Sony A3000 vs Panasonic FZ200

The Sony Alpha A3000 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in August 2013 and July 2012. The A3000 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the FZ200 is a fixed lens compact. The cameras are based on an APS-C (A3000) and a 1/2.3-inch (FZ200) sensor. The Sony has a resolution of 19.8 megapixels, whereas the Panasonic provides 12 MP.

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

Headline Specifications

Sony A3000		Panasonic FZ200
Mirrorless system camera		Fixed lens compact camera
Sony E mount lenses		25-600mm f/2.8
19.8 MP – APS-C sensor		12 MP – 1/2.3" sensor
1080/60i Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 100-16,000		ISO 100-3,200 (100 - 6,400)
Electronic viewfinder (202k dots)		Electronic viewfinder (1312k dots)
3.0" LCD – 230k dots		3.0" LCD – 460k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)
2.5 shutter flaps per second		12 shutter flaps per second
470 shots per battery charge		540 shots per battery charge
128 x 91 x 85 mm, 411 g		125 x 87 x 110 mm, 588 g

Check A3000 offers at
ebay.com
Check FZ200 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Sony Alpha A3000 and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200? 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

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Sony A3000 and the Panasonic FZ200 is provided 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 size 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 FZ200 is notably smaller (7 percent) than the Sony A3000. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the A3000 nor the FZ200 are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the FZ200 has a lens built in, whereas the A3000 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the A3000 and their specifications in the Sony E-Mount Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the A3000 gets 470 shots out of its Sony NP-FW50 battery, while the FZ200 can take 540 images on a single charge of its Panasonic DMW-BLC12 power pack. The power pack in the A3000 can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.

The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. 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.		Sony A3000	128 mm	91 mm	85 mm	411 g	470	n	Aug 2013	329	ebay.com
2.		Panasonic FZ200	125 mm	87 mm	110 mm	588 g	540	n	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
3.		Canon SX50	123 mm	87 mm	106 mm	595 g	315	n	Sep 2012	429	ebay.com
4.		Canon SX60	128 mm	93 mm	114 mm	650 g	340	n	Sep 2014	549	ebay.com
5.		Panasonic FZ100	124 mm	82 mm	92 mm	540 g	410	n	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
6.		Panasonic FZ150	124 mm	82 mm	92 mm	528 g	410	n	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
7.		Panasonic FZ300	132 mm	92 mm	117 mm	691 g	380	Y	Jul 2015	599	amazon.com
8.		Sony A58	129 mm	95 mm	78 mm	492 g	690	n	Feb 2013	599	ebay.com
9.		Sony A5000	110 mm	63 mm	36 mm	269 g	420	n	Jan 2014	449	ebay.com
10.		Sony A5100	110 mm	63 mm	36 mm	283 g	400	n	Aug 2014	549	ebay.com
11.		Sony A6000	120 mm	67 mm	45 mm	344 g	360	n	Feb 2014	599	ebay.com
12.		Sony A6400	120 mm	67 mm	50 mm	403 g	410	Y	Jan 2019	899	amazon.com
13.		Sony NEX-3N	110 mm	62 mm	35 mm	269 g	480	n	Feb 2013	499	ebay.com
14.		Sony NEX-6	120 mm	67 mm	43 mm	345 g	360	n	Sep 2012	999	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-7	120 mm	67 mm	43 mm	400 g	430	n	Aug 2011	1,349	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX1	113 mm	65 mm	70 mm	482 g	270	n	Sep 2012	2,799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX1R	113 mm	65 mm	70 mm	482 g	270	n	Jun 2013	2,799	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

The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. 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 imaging sensor is a crucial determinant of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its 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 Sony A3000 features an APS-C sensor and the Panasonic FZ200 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the FZ200 is 92 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.5 and 5.6. The sensor in the A3000 has a native 3:2 aspect ratio, while the one in the FZ200 offers a 4:3 aspect.

With 19.8MP, the A3000 offers a higher resolution than the FZ200 (12MP), but the A3000 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 4.25μm versus 1.53μm for the FZ200) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the A3000 is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 1 month) than the FZ200, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the FZ200 has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Sony A3000 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the A3000 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 27.3 x 18.2 inches or 69.3 x 46.1 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 21.8 x 14.5 inches or 55.4 x 36.9 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 18.2 x 12.1 inches or 46.2 x 30.8 cm. The corresponding values for the Panasonic FZ200 are 20 x 15 inches or 50.8 x 38.1 cm for good quality, 16 x 12 inches or 40.6 x 30.5 cm for very good quality, and 13.3 x 10 inches or 33.9 x 25.4 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Sony Alpha A3000 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 16000. The corresponding ISO settings for the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 are ISO 100 to ISO 3200, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-6400.

In terms of underlying technology, the A3000 is build around a CMOS sensor, while the FZ200 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.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service determines an overall sensor rating, as well as sub-scores for low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and color depth ("DXO Portrait"). Of the two cameras under review, the A3000 provides substantially higher image quality than the FZ200, with an overall score that is 41 points higher. This advantage is based on 4.6 bits higher color depth, 2 EV in additional dynamic range, and 3.2 stops in additional low light sensitivity. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Sony A3000	APS-C	19.8	5456	3632	1080/60i	23.7	12.8	1068	78
2.		Panasonic FZ200	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.1	10.8	114	37
3.		Canon SX50	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/24p	20.3	11.2	179	47
4.		Canon SX60	1/2.3	14.2	4608	3072	1080/60p	19.2	10.8	127	39
5.		Panasonic FZ100	1/2.3	14.0	4320	3240	1080/60i	19.4	10.7	306	39
6.		Panasonic FZ150	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	1080/60p	19.4	10.9	132	40
7.		Panasonic FZ300	1/2.3	12.0	4000	3000	4K/30p	19.3	11.0	97	38
8.		Sony A58	APS-C	19.8	5456	3632	1080/60i	23.3	12.5	753	74
9.		Sony A5000	APS-C	19.8	5456	3632	1080/60i	23.8	13.0	1089	79
10.		Sony A5100	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.8	12.7	1347	80
11.		Sony A6000	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.1	13.1	1347	82
12.		Sony A6400	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	4K/30p	24.0	13.6	1431	83
13.		Sony NEX-3N	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	22.8	12.5	1067	74
14.		Sony NEX-6	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.7	13.1	1018	78
15.		Sony NEX-7	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60i	24.1	13.4	1016	81
16.		Sony RX1	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	25.1	14.3	2534	93
17.		Sony RX1R	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	25.0	13.6	2537	91
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. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the FZ200 provides a faster frame rate than the A3000. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Sony is limited to 1080/60i.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The two cameras under review are similar with respect to both having an electronic viewfinder. However, the one in the FZ200 offers a substantially higher resolution than the one in the A3000 (1312k vs 202k dots). The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Sony A3000 and Panasonic FZ200 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

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.		Sony A3000	202	n	3.0 / 230	fixed	n	1/4000s	2.5/s	Y	n
2.		Panasonic FZ200	1312	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
3.		Canon SX50	202	n	3.0 / 461	swivel	n	1/2000s	2.2/s	Y	Y
4.		Canon SX60	922	n	3.0 / 922	swivel	n	1/2000s	6.4/s	Y	Y
5.		Panasonic FZ100	202	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/2000s	11.0/s	Y	Y
6.		Panasonic FZ150	202	n	3.0 / 460	swivel	n	1/2000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
7.		Panasonic FZ300	1440	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
8.		Sony A58	1440	n	2.7 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Sony A5000	none	n	3.0 / 461	tilting	n	1/4000s	3.5/s	Y	n
10.		Sony A5100	none	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/4000s	6.0/s	Y	n
11.		Sony A6000	1440	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/4000s	11.0/s	Y	n
12.		Sony A6400	2359	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	Y	1/4000s	11.0/s	Y	n
13.		Sony NEX-3N	optional	n	3.0 / 460	tilting	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
14.		Sony NEX-6	2359	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	n
15.		Sony NEX-7	2359	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	n
16.		Sony RX1	optional	n	3.0 / 1229	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
17.		Sony RX1R	optional	n	3.0 / 1229	fixed	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

The A3000 writes its imaging data to SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo cards, while the FZ200 uses SDXC cards. The FZ200 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the A3000 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

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 Sony Alpha A3000 and Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 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.		Sony A3000	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
2.		Panasonic FZ200	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
3.		Canon SX50	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
4.		Canon SX60	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
5.		Panasonic FZ100	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
6.		Panasonic FZ150	Y	stereo / -	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
7.		Panasonic FZ300	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
8.		Sony A58	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
9.		Sony A5000	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
10.		Sony A5100	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
11.		Sony A6000	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
12.		Sony A6400	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
13.		Sony NEX-3N	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
14.		Sony NEX-6	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony NEX-7	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Sony RX1	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony RX1R	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the FZ200 has a microphone port, which can help to improve the quality of audio recordings by attaching an external microphone. The A3000 does not feature such a mic input.

Both the A3000 and the FZ200 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The FZ200 was replaced by the Panasonic FZ300, while the A3000 does not have a direct successor. Further information on the features and operation of the A3000 and FZ200 can be found, respectively, in the Sony A3000 Manual (free pdf) or the online Panasonic FZ200 Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Sony A3000 or the Panasonic FZ200 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.

Advantages of the Sony Alpha A3000:

• More detail: Offers more megapixels (19.8 vs 12MP) with a 31% higher linear resolution.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better image quality: Scores substantially higher (41 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• Richer colors: Generates images with noticeably better colors (4.6 bits more color depth).
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (2 EV of extra DR).
• Better low-light sensitivity: Requires less light for good images (3.2 stops ISO advantage).
• Larger viewfinder image: Features a viewfinder with a higher magnification (0.47x vs 0.46x).
• More flexible: Accepts interchangeable lenses, so that lens characteristics can be altered.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 1 year and 1 month after the FZ200).

Arguments in favor of the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60i).
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• More detailed viewfinder: Has higher resolution electronic viewfinder (1312k vs 202k dots).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (460k vs 230k dots).
• More flexible LCD: Has a swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 2.5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
• Ready to shoot: Has an integrated lens, whereas the A3000 necessitates an extra lens.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (540 versus 470) out of a single battery charge.
• Sharper images: Has stabilization technology built-in to reduce the impact of hand-shake.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in July 2012).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the FZ200 emerges as the winner of the match-up (13 : 10 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports 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 Sony A3000 and the Panasonic FZ200 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 comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the A3000 or the FZ200 perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.

Expert reviews

This is why expert reviews are important. 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.		Sony A3000	3/5	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	Aug 2013	329	ebay.com
2.		Panasonic FZ200	3/5	+ +	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2012	599	ebay.com
3.		Canon SX50	3/5	+ +	..	72/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	429	ebay.com
4.		Canon SX60	3/5	+ +	..	75/100	4/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	549	ebay.com
5.		Panasonic FZ100	..	+	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2010	499	ebay.com
6.		Panasonic FZ150	3/5	+ +	..	76/100	4/5	4.5/5	Aug 2011	499	ebay.com
7.		Panasonic FZ300	..	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jul 2015	599	amazon.com
8.		Sony A58	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2013	599	ebay.com
9.		Sony A5000	3/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2014	449	ebay.com
10.		Sony A5100	4.5/5	+	..	..	4.5/5	5/5	Aug 2014	549	ebay.com
11.		Sony A6000	5/5	+	4.5/5	80/100	4.5/5	5/5	Feb 2014	599	ebay.com
12.		Sony A6400	4/5	+	4/5	85/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jan 2019	899	amazon.com
13.		Sony NEX-3N	3/5	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2013	499	ebay.com
14.		Sony NEX-6	5/5	+ +	..	78/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	999	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-7	5/5	+ +	..	81/100	4.5/5	5/5	Aug 2011	1,349	ebay.com
16.		Sony RX1	5/5	..	..	79/100	4/5	4.5/5	Sep 2012	2,799	ebay.com
17.		Sony RX1R	5/5	..	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Jun 2013	2,799	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check A3000 offers at
ebay.com
Check FZ200 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. 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 A3000 offers at
ebay.com
Check FZ200 offers at
ebay.com

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