Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX9 vs. Canon Powershot A620

[kikanjuuneko]

So, let me tell you my story.

Basically, I've had a Canon Digital Ixus V3 for two years now, a camera which I've learnt to hate with my whole heart. Indeed, for the most part, it was completely unable to serve me with any kind of decent picture, whether indoors or outdoors, in daytime or nighttime. Neither vacation photos nor photos from the local punk rock show were anything else than a waste of memory card space. In particular, when it comes to shows, I either had to take photos either flashless and be presented with blurry blobs in black space, or use the flash and be greeted with what looks like someone spitting on the camera lens.

To add insult to injury, the camera in question is now completely non-functioning. No matter what I try to take a photo of, all I get is a completely black picture. And I've pretty much had enough.

So now that I'm finally in a position where I have some money to spend, I've set my eyes on two different cameras: the Canon Powershot A620 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX9, both of which I can get my hands on for roughly the same price (and the Canon with a 512 MB memory card, nonetheless).

So what I want is a camera that will take good, bright photos and especially stable photos, even in bad lighting conditions. And preferrably with as few "droplets" on the photo as possible. I like the Lumix because of its built-in stabilizer, and I like the Powershot because it lets you manually fiddle with pretty much everything.

So what do you guys think?

[coldrain]

I have used an IXUS v myself, and found it to be very capable in normal light conditions. So my guess is your beef is mostly with its lower light performance. Well, for photos of people that do not stand very still to pose in not so light conditions, you either need to flash or you need to use higer ISO values (more sensitive) to reduce shutter time. Else the subjects will look blurry from their movement captured on the photo.
Besides that the FX9 has rather crap image quality (its 5mp sibling the FX8 is MUCH better), the IS will not help you since it does not shorten the exposure time but counter acts the camera shaking you get with longer exposures, giving still subject movement blur.

The most likely solution will be to get a Fuji camera, they use a more sensitive kind of sensor making higher ISO values less noisy and more usable. The F10 (and the F11, its follow up with some manual controls) are about the size of the Canon A620, and the Z1 and its followup the Z2 are smaller, like the FX8/9.

The F10/11 has the edge in image quality, the Z1/Z2 has the edge in compactness. No other camera will be able to make low light non flash photos without either a lot of noise or subject movement blur.

I still find it puzzling you did not manage to get good photos out of that V3 in sunny outside days, so maybe no camera will give you satisfactory results ;) :p

[Koosla]

Image stabilizers, for all their virtues (which I've come to love, especially when using zoom), are only partially successful for indoor, low-light scenarios. They'll work for still subjects (like night outdoors of buildings and such), but moving ones will be a blur, especially if you trust the stabilizer enough as to allow for the camera to choose low shutter speeds.

For indoor situations like the punk rock show you mention, a high ISO sensitivity is -save for flash usage- the only way a tiny camera will be able to choose reasonable shutter speeds that will avoid both camera movement AND subject movement. Most pocket cameras don't do well in the high ISO department, but the Fuji F10/F11 (and the rumoured substitute, I guess) are rare exceptions in that they will usually give you acceptable results even at the highest ISO1600 setting. Certainly not nearly in the same league as a dSLR, but quite usable nonetheless.

And of course they're equally good at day, outdoors, landscapes, etc. Other good points of these two cameras are their adequate resolution and lens, quite good dynamic range (for a JPEG only camera), generally nice speed and response, and long battery life. And the F11 even has some manual controls to play with.

[kikanjuuneko]

coldrain: I'm as puzzled as you are, but when I was in Morocco last year, I literally had to take the same photo three or four times with the IXUS v3 before it wasn't a blurry mess. I've tried to avoid using it at all since, and now it's just plain old dead.

Koosla: Well, my idea wasn't really to use too much of the image stabilizer during shows or anything, but just to be able to take good shots at all, which I found to be a harrowing task with my last camera. As for the A620, I had the idea because it let you fiddle with all the settings, including shutter speed and aperture, which works fine with me, as I took basic photography in high school (I failed it, but let's write that up to creative differences between myself and my teacher).

However, both of you did succeed with getting me interested in the Fuji F10, which is rather tempting, as I found it on my local Pricerunner only slightly more expensive than a DMC-FX9 or an A620 with a 1 GB memory card. Thanks!

[Koosla]

However, both of you did succeed with getting me interested in the Fuji F10, which is rather tempting, as I found it on my local Pricerunner only slightly more expensive than a DMC-FX9 or an A620 with a 1 GB memory card. Thanks! The Fuji F11, as an improvement over the F10, offers both shutter speed and aperture control. It is my understanding that it's hard to find in the USA, but if you can get it from international resellers, it might be just the pocket camera you need ;)

[kikanjuuneko]

I can find it just fine here. I'll go with the F11, then. :)