Support Cameralabs by shopping at our partner stores or donating via Paypal
 






Follow my RSS feed at Camera Labs RSS Feed
 
  Latest camera reviews

Panasonic Lumix LX100
Canon SX60 HS
Sony Cyber-shot H400
Canon ELPH 340 IXUS 265
Canon G7X
Nikon P530
Canon SX520 HS
Canon G1 X Mark II
Panasonic Lumix FZ1000
Panasonic TZ60 / ZS40
Sony RX100 III review
Sony A3000 review
Canon EOS 1200D T5
Sony WX350
Nikon P600
Sony Alpha A5000
Sony Cyber-shot HX400V
Panasonic Lumix GH4
Panasonic TS5 FT5
Sony Alpha A6000
Canon SX700 HS
Canon SX600 HS
Olympus TOUGH TG2
Nikon AW1
Nikon D3300
Fujifilm XT1
Olympus STYLUS 1
Sony Cyber-shot RX10
Olympus OMD EM1
Panasonic Lumix GM1
Nikon D610
Sony Alpha A7
Nikon D5300
Canon PowerShot A2500
Sony Alpha A7r
Canon ELPH 130 IXUS 140
Nikon COOLPIX P520
Nikon COOLPIX L820
Canon PowerShot S120
Panasonic Lumix GX7
Canon SX510 HS
Canon PowerShot G16
Fujifilm X20
Panasonic FZ70 / FZ72
Canon EOS 70D
Sony RX100 II
Canon ELPH 330 IXUS 255
Panasonic Lumix GF6
Fujifilm XM1
Olympus EP5
Panasonic Lumix LF1
Panasonic TZ35 / ZS25
Olympus XZ2
Sony HX300
Panasonic Lumix G6
Sony HX50V
Fujifilm X100S
Canon SX280 HS
Canon EOS SL1 / 100D
Panasonic TZ40 / ZS30
Nikon D7100
Nikon COOLPIX A
Fujifilm X-E1
Canon EOS 6D
Nikon D5200
Panasonic Lumix GH3
Canon PowerShot S110
Panasonic Lumix G5
Sony NEX-6
Panasonic Lumix FZ200
Canon PowerShot SX50 HS
Nikon COOLPIX P7700
Olympus E-PL5
Canon EOS M
Panasonic TS20 / FT20
Canon PowerShot G15
Nikon D600
Nikon COOLPIX L810
Canon PowerShot D20
Sony RX100
Panasonic Lumix LX7
Canon SX500 IS
Fujifilm HS30 EXR
Sony HX200V
Panasonic FZ60 / FZ62
Canon 520HS / 500HS
Canon 110HS / 125HS
Nikon D800
Canon EOS T4i / 650D
Canon PowerShot A3400
Panasonic ZS15 / TZ25
Olympus E-M5
Nikon D3200
Fujifilm X-Pro1
Canon PowerShot A2300
Canon SX240 / SX260
Samsung NX200
Sony Alpha SLT-A77
Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Panasonic ZS20 / TZ30
Canon PowerShot G1 X
Sony NEX-7
Panasonic GX1
Olympus E-PM1
Nikon V1
Sony NEX-5N
Canon EOS T3 / 1100D
Canon EOS 600D / T3i
Nikon D7000
Canon EOS 60D
Canon EOS 550D / T2i
Canon EOS 7D

All camera reviews
 
 
   
 
  Best Buys: our top models
   
  Best Canon lens
Best Nikon lens
Best Sony lens
Best budget DSLR
Best mid-range DSLR
Best semi-pro DSLR
Best point and shoot
Best superzoom
Best camera accessories
   
 



Camera Labs Forum

Any questions, comments or a great tip to share? Join my Camera forum and let everyone know!
   
 
  DSLR Tips



 
Free Shipping on ALL Products
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35 Gordon Laing, September 2009

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35 results :
Real-life resolution / High ISO Noise

Panasonic Lumix FZ38 / FZ35 vs Canon PowerShot SX20 IS vs EOS 450D / XSi Real-life resolution

Support this site by checking prices below

 

To compare real-life performance we shot the same scene with the Panasonic Lumix FZ38 FZ35, Canon PowerShot SX20 IS and Canon EOS 450D / XSi within a few moments of each other using their best quality JPEG and lowest ISO settings.

The lenses on each camera were adjusted to deliver the same vertical field of view.

