Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro
91 Imaging
35 Features
42 Overall
37
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/47f7d/47f7d7b1e27877de843384ed6303648cfc08aee4" alt="Samsung HZ35W front Samsung HZ35W front"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f42c9/f42c9a361334ffc5c5c43c170deef3b574f4dd47" alt="Sigma DP2 Quattro front Sigma DP2 Quattro front"
70 Imaging
63 Features
38 Overall
53
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 3200
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-360mm (F3.2-5.8) lens
- 245g - 107 x 61 x 28mm
- Released June 2010
- Also referred to as WB650
(Full Review)
- 20MP - APS-C Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 6400
- No Video
- 45mm (F2.8) lens
- 395g - 161 x 67 x 82mm
- Introduced February 2014
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/09f89/09f89c6b5dc0c8e793ce323afb658e7f43d45612" alt=""
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Overview
Its time to look a little more closely at the Samsung HZ35W versus Sigma DP2 Quattro, former being a Small Sensor Superzoom while the other is a Large Sensor Compact by rivals Samsung and Sigma. There is a sizable difference between the image resolutions of the HZ35W (12MP) and DP2 Quattro (20MP) and the HZ35W (1/2.3") and DP2 Quattro (APS-C) enjoy different sensor size.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bfda9/bfda97b4ea42610c4d033bdc3102b7af07982c04" alt=""
The HZ35W was released 4 years before the DP2 Quattro and that is quite a significant difference as far as tech is concerned. Both the cameras offer different body type with the Samsung HZ35W being a Compact camera and the Sigma DP2 Quattro being a Large Sensor Compact camera.
Before getting straight into a in-depth comparison, below is a simple introduction of how the HZ35W matches up vs the DP2 Quattro in the way of portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3338/c3338e925c8d47c26e739e490d039a1411046530" alt=""
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Gallery
Here is a sample of the gallery pictures for Samsung HZ35W & Sigma DP2 Quattro. The complete galleries are viewable at Samsung HZ35W Gallery & Sigma DP2 Quattro Gallery.
Reasons to pick Samsung HZ35W over the Sigma DP2 Quattro
HZ35W | DP2 Quattro |
---|
Reasons to pick Sigma DP2 Quattro over the Samsung HZ35W
DP2 Quattro | HZ35W | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Introduced | February 2014 | ![]() | June 2010 | More recent by 44 months |
Display resolution | 920k | ![]() | 614k | Sharper display (+306k dot) |
Common features in the Samsung HZ35W and Sigma DP2 Quattro
HZ35W | DP2 Quattro | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Focus manually | ![]() | Dial precise focusing | ||
Display type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed display |
Display sizing | 3" | ![]() | 3" | Equivalent display size |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Lack of selfie screen | ||
Touch display | ![]() | Lack of Touch display |
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Physical Comparison
For anybody who is intending to lug around your camera, you'll have to factor its weight and size. The Samsung HZ35W has outer measurements of 107mm x 61mm x 28mm (4.2" x 2.4" x 1.1") and a weight of 245 grams (0.54 lbs) while the Sigma DP2 Quattro has specifications of 161mm x 67mm x 82mm (6.3" x 2.6" x 3.2") along with a weight of 395 grams (0.87 lbs).
Take a look at the Samsung HZ35W versus Sigma DP2 Quattro in our brand new Camera plus Lens Size Comparison Tool.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a6ef8/a6ef8f16e8deba30cb986caafd44d83681e96a75" alt="Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses"
Bear in mind, the weight of an ILC will vary depending on the lens you select at the time. Below is the front view measurement comparison of the HZ35W against the DP2 Quattro.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e1353/e1353d51f6d0f4b182b9f777f1a7278e32cf12d6" alt="Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro size comparison Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro size comparison"
Taking into account size and weight, the portability rating of the HZ35W and DP2 Quattro is 91 and 70 respectively.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/789c4/789c42c58e5398d9638b0d968b528e718b6dfcec" alt="Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro top view buttons comparison Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro top view buttons comparison"
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Sensor Comparison
Oftentimes, it's hard to visualize the difference between sensor measurements only by reviewing specifications. The visual underneath might give you a clearer sense of the sensor sizing in the HZ35W and DP2 Quattro.
To sum up, the two cameras offer different megapixel count and different sensor measurements. The HZ35W because of its tinier sensor is going to make achieving shallower depth of field tougher and the Sigma DP2 Quattro will deliver greater detail as a result of its extra 8MP. Greater resolution will make it easier to crop pics a little more aggressively. The older HZ35W is going to be behind with regard to sensor technology.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0cb40/0cb40fb513fd6e385662c2343993751ba847a457" alt="Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro sensor size comparison Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro sensor size comparison"
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Screen and ViewFinder
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/39528/39528ac0cd0ab7c4e164a2fcccac6c2b3be6d45c" alt="Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Screen and Viewfinder comparison Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Screen and Viewfinder comparison"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/427ef/427ef51d855b8f8d8523699aa2b0465afb765511" alt=""
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40b17/40b178b2c2a7887c950c5d80f9aa0bc017ad9376" alt=""
Street Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8876b/8876ba1234536f7f948b3ad54614ecbba59fd0b6" alt=""
Sports Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9df93/9df93b830615ba08ba0f7e31492fca23710a884c" alt=""
Travel Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6d588/6d5886e45f6ed46a44c58516180e79dc4c09297f" alt=""
Landscape Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4fad8/4fad8be6e5d8cb84d21f21424f73546c57bfca20" alt=""
Vlogging Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/85299/85299aa0d77ee8b6a2d3435fdb68ab0ccaabf584" alt=""
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma DP2 Quattro Specifications
Samsung HZ35W | Sigma DP2 Quattro | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Manufacturer | Samsung | Sigma |
Model | Samsung HZ35W | Sigma DP2 Quattro |
Also Known as | WB650 | - |
Type | Small Sensor Superzoom | Large Sensor Compact |
Released | 2010-06-16 | 2014-02-13 |
Body design | Compact | Large Sensor Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Chip | - | TRUE III engine |
Sensor type | CCD | CMOS (Foveon X3) |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | APS-C |
Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 23.5 x 15.7mm |
Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 369.0mm² |
Sensor resolution | 12MP | 20MP |
Anti aliasing filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 4:3 and 16:9 | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 |
Maximum resolution | 4000 x 3000 | 5424 x 3616 |
Maximum native ISO | 3200 | 6400 |
Lowest native ISO | 80 | 100 |
RAW format | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Manual focus | ||
Touch focus | ||
Autofocus continuous | ||
Autofocus single | ||
Autofocus tracking | ||
Selective autofocus | ||
Autofocus center weighted | ||
Multi area autofocus | ||
Autofocus live view | ||
Face detect autofocus | ||
Contract detect autofocus | ||
Phase detect autofocus | ||
Number of focus points | - | 9 |
Lens | ||
Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens focal range | 24-360mm (15.0x) | 45mm (1x) |
Max aperture | f/3.2-5.8 | f/2.8 |
Macro focus range | 3cm | - |
Crop factor | 5.8 | 1.5 |
Screen | ||
Display type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Display sizing | 3 inch | 3 inch |
Resolution of display | 614 thousand dot | 920 thousand dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch functionality | ||
Display technology | - | TFT color LCD |
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder | None | None |
Features | ||
Slowest shutter speed | 16 secs | 30 secs |
Maximum shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | 1/2000 secs |
Continuous shooting speed | - | 3.0 frames per second |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Manual exposure | ||
Exposure compensation | Yes | Yes |
Change white balance | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Inbuilt flash | ||
Flash range | 5.00 m | no built-in flash |
Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in, Slow Sync | no built-in flash |
Hot shoe | ||
AE bracketing | ||
WB bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment exposure | ||
Average exposure | ||
Spot exposure | ||
Partial exposure | ||
AF area exposure | ||
Center weighted exposure | ||
Video features | ||
Supported video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30, 15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (60, 30 fps) | - |
Maximum video resolution | 1280x720 | None |
Video data format | Motion JPEG | - |
Mic jack | ||
Headphone jack | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | None |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | BuiltIn | None |
Physical | ||
Environment seal | ||
Water proof | ||
Dust proof | ||
Shock proof | ||
Crush proof | ||
Freeze proof | ||
Weight | 245g (0.54 lbs) | 395g (0.87 lbs) |
Dimensions | 107 x 61 x 28mm (4.2" x 2.4" x 1.1") | 161 x 67 x 82mm (6.3" x 2.6" x 3.2") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO All around score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Color Depth score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | not tested |
DXO Low light score | not tested | not tested |
Other | ||
Battery model | SLB-11A | BP-51 |
Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Double, Motion) | Yes (2 or 10 secs) |
Time lapse recording | ||
Storage media | SD/SDHC/SDXC, Internal | - |
Storage slots | Single | Single |
Cost at launch | $300 | $931 |