General ZS100 vs ZS200 compact question

saudidave wrote:

sheepless wrote:

I'm going to Europe this fall and am currently looking at a variety of camera options.

First off I should acknowledge that despite owning a variety of cameras over the years (currently using an FZ300 which is too large) my current goal is to find a small compact camera (fits in my bag) with zoom and ability to shoot in a wide variety of situations (ie: low light, macro, landscape, portrait and artchitecture). We will be visiting a number of museums, restaurants, night markets, vineyards etc.

In reviewing the dpreview comparison I see that the ZS100 gets a gold star rating and the ZS200 has a silver. In what I have read they are both good for macro, and the ZS100 has a longer zoom range.

I am wondering if the newer ZS200 is a better model because it is a newer model? It is $200.00 CDN more than the ZS100. Since I own neither I'm wondering which direction I should go.

Aside from using my FZ300 I take a lot of photos on my phone. It has been suggested that I just bring my IPhone, but I have difficulty accepting that suggestion, as I find taking photos fun and all part of the travelling experience.

I consider myself still very much a beginner despite having a had camera of various incarnations going back to the film days. Ease of use is important as I tend to get lost in the weeds if the menus are complex. I use EVF on my FZ300. I use Snapseed for post processing photos. My photos are only shared online and occassionally put together in a family calendar etc.

Sorry for blathering on - I wonder if anyone who has an ZS100 thought it was worth upgrading or if someone was going to make an initial purchase would pay an extra $200.00 CDN for the ZS200.

I'm a long term user of both cameras. Why the ZS100 gets a silver and the ZS100 a gold is a complete mystery to me. The IQ is the same and the 200 has vastly superior zoom (15 v 10x), the ergonomics are streets ahead and the evf is bigger and brighter. The longer zoom has a price to pay in terms of a slightly decreased aperture but it is so miniscule it makes no difference whatsoever in the real world. I have no scientifically proven evidence but I am convinced the IS is better on the 200 and that negates the aperture loss as lower shutter speeds can be used. That is what I have found with my copies.

The ZS200 is well worth the extra for the ergonomics alone, the rest of the improvements are a mssive bonus

Thank you for this - it is exactly the first hand user information I was looking for. For the ergonomics and better EVF alone it sounds like the ZS200 would better suit my needs.