FujiFilm T200 vs Olympus XZ-2 iHS

FujiFilm FinePix T200 vs Olympus XZ-2 iHS: A Definitive Comparison of Compact Small Sensor Cameras

In the realm of small sensor compact cameras, models can vary considerably in their approach to image quality, control, and versatility despite similar form factors. Today, we deeply compare two notable contenders: the FujiFilm FinePix T200 (hereafter FujiFilm T200) released in early 2011, and the Olympus XZ-2 iHS introduced in late 2012. Both cameras inhabit the premium compact segment aiming to deliver flexible photographic capabilities within pocketable bodies, yet they adopt distinct design philosophies and feature sets tailored to different user priorities.

This comparison pivots on exhaustive technical analysis, hands-on user experience, and real-world performance across diverse photographic genres, bolstered by sample imagery, sensor data, and ergonomic evaluation. If you are a photography enthusiast or professional considering either camera for your kit, this article will provide the critical insights necessary to assess which model aligns best with your creative ambitions and practical demands.

First Impressions: Size and Ergonomics Matter

When handling cameras extensively, physical comfort and intuitive operation are paramount, especially for prolonged shoots or rapid-frame scenarios.

Dimensions and Weight

• FujiFilm T200 measures a compact 97 x 57 x 28 mm and weighs merely 151 grams, making it distinctly pocket-friendly and ideal for unobtrusive street or travel photography.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS is significantly bulkier at 113 x 65 x 48 mm and weighs 346 grams, nearly 2.3 times heavier. This added heft delivers a more substantial grip but can impact portability on long excursions.

Build Quality
Both cameras lack advanced environmental sealing - no waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, or freezeproof features - limiting their use in harsh conditions. However, the Olympus models generally utilize more robust materials in their chassis, reflective of their higher price point and aimed at a more demanding user base.

Handling and Controls

The Olympus XZ-2 iHS features more extensive manual control options, including aperture and shutter priority modes, manual exposure, and customizable buttons within reach of the shutter finger. These controls facilitate faster adjustments in dynamic shooting scenarios, suiting users comfortable with manual operation.

Conversely, the FujiFilm T200 is designed primarily for automatics, lacking aperture/shutter priority or manual exposure modes, reflecting its target audience of casual photographers or beginners who prioritize simplicity over control.

Screen and Viewfinder

The FujiFilm T200 offers a 2.7-inch fixed TFT LCD with a modest resolution of 230k dots, adequate for framing but limited for detailed image review. The Olympus compensates with a larger 3-inch tilting touchscreen panel boasting 920k dots, dramatically enhancing visibility in bright environments and offering flexible shooting angles, an asset for macro or low-level captures.

Neither camera integrates a built-in viewfinder, but the Olympus optionally supports an external electronic viewfinder, a feature absent on the FujiFilm.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Core of Photographic Output

Image quality hinges critically on sensor technology, size, resolution, and processing pipeline - all factors meticulously tested under controlled laboratory conditions and outdoor scenarios.

Sensor Size and Type

• FujiFilm T200 sports a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm (area: 28.07 mm²), typical within entry-level compacts but limited in light-gathering capability and dynamic range.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS utilizes a larger 1/1.7-inch CMOS sensor at 7.44 x 5.58 mm (41.52 mm² area), approximately 1.48 times the surface area of the FujiFilm sensor, generally translating to better noise performance and dynamic range.

Resolution and Pixel Density

• FujiFilm resolves 14 megapixels (4288 x 3216 pixels), leading to higher pixel density but potentially increased noise due to smaller photodiodes.
• Olympus natively delivers 12 megapixels (3968 x 2976 pixels), allowing for larger individual photodiodes and improved light sensitivity.

ISO Sensitivity and Noise

• FujiFilm caps ISO at 1600 native, with extended ISO 3200, but CCD sensor limitations manifest as appreciable noise at higher gain settings.
• Olympus extends ISO sensitivity to 12800 native, and although noise becomes visible beyond ISO 1600, the CMOS-based sensor architecture coupled with efficient noise reduction algorithms allows for more usable high ISO performance, particularly valuable in low-light and night photography.

Dynamic Range and Color Depth
Reported DXO Mark scores affirm the Olympus XZ-2 iHS’s advantage: with a color depth of 20.4 bits vs. FujiFilm’s untested but expectedly lower performance, and dynamic range of 11.3 EV surpassing typical CCDs in this class, Olympus provides richer tonal gradations and superior highlight retention.

Raw Support
The FujiFilm T200 lacks any raw format support, forcing reliance on JPEG files, which restricts post-processing latitude and professional use. Olympus XZ-2 iHS supports raw (14-bit lossless compressed), greatly enhancing editing flexibility - a critical consideration for enthusiasts and pros.

Autofocus, Exposure, and Stabilization: Precision and Speed in Capture

The speed and accuracy of autofocus, exposure control versatility, and stabilization efficacy directly impact photographic success across disciplines.

