Nikon D7100 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)

Winner
Nikon D7100

67

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)

59

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D7100

Large screen
Screen size
3.2"
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
Great viewfinder coverage
Viewfinder coverage
100%
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Continuous shooting
Rapid fire
12 fps
Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D7100.

competitors

Nikon D7100 Competitors

Nikon D7200

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$629 - $697 body only

$997 - $1,150 with 18-140mm lens

Battery life Significantly longer battery life
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Movie continuous focus Doesn't focus continuously recording movies
Nikon D5300

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$474 body only

$459 with 18-55mm lens

GPS Has a GPS
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Viewfinder coverage Much less viewfinder coverage
Nikon D5600

Nikon D5600

Entry-level DSLR

$468 - $597 body only

$500 - $647 with 18-55mm lens

GPS Has a GPS
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Viewfinder coverage Much less viewfinder coverage

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000) Competitors

Placeholder

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX99

Travel zoom

$448

Size Much smaller
Thickness Much thinner
Aperture Narrower aperture
Placeholder

Canon PowerShot SX740 HS

Travel zoom

$338 - $399

Size Much smaller
Thickness Much thinner
Touch screen No touch screen
Placeholder

Panasonic Lumix DC-FZ1000 II

Super zoom

$898

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Size Slightly smaller
External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack

discussion

Nikon D7100
D7100
Nikon

Report a correction
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)
Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)
Panasonic

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments