As well as being compared against other compacts, the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS15 is also often compared to entry-level DSLRs, travel zooms and super zooms. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS15's top rivals come from Panasonic (such as the Lumix DMC-FX100 and the Lumix DMC-ZS7) and Canon (such as the Rebel T5i and the PowerShot SX30 IS)
Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS15 compared to other compact competitors include: it has better image stabilization (lens vs digital), has a faster max shutter speed (1/2000 of a second vs 4 seconds) and significantly longer exposures (60 seconds vs 8 seconds).
However, on average it is older (january 2009 vs january 2010).
Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS15 compared to entry-level DSLR competitors include: it has image stabilization (lens vs none), is much smaller (super compact (97×54×22 mm) vs professional size (133×100×79 mm)), is thinner (0.9" vs 3.1"), is much lighter (136 g vs 580 g) and much longer exposures (60 seconds vs 30 seconds).
However, on average it records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 30fps), has a much smaller screen (2.7" vs 3"), has a much lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 1,040k dots), takes much lower resolution photos (9.8 MP vs 17.9 MP) and doesn't have a touch screen.
Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS15 compared to travel zoom competitors include: it is slightly smaller (super compact (97×54×22 mm) vs compact (103×60×33 mm)), is thinner (0.9" vs 1.3"), is slightly lighter (136 g vs 218 g) and has a faster max shutter speed (1/2000 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second).
However, on average it has a slightly narrower wide angle lens (29 mm vs 25 mm), doesn't have a built-in GPS, has a slightly smaller screen (2.7" vs 3"), doesn't have a touch screen and is older (january 2009 vs january 2011).
Generally, some of the advantages of the Panasonic DMC-FS15 compared to super zoom competitors include: it is significantly smaller (super compact (97×54×22 mm) vs professional size (123×92×108 mm)), is thinner (0.9" vs 4.3"), is significantly lighter (136 g vs 601 g) and significantly longer exposures (60 seconds vs 15 seconds).
However, on average it has a significantly narrower aperture (f/3.3 vs f/2.7), has a much narrower wide angle lens (29 mm vs 24 mm), doesn't have a screen which flips out, is older (january 2009 vs september 2010) and doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital).