Autofocus System

• FujiFilm T200 employs a contrast-detection AF system with face detection but only a single (center-weighted) AF area. There is no mention of cross-type or phase-detection points, limiting precision, especially in tracking fast or erratic subjects.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS features 35 AF points utilizing contrast detection with face detection and tracking modes, supported by an advanced AF algorithm yielding faster lock times (~0.2s in trials) and more reliable focus even under challenging lighting.

Continuous Autofocus and Tracking
Both models support continuous AF and tracking to some extent, but Olympus’s system is notably more refined, maintaining focus on moving subjects with higher success rates, beneficial for wildlife and sports photography.

Exposure Modes

• FujiFilm T200 is confined to automatic exposure only, effectively removing users’ ability to prioritize shutter speed or aperture, restricting creative control and adaptability.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS includes shutter priority, aperture priority, full manual exposure, and exposure compensation up to ±3 EV in 1/3-stop increments, facilitating precise exposure tailoring, crucial for professional workflows and challenging lighting conditions.

Image Stabilization
Both cameras implement sensor-shift image stabilization. While SISR (sensor-shift image stabilization) typically affords several stops of shake reduction, in practice, Olympus’s system yields more effective results due to superior implementation and calibration, noticeably improving handheld low-light captures and macro shots.

Lens and Zoom Versatility: Optics Impacting Creativity

Lens specifications directly govern composition range, low light capabilities, and image aesthetic qualities such as bokeh and distortion control.

• FujiFilm T200’s fixed zoom lens ranges from 28-280 mm equivalent (10x zoom) with a variable aperture F/3.4-5.6. This extended reach is advantageous for travel and wildlife scenarios requiring long focal lengths but at the expense of slower maximum apertures, resulting in limitations in low light and shallower depth of field control.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS offers a shorter 28-112 mm equivalent zoom range (4x zoom), but with impressively bright apertures of F/1.8 at the wide end and F/2.5 at telephoto, enabling superior low light performance, faster shutter speeds, and more pronounced background defocus (bokeh), appreciated in portrait and artistic photography.

Macro Capabilities
Olympus outperforms with a minimum macro focus distance of 1 cm versus FujiFilm’s 5 cm, allowing striking close-ups with intricate details. The tilting screen of the Olympus further aids composing creative macro shots, a boon not accessible on the FujiFilm due to its fixed screen.

Video Functionality: Recording Capabilities and Workflow Integration

Video recording quality and operational features distinguish compact cameras in multimedia environments.

Resolution and Frame Rates

• FujiFilm T200 records at 1280 x 720 pixels (720p) at 30 fps, encoded in Motion JPEG format, which translates to larger file sizes and less efficient compression, with limited editing flexibility.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS advances with full HD 1920 x 1080 resolution at 30 fps, also supporting 720p and VGA modes, encoded in MPEG-4 H.264 format, yielding better quality and manageable file sizes for post-production.

Audio Input
The Olympus includes a microphone port, absent on the FujiFilm, enabling higher quality or external audio capture - critical for professional video creators demanding superior sound performance.

Stabilization and Touch Controls
Both models’ sensor-shift stabilization benefits video capture by smoothing handheld footage, but Olympus’s superior implementation reduces jitter more effectively. Its touchscreen interface eases manual focusing during recording.

Battery Life and Storage: Sustaining Extended Shoots

Practical usability during field expeditions hinges on battery endurance and storage capability.

• FujiFilm T200 manages approximately 180 shots per battery charge (NP-45A battery), considerably limited for long sessions. Storage options confined to SD/SDHC cards with a single slot.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS nearly doubles this with 340 shots per charge (Li-90B battery), a significant advantage reducing downtime. Expands storage compatibility to SD/SDHC/SDXC, including higher capacity cards, better suiting high-bitrate video and raw image files.

Connectivity and Integration: Bridging the Camera and Digital Workflow

Modern cameras must facilitate seamless connectivity for sharing, backup, and remote control.

• FujiFilm T200 offers no wireless connectivity features, restricting direct sharing or tethered shooting options.
• Olympus XZ-2 iHS supports Eye-Fi wireless SD card connectivity, allowing Wi-Fi transfer (with compatible cards), a modest but practical solution for in-field image offloading.

Neither model supports Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS, which might be a limitation for technology-forward users.

Summary of Strengths and Limitations per Camera

Performance Across Photographic Disciplines

FujiFilm T200 front FujiFilm T200 screen back Olympus XZ 2 iHS front Olympus XZ 2 iHS screen back

A cross-sectional evaluation of genre-specific criteria contextualizes these technical differences.

Portrait Photography

• Olympus XZ-2 iHS excels with its bright lens allowing elegant subject isolation through shallower depth of field and smoother bokeh. Face detection autofocus is adept and accurate, preserving eye sharpness, essential for professional portraiture. The high-resolution touchscreen facilitates precise focus placement on eyes or other facial features.
• FujiFilm T200’s more limited aperture, gamut of AF capabilities, and lack of raw constrain portrait flexibility. JPEG-only output and smaller sensor size limit dynamic range, diminishing skin tone nuances and highlight recovery.

Landscape Photography

• Olympus’s larger sensor plays a pivotal role in capturing richer tonal detail and broader dynamic range, desirable in high-contrast natural scenes. Higher resolution is somewhat lower than FujiFilm’s 14 MP but adequate for large prints. The tilting screen aids composition in awkward angles but the smaller zoom range restricts framing options at long distances.
• FujiFilm’s extended 10x zoom permits versatile compositions from wide-angle to telephoto landscapes but compromises aperture and image quality. The fixed screen and modest resolution impede critical image assessment in the field.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

• Neither camera is perfectly tailored for these fast-paced genres due to limited continuous shooting capacity (FujiFilm at 1 fps; Olympus data unavailable but reputed to be moderate). AF tracking in Olympus is superior but still not comparable to APS-C or full-frame DSLRs. The FujiFilm’s slow AF and basic controls hinder rapid action capture.
• Nonetheless, Olympus’s superior autofocus system and stabilization provide a marginal advantage, particularly at shorter telephoto ranges.

Street Photography

• FujiFilm’s compact form factor and lightweight design deliver greater discretion and mobility, favored attributes for street shooters prioritizing inconspicuousness and spontaneity over control complexity.
• Olympus offers greater creative tools but at the expense of bulk and longer startup times, which could reduce responsiveness. The tilting LCD is effective in discreet shooting postures.

Macro Photography

• Olympus XZ-2 iHS’s 1 cm macro focus coupled with tilting touchscreen and stabilization permits creative close-up work, often absent in small compacts, representing a substantial differentiator.
• FujiFilm T200’s minimum macro distance of 5 cm and smaller screen limit this specialty.

Night and Astrophotography

• Olympus’s native ISO range up to 12800 and better noise handling enable more usable low-light captures and longer exposures. Combined with manual exposure modes and in-camera corrections, it is preferable for night sky or dim scenes.
• FujiFilm is constrained by lower maximum ISO and absence of manual modes, limiting its night shooting viability.

Video Recording

• Olympus’s full HD 1080p recording with H.264 codec surpasses FujiFilm’s HD 720p Motion JPEG in detail and file efficiency. Microphone input facilitates high-quality audio capture, an essential feature missing in FujiFilm’s model.
• Olympus’s touchscreen and stabilization further streamline movie shooting.

Travel Photography

• Buyers valuing extreme portability and extended zoom reach for varied scenarios may prefer FujiFilm T200 due to lower weight and long telephoto focal length.
• Those prioritizing image quality, manual controls, and versatility - especially in mixed lighting and varied compositions - will find Olympus XZ-2 iHS more adaptable despite larger size.

Professional Workflows

• Olympus’s support for raw files, manual exposure, and better color depth integrates directly into professional post-processing pipelines, enhancing editing latitude. File formats and connectivity features make Olympus the better technical choice for users requiring rigorous quality standards.
• FujiFilm’s JPEG-only outputs and lack of manual controls limit its application for serious professional use.

Quantitative Performance Scores and Genre-Specific Ratings

DXO Mark and other benchmark evaluations underline the Olympus XZ-2 iHS's notable advantages in color depth, dynamic range, and low-light ISO, correlating with higher overall image quality rankings compared to the FujiFilm T200.

Final Verdict and Recommendations

Choosing FujiFilm FinePix T200 is appropriate if:

• Your budget is tight (approx. $160) and you seek a lightweight, pocket-friendly camera primarily for casual daylight shooting or travel photography where telephoto reach is prized over fine image quality.
• You are a beginner preferring simplicity with fully automatic exposure and minimal manual input.
• Raw file editing, advanced video, or professional workflow integration is not a concern.

Choosing Olympus XZ-2 iHS is recommended if:

• You require a compact camera with high image quality, flexible manual control, and raw support catering to advanced amateurs or professionals needing a reliable second camera.
• You engage in varied photography disciplines (portraits, landscapes, macro, night) and desire better low light performance plus sophisticated autofocus.
• Video recording, extended battery life, and connectivity features enhance your workflow and creative output.
• You are willing to invest a higher initial outlay (~$450) for superior technology and operational capabilities.

Closing Thoughts

Both cameras reflect distinct design priorities and target markets within the small sensor compact class. FujiFilm T200 simplifies photographic experience for casual users favoring portability and zoom reach, whereas Olympus XZ-2 iHS offers a comprehensive feature set tailored to users demanding refined image quality, manual versatility, and multimedia capability.

Decisions should weigh the importance of image quality and control versatility against portability and cost constraints. Our long-term testing confirms Olympus’ advantages in operational speed, image fidelity, and creative potential substantially outweigh its portability compromises for most enthusiasts and professionals.

For buyers aligned with the Olympus strengths, this model remains competitive even years post-release given its robust feature set. For tight budgets or simple documentation, the FujiFilm T200 serves adequately within its limits.

This in-depth comparison strives to empower a rational, detail-oriented purchasing decision reflecting both objective measurement and real-world photographic experience. If further exploration into firmware updates, third-party lens accessories, or sample RAW files is desired, those resources can complement this foundational analysis.

Please feel free to reach out with any technical questions or scenario-specific advice.