Roundup: Compact Digital Cameras : Panasonic DMC-FS3
27. Panasonic DMC-FS3
FX-Lite?
Panasonic's FS series is designed to fill the in between its entry-level LS80 and the high-end FX37 which cost more than twice the price of the former model when it was first released.
If there's not much to separate the FS3 and the LS80, what else do you get for your money with the FX37?
The main difference is the length of the zoom, with the FX37 starting at 25-mm, allowing it to capture a very wide area and making it very well suited to landscapes, while the FS3's starts at 33-mm, a small but certainly noticeable difference.
The overall build quality of the FX series is also much better, more robust. The more expensive cameras feel much more solid in your hand, even though the FS3 does represent a big step forward for entry-level compacts.
Amongst Panasonic's collection of digital cameras, there are some great entry-level models, like the LS80, and some classics like the FX37. In between the two comes the FS range, which makes its debut with the FS3.
The camera, which was first launched nearly a year ago, is hardly brand new, but it has recently been falling in price--so much so that it's now giving the LS80 a run for its money. The sudden drop in price of a camera that should, in theory at least, be better than the LS80, has led us to wonder if Panasonic isn't up to something.
Handling
The LS80 is made of plastic, and, although solid enough, it looks rather old-fashioned at more than 3-cm thick. The FS3 is made from the same materials but is much thinner (2.3 cm) and has a much smoother, more modern finish. Shaving off a few millimeters has made it a little easier for the camera to slip out of your hands, but the small size of theFS3 makes it easy to slide into your pocket, and, of course, much easier on the eye.
The other external elements, including the buttons or the memory card slot, are satisfactory, but the cost-cutting is obvious and the finish just can't compete with the quality of theFX series.
The controls are the same as those on the LS80--and that's not the only similarity: the lens and sensor are both identical too. Using the camera is pretty straightforward, as it makes good use of automatic features, including a few nice details like e.zoom, which allows to zoom in on your subject as much as possible with a single press, rather than gradually adjusting the focal length. A quick menu also gives easy access to the most common functions.
The screen has an average resolution and is reasonably reactive, but suffers from very narrow viewing angles that it's impossible to remedy, even though an option that's supposed to correct for this problems is activated.
For a camera at this price point, the FS3 starts up quickly (around 2.5 seconds), and the autofocus takes about a second, which is an average score. The time you need to wait between taking two photos while the first is saved is relatively short, and the burst mode is actually rather fast and reaches speeds of nearly two frames per second. That's faster than a lot of high-end compacts, and although it's only slightly slower than theFX37, the FS3 can take much longer bursts.
Without a doubt, the intelligent automatic mode will get the most use, and it too works without a problem, recognizing scenes quickly without any irritating pauses. Face detection too is quick, meaning that, all told, using theFS3 is quite a treat.
Image Quality
Somewhat unsurprisingly, the photos themselves are very close to those that we took with the LS80, with the same warm colors under artificial light and the same excellent level of detail for a camera of this size. The upgrade from the Venus Engine III to version IV hasn't made much of a difference , but we did notice a modest improvement in the level of detail above 800 ISO as well as an increased tendency to under-expose the most tricky shots.
Video clips were nice and sharp, with a resolution of 848 x 480 offering more detail than the usual VGA, although you still can't use the zoom while filming.
Rather unusually, the intelligent automatic mode really struggled with our 'Barbie with flash' test, which we use to simulate taking portraits using the flash. Because we shot it against a dark background, the camera switched to a night scene, which completely altered the white balance. Because it's very unlikely that these kind of conditions will be repeated outside of the lab, we decided not to penalize the FS3, and kept the portrait from the 'regular' automatic mode for our Product Face-Offs.
At the end of the day, this camera is an excellent replacement for the LS80. As powerful as it is accessible, it combines some excellent features like face recognition with a very attractive price point, and is more robust and easier on the eye to boot.
There's just one final difference to point out, which is that the FS3 is powered by Panasonic's own battery, while the LS80 uses two standard AA batteries. Whether this is a step forwards or backwards is, of course, a personal decision.
| Panasonic DMC-FS3 | |
|---|---|
| Pluses | Minuses |
|
|
| A slightly more stylish version of the LS80, the FS3 builds on its predecessor's strong points in a more stylish frame. It's a great little entry-level camera, and a worthy successor to the excellent FX12. |  |
should have classified the cameras to at least price and/or final rating. i got discouraged to read.
should have classified the cameras to at least price and/or final rating. i got discouraged to read.
When you say classified, what do you mean? Do you mean the pages should go in order of price, or in order of rating? Such as the cheap ones at the beginning and the expensive ones at the end OR the best cameras at the top and the worst cameras at the bottom?
i meant group them by chosen price ranges/brackets or any feature you think is relevant since comparison between cameras is just difficult with the present format wherein it is only possible to compare models of a certain brand.
It would have been nice if all the cameras were given scores (yes I know this is very subjective, but so are all the comments and pro/con sections). Idealy they would be given su scores as well (i.e. a still picture score, a video score, a asthetics score, a usablity score, maybe some others) and then the cameras could be sorted by those scores with links, maybey a short blurb at each camera in the sorted list. Another thing that would be very usefull to myself and I assume other readers is a features table that allows us to compare all the cameras.