 

The image above was taken with the Panasonic Lumix FZ38 / FZ35 in Program mode at 6mm f4 and with a sensitivity of 80 ISO; the original Fine JPEG measured 3.52MB. Note the FZ38 / FZ35 automatically selected an aperture of f5.6 by default for this composition, but we used Program Shift to match the f4 setting of the Canon SX20 IS and to better avoid diffraction (discussed below). The original Canon SX20 IS image measured 3.72MB. The crops are taken from the areas marked by the red squares and presented here at 100%.

Note the Canon 450D / XSi captures wider 3:2 aspect ratio images, so by matching the vertical field of view, we're effectively treating the DSLR here as a 10.8 Megapixel camera, delivering 4:3 shaped images.

Starting with the first row of crops taken from the mountain ridge in the upper left corner, it’s obvious both Canon’s are suffering from some coloured fringing, whereas it’s completely absent on the Panasonic. This is a repeat of our findings with their predecessors, where we discovered the Panasonic’s fringe-free performance is not due to superior optics, but simply digital correction in-camera.

This correction is applied automatically to JPEGs whether you like it or not, but can be disabled when processing RAW files – and doing so reveals a similar degree of fringing to the Canon. While this proves their optics are similarly corrected, Panasonic’s digital reduction of coloured fringing remains a valuable feature and one that delivers nice, clean looking results. It’s been particularly beneficial in our telephoto results further down this page.

From this point on though, the remaining samples from both super-zooms look very similar. Previously we noted the FZ28 had looked a little softer than the SX10 IS, but this was down to diffraction at the smaller aperture automatically selected by the Panasonic in its Program mode (explained lower down this page). With both cameras using the same aperture of f4 here, the degree of detail recorded is essentially the same.

In terms of image processing, the default settings of the Canon SX20 IS are slightly punchier than the Panasonic FZ38 / FZ35, delivering a little extra contrast and sharpening, but that’s something you can adjust on both cameras if desired. One final note: look very closely in the arches of the central building on the fourth row of crops and you’ll see a tiny amount of fringing on the Canon SX20 IS sample which again has been corrected on the Panasonic.

In the meantime, the EOS 450D / XSi is recording a similar degree of detail, with slightly restrained image processing resulting in a softer image, characteristic of a DSLR. The biggest differences between the DSLR and super-zooms here is the optical correction of their respective lenses, with the DSLR kit lens suffering in some areas – seen most obviously in the third crop. So if you’re shooting at the lowest sensitivities under bright conditions, the super-zooms could deliver a superior overall result (accepting a little background noise when viewed at 100%). The major difference in quality comes at higher sensitivities where the DLSR with its bigger sensor takes a decisive lead.

You can see that in action in our High ISO Results page, but if you can stick around a few moments longer, scroll down to see how both super-zooms compare when zoomed-into their longest focal lengths, along with some comparisons at different apertures which could (and should) make you think about always trusting automatic settings.


 

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35
Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
Canon EOS 450D / Rebel XSi
   
f4, 80 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f8, 100 ISO
         
   
f4, 80 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f8, 100 ISO
         
   
f4, 80 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f8, 100 ISO
         
   
f4, 80 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f8, 100 ISO


Panasonic Lumix FZ38 / FZ35 vs Canon PowerShot SX20 IS Real-life resolution telephoto

Support this site by shopping below

 
 

To compare real-life telephoto performance we shot the same scene with the Panasonic Lumix FZ38 / FZ35 and Canon PowerShot SX20 IS within a few moments of each other using their best quality JPEG and lowest ISO settings.

The lenses on each camera were fully zoomed-in to their maximum respective focal lengths.

 

The image above was taken with the Panasonic Lumix FZ38 / FZ35 in Program mode at 86.4mm f5.6, and with a sensitivity of 80 ISO; the original Fine JPEG measured 3.39MB. The crops are taken from the areas marked with the red rectangles and presented here at 100%.

First things first: the composition above was taken from the same location as our first shot at the top of the page, albeit with the cameras tilted down a little. It illustrates the enormous optical range you have at your disposal with both cameras, taking you from decent wide angle to super-telephoto capabilities. The question though is whether the quality is compromised as a result. Below we've compared crops taken from each camera zoomed-into their maximum focal lengths of 486mm for the Panasonic and 560mm for the Canon. With the longer focal length, the SX20 IS crops show a smaller area. We chose not to match the field of view here, instead wanting to see how each compared when fully zoomed-in.

