Fujifilm F900EXR vs Sony H400: A Deep Dive into Compact Superzoom Cameras for Enthusiasts

Choosing the right superzoom camera can be overwhelming - especially when you’re looking at feature-packed models from trusted names like Fujifilm and Sony. Today, we put two small-sensor superzooms head-to-head: the Fujifilm F900EXR and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H400. Both promise extraordinary zoom ranges and handheld versatility, but which one best fits your shooting style, technical needs, and budget?

Having spent extensive hands-on hours with both cameras, putting them through rigorous tests across various photographic genres - from landscape vistas to wildlife action shots - I’m eager to share nuanced insights and authoritative assessments that go beyond spec sheets. This is no shallow spec comparison. It’s a careful, experience-driven exploration of how these cameras perform in real-world settings, paired with technical explanations and practical buying advice.

Let’s start by sizing up these contenders...

The Physical Reality: Ergonomics and Build

One of the first things you notice holding the Fujifilm F900EXR versus the Sony H400 is how radically different their physical presence is. The Fujifilm F900EXR is a true compact - small, light, and pocketable at 105x61x36 mm and 232 grams. The Sony H400, in contrast, sports a substantial bridge body reminiscent of an SLR-style camera, measuring 130x95x122 mm and weighing a hefty 628 grams.

This weight difference directly influences handling and portability. The Fujifilm’s compact nature means it’s ideal for travel and street photographers who favor discretion and minimal gear bulk. The Sony’s larger frame offers a more substantial grip and arguably better balance when wielding such a massive 63.3x zoom lens but at the cost of portability.

The Fujifilm’s build quality, while decent for a compact, doesn’t claim any weather sealing or rugged protections. Sony’s H400 follows suit - no weatherproofing here - so neither camera is suited for harsh outdoor conditions without added protection.

Control Layout and User Interface: Navigating the Experience

Controls also reflect their design philosophies. The Fujifilm’s top plate opts for simplified ergonomics with fewer buttons, relying heavily on its EXR II processor-driven menus for settings like autofocus or image stabilization. The Sony H400, with its larger body, provides a traditional DSLR-esque control scheme including a dedicated mode dial, zoom rocker conveniently mounted on the shutter button, and an electronic viewfinder (EVF) toggle.

The presence of an EVF on the Sony is a critical ergonomic plus for bright outdoor shooting where glare hampers framing on LCDs. The Fujifilm lacks any viewfinder altogether, forcing reliance on its bright 3-inch fixed TFT LCD with 920k-dot resolution. The Sony’s 3-inch Clear Photo LCD, though lower resolution at 460k dots, is complemented by a 201k-dot EVF - a tradeoff that merits attention depending on your shooting environment.

In terms of touchscreen capability, neither camera offers it - a skipped feature that would have improved quick navigation. Still, menu responsiveness felt slightly snappier on the Fujifilm thanks to its superior processor architecture.

Sensor and Image Quality: Balancing Resolution, Noise, and Dynamic Range

Both cameras pack small sensors at the heart of their image workflows, but their technologies differ significantly.

• Fujifilm F900EXR: Sports a 1/2-inch EXR CMOS sensor measuring approximately 6.4 x 4.8 mm with 16 megapixels resolution (4608x3456 pixels). The EXR sensor uses Fujifilm’s proprietary pixel-binning and dual capture techniques designed to optimize dynamic range or low-light performance, depending on the selected mode.

• Sony H400: Utilizes a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor sized at 6.17 x 4.55 mm and delivers 20 megapixels (5152x3864 pixels). While CCD sensors traditionally excel in color fidelity and low noise at base ISO, this older technology generally falls short in dynamic range compared to modern CMOS units.

In practical term, Fujifilm’s sensor provides cleaner high-ISO images and has superior dynamic range capabilities - great for landscapes and challenging lighting. Sony’s higher nominal resolution yields sharp images but retains more noise at ISO 800 and above.

Fujifilm's inclusion of RAW support also gives professional users greater control during post-processing. Sony’s lack of RAW severely limits image editing latitude - an important drawback for pros and enthusiasts who insist on maximum creative flexibility.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Reaction Times Under Pressure

Autofocus is another critical differentiator. The Fujifilm F900EXR boasts a hybrid system with both contrast and phase-detection autofocus, capable of face detection and AF tracking in continuous shooting mode at an impressive 11 frames per second (fps). This is quite fast for a small sensor compact.

Sony H400 relies solely on contrast-detection autofocus, which is typically slower and less precise in fast-moving or low contrast scenarios. Continuous shooting is limited to a modest 1 fps burst rate, making it unsuitable for sports or wildlife photography where speed matters.

That said, both cameras offer manual exposure modes and AF single/continuous settings, but the Fujifilm’s AF performance is notably more robust in real-world use, especially under variable lighting and sudden motion.

Lens Reach: Zoom Power vs. Optical Quality

Here’s where the Sony H400 pulls ahead in sheer zoom capability - its 25-1550 mm (63.3x) lens is one of the longest available on a compact-type bridge camera, allowing you to reach distant wildlife, sporting events, or elusive details without swapping lenses.

Fujifilm's F900EXR offers a more modest 25-500 mm (20x) zoom. While much shorter, the Fujifilm lens boasts a slightly brighter maximum aperture range (f/3.5–5.3 vs Sony’s f/3.4–6.5) which can help in low light.

However, remember: extreme telephoto zoom on the Sony, while eye-catching on paper, comes with optical compromises - noticeable distortion, reduced image sharpness at the long end, and greater susceptibility to camera shake (despite built-in optical image stabilization). Fujifilm’s more moderate zoom balances image quality and reach better for generalist photographers.

In macro situations, Fujifilm allows close focusing from 5 cm, enabling decent close-ups. Sony’s macro capabilities are less defined, making it less versatile for tabletop or nature macro shooters.

Image Stabilization: Essential for Handheld Shooting

Both cameras incorporate image stabilization, but via different methods:

• Fujifilm employs sensor-shift stabilization, moving the sensor to counteract shake internally. This generally provides efficient correction across focal lengths, especially helpful at longer zoom ranges where motion blur risk rises.

• Sony uses optical stabilization, stabilizing lens elements physically. While effective, lens-based stabilization frequently struggles more at the greatest telephoto reach, especially with the H400’s gargantuan 1550 mm mark.

In my hands-on tests, Fujifilm’s stabilization allowed a steadier grip with longer shutter times at mid-zoom, while Sony excelled in shorter telephoto ranges - though longer reach shots required a tripod or support to maintain sharpness.

Video Capabilities: Meeting Enthusiast Demands?

If video is on your radar, here’s where things diverge:

• Fujifilm F900EXR records Full HD 1920x1080 video at 60 and 30 fps, using contemporary formats like MPEG-4 and H.264, which are compatible with most editing workflows. While the camera lacks microphone/headphone jacks, footage quality is acceptable for casual video.

• Sony H400 settles for HD 720p recording only, a significant downside compared to the Fujifilm’s Full HD. It surprisingly includes a microphone input, offering more control over sound capture, which might appeal to casual videographers seeking improved audio.

Neither camera offers 4K or higher frame rates, nor advanced video features like focus peaking or zebras - so seasoned videographers will likely look elsewhere. However, for basic travel or family video capture, Fujifilm’s sharper and smoother Full HD output places it ahead for video quality.

LCD and Viewfinder: Framing with Confidence

Both cameras sport 3-inch fixed LCDs, but their display technologies differ.

• Fujifilm’s TFT color LCD boasts 920k-dot resolution, yielding a sharper, more detailed live view experience even in partially shaded environments. However, it’s not touch-enabled and is fixed, limiting flexible composing angles.

• Sony’s Clear Photo LCD with 460k dots appears less crisp comparatively, but the inclusion of a 201k-dot electronic viewfinder providing 100% coverage is the big win for bright outdoor shooting or telephoto framing. The EVF significantly boosts compositional accuracy and ease of use when harsh sunlight washes out the LCD.

Choosing between these depends on shooting style: Fujifilm benefits casual users preferring a rugged, compact body focused on LCD use. Sony better suits users who prioritize eye-level framing in challenging bright conditions or those transitioning from DSLR handling styles.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Will You Shoot?

The Sony H400 has a slight edge in battery endurance, rated for around 300 shots per charge versus Fujifilm’s 260. However, real-world impact depends on usage of optical zoom, flash, and LCD/EVF usage. I noticed Sony’s heavier body feel somewhat justified by this added stamina during prolonged outings.

Both cameras use proprietary battery packs (Fujifilm NP-50A) and support SD/SDHC/SDXC memory cards - with Sony additionally accepting Memory Stick PRO Duo for backward compatibility. USB 2.0 is standard on both, but wireless connectivity features are limited: Fujifilm offers built-in Wi-Fi (handy for mobile transfer), whereas Sony lacks wireless options.

Real-World Use Cases: Which Camera Shines Where?

With the technical groundwork laid, let’s apply this knowledge to popular photographic disciplines where superzoom compacts often serve photographers.

Portraits and People Photography

Fujifilm’s EXR sensor excels in rendering natural skin tones and handling tricky lighting with its wide dynamic range modes. Face detection autofocus is snappy and reliable, enabling fast acquisition even in soft-focus conditions. The faster continuous shooting helps capture fleeting expressions for casual portraiture.

Sony’s higher resolution sensor captures great detail but struggles more with noise in dimmer indoor environments. AF is solid but slower. The EVF aids in focusing in bright outdoor portraits but lacks face detection speed of the Fujifilm.

Winner: Fujifilm for overall portraits, especially in mixed lighting.

Landscape Photography

Here, Fujifilm’s sensor delivers superior image quality, thanks to better dynamic range and RAW output enabling rich tonality and highlight recovery in post.

Sony offers higher megapixels but with limited dynamic range and greater noise, reducing print quality and flexibility.

Neither camera is weather-sealed, so caution is warranted shooting in wet or dusty outdoors.

Winner: Fujifilm for image fidelity and editing versatility.

Wildlife and Bird Photography

Sony’s massive 63.3x zoom is an obvious lure here, allowing photographers to reach out far beyond Fujifilm’s 20x zoom. However, sluggish autofocus speed and 1 fps burst limit effective action capture.

Fujifilm, with faster AF and shooting speed, will yield more keepers albeit from a shorter zoom distance.

A tripod or monopod is often essential for both at higher telephoto settings to combat shake.

Winner: Sony for extreme reach, Fujifilm for AF responsiveness.

Sports Photography

High frame rate and continuous AF tracking are essentials. Fujifilm’s 11 fps burst and hybrid AF system clearly outpace Sony's slower 1 fps and contrast-detection setup.

While neither is a pro sports shooter, Fujifilm better satisfies casual sports enthusiasts.

Winner: Fujifilm.

Street Photography

The lightweight, pocketable Fujifilm fits stealthy street shooters better - its quiet operation and compact size minimize attention.

Sony’s imposing bridge form factor and pronounced lens draw eyes and are less nimble for candid moments.

Low light is a slight challenge for both, but Fujifilm’s sensor handles noise better.

Winner: Fujifilm.

Macro Photography

Fujifilm’s 5 cm minimum focus distance and sensor-shift IS deliver decent handheld macro shots, useful for florals or small objects.

Sony’s macro mode is less defined and hampered by the massive zoom design.

Winner: Fujifilm.

Night and Astro Photography

Small sensors limit long exposure astrophotography performance by default.

Fujifilm’s superior ISO handling and sensor shift IS help produce cleaner night shots.

Sony’s max ISO 3200 works, but CCD noise and lack of long exposure ISO tweaks limit its capability.

Winner: Fujifilm.

Video Production

Fujifilm’s Full HD 60p video is a noticeable advantage over Sony’s HD 720p limitation.

Mic inputs missing on Fujifilm reduce audio control but the better codec and resolution make it the better basic video camera.

Winner: Fujifilm for video quality.

Travel Photography

Sony H400’s zoom versatility and extended battery life help capture diverse scenes when lugging minimal gear.

Yet, Fujifilm’s portability, Wi-Fi, and better low-light shooting make it a more enjoyable companion for everyday travel.

Winner: Close call, leaning Fujifilm for handheld ease.

Professional Use and Workflow

Neither camera targets profession level work, but Fujifilm’s RAW support and superior image quality edge it closer to semi-pro use.

Sony’s JPEG-only files and sensor constraints restrict professional workflow flexibility.

Winner: Fujifilm.

Summary Ratings: Performance at a Glance

Our detailed testing results reinforce Fujifilm F900EXR’s better balance of speed, image quality, and usability across most photo genres. Sony H400 shines only where extreme zoom reach is paramount.

Sample Gallery: Seeing is Believing

Fujifilm F900EXR front Fujifilm F900EXR screen back Sony H400 front Sony H400 screen back

Examining side-by-side JPEGs under controlled conditions, Fujifilm images appear more detailed in shadows with better dynamic range, smoother color transitions, and less noise. Sony’s images exhibit more grain at base ISO and softer fine detail at extreme zoom.

Value Proposition: Are You Getting Your Money’s Worth?

With prices hovering around $380 (Fujifilm) and $270 (Sony), both cameras aim for budget-conscious enthusiasts. Sony’s aggressive pricing reflects its older sensor tech and limited video performance.

Fujifilm demands a slight premium but delivers a more well-rounded photographic tool.

Final Takeaways and Recommendations

The Fujifilm F900EXR is my pick for enthusiasts and semi-professionals needing a compact, fast-shooting superzoom with superior image quality, better video, and RAW flexibility. Its sensor tech and autofocus abilities shine across portraits, landscapes, and even sports.

The Sony H400 appeals primarily to those who value the highest zoom range possible in an affordable, bridge-style package, accepting compromises in autofocus speed, image quality, and video specs. It’s suited for casual wildlife photographers who prize reach over speed or portability.

Whether you prioritize compact handling or brute zoom power, understanding these cameras’ strengths helps match gear to your photographic vision. Having tested thousands of models, I consider these cameras illustrative of the trade-offs in small-sensor superzooms - knowing your priorities and workflow needs is key to the right choice.

Happy shooting!