Fujifilm HS50 EXR vs Ricoh CX3: An In-Depth Small Sensor Superzoom Face-Off

In my 15+ years testing cameras across genres - be it for editorial shoots or pure wanderlust adventures - I’ve handled everything from cutting-edge mirrorless systems to compact superzooms. Today, I’m diving deep into two small sensor superzoom cameras from an earlier photographic era, the Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR and the Ricoh CX3. Though both belong to the same general category, their differences - technological, ergonomic, and practical - affect real-world user experiences dramatically.

I’ve spent extensive hands-on time with each, testing under varied lighting conditions, shooting styles, and environments to bring you an authoritative comparison grounded in real use. Whether you’re a hobbyist looking for budget versatility or a professional needing a niche superzoom solution, this detailed breakdown will help you understand which model suits your photographic needs best.

A Tale of Two Cameras: Size and Handling First Impressions

Let’s begin our exploration where it often matters most: the physical feel.

The HS50 EXR’s robust, SLR-style ergonomics contrast distinctly against the CX3’s compact, pocketable frame.

The Fujifilm HS50 EXR feels like a traditional DSLR in the hand - bulky but satisfying. Its SLR-like bridge style, complete with a pronounced grip and numerous manual controls, catered to photographers transitioning from DSLRs seeking zoom reach without carrying multiple lenses. At 808 grams and dimensions of 135x101x146 mm, it conveys solidity and reassurance, especially when shooting under challenging conditions.

On the other hand, the Ricoh CX3 sports a classic compact silhouette, weighing a mere 206 grams and measuring 102x58x29 mm. This diminutive footprint means you can slip it into pockets or small bags effortlessly, making it very travel-friendly. But the trade-off is less tactile control and a more casual shooting experience.

From my experience, the HS50 EXR’s heft and ergonomics make prolonged shooting sessions feel more comfortable and precise, especially for users keen on manual adjustments. The CX3, with its minimalist body, appeals as a grab-and-go device - ideal for casual photo excursions where portability trumps customization.

Control Layout and User Interface: How Intuitive Is the Experience?

There’s nothing quite like physical controls that feel natural and responsive when every fraction of a second counts. I spent several days testing the control ergonomics of both cameras in varied settings.

The HS50 EXR’s top panel bristles with dials and buttons versus the minimalism of the CX3.

The HS50 EXR flaunts a comprehensive control scheme with shutter speed dials, aperture rings (on the lens barrel), and customizable function buttons, making exposure adjustments quick and tactile. Its dedicated knobs for ISO, metering, and drive modes reduce menu diving - a blessing for on-the-fly shooting such as sports or wildlife.

Conversely, the CX3 offers a neater, pared-down layout designed for point-and-shoot simplicity. It lacks manual exposure modes and depends largely on auto settings, limiting creative control. Menus are straightforward, but the absence of physical dials curbs immediate parameter tweaking.

If you value hands-on control and speedy access, the Fujifilm's SLR-like setup will feel empowering and professional. For newcomers or casual shooters preferring simplicity, the Ricoh’s interface presents less of a learning curve, albeit at a cost to versatility.

Sensor and Image Quality: Raw Specs and Deliverables

Now, turning to image quality - the heart and soul of any camera. Both cameras utilize small, 1/2” or smaller sensors, so expectations around high ISO performance and dynamic range must be tempered.

Sensor dimensions and technology have a direct bearing on final image fidelity.

The Fujifilm HS50 EXR uses a 1/2” EXR-CMOS sensor sized at 6.4x4.8 mm with 16 megapixels. This sensor, combined with the EXR Processor II, was designed to improve noise control and dynamic range compared to previous Fuji bridge cameras. It supports RAW files, enabling more latitude in post-processing - an asset for enthusiasts and professionals chasing detail and color accuracy.

By contrast, the Ricoh CX3 sports a slightly smaller 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensor at 6.17x4.55 mm with a 10-megapixel count. It lacks RAW support, relying on JPEG processing internally. While the sensor’s backside illumination aids low-light sensitivity, it cannot compete with the Fujifilm’s bit depth or noise handling.

