Canon SX40 vs. Panasonic FZ150

Started May 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
Greynerd
Senior MemberPosts: 3,839
Like?
Re: Canon SX40 vs. Panasonic FZ150
In reply to akula57, May 7, 2012

There are so many discussions on this that I know it all by heart.

Panasonic have overcome what appears to be the most formidable technical challenge which exists for camera manufacturers, putting a filter thread on a non interchangeable lens. Canon use a nasty plastic mount and an even nastier adapter to provide the facility. Once a filter is screwed into the adapter unscrewing it is a secret known only to a few. Amazingly this bodge is used on their premium G1-X.

The Panasonic has a fast focus. The Canon has a much longer reach and good high ISO performance but is heavier, by modern standards the Panasonic is no longer a super zoom, though development may be hampered by trying to keep the same size filter thread. I suspect the image quality of the SX40 is better.

I would think whichever one you buy you will most probably want the other one after buying it which is what the manufacturers want. If a camera was produced that was completely satisfactory the whole industry would collapse.

I have a SX40 and I am not sure if I am friends with it at the moment after my battles with the adapter. My primeval instincts took over and I messed up a filter thread with some pliers. Reading DPR has shown me more intelligent methods to tackle the problem using more recently evolved mental functions. Who knows next week me and the SX40 might be the best of buddies and I no longer want to make friends with the FZ150.

I would say the FZ150 is an excellent FZ150 and the SX40 an excellent SX40 and I doubt if anyone can really tell which is best for you.

akula57 wrote:

I just bought the SX40 (returnable). Early shots are good --- I have an illness and cannot go out for a few weeks.

Anyway, 35x is 35x but the FZ150 seems to be getting even better reviews. (Perhaps the 24x zoom has certain benefits?.) Supposedly, the 150 has better OIS, better video (60p vs. 24p), raw, better speed, maybe a better sensor, and better viewfinder. Also 230,000 LCD vs. 460,000 LCD. IQ --- I'm not sure which is "better."

Anyway, to those SX40 owners out there what do you think? The SX40 is cheaper ($486 for a 24x P&S even if a Leica is almost D3100 DSLR territory and more than the LX5 --- the SX40 is as low as $349). Is the SX40 good enough and does it require a tripod? (I'm not big on carrying a tripod.)

I do prefer the price and preliminarily colors are good and 35x is 35x --- even if I only go out to 25x or so. It's well made if a bit big. Is the IS good enough?

dpreview gave the FZ150 a very good review score and does not seem to review Canon long zooms very often. Some say the SX40 is held back a bit by Canon's programming and should be "jailbroken" if that's the right word (I'd rather not.) A review might help at least a bit. SX40 reviews by individuals on dpreview seem very good as do FZ150 reviews (even the ZS20 got an excellent review on here). For about $349 I don't see how I could go too far wrong and I know I prefer it to the P500 which I returned.

Thanks for any help!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
SeeNew
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow