Just Posted: Panasonic DMC-FH7 compact camera review

What is the point of reviewing yet anothe not very interestingr compact which starts at 28mm and too many pixels? Better do a grouptest with a gang of similar candidates.

If you look at the preselected cameras in the studio comparison tool, you can see that there is a marked quality difference between cameras, even at this price level.
My mom wont pore over such a review, but she may ask me what camera I will recommend to her.

It is also interesting to know how far these low-end cameras have come with respect to image quality.
It is irritating to see that the megapixel race has started again.

These types of reviews are great for people like myself who work in retail. We sell both cheap and higher-end consumer cameras and I can't be bothered to learn the insignificant differences between cheap cameras. This is helpful just for telling me what it's good at and bad at. That is really all people need to know on basic compacts. Also it can't hurt to broaden DPReview's audience to include the average joe a bit more like this does.

The obvious point is this: too many budget compact cameras appear each year to allow full reviews of all. Enthusiasts may not care about such cameras, but consumers at large want at least some independent reference.

It might be more useful and cost-effective, though, to score such cameras by means of annual group roundups of competing models, as done recently in the case of rugged and water-resistance devices.

I am impressed that CCD sensors are making a comeback in some devices. Is there a generic reason? Perhaps it reduces rolling shutter in video mode, but what else?

I think the compact review format is perhaps TOO brief. I don't even see the lens aperture range listed anywhere? Was the physical size of the sensor mentioned? Please be sure to give us essential specs like this!

Would have brought this camera if it is 10mp with F2.8-5.6. 28-112mm.....

The 16 Mpix is just silly. The studio scene comparison tool reveals it painfully.
Clearly the Lumix FH7 lens isnt sharp enough to take advantage of the sensor resolution. It is just a waste. In stead, the FH7 is handicapped with poor hi-iso performance as well. And with a lens starting at f3.1 and going to f6.5 when zoomed, that is a bad combo.

There havent been any recent revolutions, 16 Mpix is far too much for such a small sensor. And clearly, the higher number of pixels, the more the camera will sell.

This review just proves how badly high pixel density affects image detail and noise. As another poster said, keep these cameras in the group reviews.

Please more p&s reviews!!
Many people here buy compacts.

If we're getting extra mini reviews that don't delay the bigger cam reviews, then I say keep em coming.

Honestly.... I think "group reviews" are the best way to handle these mundane cameras.

This site seems to specialize in reviewing enthusiast level gear, and they should do more of that and less of this. There are other sites that review every camera released, and do a better job reviewing low end products.

I love Panasonic cameras but I don't know why every Panasonic point & shoot seems to take priority on this site. I am guessing there are some politics involved.
We have been waiting for a review of the Sony HX100v for ever (and finally we had some studio shots added) but it seems that every Panasonic that comes out gets special attention.

"Dpreview was great when they actually did reviews of any camera category."

To be fair, there was a time when the compact camera market was pretty diverse; Fuji had their SuperCCD technology, Kodak had their unusual twin-lens design, and there was still a fair amount of differentiation between compact models.

Nowadays compact cameras are a commodity, not aimed at the kind of people likely to pore over full-sized samples. People buy them because they're on offer in the local Argos, or they like the colour. They're broadly the same in terms of performance, often using the same sensors and lens units, which puts DPReview in the awkward position of either repeating itself, or becoming ever-more obsessed with tiny trivial differences. The group tests are a good solution in this respect.

It's nice to see DPR reviewing less featured cameras, but I do not agree to review every camera. I think they can make their own pre-selection before posting a review, for most DPR visitors don't need to have reviews of all cameras, but of those that reach at least an above average performance in general. But as exceptions, they of course should continue to review those cameras (ultracompact or not, cheap or not) that are highly claimed or expected to be great cameras but aren't, as a kind of warning and demystification caused by overrated reviews or exaggerated (or well appealing) ads.

Wow, a compact camera review after ages, DP review is becoming exciting again!!!

Finally! You should have done this years ago and we wouldn't be stuck with tons of previews that only get to be reviews when interest in the camera has already waned. Kudos!