Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5

Winner
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6

77

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5

59

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
1,036k dots
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 30fps
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5

Movie format
Full HD
1080p @ 60fps
Sensor type
CMOS Sensor
Better in low light
Screen resolution
High resolution screen
920k dots
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons

galleries

Explore our gallery of 5 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5.

competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100 (Lumix DMC-TZ100)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS100 (Lumix DMC-TZ100)

Travel zoom

Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
Viewfinder Has a viewfinder
Movie format Lower resolution movies
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$538 with 14-42mm lens

External flash Supports an external flash
Weight Lighter
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Image stabilization No image stabilization

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF7

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$536 with 12-32mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Battery life Shorter battery life
Leica D-LUX 5

Leica D-LUX 5

Pro digicam

Image stabilization Image stabilization
External flash Supports an external flash
Movie format Lower resolution movies
Sony NEX-5N

Sony NEX 5N

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Lens availability Significantly fewer lenses available

discussion

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF6
Lumix DMC-GF6
Panasonic

Report a correction
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF5
Lumix DMC-GF5
Panasonic

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments