Head to Head: Fujifilm FinePix F100fd vs. Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35

[David Rasnake]

The middle of the month has rolled around again, meaning it's time for another comparison courtesy of DCR's Head to Head series. In this month's bout, two high-end, wide-zoom compacts – the Fujifilm FinePix F100fd and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35 – head into the ring for a wide-angle smackdown of epic proportions: "Two cameras enter, one camera leaves!" Or something...

The idea for this pairing was suggested by DCR reviewer Jim Keenan – who provided our analysis of both cameras – in his final thoughts on the Fuji:

"After reviewing the Panasonic FX35, I was sure I'd discovered the compact to get for my sister who wanted to take photos without any real involvement other than being there, but now comes the Fuji F100fd and the decision is up in the air. The Panasonic was a favorite because of its excellent lens, but the Fuji's got a lens that's pretty close. Decisions, decisions."

Decisions indeed. With comparable price tags and some serious specs offered up all around, how to navigate the murky waters separating these two titans of compact camera performance? Based on Jim's review notes and feedback plus my own experience shooting with both cameras, here's one take on how two of the most solid performers in this class stack up.

---

Sophistication and Style

At a price point above $300 for a compact camera, carefully thought out, intentional styling becomes less of a nicety and more of a necessity. On that score, both the F100fd and the FX35 pass muster. Issues of style being largely issues of personal taste, it's assumed that some will disagree with my judgments in this category. Most basically, suffice it to say that neither camera commits serious design atrocities.

Though they're both nicely crafted and should both appeal to certain users, the F100fd and the FX35 represent two fairly divergent approaches to the digicam design problem. The slightly larger Fuji emphasizes curved surfaces, with a front panel dominated by the lens.

(view large image)

 

The F100's signature curved top is an interesting touch that sets it apart from the mass of anonymous digicams. From a design standpoint, I found the Fuji's flash placement directly in front of the zoom toggle just a bit too easy to cover with an errant finger.

(view large image)

An uncluttered back panel and a slightly larger LCD than the Panasonic also give the Fuji a sense of refinement. The control surface is a typical Fuji take on the standard d-pad arrangement, and though the entire interface can feel a bit unfamiliar at first, things quickly fall into place with the F100fd.

The Panasonic is comparatively longer and leaner, with a skinnier profile all around and more grip space to the left of the lens.

(view large image)

 

A slightly more traditional d-pad arrangement occupies the FX35's rear deck. Larger buttons are still on my wish list for future Lumix models, but build quality on the Panasonic is excellent in just about every way, with tight seams and basically no flex.

(view large image)

Overall, the F100fd keeps things classy (and not Will Ferrell classy, either) in matte silver, but it just doesn't bring the industrial-style visual interest and tactile appeal of the FX35's alloy body. If you don't care one way or another how your camera looks, the whole question's a moot point, but from where I sit the FX35 the better looking, better feeling choice.

Advantage: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35

---

Features and Specs

The Fuji rolls into this ring with a fearsome 12 megapixels of resolution. Once, this would have been taboo territory for a compact camera, with more grain than you'll find in a box of Wheaties in every shot – especially in low light. The game changer, of course, is that the F100fd uses Fuji's eighth-generation SuperCCD sensor, which, as we'll see in the image quality analysis, makes basically every bit of that added resolution usable in just about any situation.

Of course, the difference between the FinePix's 12 megapixels and the Lumix's 10.1 is all but impossible to distinguish at normal print sizes. In terms of modes and options, the Panasonic is also the more well dressed of these two cameras, with an array of AF and metering options given advanced shooters everything they could ask for – except manual exposure control, that is.

The great leveler between these two devices is the zoom lens. Both highly tout their wide-angle abilities – the Fuji has a 28mm wide end, the Panasonic an even more impressive 25mm variant – as a key selling point. The Lumix delivers a wider view, but with its 4x range it also runs out of steam at the equivalent of about 100mm. Although the Fuji is marginally narrower, a top-end range out to 140mm gives the FinePix a little more balance where covering the full gamut of possibly shooting scenarios is concerned.

On paper at least, and to some (albeit small) measure in practice as well: though it's close to a tie, a bigger zoom range, more resolution, Fuji's famed SuperCCD sensor, and a larger screen all add up to a physical specs victory for the FinePix.

Advantage: Fujifilm FinePix F100fd

---

Ease of Use

The F100fd goes in a slightly different direction than the previous manual-exposure F cameras it replaces: there are no manual controls, with the FinePix boasting its accommodating point-and-shoot capabilities instead. In this mindset, what appeals to me about the Fuji (and what may ultimately frustrate shooters seeking advanced options) is how well its more advanced features are segregated within the menu system. If you want more control, it's there; if you want to shoot unencumbered by lots of options, you've got it.

By contrast, Panasonic targets a slightly more gadget savvy consumer with its FX cameras. There's still no doubt that the Lumix is easy to use, with its Intelligent Auto mode handling essentially the full range of settings if you so choose. What tips the balance on this one in favor of the Fuji, however, is the Lumix's "icon and acronym" approach to stuffing as many features as possible into a tiny camera. Tech heads will love all that the FX35 does, but those more interested in pointing and shooting may be left wishing for something a little more familiar and less overwhelming.

Advantage: Fujifilm FinePix F100fd

---

Image Quality

Fuji's ace in hole is unquestionably its low light performance. Side-by-side comparisons of 100-percent crops from the F100fd and the FX35 suggest that the Fuji has a solid stop of performance improvement over the averagely noisy Panasonic, with ISO 800 shots from the latter looking more like ISO 1600 from the former.

Fujifilm FinePix F100fd, ISO 1600, 100% Crop

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35, ISO 800, 100% Crop

If IQ judgments were based entirely on noise performance, Fuji would walk away with this one as well. Sadly for the FinePix, in real world usage they're simply not. Optically, the two cameras are a good match, with good sharpness all around; in this match-up, the Panasonic may have a slight edge in terms of overall abilities, but it's not enough of a lead to definitively decide the issue in my mind.

What seals the deal for the Lumix, however, is its fantastic approach to color and processing: the FX35 impressed us with what it was capable of in terms of vibrancy and wide-range color reproduction, turning in a performance that the F100fd, even with all of its advanced dynamic range expansion options, really can't match.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35 (view large image)

While the Fuji can be brought to life to some degree by working in its proprietary F-Chrome color mode, the saturation gain at this point is almost too much, and is a little artificial looking on balance compared to the FX35's rich straight-from-the-box image tone.

For more sample images and a detailed breakdown of image quality for each camera, check out our full reviews:

• Fujifilm FinePix F100fd Review
• Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35

Advantage: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35

---

Price and Value

As noted, both cameras are slotted in roughly the same price bracket, with street prices on average coming close to the $350 mark in both cases. The tie-breaker in this case comes in the fact that some reputable online retailers have recently offered the FX35 for under $300, with the camera falling as low as $290 from one well-rated vendor in the past week alone.

Moreover, the FX35 has been on the market slightly longer than the only recently available F100fd, meaning that we'll likely see even more deals in the short term on the Panasonic. For cameras that come away so even matched on balance, $50 in savings might be enough to sway consumers toward the Lumix.

Advantage: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX35

---

Conclusions

In the interest of full disclosure, I've done little to hide the fact that the FX35 is one of my favorite cameras so far in this year's new crop (it won an Editor's Choice award around here, after all). Of course, no camera is perfect, and the FX35 is no exception. What's interesting to me in this comparison is how much these two devices complement each other, with the Panasonic's weaknesses playing to the Fuji's strengths and vice versa. I suppose one solution would be to buy both, but then you'd be out nearly $700 and two pockets.

The fact that they're such clear contrasts in some ways – the Fuji's curviness versus the Panasonic's straight-edged industrial look, the Panasonic's vibrant image tone in outdoor shots versus the Fuji's impressive low light abilities – may make choosing between the F100fd and the FX35 that much easier or that much harder, depending on your perspective. They're unquestionably different cameras with fairly well-defined capabilities differences, brought together by similar price classing and optically proficient wide-angle lenses on both sides. The perfect camera might well be the one that unites the respective strengths of each of these two competitors, but even on their own, either of these powerful point-and-shoots can be a great choice depending on what your needs are.

