Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS vs FujiFilm FinePix Z800EXR: An In-Depth Ultracompact Camera Showdown

In the ever-evolving world of ultracompact digital cameras, two models - the Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS and the FujiFilm FinePix Z800EXR - have distinguished themselves in different eras with unique feature sets and user experiences. As an industry veteran with over 15 years of rigorous, hands-on camera testing - from sensor performance to ergonomics - I find it illuminating to pit these two side by side. Though separated by nearly five years in release date (2010 vs 2015), their ultracompact status and similar positioning invite a detailed comparison that can help dedicated photography enthusiasts and professionals decide which might better serve their pocket-friendly shooting needs.

Let’s take an analytical deep dive into their design, capabilities, and shooting application to reveal what each offers in practical use and technical terms.

Compact Design and Ergonomics: Size Matters in Pocketability

When considering ultracompact cameras, physical size and handling impressions weigh heavily on the buying decision. I find that the ergonomics often dictate whether a camera will be used regularly or stuffed away after first impressions.

The Canon ELPH 350 HS measures 100 x 58 x 23mm and weighs 147g, while the FujiFilm Z800EXR is slightly smaller and lighter at 98 x 59 x 20mm, 158g. The dimensional differences are marginal, but each camera’s shape and button layout create distinct handling experiences.

The Canon adopts a rounded profile with a modest grip ridge, providing decent stability for a camera this size, especially for photographers with larger hands or those planning extended use. Conversely, the FujiFilm feels flatter and perhaps a bit more streamlined, emphasizing pocketability above ergonomics. Its flatter body can make it more discreet - a consideration for street or travel photography where you want to avoid drawing attention.

Moving on to control layout, the Canon’s traditional button arrangement presents a familiar interface. The FujiFilm, however, integrates a touchscreen on its larger 3.5-inch display - which we’ll discuss more in the next section - allowing for more modern input options but at the expense of physical tactile buttons, something some photographers still prefer for precise control without looking.

Both cameras forgo viewfinders entirely. That’s expected in this category but stacks pressure on the rear screens for composition. A note: Neither camera is ruggedized, lacking weather sealing or impact resistance, so care in harsh conditions remains necessary.

User Interface and Display Tech: Touchscreen vs Fixed

Image framing and menu navigation hinge heavily on the rear display quality and interface design, something I scrutinize closely when testing compact cameras.

The FujiFilm FinePix Z800EXR boasts a 3.5-inch touchscreen LCD with a resolution around 460k dots. In contrast, the Canon ELPH 350 HS employs a fixed 3-inch non-touch display with a lower resolution of 461k dots. The FujiFilm screen, being both larger and touch-enabled, feels more contemporary and flexible for reviewing shots, adjusting exposure, or changing settings swiftly.

During real-world testing, the Canon's screen offers adequate clarity but lacks any touch interactivity - menus must be navigated via buttons. This can slow down adjustments in fast-paced shooting scenarios like street or travel photography. The FujiFilm’s touch interface is responsive and intuitive, making it easier to dial in settings or shift focus points quickly.

However, touchscreen LCDs can compromise visibility in bright sunlight due to reflections, while the Canon's matte finish helps mitigate glare somewhat. This means outdoor usability goes toe-to-toe for these two.

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder, compelling reliance on the screen in bright outdoor conditions - where I recommend using a wearable hood or shading your palm for better visibility.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Heart of the Difference

Image quality remains paramount, and here the two cameras diverge significantly in sensor technology and resolution.

Canon ELPH 350 HS sports a 1/2.3-inch back-illuminated CMOS sensor with 20 megapixels, whereas the FujiFilm Z800EXR features a slightly larger 1/2-inch CCD sensor offering 12 megapixels.

The Canon’s BSI-CMOS sensor delivers higher resolution and better noise characteristics, benefiting from the DIGIC 4+ image processor’s efficient noise reduction algorithms. We see a distinct advantage in low-light performance as Canon’s sensor detects light more sensitively and efficiently manages ISO up to 3200 native.

In contrast, the FujiFilm utilizes Fuji’s EXR super CCD design, optimized primarily for dynamic range and color gamut through pixel binning and pixel shift technologies. While its 12-megapixel resolution is lower, the sensor boasts wider per-pixel photosites, translating to strong color reproduction and respectable noise performance at low ISO levels, albeit less effective beyond ISO 800.

In daylight landscapes, both deliver punchy color and detail. Under challenging indoor or dusk conditions, the Canon pulls ahead with cleaner shadows and retaining detail at boosted ISO. FujiFilm’s performance felt limited in dim settings by comparison.

Neither camera supports RAW capture, constraining post-processing latitude. JPEG compression is decent but expect limited flexibility for professional-grade tweaks.

Lens Systems and Optical Performance: Zoom Ranges and Apertures

The fixed lens design is the norm here but focal lengths and apertures can drastically influence creative options.

The Canon offers a 25-300mm (35mm equivalent) zoom - a considerable 12x reach with an f/3.6-7.0 aperture range. The FujiFilm provides a narrower 35-175mm zoom (5x) with a faster f/3.9-4.7 aperture.

Canon’s longer telephoto reach extends versatility for landscape panoramic compression, wildlife glimpses, and casual sports shots, although the maximum aperture at the long end (f/7) is quite slow, requiring ample light or image stabilization.

FujiFilm’s shorter focal range but wider maximum aperture past the telephoto end makes it somewhat better suited for portraits and low-light scenes within moderate zoom. However, 175mm equivalent max focal length restricts distant subject capture.

Both employ optical image stabilization. Canon uses traditional optical stabilization in the lens, while FujiFilm uses sensor-shift stabilization. Personally, I find optical lens stabilization often more effective in telephoto ranges, though the FujiFilm sensor-shift approach helps immensely when zoomed in moderately or shooting macro.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Tracking and Burst Capabilities

While these cameras are not designed for serious action photography, autofocus performance and shooting speed affect handling usability.

Canon ELPH 350 HS features 9 focus points with face detection and contrast-detection AF, supporting continuous AF tracking. In practice, focusing is generally quick and accurate in good light, with reliable subject lock on faces - a boon for casual portraits or family snaps.

FujiFilm Z800EXR has a more basic contrast-detection AF system, no face detection, and single-point AF only. Autofocus feels noticeably slower and less confident, especially in low contrast scenes or low light.

Burst shooting rates are modest: Canon achieves 2.5 fps continuous, FujiFilm 2.0 fps. Not fast enough for serious sports or wildlife action, but acceptable for casual snapshots.

Neither camera includes advanced autofocus features such as eye detection or animal AF, reflecting their entry-level ultracompact orientation.

Video Capabilities: Basic HD Recording

In an era where video is often a dealbreaker, both cameras support HD video recording but with differences.

Canon shoots 1080p Full HD at 30fps using the H.264 codec - yielding relatively efficient files with good quality for casual sharing. It has HDMI out, facilitating easy playback on external displays.

FujiFilm maxes out at 720p HD at 24fps in Motion JPEG format - a less efficient codec leading to larger file sizes and lower video quality. It lacks HDMI out and any built-in wireless streaming, limiting convenience.

Neither camera offers professional video features like mic inputs, headphone jacks, or high frame rate video modes, so video usage should remain casual.

Build Quality, Battery Life, and Connectivity: Everyday Reliability

Judging build quality, materials are typical plastic-bodied but relatively sturdy for point-and-shoot class. Neither offers weather sealing, so users should avoid exposure to precipitation or dust.

Battery life is where the Canon excels slightly, rated at 250 shots per charge using the NB-11LH battery, which is decent for travel or day trips. FujiFilm’s rating is unspecified but generally lower given its older design and smaller capacity NP-45A battery.

Connectivity-wise, Canon supports built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for wireless image transfer - a serious advantage for on-the-go sharing and remote control via smartphones. FujiFilm’s model predates common consumer wireless features and offers none, relying on physical USB connection which is slower and less convenient.

Real-World Applications Across Photography Genres

Having dissected specs and technicalities, let’s consider both cameras in everyday photography disciplines.

Portrait Photography

Canon’s face detection and higher resolution sensor better capture fine skin tone subtleties and detail. Its longer zoom aids flattering compression for headshots, though limited aperture reduces background blur potential. FujiFilm comes short on autofocus sophistication and lower resolution, visibly less appealing for portraits.

Landscape Photography

The FujiFilm’s unique EXR sensor excels in dynamic range and color accuracy under bright sunlight - beneficial for landscapes. Canon’s higher resolution and longer zoom allow detailed composition and framing. Neither is weather sealed but Canon’s sensor provides better shadow detail overall.

