FX200, 600mm: {} G3X, 600mm: {} Moving into the realm of digital zoom: FZ200, 48X: {} G3X, 50X: {} FZ200, 96X: {} G3X, 100X: {} The FZ200 has been tweaked with in-camera settings, per Graham Houghton. The G3X is straight out of the box, about an hour ago. Taken in P mode, at whatever settings the cameras thought were right and proper. Additional: Fz200, 48x, iso 1600: {} G3X, 50x, iso 4000: {} I would be interested in any comments on the comparison. Cheers, Jock
The G3X could use some tweaking, e.g., sharpening. The light bulb shot really shows the effect of the larger sensor Why was the iso a stop and bit higher on the G3X?
I'm not in the market for a superzoom, but thought this might be a good place to mention that there is a used (9 out of 10) FZ200 at B & H for $189. Even if you just use it as a fixed 600 lens, it's quite a deal. Maybe for someone who wants to adopt the two camera solution. Used Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Digital Camera DMC-FZ200K B&H
Nice comparison Jock. To me it validates the idea that if one of these were to be your only camera it would seem logical to invest in the more expensive, larger sensor option. But if you have other primary options, for low light, or whatever, then going with the value option might make a lot of sense (and dollars).
And the LX-7 is under $200 at Adorama. So for under $400 you can get a decent two camera solution that covers a wide focal range.
