Support this site by price checking below

Panasonic Lumix FZ28 vs Canon PowerShot SX10 IS outdoor scene telephoto

Note: as above, both the Panasonic FZ28 and Canon SX10 IS were in Program mode, where this time they automatically selected apertures of f7.1 and f5.7 respectively. This once again raises concerns over diffraction on the FZ28, but see our note at the top of this page.

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 SX10 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 FZ28’s crops exhibit impressively low fringing (due to in-camera processing as explained above), but are marred by softness and a fine texture of noise which becomes more obvious if you increase the sharpening. In contrast, while the SX10 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 earlier super-zooms, it’s impressive just how good they’ve now become. Now scroll down further to see a comparison of the FZ28 at f4.0 and f5.6 to see if diffraction is an issue at these settings when shooting real-life subjects, followed by a RAW versus JPEG comparison.

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28		Canon PowerShot SX10 IS
f7.1, 100 ISO		f5.7, 80 ISO
f7.1, 100 ISO		f5.7, 80 ISO
f7.1, 100 ISO		f5.7, 80 ISO
f7.1 , 100 ISO		f5.7, 80 ISO

The examples above show the FZ28 automatically selecting smaller apertures than the Canon 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; coincidentally the FZ18 did exactly the same thing. Since this first page of results is designed to compare how the automatic modes on each camera evaluate the same scene, we’ve stuck with the default settings for our main discussion here.

Diffraction and subsequent loss of fine detail is however an issue at smaller apertures, and the settings selected by the FZ28 here were operating close to its minimum of f8. As explained above, this is due to the camera’s Program line which tends to avoid shutter speeds faster than 1/500 in Program unless it absolutely has to – so when faced with a bright scene at its lowest ISO, it has no choice but to close the aperture. Indeed we have two examples in our Gallery where the FZ28’s Program mode actually chose f8 at 1/400 and 1/500, rather than f5.6 at 1/800 or 1/1000.

While this is an odd decision by Panasonic’s engineers when setting the Program line for the FZ28 (compared to the Canon which aims for larger apertures with quicker shutters if it’s bright), it does of course beg the question whether the Lumix could record greater detail at smaller f-numbers. So we reshot our standard outdoor scene with the FZ28 zoomed-out at every f-number in Aperture Priority mode to see.

Below are crops taken from the samples at f4.0 and f5.6. There’s arguably a fractional improvement in fine detail on the f4.0 sample on the left (most obviously in the foliage areas), but it’s hardly a difference of night and day, and continues to show the FZ28 exhibiting an overall softness compared to the Canon SX10 IS. The quality does however drop significantly at f8, and worryingly we found the FZ28 (like the FZ18 before it) using this aperture several times under very bright conditions – see our Gallery for examples. Again to avoid this, you may need to manually choose larger apertures using Program Shift or Aperture Priority.

While this first results page compares each camera in their automatic modes, we switch to Aperture Priority for our studio results on the next page to discover the optimum settings. But first scroll down a little further to see the FZ28’s RAW performance.

We photographed the scene here in the Lumix FZ28’s RAW plus Fine JPEG mode, allowing us to directly compare images created from exactly the same data. Below are 100% crops taken from the original JPEG file alongside the RAW version, processed with the supplied Silkypix Developer Studio 3.0SE software using its default settings.

As we’ve seen before with Silkypix, the default settings deliver softer results than the in-camera JPEGs, and the crop below also exhibits posterisation effects that give it a slightly unnatural, painted appearance. Silkypix does of course offer a wealth of adjustments though including the ability to tweak noise reduction and apply lens corrections. So while the result below is not particularly impressive, we’re still very pleased to find RAW on the FZ28 – it’s a key advantage over the SX10 IS, and as you’ll see on the next page it offers a small boost in ultimate resolution. And as always, you may achieve better results with alternative RAW development software.

Now let’s look at the Lumix FZ28’s resolution in a studio environment.

The image left was taken with the Panasonic Lumix FZ28 in Program mode at 6mm f5.6 and with a sensitivity of 100 ISO; the original Fine JPEG measured 2.34MB. The crops are taken from the upper left, center, lower right and lower left portions of the originals and presented here at 100%.