Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro
91 Imaging
35 Features
42 Overall
37
63 Imaging
69 Features
56 Overall
63
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 80 - 3200
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-360mm (F3.2-5.8) lens
- 245g - 107 x 61 x 28mm
- Introduced June 2010
- Also Known as WB650
(Full Review)
- 29MP - APS-C Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 6400
- Sigma SA Mount
- 625g - 147 x 95 x 91mm
- Revealed February 2016
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music video Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Overview
On this page, we are analyzing the Samsung HZ35W and Sigma Quattro, former being a Small Sensor Superzoom while the other is a Advanced Mirrorless by companies Samsung and Sigma. There exists a sizable gap between the sensor resolutions of the HZ35W (12MP) and Quattro (29MP) and the HZ35W (1/2.3") and Quattro (APS-C) boast totally different sensor sizing.
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsThe HZ35W was released 6 years earlier than the Quattro and that is quite a significant difference as far as technology is concerned. Both of these cameras have different body design with the Samsung HZ35W being a Compact camera and the Sigma Quattro being a Rangefinder-style mirrorless camera.
Before delving straight to a comprehensive comparison, here is a quick summary of how the HZ35W grades versus the Quattro for portability, imaging, features and an overall rating.
Photography Glossary Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Gallery
Below is a sample of the gallery pictures for Samsung HZ35W & Sigma sd Quattro. The complete galleries are viewable at Samsung HZ35W Gallery & Sigma Quattro Gallery.
Reasons to pick Samsung HZ35W over the Sigma Quattro
| HZ35W | Quattro |
|---|
Reasons to pick Sigma Quattro over the Samsung HZ35W
| Quattro | HZ35W | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revealed | February 2016 |  | June 2010 | Fresher by 69 months |
| Display resolution | 1620k |  | 614k | Sharper display (+1006k dot) |
Common features in the Samsung HZ35W and Sigma Quattro
| HZ35W | Quattro | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus manually |  | Dial exact focusing | ||
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Display dimensions | 3" |  | 3" | Equal display measurement |
| Selfie screen |  | Neither contains selfie screen | ||
| Touch display |  | Neither contains Touch display |
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Physical Comparison
In case you're aiming to carry your camera regularly, you need to consider its weight and volume. The Samsung HZ35W has got exterior dimensions of 107mm x 61mm x 28mm (4.2" x 2.4" x 1.1") having a weight of 245 grams (0.54 lbs) and the Sigma Quattro has sizing of 147mm x 95mm x 91mm (5.8" x 3.7" x 3.6") and a weight of 625 grams (1.38 lbs).
See the Samsung HZ35W and Sigma Quattro in our newest Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Remember that, the weight of an ILC will change dependant on the lens you have chosen at the time. Below is a front view proportions comparison of the HZ35W versus the Quattro.
Taking into consideration dimensions and weight, the portability rating of the HZ35W and Quattro is 91 and 63 respectively.
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Sensor Comparison
More often than not, it's hard to visualise the contrast between sensor sizing only by reviewing specifications. The photograph underneath will give you a much better sense of the sensor dimensions in the HZ35W and Quattro.
Plainly, the 2 cameras provide different megapixels and different sensor sizing. The HZ35W because of its tinier sensor will make achieving bokeh harder and the Sigma Quattro will deliver extra detail as a result of its extra 17 Megapixels. Greater resolution will also make it easier to crop photos more aggressively. The older HZ35W is going to be behind with regard to sensor tech.
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Screen and ViewFinder
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhone Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesStreet Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsSports Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modesTravel Comparison
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banLandscape Comparison
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a LandslideVlogging Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next month
Samsung HZ35W vs Sigma Quattro Specifications
| Samsung HZ35W | Sigma sd Quattro | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Make | Samsung | Sigma |
| Model type | Samsung HZ35W | Sigma sd Quattro |
| Otherwise known as | WB650 | - |
| Class | Small Sensor Superzoom | Advanced Mirrorless |
| Introduced | 2010-06-16 | 2016-02-23 |
| Body design | Compact | Rangefinder-style mirrorless |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Chip | - | Dual TRUE III |
| Sensor type | CCD | CMOS (Foveon X3) |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | APS-C |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 23.5 x 15.6mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 366.6mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 12 megapixel | 29 megapixel |
| Anti alias filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 4:3 and 16:9 | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 |
| Highest resolution | 4000 x 3000 | 5424 x 3616 |
| Highest native ISO | 3200 | 6400 |
| Minimum native ISO | 80 | 100 |
| RAW support | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch focus | ||
| Continuous AF | ||
| AF single | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| AF selectice | ||
| AF center weighted | ||
| AF multi area | ||
| Live view AF | ||
| Face detection focusing | ||
| Contract detection focusing | ||
| Phase detection focusing | ||
| Total focus points | - | 9 |
| Lens | ||
| Lens support | fixed lens | Sigma SA |
| Lens zoom range | 24-360mm (15.0x) | - |
| Highest aperture | f/3.2-5.8 | - |
| Macro focusing range | 3cm | - |
| Amount of lenses | - | 76 |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 1.5 |
| Screen | ||
| Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Screen diagonal | 3 inches | 3 inches |
| Resolution of screen | 614k dot | 1,620k dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch function | ||
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | None | Electronic |
| Viewfinder resolution | - | 2,360k dot |
| Viewfinder coverage | - | 100 percent |
| Viewfinder magnification | - | 0.73x |
| Features | ||
| Lowest shutter speed | 16 secs | 30 secs |
| Highest shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | 1/4000 secs |
| Continuous shooting speed | - | 3.8 frames per sec |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manually set exposure | ||
| Exposure compensation | Yes | Yes |
| Set WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash distance | 5.00 m | no built-in flash |
| Flash modes | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in, Slow Sync | no built-in flash |
| Hot shoe | ||
| AEB | ||
| White balance bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment metering | ||
| Average metering | ||
| Spot metering | ||
| Partial metering | ||
| AF area metering | ||
| Center weighted metering | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30, 15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (60, 30 fps) | - |
| Highest video resolution | 1280x720 | - |
| Video format | Motion JPEG | - |
| Mic input | ||
| Headphone input | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | None |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 3.0 (5 GBit/sec) |
| GPS | BuiltIn | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment seal | ||
| Water proofing | ||
| Dust proofing | ||
| Shock proofing | ||
| Crush proofing | ||
| Freeze proofing | ||
| Weight | 245g (0.54 lb) | 625g (1.38 lb) |
| Physical dimensions | 107 x 61 x 28mm (4.2" x 2.4" x 1.1") | 147 x 95 x 91mm (5.8" x 3.7" x 3.6") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery ID | SLB-11A | BP-61 |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Double, Motion) | Yes |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC, Internal | SD/SDHC/SDXC |
| Storage slots | One | One |
| Pricing at launch | $300 | $738 |