Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5 vs Canon PowerShot SX240 HS

Winner
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5

50

Canon PowerShot SX240 HS

42

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5

Really small
Size
Super compact (95×53×23 mm)
Thin
Thickness
0.9"
Light-weight
Weight
159 g
Long exposures
Longest exposure
60 seconds
 

Reasons to buy the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS

Wide angle
Wide angle lens
25 mm
High-speed framerate
High speed movies
240 fps
Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look
Sensor type
CMOS Sensor
Better in low light

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5.

competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5

Panasonic Lumix DC-GH5

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,998 body only

$1,997 - $2,598 with 12-60mm lens

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Screen size Much larger screen
Size Much larger
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS7

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS7

Compact

Screen size Significantly larger screen
Aperture Wider aperture
Wide angle Significantly worse wide angle
Sony Alpha a6300

Sony Alpha a6300

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$776 - $898 body only

$906 - $998 with 16-50mm lens

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Size Much larger

Canon PowerShot SX240 HS Competitors

Fujifilm FinePix HS25 EXR

Fujifilm FinePix HS25 EXR

Super zoom

$493

Zoom Significantly more zoom
Battery life Much longer battery life
Size Much larger
Canon PowerShot SX230 HS

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS

Travel zoom

$340

GPS Has a GPS
Aperture Wider aperture
Wide angle Significantly worse wide angle
Canon PowerShot SX720 HS

Canon PowerShot SX720 HS

Travel zoom

$294 - $299

Zoom Much more zoom
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

discussion

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FS5
Lumix DMC-FS5
Panasonic

Report a correction
Canon PowerShot SX240 HS
PowerShot SX240 HS
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments