Professional Use: Both cameras are consumer-grade with limitations in manual controls, RAW support, and robustness - better suited as secondary or casual shooters.

Autofocus and Image Stabilization: The Unsung Heroes

AF performance can make or break a camera especially when shooting fast or unpredictable subjects.

Both use contrast detection autofocus, common in point-and-shoot models but generally slower and less reliable than phase detection systems.

The Panasonic ZS1 has 11 focus points and offers face detection, which helps for portraits and moderate tracking. It lacks continuous AF for burst shooting, so missed focus shots are common if subjects move rapidly.

Sony’s W620 presumably has fewer focus points (undisclosed exact number), but does feature face detection and basic AF tracking. Unfortunately, without optical stabilization, handheld zoom shots often suffer from shake, making autofocus utility less impactful.

The ZS1’s optical image stabilization is a standout for both photo and video, drastically improving sharpness in low-light and tele shooting. Sony’s absence of stabilization is a dealbreaker if you shoot frequently at the long end.

Video Capabilities: Simple Footage or Creative Tool?

Neither camera aims to satisfy videographers, but their differences bear mention.

Panasonic records in Motion JPEG at a max of 848x480 (WVGA) at 30fps, a low resolution by today’s standards with rather large file sizes and limited editing flexibility.

Sony W620 can record 720p HD at 30fps in Motion JPEG, delivering slightly better video sharpness and framing options.

Neither supports mic or headphone jacks, slow-motion modes, nor advanced codecs like AVCHD or MP4. So video use is strictly casual.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity: Practical Considerations

Sony’s battery life is rated at 220 shots per charge, which aligns with typical compact rates but is low by DSLR or mirrorless standards. Panasonic does not provide official battery life figures, but expect similar or slightly fewer shots due to stabilization power draw.

Both cameras rely on removable lithium-ion packs, but Sony’s NP-BN battery is easier to find replacements or spares for, being used in multiple Sony models.

Storage-wise, Panasonic uses standard SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, while Sony adds flexibility supporting multiple formats including Memory Stick Duo variants and microSD cards, which may appeal if you have various legacy media lying around.

Connectivity options are minimal on both. Sony supports Eye-Fi wireless SD cards for WiFi transfer, a neat trick for its time but now outdated. Panasonic lacks any wireless features.

Build Quality and Environmental Resilience

Neither camera offers weather sealing or ruggedized construction, limiting use in harsh conditions.

Lens and body plastics feel reasonably solid on both, with Panasonic’s thicker profile imparting a sense of durability. The Sony’s ultra-compact frame relies more on lightweight plastics, meaning a little more fragility, though for typical indoor or travel use, both hold their own.

Price-to-Performance Overview: Value For Money?

While prices fluctuate over time and availability, here's what I found:

• The Sony W620 typically retails around $100-$120, reflecting its basic feature set and compact size.
• The Panasonic ZS1 is often more expensive, around $150-$200, justified primarily by longer zoom, stabilization, and better ergonomics.

Given the modest specs and limited manual control on both, both cameras compete more on design preferences and brand loyalty than pure imaging capability.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

My Recommendations: Which Should You Choose?

For versatile zoom and outdoor shooting enthusiasts:

The Panasonic Lumix ZS1 is the better choice if you value reaching distant subjects, handheld stability, and generally more refined control over your images. Despite lacking RAW support and manual modes, it performs well for casual wildlife, macro, and landscape shots where zoom and steadiness matter.

For casual shooters and street photographers wanting ultra portability:

The Sony Cyber-shot W620 wins as a pocket-friendly, lightweight companion perfect for snapping everyday moments, street scenes, and travel memories without noticeable lens extension or weight. The improved video resolution and decent sensor resolution make it an appealing option for those who prioritize convenience.

If you want more advanced features like RAW shooting, manual controls, or 4K video:

Neither camera fits this mold. Consider modern mirrorless compact cameras or enthusiast-level point-and-shoots for those capabilities.

Final Performance Ratings at a Glance

I utilized standardized lab testing and extensive in-the-field trials to score overall and genre-specific performances.

Panasonic leads in overall image quality and versatility. Sony scores well for portability and basic convenience.

Closing Thoughts

While both the Panasonic ZS1 and Sony W620 are products of their time, embodying early attempts at packing zoom and features into small compacts, they each have distinct merits. If you’re hunting for a low-cost, dependable point-and-shoot without sacrificing all telephoto capacity, the Panasonic Lumix ZS1 remains surprisingly competitive today.

Alternatively, if you want a slim, lightweight camera primarily for snapshots and travel ease, the Sony W620 covers that base nicely.

Ultimately, your choice depends on your priorities - zoom and image stabilization or ultra portability and higher resolution images.

I hope this detailed hands-on comparison clarifies the options. If you want to see these cameras in action, check out my in-depth video reviews which underscore many of these points from handling to indoor/outdoor shooting tests. Remember, practical experience trumps specs on paper!

Happy shooting!

Note: All analyses and images stem from direct camera handling and testing over several weeks, applying industry-standard evaluation methods across multiple photography scenarios.