FujiFilm FinePix S1600 vs. S4000: An In-Depth Comparison of Two Superzoom Bridge Cameras

In the realm of budget-friendly small sensor superzoom cameras, FujiFilm’s FinePix line has carved a niche among casual users and enthusiasts who desire versatility without the investment or bulk of interchangeable lens systems. Today, I’ll be dissecting two notable contenders from Fuji’s superzoom bridge lineup: the FujiFilm FinePix S1600 (2010) and its successor in spirit, the FinePix S4000 (2011). Both sporting the characteristic SLR-like bridge body, fixed superzoom lenses, and modest CCD sensors, these cameras invite comparison not just on paper, but through the lens of practical photography.

Having handled and tested hundreds of compact and bridge cameras, I’ll provide technical insights bolstered by real-world shooting experience across diverse photographic disciplines - portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, street, macro, night, video, and beyond. Expect analysis grounded in sensor tech, autofocus, ergonomics, usability, and value considerations. Let's head into the field.

First Impressions and Design: Size, Handling, and Ergonomics

Physical ergonomics often shape the shooting experience as much as specs. Both cameras adopt a classic bridge camera profile with pronounced handgrips and electronic viewfinders (EVFs), but subtle differences affected usability in my hands.

The S1600 is noticeably lighter and more compact (110 x 73 x 81 mm; 337 grams) compared to the heftier S4000 (118 x 81 x 100 mm; 540 grams). The S4000’s additional heft is palpable, especially after extended handheld shooting - more stabilizing weight but potentially fatiguing for street shooters or travel.

Both rely on AA batteries, easing replacements in the field but compromising weight and eco-friendliness compared to lithium-ion packs. The S4000 offers slightly better battery endurance (rated roughly 300 shots), whereas Fuji does not officially specify battery life for the S1600, but expectedly it’s similar or slightly less given size constraints.

Looking down at the control layouts, the S4000 integrates a more refined shutter speed and aperture priority dial, making manual exposure adjustments more intuitive. The S1600 also provides manual and shutter/aperture priority modes but requires menu navigation for some parameters, slowing workflows for seasoned shooters craving rapid changes.

The electronic viewfinders, both with around 97-99% coverage, lack detailed resolution specs and felt somewhat dim under bright conditions. An improvement in viewfinder brightness and clarity would particularly benefit outdoor sports and wildlife photographers who rely on tracking fast subjects.

In sum: The S1600’s compactness favors portability and quick grabs; the S4000’s size suggests greater ruggedness and more robust controls but demands a commitment to heftier gear. Your shooting posture and typical environment will determine which feels right.

Sensor and Image Quality: Resolution, Sensitivity, and Dynamic Range

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor - a tiny format by today’s standards but common for superzoom bridges of their era. CCD sensors bring a certain character but generally lag behind CMOS counterparts in noise control and video.

The S1600 delivers a 12-megapixel resolution (4000 x 3000 max), whereas the S4000 slightly bumps this to 14 megapixels (4288 x 3216). While higher resolution offers improved cropping latitude and minor detail advantages, the sensor size limits inherent image quality improvements, especially in low light.

ISO ranges for both cameras nominally span 100-1600 native but the S4000 extends ISO up to 6400 as a boosted setting, albeit with significant noise and detail loss at that extreme. Both cameras lack raw support, restricting post-processing flexibility - a clear limiting factor for enthusiasts.

In practical shooting tests across landscapes and portraits, I found the S4000 marginally sharper at base ISO, likely due to its extra resolution and more advanced in-camera sharpening algorithms. However, noise levels above ISO 800 rose quickly on both, making them best suited to daylight or well-lit environments.

Dynamic range, a traditional challenge with small sensors, is constrained but not dismal. The S4000 showed modestly improved highlight recovery and shadow detail retention compared to the S1600, implying minor but meaningful processing advancements.

To sum up, while neither camera will compete with larger sensor systems, the S4000’s higher resolution and marginally better noise handling provide tangible image quality improvements for landscapes and portraits shot in good light.

Highlighting LCD and User Interface: Composing and Reviewing Your Shots

The rear LCD screen is a reliable interface window for composition and reviewing images, especially when shooting without the EVF.

Both models feature a 3-inch fixed LCD screen, but the S4000 sports twice the resolution (460k dots vs. S1600’s 230k dots). The increased pixel density translates to crisp, detailed image previews and more accurate focus confirmation - crucial when shooting fine portrait details or sharp macro subjects.

The interface layout on the S4000 is cleaner and more responsive, with fewer nested menus interrupting workflow. The S1600, while straightforward, sometimes requires digging deeper for exposure settings or function adjustments. Neither camera offers a touchscreen, which is understandable given their release era but a small frustration for today’s standards.

For photographers prioritizing on-the-fly composition checks, exposure validation, and quick playback without external monitors, the S4000’s display slightly edges the competition.

Zoom and Optics: Lens Reach, Aperture, and Practical Telephoto Use

Superzoom cameras are built around their lens capabilities, and both Fujis feature formidable zoom ranges - defining their appeal for travel and wildlife photographers.

• S1600: 28-420mm equivalent (15x zoom), max aperture ranges from f/4.0 (wide) to f/4.8 (tele)
• S4000: 24-720mm equivalent (30x zoom), aperture from f/3.1 (wide) to f/5.9 (tele)

The S4000's 30x zoom offers spectacular reach - doubling the S1600’s telephoto extent and opening creative horizons for those who hunt distant subjects, be it birds, events, or urban details. The caveat: The max aperture tightens significantly to f/5.9 at the long end, reducing light capture and challenging autofocus in dim conditions.

Image stabilization is sensor-shift type in both cameras, a welcome inclusion given the dizzying zooms. In practice, I found the stabilization on the S4000 slightly more effective, perhaps tuned to the broader focal range, allowing sharper hand-held shots at longer reach. Still, users should temper expectations with these small sensor bridges - tripods or support remain essential for critically sharp tele-shots.

The macro focusing distance is an impressive 2 cm on both models, enabling intimate close-ups with pleasant background separation. Up close, lens sharpness performs reasonably with minor softness at the edges and some chromatic aberration at extreme zooms.

For wildlife and travel photogs, the S4000 wins on flexibility and reach, whereas the S1600’s wider aperture range in shorter zoom applications may favor general walk-around versatility.

Autofocus, Continuous Shooting, and General Performance

Speed and accuracy in autofocus can make or break spontaneous shooting genres like wildlife or sports.

Both cameras feature contrast-detection AF with promising features, but the S4000 incorporates face detection and AF tracking - absent in the S1600.

• S1600: AF single, AF continuous
• S4000: AF single, AF continuous, AF tracking, face detection, AF center, AF multi-area

During dynamic test scenarios mimicking wildlife and sports shooting, the S4000’s AF tracking proved surprisingly adept given hardware constraints. It maintained lock on moving subjects better, while the S1600 often struggled with focus hunting in continuous mode.

However, continuous shooting speed is limited to 1 frame per second on both - painfully slow by today’s standards and unsuitable for high-octane sports photography. These cameras are firmly targeted at casual to enthusiast shooters prioritizing versatility over rapid-fire action.

Of note, neither camera supports manual focusing, which can frustrate macro or precise focus shooters, although the 2 cm macro mode somewhat compensates.

Durability, Weather Resistance, and Build Quality

Neither the S1600 nor the S4000 offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or shockproof features, which matches their budget superzoom positioning.

Their plastic polycarbonate bodies feel solid in hands but not rugged beyond everyday handling. Extreme environmental demands - rain, snow, sand, rugged hiking - require protective accessories.

If your photographic journey extends into harsh conditions, these cameras demand careful handling. For urban, landscape, or casual outdoor photography, their build quality is more than adequate.

Video Shooting Capabilities

Video specs reflect the era and entry-level focus.

Both shoot HD video at 1280 x 720 pixels, 30 frames per second in Motion JPEG format - a highly compressed codec resulting in large files and moderate video quality.

The S4000 adds an HDMI output port, allowing convenient connection to external displays. An edge for videographers wanting better playback options.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone jacks, disabling higher audio quality recording or monitoring. No higher-res 4K or slow-motion modes exist; these devices are simple point-and-shoot video companions.

If video is a priority beyond casual clips, modern alternatives excel. But for quick family videos or light events, both cameras suffice.

Battery Life and Storage

Both models use readily available 4 AA batteries - a double-edged sword.

Advantages:

• Easy replacement worldwide
• Spare batteries inexpensive and disposable or rechargeable

Disadvantages:

• Added weight compared to proprietary lithium-ion
• Limited shot count per set (S4000 rated ~300 shots, S1600 undefined but similarly modest)
• Environmental inefficiency with disposables

Storage relies on a single SD/SDHC card slot on each camera - standard and reliable. I recommend using Class 6 or faster cards for smooth continuous shooting and video recording.

Practical Use Across Photography Genres

Let's evaluate both cameras’ relative merit in specific photographic disciplines, augmenting experience with hands-on results and observations.

FujiFilm S1600 front FujiFilm S1600 screen back FujiFilm S4000 front FujiFilm S4000 screen back

Portrait Photography

Portrait shooting demands pleasing skin tone rendition, good bokeh, and effective eye detection or autofocus accuracy.

• S1600: Decent skin tone reproduction; however, lack of face detection sometimes resulted in focus hunting or missed eye sharpness.
• S4000: Better face detection efficiency and AF tracking helped nail focus on faces even in complex scenes. Bokeh is limited by small sensor and lens aperture but adequate for casual portraits.

Neither camera offers raw files restricting post-processing for skin tone tweaks.

Landscape Photography

Key aspects: resolution, dynamic range, color fidelity, weather sealing.

The S4000 holds a small advantage with higher resolution and slightly improved dynamic range, yielding crisper images with richer shadow detail in test landscapes from bright coastal vistas to shaded forests.

Neither sports weather sealing for extremes, but standard outdoor shooting is comfortable.

Wildlife Photography

Requires rapid autofocus, long reach, burst shooting.

The S4000’s 30x reach and AF tracking make it the only viable candidate. It still won’t challenge dedicated DSLRs or mirrorless with telephoto primes but can capture distant birds and animals reasonably.

The S1600’s 15x zoom is often too limited for effective wildlife use.

Sports Photography

Fast continuous shooting and accurate autofocus needed.

Both cameras are handicapped by 1 fps burst and contrast AF, making them unsuitable for fast-moving sports. The S4000’s AF tracking is helpful but insufficient for consistent results.

Street Photography

Discretion, portability, and low light prowess matter.

S1600’s lighter size aids portability and street discretion, but limited high ISO and no low light AF assistance restrict usability after dusk.

The S4000, although larger, benefits from face detection and marginally better low light focus but its size is more conspicuous.

Macro Photography

Close focusing capability and focus precision essential.

Both cameras’ 2 cm minimum focusing distances enable pleasant macro shots with adequate detail for casual exploration. Neither supports focus bracketing or stacking.

Night and Astro Photography

High ISO performance and exposure control key.

Neither camera excels here; limited native ISO, no raw, and small sensors produce noisy images in low light. Manual exposure modes and slow shutter speeds permit long exposures but require stable tripods.

Video Capabilities

As addressed earlier, suitable only for casual HD clips. S4000’s HDMI output enhances playback convenience.

Travel Photography

Versatility, battery life, weight.

• S1600’s compactness and lighter weight align with travel convenience.
• S4000’s extensive zoom and improved AF enhance creative options.
• Battery life marginally favors S4000 but AA reliance remains burden.

Recommendations depend on travel style: light and fast vs. versatility focused.

Professional Work

Neither camera suits professional assignments due to small sensor, lack of raw, modest AF, and build limitations.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Neither model allows lens changes - the “fixed lens” design is core to their superzoom appeal but not ideal for photographers desiring glass swapping or specialized optics.

The zoom range and optical qualities embedded limit flexibility but provide out-of-the-box all-in-one convenience.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Both cameras lack wireless or Bluetooth connectivity, unusual by today’s standards but typical for early 2010s models.

The S4000 includes an HDMI output port, suitable for external playback, while the S1600 does not. Both rely on USB 2.0 for file transfer.

No GPS, NFC, or cloud integration mean post-shoot image management requires manual handling.

Price, Value, and Final Performance Ratings

Currently, these cameras are bargain-bin relics, with the S1600 offered around $130 and S4000 near $280. For used or entry-level superzoom buyers on tight budgets, these price points present accessible options.

Performance ratings give us an objective summary:

• S1600: Lower score across key performance metrics - more entry-level
• S4000: Higher ratings in autofocus, image quality, versatility

And genre-specific scores:

Indicate the S4000 outperforms in portrait, landscape, wildlife, and video, while the S1600 holds minor strengths in portability and casual shooting.

Conclusion: Which FujiBridge Camera Fits Your Needs?

The FujiFilm FinePix S1600 is a compact, easy-to-use superzoom suitable for casual shooters who prize portability and straightforward operation over features or ultimate image quality. It’s a decent companion for family photos, daylight landscapes, and travel snapshots where weight and simplicity trump optics reach.

The FujiFilm FinePix S4000 upgrades the experience with an extended zoom (up to 720mm equiv), enhanced autofocus including face detection and tracking, higher resolution, better LCD screen, and video playback via HDMI. It answers the needs of photographers seeking more flexible framing options and improved autofocus performance - especially wildlife enthusiasts and those valuing manual control options within an affordable bridge camera.

Both models reflect their small sensor limitations, lack raw shooting, and modest continuous performance. Neither can rival modern mirrorless or DSLRs for advanced applications but remain capable for users seeking versatile superzoom bridges on a budget.

For photography enthusiasts selecting their next bridge camera or budget superzoom, the S4000 is the clear winner if your budget and tolerance for bulk permit. The S1600 holds charm as a lightweight, simple snapshot machine. Knowing each camera’s strengths and weaknesses, matched to your shooting style, will yield the best satisfaction - and the best photos.

Happy shooting!