Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)

Winner
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

100

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500 (Lumix DMC-FZ2000)

76

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/1.8
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
1,229k dots
Really small
Size
Compact (102×58×41 mm)
High true resolution
True resolution
20 MP
 

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

Light sensitivity
High ISO
25,600 ISO
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
Fastest shutter speed
Fast shutter speed
1/4000 of a second

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III.

competitors

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Competitors

Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II

Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark II

Pro digicam

$532 - $649

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Screen resolution Lower resolution screen
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV

Pro digicam

$650 - $898

Continuous shooting Shoots faster
Battery life Shorter battery life
Canon PowerShot SX620 HS

Canon PowerShot SX620 HS

Travel zoom

$179 - $249

Zoom Slightly more zoom
Size Slightly smaller
Aperture Much narrower aperture

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

Placeholder

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX99

Travel zoom

$448

Size Much smaller
Thickness Much thinner
Aperture Significantly narrower aperture
Placeholder

Canon PowerShot SX740 HS

Travel zoom

$338 - $399

Size Much smaller
Thickness Much thinner
Aperture Narrower aperture
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

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III
Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III
Sony

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

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments