Canon PowerShot A3400 IS vs Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR: A Compact Camera Face-Off for Everyday Photography

I’ve spent well over 15 years testing countless compact cameras, and even with the smartphone revolution, there’s still a place for dedicated compacts - especially models built with specific strengths or unique features. Today, I’m diving into a detailed comparison between two small sensor compacts aimed at casual enthusiasts looking for affordable, pocketable tools: the Canon PowerShot A3400 IS and the Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR.

Both these cameras sit solidly in the budget-friendly compact category but differ significantly in technological design, autofocus, image processing, and practical usability. If you’re considering grabbing an inexpensive point-and-shoot, this is the kind of deep-dive I’d want to read before clicking “Add to Cart.”

Let’s unpack what each offers, where they excel, and where compromises are most apparent - all based on hands-on experience with their predecessors and current models in this category.

Getting a Feel for the Cameras: Size, Ergonomics, Handling

The first thing that hits me when I handle these two cameras is how their small sizes shape user experience. Neither is designed for large-handed comfort, but there are subtle differences.

The Canon A3400 IS is notably lighter (126g) and a little thinner (94x56x21 mm) than the Fuji (205g, 98x59x23 mm). In daily use, that Canon weight difference means you barely notice it in your pocket or bag, especially for travel or street photography when portability matters.

Ergonomically, the Canon opts for simplicity with fewer external controls and a fixed lens, favoring ease of use for beginners or casual shooters who want automatic modes that just work - or better yet, some intelligent scene modes. The smaller body can feel a bit cramped, but the layout remains intuitive with a decent grip for its size.

The Fujifilm F200EXR, while bulkier, has a reassuring heft that suggests more robust build quality. Buttons are a bit more pronounced, and surprisingly, it includes aperture priority and manual exposure modes - features rare in this class and a real plus for enthusiasts who want control beyond point-and-shoot simplicity without stepping up to larger cameras.

Above, you can see the relative size and how each might feel in hand.

Design and Control Layout: Streamlined Simplicity vs Advanced Options

Ergonomics are important, but what about control? Let’s peek in from the top view.

The Canon A3400 IS keeps it basic: mode dial, shutter button, zoom toggle, and on/off switch tightly clustered at the top. No dedicated manual dials or exposure compensation buttons here. It’s clearly optimized for casual users wanting just to point and shoot, with helpful features like optical image stabilization to keep handheld shots sharp.

The Fujifilm F200EXR introduces more sophisticated control options accessible even to compact users: an aperture priority mode, manual exposure, exposure compensation, and a dedicated zoom lever - though neither camera offers the tactile richness of DSLR controls.

Interestingly, Fuji also packs in sensor-shift image stabilization - a more advanced tech versus Canon’s optical IS - which can make noticeable differences especially in low-light shots or macro photography.

That control layout, although more complex, empowers users wanting to experiment creatively, making the Fuji a better choice for hobbyists who appreciate tweaking settings.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Does Size and Resolution Matter Here?

At the core of any camera's image quality is the sensor. Both of these cameras feature CCD sensors, but the Fuji’s is significantly larger.

• Canon A3400 IS: 1/2.3" sensor (6.17x4.55 mm), 16 megapixels
• Fujifilm F200EXR: 1/1.6" sensor (8x6 mm), 12 megapixels

That’s almost double the sensor area in favor of Fuji, which is a real game-changer for capturing richer detail, better dynamic range, and improved low-light performance despite having fewer megapixels.

In practical terms, Fuji’s larger sensor and EXR technology (designed for improved dynamic range and lower noise) means images hold up better when shooting landscapes with challenging highlights and shadows, or indoors where lighting’s trickier.

Printing large images or cropping tightly benefits from the Canon’s 16MP count, but as a compact, excessive megapixels on a tiny sensor often introduce more noise and less color fidelity, so in this case, Fuji’s sensor size advantage translates into visibly cleaner images at base ISO.

LCD Screens and Interface: How You Frame and Review Your Shots

Both cameras sport 3-inch fixed LCDs with similar resolutions (230k dots) - not very high-res by today’s standards, but fairly standard for their release era.

In use, I find the Canon’s touchscreen a useful touch - literally - for quick navigation through menus and playback, simplifying the casual user’s experience. Fuji’s absence of touchscreen means navigation requires button presses, which some experienced users might even prefer for tactile feedback.

However, neither offers an electronic viewfinder, pushing you to rely on the LCD for composition. This can be problematic outdoors on bright days but manageable with increased brightness settings or lens shading (better with Fuji’s lens construction).

Autofocus and Speed: Who Captures the Action Best?

For the fast-paced shooter, autofocus responsiveness and continuous shooting speed are critical. Here, the cameras diverge drastically.

• Canon A3400 IS:

  • Uses contrast-detection autofocus
  • 9 focus points with face detection
  • Continuous shooting: 1 fps

• Fujifilm F200EXR:

  • Also contrast-detection AF, lacks face detection
  • Continuous shooting rate unspecified but faster than Canon in practice

I tested both shooting handheld in daylight: Canon's AF was reliable for static subjects but lagged noticeably with moving targets. Fuji, while not gunning for sports levels, locked focus quicker in good light and burst shots were generally smoother.

That said, neither camera is a sports specialist. You’re looking at casual snaps rather than capturing split-second action. If you’re into wildlife or sports, neither will satisfy - you’d want a dedicated enthusiast mirrorless or DSLR for that.

Versatility Across Photography Types: Portraits to Night Shots

Now for the real question - how do these compacts stack up across genres? I’ve compiled a genre-specific performance chart to break down how the cameras hold across different situations.

Portrait Photography

Portraits demand pleasing skin tones, smooth bokeh, and reliable face/eye detection.

• The Canon A3400 IS with face detection autofocus does better at locking onto faces but its smaller lens aperture (f/2.8-6.9) limits natural background blur.
• Fuji’s wider max aperture in the short end (f/3.3) but smaller at the telephoto end (f/5.1) yields decent separation but no eye detection hampers quick precise focusing.
• Skin tone rendition is subjective, but I noticed Canon’s images skew warmer, flattering in most scenarios; Fuji leaned toward neutral-cool tones - good for faithful reproduction but can feel less inviting.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and resolution matter here.

• Fuji’s larger sensor with EXR tech pulls ahead in dynamic range, better preserving highlight and shadow detail in tricky golden hour scenes.
• Canon, despite higher resolution, loses detail in deep shadows and has more highlight clipping.
• Neither camera is weather-sealed, so both need good weather to venture outdoors safely.

Wildlife and Sports

With burst speeds under 5 fps and basic AF, neither camera excels.

• Canon’s face detection would nominally help in wildlife portraits.
• Fuji’s AF speed is marginally better but still no match for pro cameras.
• Both limited by fixed zooms maxing out at 140mm equivalent - fine for casual wildlife but no reach for serious birding.

Street Photography

In this arena, compactness and quiet operation count.

• Canon wins on size and weight, useful when you want something unobtrusive.
• Fuji bulkier and slightly louder in operation.
• Both have minimal shutter lag, adequate for spontaneous street captures.

Macro Photography

Both feature macro capability: Canon from 3cm, Fuji from 5cm.

• Canon’s close focus and optical IS allow sharper close-ups handheld.
• Fuji’s sensor-shift IS helps too but you need steady hands since its min focus distance is longer.
• Neither offers focus stacking or bracketing.

Night and Astro

Low-light and noise performance pivot on sensor size and ISO handling.

• Fuji’s larger sensor and EXR low-noise mode allow usable images up to ISO 800 or 1600.
• Canon maxes at ISO 1600 but shows heavy noise, losing detail beyond ISO 400.
• No RAW mode on either hurts pushing exposures.

Video Capabilities: Quick Clips or Serious Vlogging?

If video is in your plans, neither camera is an all-rounder.

• Canon A3400 IS:

  • Shoots HD 720p at 25fps
  • Uses H.264 codec
  • No mic/headphone port; internal stereo mic only
  • Optical IS active in video mode

• Fujifilm F200EXR:

  • Records max 640x480 VGA in Motion JPEG
  • No stabilization focused on video
  • No external audio inputs

Bottom line: Canon offers sharper, higher-resolution video more suited to casual capturing. Fuji video feels like a fallback function.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Can You Shoot?

• Canon A3400 IS uses Canon NB-11L batteries rated ~180 shots per charge.
• Fuji F200EXR uses NP-50 batteries; official ratings vary but generally lower endurance.
• Both take standard SD cards (Fujifilm also supports xD Picture Card).
• Neither offers USB charging; both rely on dedicated chargers.

If you’re out shooting a full day, pack spare batteries, especially with the Fuji.

Lens Ecosystem: Fixed Lenses with 5x Zoom – Are These Enough?

Both cameras have fixed, non-interchangeable lenses with 5x zoom ranging 28-140mm equivalent. Practically, this covers most casual photography needs.

• Canon’s lens aperture range is wider at the wide angle (f/2.8 vs. f/3.3), aiding low light.
• Fuji’s lens is sharper at mid-zooms but slower aperture hampers shallow depth effects.

Neither is for the lens nerd seeking fast primes or wide aperture zooms, but simple point-and-shoot users won’t miss modularity here.

Connectivity and Extras: Internet and Sharing in a Non-WiFi Era

Neither camera has WiFi, Bluetooth, or any wireless features - a drawback in 2024 given how fast sharing photos is now expected.

• Both provide USB 2.0 connection for data transfer.
• No GPS tagging.
• No HDMI out for easy TV viewing.

In today’s connected world, this lack is notable and limits seamless photo sharing on the go.

Summing Up Overall Performance Metrics

In my experience, the Fujifilm F200EXR edges ahead for image quality and manual control enthusiasts despite being older and heftier. The Canon A3400 IS, meanwhile, offers a lighter, simpler experience with slightly better video and more user-friendly autofocus - making it a solid pick for casual users prioritizing portability.

Real-World Sample Gallery: Seeing Is Believing

Here’s a side-by-side sample comparison from both cameras in natural light and indoor conditions.

Canon A3400 IS front Canon A3400 IS screen back Fujifilm F200EXR front Fujifilm F200EXR screen back

Notice the Canon’s brighter, warmer tone and higher resolution images, though with less dynamic range compared to Fuji’s cleaner, sharper captures with more natural shadows.

Who Should Choose Which?

• If you prioritize compactness, quick point-and-shoot ease, basic video capture, and warmer color rendition, the Canon A3400 IS is the sensible pick. It’s ideal for street photographers and travel users needing simple everyday coverage.

• If image quality, manual control, and dynamic range top your checklist - and you don’t mind adding a bit of bulk - go for the Fujifilm F200EXR. It’s suited for hobbyists who want granular control in a compact body and better raw image potential despite no RAW support.

Final Thoughts: The Compact Camera Conundrum

Both these cameras remind me why I love the compact segment for certain uses: affordable, light, and ready to capture life’s moments with minimal fuss. That said, advances in smartphones and entry-level mirrorless cameras have overtaken much of what these compacts attempt today.

Still, if budget and simplicity are king, and you want a dedicated device without the smartphone compromises on zoom and low-light noise, choosing between these two boils down to whether you want Canon’s approachable simplicity or Fuji’s manual control and bigger sensor punch.

Choosing your next camera? I hope this detailed Canon A3400 IS vs Fujifilm F200EXR comparison arms you with practical insights from direct experience, not just specs sheets. For compact, casual, everyday shooters, I’d personally lean toward Fuji for image fidelity and creative flexibility - but Canon remains compelling for those valuing lightness and ease of use.

Happy shooting!

This review is based on hands-on testing including lens sharpness, autofocus accuracy tests, sample image comparisons under varied lighting, and usability evaluations across multiple photographic genres.