Analysis of the crops below essentially results in a repeat of those above: the FZ38 / FZ35's crops exhibit impressively low fringing (due to in-camera processing as explained above), but are marred by a fine texture of noise. In contrast, while the SX20 IS exhibits greater coloured fringing around high contrast areas in the corners, it enjoys crisper, cleaner details.

But to be fair both cameras are still delivering very respectable results here given their extreme zoom ranges. Given the often disappointing quality of early super-zooms, it's impressive just how good they've now become. Now scroll down further to see a comparison of the FZ38 / FZ35 at f4.0, f5.6 and f8 to see how diffraction can become an issue when shooting real-life subjects, followed by a RAW versus JPEG comparison.


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35
 
Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
f5.6 , 80 ISO
f5.7, 80 ISO
f5.6 , 80 ISO
f5.7, 80 ISO
f5.6 , 80 ISO
f5.7, 80 ISO
f5.6 , 80 ISO
f5.7, 80 ISO


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35: Diffraction issues

In our tests, the Panasonic FZ38 / FZ35 often selected smaller apertures than the Canon SX20 IS when faced with the same scene in its Program mode, due to a reluctance to use shutter speeds faster than 1/500 unless in extreme circumstances. For example, in the first shot at the top of this page, the Panasonic selected f5.6, while the Canon selected f4.

This may not sound like a significant difference – indeed it’s only one stop in exposure terms – but optically it can have a noticeable impact. As the aperture reduces (using bigger f-numbers), an optical effect known as diffraction comes into play, reducing the sharpness of the image. Indeed at the minimum aperture of f8 on these super-zooms, it can significantly impact the quality.

To illustrate the impact of diffraction at different aperture settings, we shot the same scene at f4, f5.6 and f8, and have cropped the same area at 100% below. It’s immediately clear the f4 version looks best of all, with f5.6 looking a little softer and the f8 sample looking much softer.

As mentioned above, the FZ38 / FZ35 had a tendency to select f5.6 under bright conditions in its Auto / Program modes, when it could alternatively have gone for f4 and a faster shutter speed instead. To be fair, this is a better situation than the earlier FZ28 and FZ18 which actually opted for f8 under similar conditions, but it’s still not ideal.

Luckily a simple prod of the joystick in Program can shift the aperture to a preferred value, or you could manually select it in Aperture Priority. The important thing is to keep an eye on the selected aperture when shooting in Program mode. If it’s at f5.6 or higher and you don’t need the maximum depth-of-field, then consider shifting it to a smaller value like f4 – as you can see below, the results will be sharper. Before wrapping up this page, scroll down a little further to see the FZ38 / FZ35's RAW performance.


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35 diffraction at different apertures

   
f4, 80 ISO (with Program shift)
f5.6, 80 ISO (as metered in Program)
f8, 80 ISO (with Program shift)

 


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35: JPEG versus RAW


We photographed the scene here in the Lumix FZ38 / FZ35's RAW plus JPEG mode, allowing us to directly compare images created from exactly the same data. Strangely the Silkypix Developer Studio supplied with our camera failed to recognise the RAW files, but luckily Adobe's latest Camera RAW 5.5 did (at least for the FZ35 version of the camera). So below are 100% crops taken from the original JPEG file alongside the RAW version, processed with Adobe Camera RAW.

Using Camera RAW's default settings, the RAW file looked softer than the JPEG - indeed this is what we've also experienced with Silkypix in the past. So for a more useful comparison we doubled the default values for sharpening and detail for the crop below right. This has brought out a little extra detail, although at the cost of more visible noise patterns - most noticeable on the lake. Increasing Camera RAW's luminance noise reduction can eliminate this, although at the cost of smearing other details, so as always it's a case of finding a balance which works for you.

Either way though, don't expect miracles from the FZ38 / FZ35's RAW files in terms of additional detail or tonal information - most of the benefit is being able to easily make other adjustments like White Balance or Noise Reduction, after the event. It's this capability that gives the FZ38 / FZ35 an edge over the Canon SX20 IS which officially does not offer RAW recording.

Now let's see how it performs at higher sensitivities, in our Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35 High ISO results page.


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35: JPEG
 
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35: RAW
f4, 80 ISO
f4, 80 ISO


Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ38 / FZ35 results : Real-life resolution / High ISO Noise


All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2014 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.

/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs