Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48

Winner
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150

50

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48

46

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150

High speed movies
High-speed framerate
220 fps
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
CMOS Sensor
Sensor type
Better in low light
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48

Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds
Screen size
Large screen
3"
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150.
Explore our gallery of 19 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48.

competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200

Super zoom

$400

Battery life Significantly longer battery life
High-speed framerate Higher speed movies
Size Larger
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$559 body only

$995 with 14-140mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Interchangeable lenses Has interchangeable lenses
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$447 body only

$393 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Supports 24p Supports 24p
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40

Super zoom

$480

Screen resolution Lower resolution screen
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

Super zoom

$725

Battery life Longer battery life
Size Slightly smaller
Screen size Much smaller screen
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300

Super zoom

$493 - $598

Movie format Higher resolution movies
External mic jack Has an external mic jack
Size Larger

discussion

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150
Lumix DMC-FZ150
Panasonic

Report a correction
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ48
Lumix DMC-FZ48
Panasonic

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments