As well as being compared against other travel zooms, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS35 is also often compared to entry-level DSLRs, super zooms, waterproofs, ultra compacts and compacts. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS35's top rivals come from Panasonic (such as the Lumix DMC-FS30 and the Lumix DMC-TZ60) and Nikon (such as the Coolpix L840 and the Coolpix L340)

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS35 compared to other travel zoom competitors include: it is slightly smaller (compact (99×57×28 mm) vs compact (103×59×36 mm)), has better image stabilization (lens vs sensor shift), is slightly lighter (135 g vs 178 g) and significantly longer exposures (60 seconds vs 15 seconds).

However, on average it doesn't have a built-in GPS, has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS), is older (january 2011 vs january 2013) and has a slower max shutter speed (1/1600 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second).

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS30

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS30
1 year older
$220

Significant advantages of the DMC-FS30 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FS30 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Heavier: 178 g vs 135 g

common strengths of the DMC-FS30 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Compact (100×56×28 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 178 g vs 135 g
  • Very thin: 1.1" vs 1.1"

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60
3 years newer
$2,192

Significant advantages of the DMC-TZ60 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Has a GPS
  • Significantly better wide angle: 24 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly more zoom: 30x vs 8x

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-TZ60 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much larger: Compact (111×64×34 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Significantly heavier: 214 g vs 135 g
  • Significantly thicker: 1.4" vs 1.1"

common strengths of the DMC-TZ60 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Compact (111×64×34 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 214 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 1.4" vs 1.1"

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ4

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ4
2 years older

Significant advantages of the DMC-TZ4 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-TZ4 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much larger: Compact (103×59×36 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.5" vs 2.7"
  • Much heavier: 245 g vs 135 g

common strengths of the DMC-TZ4 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Compact (103×59×36 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Light weight: 245 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 1.4" vs 1.1"

Canon PowerShot IXUS 160

Canon PowerShot IXUS 160
4 years newer
$133

Significant advantages of the IXUS 160 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (95×54×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Thinner: 0.9" vs 1.1"
  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the IXUS 160 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Worse image stabilization:
    1. Digital
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Much shorter max exposures: 15 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the IXUS 160 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (95×54×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 127 g vs 135 g
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Canon IXUS 135

Canon IXUS 135
2 years newer

Significant advantages of the IXUS 135 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (93×52×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Faster autofocus: Phase detection vs Contrast detection
  • Thinner: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Significant disadvantages of the IXUS 135 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Worse image stabilization:
    1. Sensor shift
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Significantly shorter battery life: 200 shots vs 250 shots
  • Much shorter max exposures: 15 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the IXUS 135 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (93×52×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 134 g vs 135 g
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS37

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS37
similar age

Significant advantages of the DMC-FS37 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much larger screen: 3" vs 2.7"
  • Has a touch screen

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FS37 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the DMC-FS37 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Compact (99×57×28 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 159 g vs 135 g
  • Very thin: 1.1" vs 1.1"

compared toEntry-level DSLR competitors

Sony SLT A58

Sony SLT A58
2 years newer
$330 (body only)

Significant advantages of the SLT A58 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SLT A58 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the SLT A58 and DMC-FS35

  • None found

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS35 compared to super zoom competitors include: it is slightly smaller (compact (99×57×28 mm) vs prosumer size (114×89×96 mm)), has better image stabilization (lens vs none), is thinner (1.1" vs 3.8"), is slightly lighter (135 g vs 538 g) and much longer exposures (60 seconds vs 4 seconds).

However, on average it has a much narrower wide angle lens (28 mm vs 4 mm), has a much smaller screen (2.7" vs 3"), has a significantly lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 921k dots), doesn't have a screen which flips out and has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Nikon Coolpix L840

Nikon Coolpix L840
4 years newer
$274

Significant advantages of the L840 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much larger screen: 3" vs 2.7"
  • Much longer battery life: 590 shots vs 250 shots
  • Much higher resolution screen: 921k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the L840 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Larger: Prosumer size (114×89×96 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Significantly thicker: 3.8" vs 1.1"
  • Significantly heavier: 538 g vs 135 g

common strengths of the L840 and DMC-FS35

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (114×89×96 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Light weight: 538 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 3.8" vs 1.1"

Nikon Coolpix L340

Nikon Coolpix L340
4 years newer
$237

Significant advantages of the L340 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much better wide angle: 4 mm vs 28 mm
  • Much longer battery life: 960 shots vs 250 shots
  • Much larger screen: 3" vs 2.7"

Significant disadvantages of the L340 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens
  • Significantly thicker: 3.3" vs 1.1"
  • Much shorter max exposures: 1 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the L340 and DMC-FS35

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (111×76×83 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Light weight: 430 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 3.3" vs 1.1"

Canon PowerShot SX500 IS

Canon PowerShot SX500 IS
1 year newer
$962

Significant advantages of the SX500 IS (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much larger screen: 3" vs 2.7"
  • Significantly better wide angle: 24 mm vs 28 mm

Significant disadvantages of the SX500 IS (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Shorter battery life: 195 shots vs 250 shots
  • Thicker: 3.2" vs 1.1"
  • Much shorter max exposures: 15 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the SX500 IS and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Standard size (104×70×80 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 341 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 3.2" vs 1.1"

compared toWaterproof competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS35 compared to waterproof competitors include: it has a significantly larger screen (2.7" vs 2.5"), has image stabilization (lens vs none), is newer (january 2011 vs june 2009), is slightly lighter (135 g vs 156 g) and much longer exposures (60 seconds vs 4 seconds).

However, on average it is significantly larger (compact (99×57×28 mm) vs compact (100×56×25 mm)), significantly lower maximum light sensitivity (1,600 ISO vs 6,400 ISO), is thicker (1.1" vs 1") and is not waterproof.

Pentax Optio W80

Pentax Optio W80
1 year older

Significant advantages of the W80 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the W80 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the W80 and DMC-FS35

  • None found

compared toUltra compact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS35 compared to ultra compact competitors include: it has a slightly wider wide angle lens (28 mm vs 33 mm), has a slightly larger screen (2.7" vs 2.5"), is newer (january 2011 vs february 2009), is slightly lighter (135 g vs 165 g) and significantly longer exposures (60 seconds vs 15 seconds).

However, on average it is much larger (compact (99×57×28 mm) vs ultra compact (87×56×18 mm)), is thicker (1.1" vs 0.7") and doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs tunnel).

Canon Digital IXUS 100 IS

Canon Digital IXUS 100 IS
1 year older

Significant advantages of the 100 IS (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the 100 IS (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the 100 IS and DMC-FS35

  • None found

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH5

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH5
similar age

Significant advantages of the DMC-FH5 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FH5 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the DMC-FH5 and DMC-FS35

  • None found

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS35 compared to compact competitors include: it has a significantly wider wide angle lens (28 mm vs 33 mm), has a slightly larger screen (2.7" vs 2.5"), has better image stabilization (lens vs none), is newer (january 2011 vs february 2007) and significantly longer exposures (60 seconds vs 8 seconds).

However, on average it has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.3 vs f/2.6), is much larger (compact (99×57×28 mm) vs super compact (87×57×23 mm)), has a significantly shorter battery life (250 shots vs 340 shots), is thicker (1.1" vs 0.9") and doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs tunnel).

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS62

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS62
1 year older
$144

Significant advantages of the DMC-FS62 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (97×55×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Thinner: 0.9" vs 1.1"
  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FS62 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much worse wide angle: 33 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.5" vs 2.7"

common strengths of the DMC-FS62 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (97×55×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Very light: 135 g vs 135 g

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH8

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FH8
1 year newer

Significant advantages of the DMC-FH8 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (96×57×19 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Significantly better wide angle: 24 mm vs 28 mm
  • Much larger screen: 3" vs 2.7"

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FH8 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much shorter max exposures: 8 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the DMC-FH8 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (96×57×19 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Very light: 123 g vs 135 g

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W80

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W80
3 years older

Significant advantages of the DSC-W80 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (91×58×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Much longer battery life: 340 shots vs 250 shots
  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-W80 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much worse wide angle: 35 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.5" vs 2.7"
  • Much shorter max exposures: 1 seconds vs 60 seconds

common strengths of the DSC-W80 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (91×58×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Very light: 175 g vs 135 g

Casio Exilim EX-Z4

Placeholder
7 years older

Significant advantages of the EX-Z4 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (87×57×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None
  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the EX-Z4 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller screen: 2" vs 2.7"
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens
  • Much worse wide angle: 35 mm vs 28 mm

common strengths of the EX-Z4 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (87×57×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 170 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS42

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS42
1 year older

Significant advantages of the DMC-FS42 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (98×55×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Thinner: 0.9" vs 1.1"
  • Faster max shutter speed: 1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FS42 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens
  • Much worse wide angle: 33 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.5" vs 2.7"

common strengths of the DMC-FS42 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (98×55×22 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Very light: 132 g vs 135 g
  • Thin: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS10

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS10
1 year older
$172

Significant advantages of the DMC-FS10 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • Much smaller: Super compact (98×55×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FS10 (vs the DMC-FS35)

  • None found

common strengths of the DMC-FS10 and DMC-FS35

  • Very small: Super compact (98×55×23 mm) vs Compact (99×57×28 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Very light: 163 g vs 135 g