[chengdude]

I'm not sure I'd describe a battle of two diminutive pocket cams as a "smackdown of epic proportions"...maybe a "slaparound"?

Glad to see Panasonic staying on top of their game with the FX-35; makes me all the more curious how the FX-500 would fare with that extra 1x of zoom. Panasonic really has had the whole pocket camera thing figured out for quite a while now, so much so that I'm worried there's an emphasis on ever more gadget creep (and certainly pixel bloat) over imaging performance in recent FX iterations. Nothing so far has made me anxious to toss my FX-01, although the 25mm and better AF modes make it tempting.

[David Rasnake]

I'm not sure I'd describe a battle of two diminutive pocket cams as a "smackdown of epic proportions"...maybe a "slaparound"?

I once saw a textbook description of humor as "the juxtaposition of incongruous elements." I guess the idea of two tiny cameras locked in an epic struggle was my attempt at humor, by this definition.

I tend to agree about Panasonic having perfected the compact camera formula. It's interesting to me, in a very early evaluation of the FX500 (which we're reviewing right now - first thoughts coming in the next few days) that it diverges from the basic look, with a lot more plastic than I'm used to seeing on a Panasonic. I expected it to feel very much like the FX35, but in a side-by-side analysis it would be hard to tell unless you know as much that the cameras were even from the same manufacturer.

dr

[chengdude]

it diverges from the basic look, with a lot more plastic than I'm used to seeing on a Panasonic. I expected it to feel very much like the FX35, but in a side-by-side analysis it would be hard to tell unless you know as much that the cameras were even from the same manufacturer.

(covers ears)

Noooo, don't say that. I can't hear you... I can't hear you...

Looks like you've just revealed a major reason the loaded FX-500 was announced at only $50 more than the FX-35.

[David Rasnake]

Sorry for the spoiler. I shot some with the FX500 yesterday, and I'm taking it out shooting this morning, so I should be able to say a least a little more soon.

dr

[user]

why 1600 ISO of Fuji compared with 800 ISO of Panasonic?
obviously 800 ISO of Panasonic is better
you should compare same ISO shots
this is the first 'head to head' I read and I would like to say that more in depth and shots comparison is needed
thanks anyway

[David Rasnake]

why 1600 ISO of Fuji compared with 800 ISO of Panasonic?
obviously 800 ISO of Panasonic is better
you should compare same ISO shots
this is the first 'head to head' I read and I would like to say that more in depth and shots comparison is needed
thanks anyway

As I wrote in the text of the piece:

"Fuji's ace in hole is unquestionably its low light performance. Side-by-side comparisons of 100-percent crops from the F100fd and the FX35 suggest that the Fuji has a solid stop of performance improvement over the averagely noisy Panasonic, with ISO 800 shots from the latter looking more like ISO 1600 from the former."

The point is that ISO 800 from the Panasonic is roughly the same as ISO 1600 from the Fuji, and in turn, that the Fuji has some noise performance advantages over Panasonic. I believe they look quite similar, and can't see that the Panasonic looks significantly better than the Fuji, even at a lower ISO.

As for more sample images, that's why the links to the original reviews are there.

dr

[Persian]

Thanks for the great and fair compare.

There is no doubt that Fuji has the best-in-class ISO performance, but almost all the Fuji cameras like to choose an high ISO in full auto mode that is unnecessary. Since many consumers don't know even what is ISO, (forget the limited Auto-ISO setting), it's possible they have noisy pictures sometimes. So since we are in consumer level, I think the F100fd's great ISO performance is not a big advantage over its rival.

The consumers say that Fuji cameras have dull output with neutral colors, so they usually prefer the Panasonic's (or Canon's) output. They are right, but prosumer level is a different story and Fuji's output changes to a life-raw-SLR like output with a wide PP potential (colors, shadows, highlights, noise, etc.) and Panasonic's output will be an artificially-digitally-manipulated looking output with a limited PP potential.

I do prefer Fuji's output (I'm a S6000fd user), but again, since the F100fd and FX35 are in the consumer level, so I think the FX35 is a better choice.