Wildlife Photography

Canon’s 12x zoom is a clear boon here for closer shots of distant animals, though AF speed is middling. FujiFilm’s shorter lens and slower focusing limit wildlife use. Neither camera supports high frame rates needed for fleeting action.

Sports Photography

Both falter due to slow continuous shooting and AF. Canon edges out with slightly better focusing and faster frame rate, but neither is apt for serious sports use.

Street Photography

FujiFilm’s compact, low-profile design combined with touchscreen ease makes it a discreet street shooter, yet its slow AF and reduced dynamic range can hinder candid capture. Canon’s longer zoom could attract unwanted attention but offers more framing flexibility. Both lack viewfinders, somewhat limiting eye-level composition.

Macro Photography

Canon’s close focus distance of 1cm and optical stabilization enhance macro chances versus FujiFilm’s minimum focusing at 9cm. Canon is preferable for floral or detail macro shots.

Night and Astro Photography

Canon’s sensor outperforms in low light with higher native ISO and sustained quality. Neither offers Bulb mode or extended shutter speeds beyond 15 seconds, limiting astrophotography scope.

Video Usage

Canon’s Full HD 30fps and wireless connectivity make it the better choice for casual video recording and sharing. FujiFilm’s limited 720p and Motion JPEG format make videos look dated.

Travel Photography

Canon’s Wi-Fi, longer zoom, and ergonomics provide solid travel support - though size is slightly larger. FujiFilm’s screen and touchscreen controls favor versatility in bright and varied environments but from the perspective of image quality and connectivity, Canon wins for the traveling enthusiast.

Professional Workflows

Neither camera is tailored for professional studio or event photography due to lack of RAW support and limited manual controls. However, Canon’s higher resolution and connectivity options integrate better with modern workflows if casual/pro-level work is needed.

Summary of Strengths and Drawbacks

Visual Evidence: Sample Images and Performance Ratings

To ground these observations, here are side-by-side representative images captured in daylight and indoor conditions showing resolution, color fidelity, and noise levels.

Canon ELPH 350 HS front Canon ELPH 350 HS screen back FujiFilm Z800EXR front FujiFilm Z800EXR screen back

Interpreting official performance rankings (subject to hands-on testing variance), Canon’s overall score advantage, particularly in low-light ISO and autofocus speed, supports many of our first-hand conclusions.

When considering genre-specific performance - portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, street, macro, night, video, travel, and professional - the cameras reveal distinct suitability ranges.

Who Should Choose Each Camera?

Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS is ideal if you:

• Want higher image resolution and better low-light performance in a compact body.
• Appreciate wireless connectivity for fast image transfer and remote camera control.
• Desire versatile zoom range (25-300mm) suited for travel, casual telephoto needs, and some wildlife.
• Are willing to accept a fixed screen without touchscreen convenience.
• Are less concerned with a slightly larger footprint and dated video codec.

FujiFilm FinePix Z800EXR suits you if:

• You prioritize excellent color reproduction and dynamic range landscape shots under good lighting.
• Prefer a larger touchscreen interface for easy menu navigation and focus selection.
• Seek a camera with a slimmer profile and more pocket-friendly design.
• Mainly shoot in bright daylight and casual settings requiring less zoom reach.
• Value a more tactile shooting experience without complicating wireless features.

Final Thoughts

Both the Canon ELPH 350 HS and FujiFilm FinePix Z800EXR represent snapshots of ultracompact camera evolution - the FujiFilm offering an earlier-era color science-driven approach, while Canon delivers a more modern balance of sensor tech, connectivity, and focal versatility.

For camera enthusiasts who prioritize image quality, zoom flexibility, and wireless ease in an ultracompact form, the Canon is the better contemporary choice. FujiFilm’s strengths in display usability and dynamic range color output make it a fine option for daylight travel and landscape shooting within a modest budget.

Neither camera targets professional demands, but each brings practical advantages tailored to casual enthusiast needs. Through my extensive direct testing of hundreds of sensors, lenses, and autofocus systems, I find these distinctions consistent and reliable guides for prospective buyers.

As always, I encourage hands-on trials when possible - especially for ergonomics and UI - to confirm personal fit. This comparison aims to equip you with solid groundwork, freeing your decision-making from marketing hyperbole toward genuine, field-tested insights.

Happy shooting!