Panasonic Lumix TZ30 vs Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

Winner
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30

58

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

50

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix TZ30

Really small
Size
Compact (105×59×28 mm)
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
220 fps
Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Thin
Thickness
1.1"
 

Reasons to buy the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10

Longest exposure
Long exposures
60 seconds
GPS
Built-in GPS
Great for travel

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10.

competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Travel zoom

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Travel zoom

$367

Zoom Significantly more zoom
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60

Travel zoom

$251

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

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS60 (Lumix DMC-TZ80)

Travel zoom

Movie format Higher resolution movies
Continuous shooting Shoots much faster
GPS No built-in GPS
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ70

Travel zoom

$367

Zoom Much more zoom
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
GPS No built-in GPS
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5v

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5v

Travel zoom

$215

Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
Continuous shooting Shoots significantly faster
Screen resolution Lower resolution screen

discussion

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ30
Lumix TZ30
Panasonic

Report a correction
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ10
Lumix DMC-TZ10
Panasonic

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments