Updated (September 2011): Compare the Canon Powershot S100 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

Canon Powershot S100 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

Winner
Canon Powershot S100

56

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

34

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon Powershot S100

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/2
Really small
Size
Compact (99×60×28 mm)
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
240 fps
24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds
GPS
Built-in GPS
Great for travel

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon Powershot S100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10.

competitors

Canon Powershot S100 Competitors

Canon PowerShot S120

Canon PowerShot S120

Pro digicam

$520

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Supports 24p No 24p support
Canon PowerShot S110

Canon PowerShot S110

Pro digicam

$449

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
GPS No built-in GPS
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Pro digicam

$489 - $498

Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Travel zoom

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Size Significantly larger
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Travel zoom

$298

Zoom Much more zoom
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Size Larger
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100 (Lumix DMC-TZ100)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100 (Lumix DMC-TZ100)

Travel zoom

Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Size Much larger

discussion

Canon Powershot S100
Powershot S100
Canon

Report a correction
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10
Lumix DMC-TZ10
Panasonic

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments