Canon R3 vs Panasonic FZ2000

The Canon EOS R3 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2000 (labelled Panasonic FZ2500 in some countries) are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in September 2021 and September 2016. The R3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the FZ2000 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on a full frame (R3) and an one-inch (FZ2000) sensor. The Canon has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Panasonic provides 20 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Canon R3		Panasonic FZ2000
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Canon RF mount lenses		24-480mm f/2.8-4.5
24 MP – Full Frame sensor		20 MP – 1" sensor
6K/60p Video		4K/30p Video
ISO 100-51,200 (50 - 204,800)		ISO 125-12,800 (80 - 25,600)
Electronic viewfinder (5760k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (2360k dots)
3.2" LCD – 4150k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Swivel touchscreen		Swivel touchscreen
12 shutter flaps per second		12 shutter flaps per second
In-body stabilization		Lens-based stabilization
Weathersealed body		not weather sealed
760 shots per battery charge		350 shots per battery charge
150 x 143 x 87 mm, 1015 g		138 x 102 x 135 mm, 915 g

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check FZ2000 price at
amazon.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Canon EOS R3 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2000? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The physical size and weight of the Canon R3 and the Panasonic FZ2000 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Panasonic FZ2000 is considerably smaller (34 percent) than the Canon R3. It is worth mentioning in this context that the R3 is splash and dust resistant, while the FZ2000 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the FZ2000 has a lens built in, whereas the R3 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup.

Concerning battery life, the R3 gets 760 shots out of its Canon LP-E19 battery, while the FZ2000 can take 350 images on a single charge of its Panasonic DMW-BLC12 power pack. As can be seen in the images above, the R3 has a battery grip built in. This facilitates image-taking in portrait orientation and gives it additional battery power. The power pack in the R3 can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.

Body Specifications

#		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R3	150 mm	143 mm	87 mm	1015 g	760	Y	Sep 2021	5,999	amazon.com
2.		Panasonic FZ2000	138 mm	102 mm	135 mm	915 g	350	n	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
3.		Canon R6 Mark II	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	670 g	450	Y	Nov 2022	2,499	amazon.com
4.		Canon 1D X Mark III	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1440 g	2850	Y	Jan 2020	6,499	amazon.com
5.		Canon R5	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	738 g	320	Y	Jul 2020	3,899	amazon.com
6.		Canon R6	138 mm	98 mm	88 mm	680 g	360	Y	Jul 2020	2,499	amazon.com
7.		Canon 1D X Mark II	158 mm	168 mm	83 mm	1530 g	1210	Y	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	152 mm	116 mm	76 mm	950 g	950	Y	Mar 2012	3,499	ebay.com
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	152 mm	114 mm	75 mm	850 g	850	Y	Sep 2008	3,499	ebay.com
10.		Fujifilm X100F	127 mm	75 mm	52 mm	469 g	390	n	Jan 2017	1,299	ebay.com
11.		Leica SL2-S	146 mm	107 mm	83 mm	931 g	510	Y	Dec 2020	4,895	amazon.com
12.		Panasonic FZ1000	137 mm	99 mm	131 mm	831 g	360	n	Jun 2014	899	ebay.com
13.		Sony RX100 V	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	299 g	220	n	Oct 2016	999	ebay.com
14.		Sony RX10 II	129 mm	88 mm	102 mm	813 g	400	Y	Jun 2015	1,299	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX100 IV	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	298 g	280	n	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
16.		Sony A850	156 mm	117 mm	82 mm	895 g	880	Y	Aug 2009	1,999	ebay.com
17.		Sony A900	156 mm	117 mm	82 mm	895 g	880	Y	Sep 2008	2,999	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The FZ2000 was launched at a lower price than the R3, despite having a lens built in. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Canon R3 features a full frame sensor and the Panasonic FZ2000 an one-inch sensor. The sensor area in the FZ2000 is 87 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.0 and 2.7. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

With 24MP, the R3 offers a higher resolution than the FZ2000 (20MP), but the R3 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.00μm versus 2.41μm for the FZ2000) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the R3 is a much more recent model (by 4 years and 11 months) than the FZ2000, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels.

The resolution advantage of the Canon R3 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the R3 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Panasonic FZ2000 are 27.4 x 18.2 inches or 69.5 x 46.3 cm for good quality, 21.9 x 14.6 inches or 55.6 x 37.1 cm for very good quality, and 18.2 x 12.2 inches or 46.3 x 30.9 cm for excellent quality prints.

The R3 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Canon EOS R3 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 51200, which can be extended to ISO 50-204800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2000 are ISO 125 to ISO 12800, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 80-25600.

In terms of underlying technology, the R3 is build around a Stacked BSI-CMOS sensor, while the FZ2000 uses a BSI-CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). Of the two cameras under review, the R3 provides substantially higher image quality than the FZ2000, with an overall score that is 26 points higher. This advantage is based on 2 bits higher color depth, 2.1 EV in additional dynamic range, and 2.9 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Canon R3	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	6K/60p	25.0	14.7	4086	96
2.		Panasonic FZ2000	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	23.0	12.6	538	70
3.		Canon R6 Mark II	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4k/60p	25.4	14.6	3154	96
4.		Canon 1D X Mark III	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.2	14.5	3248	91
5.		Canon R5	Full Frame	44.8	8192	5464	8K/30p	25.3	14.6	3042	95
6.		Canon R6	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4k/60p	24.2	14.3	3394	90
7.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Full Frame	20.0	5472	3648	4K/60p	24.1	13.5	3207	88
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	Full Frame	22.1	5760	3840	1080/30p	24.0	11.7	2293	81
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	Full Frame	21.0	5616	3744	1080/30p	23.7	11.9	1815	79
10.		Fujifilm X100F	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.9	13.2	1704	81
11.		Leica SL2-S	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	4K/60p	25.2	14.1	3504	95
12.		Panasonic FZ1000	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.1	11.7	517	64
13.		Sony RX100 V	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.4	586	70
14.		Sony RX10 II	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	23.0	12.6	531	70
15.		Sony RX100 IV	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	22.8	12.6	591	70
16.		Sony A850	Full Frame	24.4	6048	4032	none	23.8	12.2	1415	79
17.		Sony A900	Full Frame	24.4	6048	4032	none	23.7	12.3	1431	79
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the R3 provides a higher video resolution than the FZ2000. It can shoot video footage at 6K/60p, while the Panasonic is limited to 4K/30p.

Feature comparison

Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under consideration are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the R3 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the FZ2000 (5760k vs 2360k dots). The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Canon R3, the Panasonic FZ2000, and comparable cameras.

Core Features

#		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Canon R3	5760	Y	3.2 / 4150	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
2.		Panasonic FZ2000	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Canon R6 Mark II	3690	n	3.0 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
4.		Canon 1D X Mark III	optical	Y	3.2 / 2100	fixed	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	n
5.		Canon R5	5760	Y	3.2 / 2100	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
6.		Canon R6	3690	n	3.0 / 1620	swivel	Y	1/8000s	12.0/s	n	Y
7.		Canon 1D X Mark II	optical	Y	3.2 / 1620	fixed	Y	1/8000s	16.0/s	n	n
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	optical	Y	3.2 / 1040	fixed	n	1/8000s	6.0/s	n	n
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	optical	Y	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/8000s	3.9/s	n	n
10.		Fujifilm X100F	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	n	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
11.		Leica SL2-S	5760	Y	3.2 / 2100	fixed	Y	1/8000s	20.0/s	n	Y
12.		Panasonic FZ1000	2359	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Sony RX100 V	2359	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	24.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Sony RX10 II	2359	Y	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/3200s	14.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony RX100 IV	2359	n	3.0 / 1228	tilting	n	1/2000s	16.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony A850	optical	Y	3.0 / 922	fixed	n	1/8000s	3.0/s	n	Y
17.		Sony A900	optical	Y	3.0 / 922	fixed	n	1/8000s	5.0/s	n	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One feature that is present on the R3, but is missing on the FZ2000 is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.

The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, both cameras under consideration feature an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).

The Canon R3 and the Panasonic FZ2000 both have an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

The R3 writes its imaging data to CFexpress (type B) or SDXC cards, while the FZ2000 uses SDXC cards. The R3 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the FZ2000 only has one slot. The R3 supports UHS-II cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 312 MB/s), while the FZ2000 can use UHS-I cards (up to 104 MB/s).

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Canon EOS R3 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2000 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

#		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Canon R3	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
2.		Panasonic FZ2000	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
3.		Canon R6 Mark II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
4.		Canon 1D X Mark III	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.1	Y	-	Y
5.		Canon R5	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
6.		Canon R6	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	micro	3.2	Y	-	Y
7.		Canon 1D X Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	3.0	-	-	-
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	Y	mono / mono	Y	Y	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Fujifilm X100F	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Leica SL2-S	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	full	3.2	Y	-	Y
12.		Panasonic FZ1000	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
13.		Sony RX100 V	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
14.		Sony RX10 II	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
15.		Sony RX100 IV	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
16.		Sony A850	Y	- / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony A900	Y	- / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

Studio photographers will appreciate that the Canon R3 (unlike the FZ2000) features a PC Sync socket, so that professional strobe lights can be controlled by the camera.

Both the R3 and the FZ2000 are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The FZ2000 replaced the earlier Panasonic FZ1000, while the R3 does not have a direct predecessor. Further information on the features and operation of the R3 and FZ2000 can be found, respectively, in the Canon R3 Manual (free pdf) or the online Panasonic FZ2000 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Canon R3 or the Panasonic FZ2000 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS R3:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 20MP) with a 10% higher linear resolution.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (26 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (2 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (2.1 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (2.9 stops ISO advantage).
• Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (6K/60p vs 4K/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (5760k vs 2360k dots).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.76x vs 0.74x).
• Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
• Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.2" vs 3.0") for image review and settings control.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (4150k vs 1040k dots).
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/8000s vs 1/4000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• More portrait friendly: Features an integrated vertical grip for easier portrait shooting.
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (760 versus 350) on a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
• Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.2 vs 2.0).
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Better studio light control: Has a PC Sync socket to connect to professional strobe lights.
• Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
• Faster buffer clearing: Supports a more advanced SD data transfer standard (UHS-II vs UHS-I).
• More modern: Reflects 4 years and 11 months of technical progress since the FZ2000 launch.

Reasons to prefer the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2000:

• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the R3 necessitates an extra lens.
• More compact: Is smaller (138x102mm vs 150x143mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Less heavy: Has a lower weight even though it has a lens built in (unlike the R3).
• Easier fill-in: Has a small integrated flash to brighten shadows of backlit subjects.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2016).

If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the R3 is the clear winner of the match-up (24 : 6 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Canon R3 and the Panasonic FZ2000 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and Best Superzoom Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the R3 or the FZ2000. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

Expert reviews

This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

#		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Canon R3	5/5	o	4.5/5	..	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2021	5,999	amazon.com
2.		Panasonic FZ2000	..	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
3.		Canon R6 Mark II	5/5	+ +	4.5/5	91/100	4.5/5	5/5	Nov 2022	2,499	amazon.com
4.		Canon 1D X Mark III	..	+ +	5/5	..	4.5/5	4/5	Jan 2020	6,499	amazon.com
5.		Canon R5	4.5/5	+	4/5	91/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2020	3,899	amazon.com
6.		Canon R6	5/5	+ +	4/5	90/100	4.5/5	5/5	Jul 2020	2,499	amazon.com
7.		Canon 1D X Mark II	..	..	4.5/5	89/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2016	5,999	ebay.com
8.		Canon 5D Mark III	..	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Mar 2012	3,499	ebay.com
9.		Canon 5D Mark II	4/5	91/100	..	79/100	4/5	..	Sep 2008	3,499	ebay.com
10.		Fujifilm X100F	5/5	+	3.9/5	83/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	1,299	ebay.com
11.		Leica SL2-S	4/5	..	4/5	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Dec 2020	4,895	amazon.com
12.		Panasonic FZ1000	4/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2014	899	ebay.com
13.		Sony RX100 V	4.5/5	+ +	..	83/100	4/5	4.5/5	Oct 2016	999	ebay.com
14.		Sony RX10 II	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2015	1,299	ebay.com
15.		Sony RX100 IV	4.5/5	+ +	..	85/100	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	999	ebay.com
16.		Sony A850	3/5	..	..	75/100	..	4.5/5	Aug 2009	1,999	ebay.com
17.		Sony A900	..	+ +	..	+ +	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2008	2,999	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Thus, a score needs to be put into the context of the launch date and the launch price of the camera, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check FZ2000 price at
amazon.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make your choice using the following search menu. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check R3 price at
amazon.com
Check FZ2000 price at
amazon.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.