FujiFilm F300EXR vs Sony Cyber-shot W650: A Hands-On, No-Nonsense Compact Camera Face-Off

Choosing a compact camera today often feels like stepping into a time machine with all the sportier mirrorless and smartphone models zooming past. Yet, the small sensor compacts like FujiFilm’s F300EXR and Sony’s Cyber-shot W650 retain a stubborn appeal for some - perhaps it’s that pocketable zoom range, or simplicity, or just nostalgia. Having put both of these cameras through my usual gauntlet of real-world tests and technical scrutiny, I'm eager to share a thorough comparison. If you’re eyeing either, this deep dive will serve you well.

Setting the Stage: What Are We Comparing?

The FujiFilm FinePix F300EXR, announced in July 2010, is a small sensor superzoom compact boasting a substantial 15x zoom range (24-360mm equivalent), powered by Fuji's EXR processor and a relatively large 1/2” CCD sensor. Meanwhile, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W650, arriving in early 2012, is a more modest compact with a 5x zoom (25-125mm equivalent), equipped with a 1/2.3” CCD sensor and the BIONZ image processor.

Both cameras eschew manual focus and RAW support, aiming squarely at casual point-and-shoot users. But how do they stack up when dissected through a photographer’s critical eye?

First Impressions: Design, Handling, and Ergonomics

If you’re hunting for the kind of camera that practically disappears in your pocket, the Sony W650 easily wins the slimness and weight battle, tipping scales at a featherlight 124 grams with dimensions under 10 cm wide and less than 2 cm thick. Fuji’s F300EXR is chunkier and heavier (215 grams and notably thicker), a trade-off largely attributable to the extended 15x lens zoom mechanism and sensor stabilization hardware.

Fuji’s control layout is more deliberate, with dedicated dials for shutter and aperture priority, plus manual exposure modes - a surprise for a compact. Sony, on the other hand, keeps it basic, relying on automatic modes with little user intervention. The F300EXR's grip is more pronounced, lending confidence for telephoto shots, while the W650 feels more like a sleek gadget you snap quickly with.

In practice, Fuji’s heft adds stability, especially at longer zooms, but it can feel bulkier in a jeans pocket. The Sony is a pocket ninja, but sacrifices some tactile precision and handling comfort on the long end.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Here’s where things get interesting. Both cameras use CCD sensors, which have an older reputation but still deliver decent image quality. Fuji’s sensor measures a generous 6.4 x 4.8 mm (1/2”), which is slightly larger than Sony’s 6.17 x 4.55 mm (1/2.3”). The difference might sound trivial, but in the pixel world, it can mean better low-light performance and dynamic range.

Fuji offers 12 megapixels compared to Sony’s 16, but don’t let that fool you: Sony's higher resolution on a smaller sensor tends to bring more noise and less dynamic range, particularly above ISO 400. Fuji’s EXR processor is designed to optimize sensor output by selectively trading resolution for noise reduction and dynamic range, a neat technical trick resulting in better mid-ISO images than one would expect from a 2010 compact.

Talking image quality, Fuji’s pictures from 100 to 400 ISO appear cleaner, with slightly better highlight retention and color depth. Sony’s images, while more detailed on paper, reveal fine noise grain earlier and handle harsh lighting less gracefully.

For video enthusiasts, both cameras max out at 1280x720 HD, but Fuji records at 24 fps with Motion JPEG, while Sony delivers smoother 30 fps in MPEG-4/H.264. The downside for both? No external microphone input and no headphone out make on-the-spot audio tweaks impossible.

Putting Optics to the Test: Lens and Zoom Versatility

Fuji’s much longer 24-360 mm equivalent range caters well to those needing telephoto reach - think wildlife from a distance or isolating a flower in macro. The lens starts moderately bright at f/3.5 and drifts to f/5.3 when zoomed all the way, which is respectable though not glamorous. Sony's lens is shorter at 25-125 mm equivalent, starting wider at f/2.6 but tapering off quickly to f/6.3.

From personal shooting experience, Fuji’s 15x zoom is visibly more versatile, lending itself to travel and nature shooting where reach matters. The Sony, with its brighter wide end, excels in indoor or low-light snapshots but feels constricted when you want to zoom in on faraway action.

For macro, both cameras can focus as close as 5 cm, but Fuji’s sensor-shift image stabilization smooths out those shaky close-ups far better than Sony’s optical stabilization.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Capturing the Moment

Neither camera supports manual focus - a no-go for precision lovers but expected at this level. Sony’s autofocus system is contrast-detection based and surprisingly responsive, with face detection added for better portrait framing. Fuji’s contrast focus is slower and less consistent in dimmer lighting, lacking face or eye detection; this can be a frustration when tracking quick subjects like kids or pets.

Continuous shooting speed is slow all around: Fuji manages 2 frames per second (fps), Sony only about 1 fps. Neither is suited for action or sports but can handle casual burst shots for fleeting moments.

Screen and Viewfinder: Framing Your Shot

The rear 3-inch screens stand apart primarily in resolution and clarity. Fuji presents a 460k-dot fixed LCD, bright and detailed enough for manual exposure adjustments, though visibility under blazing sun can be challenging. Sony offers a 230k-dot screen with “Clear Photo TFT” technology, which is sharper-looking at moderate brightness but less detailed for menu viewing.

Neither camera sports an electronic viewfinder, so all framing depends on the LCD. Fuji's screen size and resolution grants a marginal edge for critical focusing and reviewing images.

Build Quality and Weather Sealing: Can They Keep Up?

Both cameras are plastic-bodied with no weather sealing, dustproofing, or ruggedness claims. That's par for the course in compacts of this vintage and price point. Fuji feels slightly sturdier, probably because of its thicker chassis, but expect neither to survive drops or serious outdoor abuse.

Battery Life and Storage: Going the Distance

Sony boasts about 220 shots per battery charge using the NP-BN battery, a figure I found fairly accurate in real-world use. Fuji’s figures are less clearly stated, but the NP-50 battery tends to last just over 200 shots under average conditions. Neither sets a long-lasting benchmark - carry spares if you plan heavy shooting.

Storage-wise, Fuji accepts SD/SDHC cards, while Sony is more versatile, supporting SD/SDHC/SDXC cards as well as proprietary Memory Stick Duo formats and microSD cards via the slot. The flexibility with Sony is handy for those with mixed card collections.

Connectivity and Extras: Sharing Made (Somewhat) Simple

On the connectivity front, Sony acknowledges the digital age somewhat, featuring Eye-Fi wireless card compatibility via card slot, making photo transfers easier with supported cards and apps. Fuji, however, offers none - USB 2.0 and HDMI are your only data out options.

Neither camera has Bluetooth, NFC, GPS, or advanced wireless features we expect today, which is understandable given their production dates.

Real-World Photography Disciplines: Where Do They Shine?

Let's break down performance across main photographic genres, spotlighting what these cameras truly excel or falter at.

Portrait Photography - Skin Tones and Bokeh

Both cameras rely on relatively small sensors and fixed lenses with limited optical speed, so bokeh quality is modest at best. Fuji’s 24 mm wide angle combined with EXR sensor technology reproduces natural skin tones with pleasant color depth and less noise at moderate ISOs. Sony’s brighter f/2.6 at the wide end helps indoors but introduces less creamy background separation.

Neither has eye-detection autofocus, but Sony's face detection autofocus assists framing. Fuji’s slower autofocus can betray you with missed focus in fast candid moments.

Landscape Photography - Dynamic Range and Detail

Fuji’s larger sensor and EXR processor provide a tangible advantage in dynamic range, crucial when dealing with high-contrast landscapes. Details hold better in shadows and highlights compared to Sony’s noisier outputs.

Sony’s higher megapixel count might tempt you, but pixel-level analysis shows coarser noise and less tonal nuance. Neither camera is weather-sealed, so caution is advised shooting outdoors in tough conditions.

Wildlife and Telephoto - Autofocus Speed & Zoom Reach

Fuji dominates this category thanks to its 15x zoom, allowing wildlife or distant subjects to fill frames without cropping. Yet, autofocus speed occasionally lags, meaning some missed shots on quick-moving birds or critters.

Sony’s 5x zoom restricts effective telephoto use. While quicker to lock focus, the lens reach limits your framing creative latitude.

Sports and Action - Burst Rates and Tracking

Neither camera is designed for high-speed photography. Fuji’s 2 fps and Sony’s 1 fps burst rates are laughably slow by today’s standards. Continuous autofocus is absent; tracking moving subjects is effectively non-existent.

Sports photographers should look elsewhere entirely.

Street Photography - Discretion and Portability

Sony’s slim profile and light weight make it a stealthier street choice, unobtrusive and quick to pull out. Fuji’s larger footprint increases presence but delivers higher quality images when you do shoot.

Agility beats image quality here for many street shooters, tipping the scale lightly toward Sony - but the image noise and slower response can be a downer.

Macro Photography - Close Focusing and Stabilization

Both focus to within ~5cm, but Fuji’s sensor-shift image stabilization really stabilizes those close-ups. The W650’s optical stabilization is decent but less effective in macro range.

If you love snapping flowers or textures, Fuji offers steadier shots.

Night and Astro - Low Light and Exposure Modes

Low light is challenging for compact cameras with small sensors and slow zoom lenses. Fuji’s EXR tricks boost ISO performance at up to 3200 ISO, albeit with noise. Sony's brighter f/2.6 wide aperture aids low-light shots at short zooms but noise rises quickly.

Neither camera supports bulb modes or specialized astro functions, so astrophotography fans should look elsewhere.

Video Capabilities - Recording and Audio

Fuji captures 720p at 24 fps with Motion JPEG - a pretty heavy codec limiting record times and file sizes. Sony steps it up slightly with 720p at 30 fps and H.264/MPEG-4 compression, giving slightly smoother video at the same resolution.

Audio inputs are nil on both cameras, so videographers must settle for built-in mic quality. Neither offers image stabilization during video recording.

Travel Photography - Versatility and Battery Life

Fuji’s versatile zoom and robust handling pair well for varied travel scenarios where optically reaching far or capturing landscapes matters. Sony's travel appeal is compactness and convenience, perfect for casual sightseeing.

In battery life and storage flexibility, Sony nudges Fuji modestly.

Professional Work - Reliability and Workflow

Neither camera supports RAW format or advanced color profiles, limiting professional uses. Fuji’s manual modes and exposure compensation offer creative control but the small sensor and fixed lens limit output quality.

Sony’s autofocus face detection might help event photography snapshots, but the limited manual control constrains workflow.

Summary and Scores: How They Stack Up Overall

FujiFilm F300EXR front FujiFilm F300EXR screen back Sony W650 front Sony W650 screen back

After extensive hands-on testing and controlled shooting comparisons across different conditions, here’s where each model lands in general use:

Who Should Buy the FujiFilm F300EXR?

• Travelers and wildlife enthusiasts: who need a compact zoom with reach and decent image quality.
• Hobbyists craving manual exposure controls: within an easy-to-use point-and-shoot body.
• Macro fans: who benefit from superior stabilization and decent close-up capability.
• Budget-conscious photographers: wanting better noise control and dynamic range over 16MP pixel peepers.

If you don't mind the extra bulk and slower autofocus, the Fuji will deliver more versatile images overall.

Who’s the Sony Cyber-shot W650 Made For?

• Casual snapshooters: seeking an ultra-compact camera for quick grabs and social media sharing.
• Indoor and family photographers: benefiting from the brighter f/2.6 wide aperture and face detection autofocus.
• Travelers valuing pocket ultra-portability: who prioritize size over zoom reach.
• Beginners or seniors: wanting straightforward automatic shooting with eye-pleasing colors and basic controls.

In summary, Sony’s W650 is a nifty, friendly companion for stress-free shooting but lacks the versatility and image quality needed for more ambitious photographers.

Final Thoughts: Bridging Past and Present

Both the FujiFilm F300EXR and Sony Cyber-shot W650 represent snapshots of compact camera evolution just before smartphone cameras became ubiquitous. They remind us of the joys when bigger zooms and manual tweaking were major draws.

For enthusiasts who cherish a distinct shooting experience with better optical zoom and manual options, the F300EXR still holds value if found at a good price. The W650 is a charming, no-frills point-and-shooter for those who prize simplicity and portability above all else.

If serious image quality, autofocus speed, or video capabilities matter most, I’d suggest considering modern mirrorless or smartphone technology instead. But if nostalgia or a simple companion camera calls you, either could serve - just pick based on your priorities.

I hope this granular comparison helps you navigate these two time capsules of compact camera history with clarity and confidence. Happy shooting (and zooming)!