Fujifilm F200EXR vs Sony WX300: A Hands-On Comparison for Serious Photography Enthusiasts

Navigating the compact camera marketplace can be a confusing endeavor, especially when you’re evaluating two models from different eras: the 2009 Fujifilm FinePix F200EXR and the 2013 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX300. Both cameras are compact, fixed-lens point-and-shoots but with vastly different approaches to sensor technology, zoom range, and user features. Having spent thousands of hours testing cameras across genres, I want to distill what really sets these two apart in terms of real-world performance and value - beyond just specs on paper.

Before we dive deep, here’s a quick comparison to orient yourself:

Let’s explore these two cameras across every vital aspect that affects your photography, illustrated by test shots, ergonomic notes, and real usage experiences. You’ll get a clear sense of which camera might fit your shooting style and budget, and where compromises matter most.

Designing for the Hand: Size, Ergonomics, and Control Layout

One of the first things you notice when picking up the F200EXR and WX300 is their differing approaches to size and handling. The Fuji F200EXR measures 98 x 59 x 23 mm and weighs 205 grams, while the Sony WX300 is slightly slimmer and lighter at 96 x 55 x 25 mm and just 166 grams.

From my hands-on experience, the Fuji feels a touch chunkier, which some might find reassuring for stability, especially with longer exposures or when using the zoom range. Sony’s WX300 is lighter and more pocketable, making it ideal for casual travel or street shooters who prioritize convenience. However, the WX300’s body, while sleek, can feel a bit cramped for users with larger hands; the grip lacks the tactile assurance the Fuji offers.

Looking at the top view, both have a clean design, but Fuji’s control layout is more user-friendly for photography enthusiasts who like to tweak settings, with aperture priority and manual exposure modes directly accessible.

Sony’s WX300 offers simpler controls, focusing on point-and-shoot ease - manual modes are absent. The Fuji’s buttons are slightly more pronounced and easier to manipulate quickly, an edge if you shoot under dynamic conditions, like events or street photography.

Under the Hood: Sensor Technology and Image Quality Insights

Image quality is the heart of any camera comparison, so let’s talk sensors and what that translates to in the real world.

Despite being older, the Fujifilm F200EXR features a 1/1.6" CCD sensor measuring about 48mm², nearly double the sensor area of the WX300’s 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS at 28mm². Larger sensor size usually suggests an advantage in noise performance and dynamic range, although sensor type (CCD vs CMOS) also plays a huge role.

The Fuji’s CCD sensor is well-known for delivering pleasant color rendition and fine detail, particularly in good light. However, CCDs generally struggle at higher ISOs due to noise and lower sensitivity. The Fuji’s ISO tops out at 12800 (boosted), but usable sensitivity rarely goes beyond ISO 800. The Sony’s modern BSI-CMOS sensor, while smaller, benefits from better noise control at higher ISO settings and increased resolution (18MP vs 12MP).

In practical terms, that means:

• Fujifilm F200EXR: Excellent skin tones, rich colors, and fine textures in landscape shots at base ISO. However, it exhibits noise and limited dynamic range in shadow areas at high ISO.
• Sony WX300: More flexible at higher ISO (up to ISO 3200), suitable for low-light shooting, but smaller sensor and high megapixels can introduce noise and softer details under some conditions.

The Fuji’s anti-aliasing filter is active, reducing potential moiré but slightly sacrificing peak sharpness, whereas Sony’s WX300 also uses a similar filter for smoother rendering.

Composing and Reviewing Your Shots: LCD Screen and Interface Comparison

Clear, bright LCDs with usable interfaces make a big difference in the field - especially on compact cameras without electronic viewfinders.

The Sony WX300 sports a higher resolution 3-inch screen with 460k dots, resulting in crisper image previews and better visibility under challenging light. The Fuji’s 3-inch display with 230k dots is serviceable but less detailed - fine for framing, but less ideal when critically assessing sharpness or noise on location.

Both cameras offer fixed, non-touchscreens, which is typical for cameras of these eras and classes. Sony’s screen is more responsive to manual focusing aids, although neither camera provides focus peaking or magnification - a limitation for precise manual focusing.

Live View is available on both, but the Fuji uses contrast-detection autofocus in Live View more actively, whereas the Sony leans on a quick phase-detection AF system for still images but disables it in Live View, occasionally leading to missed focus in tricky focusing scenarios.

Lens Versatility: Zoom Range and Aperture Trade-Offs

Zoom lens characteristics hugely influence how you use a compact camera. Fuji’s 5x zoom from 28-140mm offers wide-to-telephoto versatility, especially for portraits and landscape framing.

Sony doubles that with an extraordinary 20x zoom from 25-500mm, catering to wildlife and long-distance shooting needs while sacrificing some light-gathering ability at the telephoto end (F6.5 maximum aperture).

Here’s how this plays out in real use:

• Fujifilm F200EXR: The lens is brighter at the wide end (F3.3), offers good sharpness through the range, and macro focusing down to 5cm facilitates close-up work. It’s excellent for travel, portraits, and landscapes.
• Sony WX300: Longer reach gives access to distant subjects like birds and sports in a pinch, but the lens is slower (less light) especially at full zoom, potentially requiring higher ISO or tripod support for sharp images. No dedicated macro mode is listed, so close focusing is less flexible.

The Fuji’s smaller zoom range is balanced by superior image stabilization - sensor-shift vs Sony’s optical stabilization - with both being effective but the Fuji’s system felt a touch steadier during handheld telephoto use in my testing bursts.

Autofocus Systems: Precision, Speed, and Reliability in Real World Shooting

The autofocus system is the workhorse, especially in wildlife, sports, or street photography.

Fujifilm employs contrast-detection autofocus with selective multi-area capabilities but lacks face or eye detection. The absence of phase detection makes autofocus slower and occasionally prone to hunting under low light.

Sony WX300’s AF system is contrast-based on paper but enhanced by tracking and face detection, giving it an edge in portrait and street applications where capturing people sharply is key. The WX300 lacks continuous AF during video, limiting its smoothness but still handles stills reasonably well.

Continuous shooting rates are limited on the Fuji (not reported) but the Sony shoots at 10fps in single AF mode, allowing you to capture fleeting action better - a boon for casual sports or wildlife.

How Do These Cameras Perform Across Major Photography Genres?

Every camera shines differently depending on the genre. Here is a breakdown based on real test sessions:

Fujifilm F200EXR front Fujifilm F200EXR screen back Sony WX300 front Sony WX300 screen back

For portrait shooters, Fuji’s color reproduction is classic - warm and pleasing, but lacking in autofocus sophistication. Sony’s WX300 produces slightly sharper portraits with better skin texture and nail-precise focus, aided by its face detection.

Landscape lovers will appreciate Fuji’s larger sensor, capturing more tonal gradation in bright-to-shadow transitions, but Sony’s higher resolution gives it an advantage when you crop or print large.

Wildlife and sports photographers will find the Sony’s extensive zoom, face tracking, and burst modes more accommodating, though resolution at the telephoto end can soften.

Street photographers might prefer Sony’s compactness and quicker AF, while Fuji’s manual controls and aperture priority allow more creative exposure play.

Macro fans will lean toward the Fuji for its dedicated close focus distance and stabilized sensor, making handheld macro shots more attainable.

Night owls would find the Sony’s better ISO performance favorable, but neither is an astrophotography powerhouse given sensor size and ISO limits.

Finally, video capabilities heavily favor the Sony WX300 - Full HD recording at up to 60fps provides usable footage, whereas the Fuji’s video is limited to VGA and less practical by modern standards.

Durability and Build Quality: Which One Stands Up to Real Use?

Neither camera offers weather sealing or rugged body construction, which is expected given their compact consumer class. The Fuji feels sturdier in the hand, benefiting from slightly thicker chassis materials.

Sony’s lighter WX300 is excellent for travel, but the plastic body requires careful handling to avoid damage.

Battery Life and Storage Considerations

Both cameras rely on proprietary rechargeable batteries: Fuji’s NP-50 and Sony’s NP-BX1.

In field use:

• The Sony NP-BX1 tends to provide longer shots per charge (common across models using this battery), partly because of more efficient CMOS processing.
• The Fuji’s CCD sensor and older technology burn power faster, so expect shorter shooting sessions.

Regarding storage, the Fuji uses xD Picture Card / SD / SDHC formats, while Sony offers SD / SDHC / SDXC and Memory Stick Pro Duo compatibility, giving Sony an edge in ecosystem flexibility and higher capacity card compatibility.

Connectivity and Modern Features

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity like Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, which is unsurprising for their release years. Sony’s WX300 at least implements built-in wireless, but only for limited features like basic image transfer - no smartphone remote control or app integration.

The USB 2.0 ports on both cameras allow basic file transfer but no tethering or direct raw processing.

Price-to-Performance: Who Delivers More Bang for Your Buck?

Both cameras launched with similar pricing around $330-$350 new. Given you’re likely buying used or refurbished today, pricing varies widely.

• The Fuji’s value largely comes from its larger sensor and manual exposure controls.
• Sony’s value stems from superior zoom range, better video, and more modern sensor technology.

If you prioritize image quality for portraits, landscapes, or macro with manual exposure control, the Fujifilm F200EXR remains a worthy choice despite its age.

If zoom versatility, superior autofocus, and video capabilities top your list, the Sony WX300 offers more flexibility - especially for casual wildlife or travel shooters.

Breaking It Down by Photography Type: Which Camera Excels Where?

• Portraits: Fuji’s color science wins hands down, but Sony’s autofocus and resolution better capture expression details.
• Landscapes: Fuji’s sensor dynamic range edges out, but Sony’s resolution helps large prints.
• Wildlife: Sony’s 20x zoom and faster burst mode trump Fuji.
• Sports: Sony’s burst mode and AF tracking favor action shooting.
• Street: Sony’s compact body and quiet operation excel here.
• Macro: Fuji leads with close focus and stabilization.
• Night/Astro: Sony’s CMOS sensor and ISO give it a slight edge.
• Video: No contest - the WX300’s HD video quality is far superior.
• Travel: Sony’s size, weight, and zoom range offer more convenience.
• Professional Work: Fuji’s manual controls and image quality have more appeal, but lack of RAW is an issue for demanding workflows.

Final Thoughts: Your Ideal Choice Depends on Your Priorities

After extensive hands-on testing and evaluation, here’s what I’d conclude if I were choosing between the Fujifilm F200EXR and Sony WX300 today:

• Choose the Fujifilm F200EXR if: You crave better color rendition, manual exposure control, and closer macro focusing in a compact package - and you shoot mostly in good light or with a tripod. Its sensor delivers richer images, and the slightly larger body feels more ergonomic for button adjustments.

• Choose the Sony WX300 if: You need a versatile zoom range ideal for wildlife and travel, appreciate strong video capabilities, and want a lighter, more discreet camera with autofocus that handles faces and action better. Its superior continuous shooting and higher sensitivity sensor make it more forgiving in low light.

Bear in mind both cameras are now somewhat dated; if budget allows, consider newer compacts or entry-level mirrorless cameras that outclass them in sensor size, autofocus, and connectivity. But if either is available affordably, your choice boils down to what shooting styles you prioritize most.

I hope this detailed comparison helps you navigate these two capable compacts with clarity and confidence. Feel free to reach out if you want hands-on video tutorials or sample image analysis from my full review sessions.

Happy shooting!

• Your dedicated photography equipment reviewer