Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (
-   Panasonic / Leica (
-   -   FZ35 vs FZ150 low ISO still image quality ? (

surplusshooter Jul 10, 2012 10:03 AM

FZ35 vs FZ150 low ISO still image quality ?
I have the Panasonic Lumix FZ35 and just love it's super sharp "still" image quality when shot at ISO 80. I would really like to know if there is a noticeable difference in the "still" image quality in photos shot with the FZ150 at it's lowest ISO setting which is ISO 100. I know that the FZ150 has many more features than that of the FZ35, I not concerned with that, just low ISO image quality. Is there anyone out there that have or has had both cameras that can give me an honest evaluation. Thanks.

Ozzie_Traveller Jul 10, 2012 5:44 PM

G'day ss

I had the FZ35 for many years and was always unimpressed with the noisy images in low light.
fwiw- my FZ was a grey market job ... other FZ's that I played with gave better results > but all that's another long story

My missus has the FZ100, so here are some qwik images from today
We're out in the motorhome at the moment and the pic is a pile of stuff thrown into a corner of the couch.
It's 7am, overcast & raining, not much light is coming thru the windows, so the couch is pretty dark - the fabric is a dark-blue colour with patches on it
In image-1, the meter showed both speed & f-stop in red, indicating out-of-range ... at iso-400 it came 'white', thus telling me that at iso-100 the pix were 2EV underexposed

1- here's the scene as a whole @ iso-1600

2- here's an edge-of-frame view

3- here's a centre-of-frame view

To create this montage, 3x images were shot as ex-camera jpg using iso-100 + iso-400 + iso-1600. A 640 x 640pixel chunk was copied into a new canvas of 2000px x 800px and the text inserted at the bottom of the canvas. Finally it was saved to 1024px wide jpg of about 250kb in size for uploading here

Hope this helps your decisions ...
Regards, Phil

SIMON40 Jul 10, 2012 6:32 PM

Without having owned either- though I do have an FZ-150 on the way.. :) ... I wouldn't imagine there would be much difference with low iso image quality.
The differences between the FZ-35 and the FZ-150 would be more noticeable as the iso increases- certainly past iso 400...
The FZ-150 is certainly superior in many other ways- improved movie capture,longer AND wider zoom range,faster autofocus and burst speeds,adjustable LCD- and much more besides....
However,if you're happy with your zoom range- and won't be shooting using higher iso's- then I guess you wouldn't be gaining much.
Just be aware- higher iso capability not only allows more flexibility in lower light, it also enables faster shutter speeds for lively/moving subjects.... :)

scot628 Jul 14, 2012 11:39 AM

2 Attachment(s)
I don't think you need worry. The FZ150 does really well at iso 100. I have both the FZ35 and currently have a FZ150 and loved them both. In good light both the iso80 and iso 100 pics are clear and sharp. I've added a couple of run of the mill examples - the river shot was taken with the fz35 at iso 80 and the building picture was with the fz150 at iso100. Both look crisp to my untrained eye! Hope that helps.

pboerger Jul 14, 2012 12:38 PM

I have both, having switched to the FZ150 a couple of months ago. Given the very narrow parameters of your question, simple still shots in low ISO only, the cost of the FZ150 would not be worth it. The FZ35 takes excellent basic pictures in the right hands. ALL things being equal, however, the FZ150 is a superior camera in many ways.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:45 PM.