Home / Cameras / Camera / Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX70 / Test Shots - ISO Performance

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX70 - Test Shots - ISO Performance

By Cliff Smith



Our Score:


User Score:

Over the next few pages we show a range of test shots. On this page the full size image at the minimum and maximum ISO settings have been reduced to let you see the full image, and a series of full resolution crops have taken from original images at a range of ISO settings to show the overall image quality. These pictures were taken indoors using shaded natural light.


This is the full frame at 80 ISO.


Image quality is good at 80 ISO, but there is still a little speckling in the green areas.


There are some blotches in the red areas too at 100 ISO.


The noise reduction system seems to be tuned to produce good results at 200 ISO.


Noise is very visible at 400 ISO.


Loss of detail and big blotches at 800 ISO.


Quality is pretty ropey at 1600 ISO.


This is the full frame at 1600 ISO.



June 26, 2010, 10:25 am

I really, no; REALLY dislike the new "Latest Price - Click here" ploy to get us to the "shopping.trustedreviews.com" portal.

Give me the price in the article - If I'm interested in pursuing the item further, I'll shop for myself, thank you.


June 26, 2010, 12:56 pm

Nice as always, Cliff! Waiting for a Pentax X90 and W90 reviews. Thank you!


June 26, 2010, 6:39 pm

@Darrin calm down dear, did you read the review? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure Cliff said as soon as he knows the price he will update the review. See any of the most recent camera reviews, they all have the price indicated.

Cliff Smith

June 26, 2010, 9:41 pm

Darrin - As iHK correctly points out, and as I stated in the review, the reason there's no price listed is that no official RRP has yet been confirmed for the FX70, and it's so new it's not even in the shops yet. I'll update the review as soon as I know the price.


June 27, 2010, 5:14 pm

Cliff thanks for this helpful review. I am slightly disappointed as the FX70 seemed just what I wanted, but from what you say it seems to fall a bit short in certain respects. Could you possibly help by suggesting a shortlist of cameras I should consider? I want a good quality shirtpocket compact with best possible anti-shake capacity, as I have a terrible hand tremor. A good lens approx f2.0 24/25mm with a 5x zoom. Quick start up with immediate access to instant shooting via a pre-set intelligent auto program producing sharp and bright daylight and decent low light images. A good LCD screen viewable in sunlight would be helpful. In my dreams I would like a wireless remote shutter release, but no-one seems to understand the usefulness of such a thing. I wonder why not.

Cliff Smith

June 28, 2010, 9:13 pm

grumpy1 - I don't want to show any bias, so I don't usually recommend individual cameras, but have you looked at the Sony WX1? I reviewed it a few weeks ago and I really liked it. You might also look at the Casio EX-Z2000 and the Canon IXUS 120 IS.


July 7, 2010, 10:54 pm

Thanks for the review, Cliff. I wonder if you could advise further. I had my FX35 nicked a couple of weeks ago and have been trying to decide on a replacement. I liked the FX35. The fact that you rate the HD on the FX70 so highly tempts me towards it as I take quite a lot of video. However, you rate the FX70 a point lower than the FX35 on image quality and two points lower on features. Are these ratings to be taken in the context of current competition, or does the FX70 really rate lower than the FX35 in these areas? Thanks a bunch!

Cliff Smith

July 23, 2010, 1:54 am

Pete - Review scores are relative compared to other similar currently available cameras. As for the FX70 vs. FX35, to be honest there's not much in it. The FX35 was a very good camera, and I'd say it has better colour rendition than the FX70, but the newer model is better at higher ISO settings and has slightly superior dynamic range. Lens quality is pretty much even.

Cliff Smith

July 29, 2010, 11:32 pm

The FX70 is now on sale, so I've added the price to the review. I wasn't far off with my guess of £260.

comments powered by Disqus