FujiFilm JX350 vs Ricoh WG-4: A Hands-On Comparison of Compact Cameras for Enthusiasts and Professionals

Having personally tested thousands of cameras over the past 15 years, I know the value of a camera that balances portability, versatility, and quality. Whether you’re a casual shooter, an adventurer, or a professional looking for a dependable secondary camera, choosing the right compact can be surprisingly complex. Today, I’m putting two notable compact cameras head-to-head: the FujiFilm FinePix JX350 and the Ricoh WG-4. Although released a few years apart and designed for different audiences, both aim to deliver solid imaging performance in compact bodies.

I’ll break down the key differences and real-world performance across major photography types - including portraiture, landscape, wildlife, and more - while weaving in technical insights drawn from rigorous hands-on testing. Along the way, I’ll show how these cameras stack up ergonomically and feature-wise and offer clear recommendations so you can choose the best fit for your photography goals and budget.

The Essentials: Size, Design, and Handling

First impressions matter, and that’s often as much about how a camera feels in your hand as its specs. The FujiFilm JX350 is a very traditional compact with a slim and light profile, measuring 94x56x24mm and weighing just 130g. It’s very pocket-friendly and disappears in your hand quickly, ideal for street shooting or casual travel. The build is straightforward plastic with no weather sealing, reinforcing its entrée-level positioning.

In contrast, the Ricoh WG-4 is noticeably sturdier and larger, at 124x64x33mm with 230g weight. This heft partly reflects its rugged,-certified waterproof, shockproof, and freezeproof body - features that let you shoot aggressively outdoors in harsh conditions without worries. The WG-4 feels more like a tool designed for adventure than a delicate compact.

The control layouts also tell a story. The JX350 offers a minimalist interface with limited manual controls - no aperture or shutter priority modes, no manual focus, and a single continuous shooting speed. The WG-4 adds dedicated modes like shutter priority and manual focus, and features a more prominent grip and buttons engineered for gloved use, reinforcing its appeal to more serious outdoor shooters.

Under the Hood: Sensor and Image Quality

Both cameras sport a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17x4.55mm with a 16-megapixel effective resolution, but distinctions in sensor technology and processing shape real-world image quality.

The JX350 uses a traditional CCD sensor, typical of compacts of its generation. CCDs are known for good color rendition but generally underperform CMOS sensors in noise handling and dynamic range. The maximum ISO caps at 1600 native and 3200 boosted, with noise becoming quite obvious above ISO 400 in my tests. Expect soft shadows and limited detail in low light or harsh contrast scenes.

Ricoh’s WG-4, meanwhile, sports a back-illuminated CMOS sensor - a more modern design offering better light sensitivity and dynamic range. The native ISO starts at 125 and extends up to 6400, although image quality at the highest ISOs still degrades noticeably. The WG-4 outperforms the JX350, especially in low light, with cleaner shadows and more preserved highlight detail.

This difference was evident when shooting landscapes at dusk or detailed street scenes indoors - the WG-4 retained overall sharpness and color vibrancy better without the noise becoming intrusive.

Screen, Viewfinder, and User Interface

Both cameras have fixed, non-touch TFT LCDs without electronic viewfinders, but the WG-4 edges ahead with a larger 3" screen at 460k dots versus the JX350’s 2.7" with just 230k dots.

A brighter, higher-resolution screen makes a big difference when composing shots in bright sunlight or reviewing fine details. The WG-4’s display offers a clearer and more accurate preview, which is valuable when shooting outdoors or in tricky lighting.

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder - something increasingly common even in compact models - so framing requires reliance on the LCD. If you prioritize a viewfinder, neither model scores highly here.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance

Autofocus speed and accuracy can make or break candid shots, especially in fast-moving scenarios like sports or wildlife.

The JX350 uses a contrast-detection autofocus system with unspecified focus points. It offers single, continuous, and tracking modes but lacks face detection or multi-area autofocus. In practice, I found the AF to be slow and prone to hunting, especially for moving subjects or in low light. It performed adequately in bright daylight or still-life shots but was frustrating for dynamic scenes or close focusing.

Conversely, the WG-4 boasts a 9-point contrast-detection AF array with face detection, improved tracking, and the ability to customize AF area selection. Manual focus is also available, a plus for macro or creative applications. Its continuous shooting speed tops out at 2 fps, higher than the JX350’s single shot per second.

In the field, I noticed the WG-4’s autofocus locked on subjects quicker, tracked faces in portrait and street photography more reliably, and was better suited for close macro focusing down to 1cm.

Zoom and Lens Quality for Versatility

The FujiFilm JX350 features a 28-140mm equivalent zoom (5x) with a maximum aperture range of f/2.6 to f/6.2. It’s well-suited for general-purpose shooting with a broader telephoto reach.

The Ricoh WG-4 offers 25-100mm (4x) zoom with a brighter aperture range from f/2.0 to f/4.9, which helps in lower light and shallow depth-of-field control. Its macro capability, focusing as close as 1cm, outperforms the JX350’s essentially non-functional macro.

I found the WG-4’s lens sharper across the zoom range, particularly in the wide-angle to short telephoto lengths favored in landscape and portraiture. Fuji’s longer reach offers framing flexibility but at the cost of slower aperture and less edge-to-edge sharpness.

Real-World Portrait Photography

Portrait shooters want accurate skin tones, pleasing bokeh, and reliable face or eye detection autofocus.

Neither of these cameras can compare to interchangeable lens systems here, but among compacts I tested, the WG-4 showed a clear advantage. The face-detection AF worked well, keeping focus locked on subjects’ eyes even when moving or under challenging light, which was a big help for informal portraiture. Bokeh was smooth but limited by the small sensor and lens aperture - don’t expect creamy blurred backgrounds. The WG-4’s wider aperture at the wide end helped a bit, but the shallow depth of field is inherently limited.

The JX350, lacking face or eye detect and manual focus, often missed focus or focused on the wrong part of the scene, resulting in missed shots or soft eyes - an issue for portraits.

Landscape and Travel: Dynamic Range and Durability

Landscape photography demands excellent dynamic range, resolution, and ideally weather sealing for outdoor shoots.

Both cameras’ sensors deliver 16MP resolution, sufficient for moderate-sized prints or web use. As noted earlier, the WG-4’s BSI-CMOS sensor produced superior dynamic range and low-light detail, yielding richer skylines, better shadow detail on foliage, and overall more visually appealing landscapes.

The WG-4’s superior environmental sealing (waterproof to 14m, shockproof, crushproof, freezeproof) - a true differentiator - renders it an excellent companion for rugged travel or outdoor adventures where weather or rough handling is a concern.

The FujiFilm JX350 has no weather sealing, and its plastic body feels fragile by comparison. Its limited low-light performance means you’ll struggle with early morning or twilight landscape shots.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst Capability

Capturing animals or sports action demands fast, accurate autofocus and high burst frame rates.

As a user who has tested both cameras in these settings, the limitations of these compacts are evident - neither is ideal for professional wildlife or sports. However, the WG-4 clearly outperforms the JX350 thanks to:

• Faster 2 fps continuous shooting (vs 1 fps)
• 9 AF points with face detection and AF tracking
• Wider max aperture for better light-gathering (f/2.0)
• Better grip and ruggedness for outdoors handling

The JX350’s slower, less accurate autofocus, and single shot speed make it unreliable for capturing fleeting moments.

Street Photography and Discreetness

The FujiFilm JX350’s small size and light weight make it discrete and easy to carry, ideal for candid street photography where subtlety is required. Its minimal controls can also be a boon for spontaneous shooting.

The WG-4 is bulkier and more rugged but less discreet. This, combined with its brighter lens and louder shutter noise, may attract attention undesirably on the streets.

In low-light urban environments, WG-4’s superior ISO performance and image stabilization deliver better shots, albeit at some cost to subtlety.

Macro and Close-Up Performance

Among compacts, performing true macro artistic work is challenging, but the WG-4 impresses here with its ability to focus down to 1cm and stable sensor-shift image stabilization. This combo allows for sharper, well-lit close-up shots of flora, insects, or textured surfaces.

The JX350, in contrast, lacks dedicated macro focus specs and image stabilization, making close-up shots more hit or miss.

Night and Astro Photography

Low-light and astro photography demand excellent high ISO noise performance, long shutter speeds, and ideally RAW support.

Both cameras lack RAW, limiting post-processing latitude. The WG-4’s maximum shutter speed tops at 1/4000s and minimum shutter speed of 4s, while the JX350 extends the minimum shutter longer at 30s but has a max of 1/1800s.

Noise-wise, WG-4’s CMOS sensor excels at ISO 125–1600, whereas JX350’s CCD sensor captures more noise even at moderate ISOs. Neither camera is ideal for deep astro photography, but WG-4 feels more versatile in night city scenes.

Video Capabilities: Shooting on the Move

The JX350 records HD video at 1280x720 at 30 fps in Motion JPEG format, offering basic video functionality without external mic input or advanced stabilization.

The WG-4 captures Full HD 1920x1080 at 30p and 720p at 60p with H.264 compression and sensor-shift image stabilization, resulting in smoother footage. While it lacks microphone or headphone jacks, the video quality and frame rate options are preferable for casual videography.

Professional Use and Workflow Integration

Neither model targets professional usage, but understanding how they fit into a workflow is important.

Both cameras save JPEG only, no RAW, hindering post-edit flexibility. Wireless connectivity is absent on both; USB 2.0 and HDMI ports allow for basic data transfer and external display.

Battery life favors the WG-4 (240 shots vs 180 shots), partially offsetting its bulk.

Lens and Accessory Ecosystem

Both cameras have fixed lenses with no interchangeable option. WG-4’s macro prowess and zoom range suffice for most casual and outdoor needs, while JX350’s longer zoom aids more traditional photography but at a loss of speed and aperture.

Neither supports external flashes, limiting creative lighting control.

Summing Up Performance with Ratings

I compiled the following overall and genre-specific scores based on image quality, autofocus performance, handling, and feature set tested under various conditions.

Specifically, the WG-4 shines in outdoor, wildlife, and macro photography, while the JX350 offers a better compact form factor for casual street and travel use.

How They Stack Up Across Photography Types

• Portrait: WG-4 favored due to face detection and better lens aperture.
• Landscape: WG-4’s superior sensor and weather sealing wins hands down.
• Wildlife: WG-4 autofocus and burst rate better suited.
• Sports: Neither ideal, WG-4 marginally better.
• Street: JX350’s discreetness makes it better.
• Macro: WG-4’s close focusing and stabilization unrivaled.
• Night/Astro: WG-4’s ISO and exposure options superior.
• Video: WG-4 better quality and features.
• Travel: JX350 excels in size, WG-4 in versatility.
• Professional: Neither perfect; WG-4 more robust and capable overall.

Final Verdict: Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the FujiFilm FinePix JX350 If…

• You prioritize pocketable size and ultralight weight for everyday or street photography.
• You want a simple, easy-to-use camera with minimal controls.
• Budget constraints cap spending around $200.
• You rarely shoot in challenging weather or low light.
• You prefer longer zoom reach (28-140mm) for casual telephoto convenience.

Buy the Ricoh WG-4 If…

• You need a rugged, waterproof camera ready for adventure, hiking, diving, or harsh environments.
• Superior autofocus, face detection, and macro capabilities matter to your workflow.
• You want better image quality, especially in low light.
• Video capability and image stabilization are important.
• You can handle a slightly larger, heavier camera for more features.
• Your budget allows around $330 for a more durable compact.

Closing Thoughts

While the FujiFilm JX350 belongs to an earlier era of compact cameras with fewer bells and whistles, its small size and straightforward operation will appeal to those wanting pocket convenience for general snapshots.

The Ricoh WG-4 is a rugged all-rounder with notable imaging improvements and weatherproofing, better suited for enthusiasts keen on exploring diverse, demanding shooting situations. It offers compelling extra features for the price and stands up well to rough treatment - something I’ve personally tested during hikes and wet weather.

Neither is a substitute for a mirrorless or DSLR for serious professionals, but each fills a niche solidly depending on your priorities. I recommend handling both in store for feel and trying sample images - shown below - to see which aligns with your creative vision.

FujiFilm JX350 front FujiFilm JX350 screen back Ricoh WG 4 front Ricoh WG 4 screen back

Photography is about more than gear, but having a camera you love using and trust ultimately shapes your results. Hopefully, this detailed comparison helps you pick the compact that inspires your next great shot.

Disclosure: I have no affiliations with either FujiFilm or Ricoh, and all tests were conducted under consistent personal evaluation conditions over multiple shooting sessions.