In practice, I found the HS50 EXR delivers richer color depth, better highlight retention, and cleaner shadows in mid to high ISO settings (up to ISO 3200 usable). The CX3 is decent at base ISO, but images show notable noise and less flexibility post-capture - unsurprising given its jpeg-only workflow and sensor limitations.

If you require image versatility and plan to work in RAW, the Fujifilm is the obvious choice. The Ricoh fits best as a casual camera with manageable image quality for web sharing and snapshots.

Viewing Experience: LCD Screen and Viewfinder Comparison

Framing the shot is crucial, especially with long focal lengths and tricky compositions.

The HS50 EXR’s fully articulated display adds versatility compared to the CX3’s fixed screen.

The HS50 EXR boasts a 3-inch fully articulating LCD with a 920k-dot resolution, which is bright, detailed, and flexible for awkward angles, macro work, or tripod setups. Complementing the rear screen is an electronic viewfinder (EVF) also at 920k dots, which I've found invaluable under bright daylight or active shooting scenarios where eye-level composure aids steadiness.

The CX3 offers a 3-inch fixed LCD of comparable resolution but lacks any viewfinder altogether. Here, shooting outdoors in bright conditions can be challenging, as reflected images tend to wash out despite anti-reflective coatings.

For users who prioritize accurate composition tools and extended shooting angles, Fuji’s articulated screen plus EVF duo is a significant advantage. Those seeking a simpler compact might manage with the Ricoh’s single LCD but should anticipate composition frustrations outdoors.

Zoom Range and Lens Performance: Flexibility From Wide To Telephoto

One of the main draws to these superzooms is extreme focal length versatility without lens swaps.

The Fujifilm HS50 EXR packs an impressive 24-1000 mm (equivalent) lens with an aperture ranging from f/2.8 at wide angle to f/5.6 max tele. This 41.7x optical zoom is formidable, covering landscapes to distant wildlife with decent low-light capability upfront. The lens’s optical stabilization is optical and supports manual focus rings, aiding precise focus control - a benefit I appreciated during macro and telephoto work where focus precision is crucial.

The Ricoh CX3 has a 28-300 mm equivalent lens, f/3.5 to f/5.6 aperture, with a 10.7x zoom factor. While this is respectable for a compact, it lacks the reach of the Fuji and features sensor-shift stabilization instead of lens-based. Manual focus is available but limited to a narrower control scheme.

In real-world shooting, the HS50’s superzoom gives it clear dominance in versatility - from wide vistas to spotting wildlife at a distance. The CX3 will serve well in everyday street or casual travel photography but is limited when pushing extensive zooms.

Autofocus: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking Abilities

For action-oriented photography - sports, wildlife - the autofocus system is a critical differentiator.

The Fuji HS50 EXR’s hybrid system combines phase-detection AF with contrast detection, delivering fast, accurate focus and continuous tracking over multiple points. Its eye detection autofocus works sparingly in supported modes, improving portrait sharpness.

I found the Fuji’s AF system reliable under various light levels, locking focus swiftly even at full telephoto reach. Continuous autofocus tracking helped capture decisive moments in sports settings, although it’s not on par with top-tier DSLRs.

The Ricoh CX3, however, uses contrast-detection AF only, which is slower and more prone to focus hunting, especially in low light or moving subjects. Face detection is absent, reducing portrait-focus efficiency.

If your photography heavily involves fast subjects, the HS50 EXR’s autofocus system is meaningfully better. The CX3 is best suited for still subjects or controlled environments.

Build Quality and Weather Protection: Durability Assessment

While neither of these cameras are professional weather-sealed bodies, build quality impressions differ.

Both cameras lack environmental sealing; neither is waterproof, dustproof, or shockproof. The HS50 EXR’s larger body and robust materials feel reassuring and rugged enough for travel and field use, whereas the CX3’s plastic compact shell feels more delicate and prone to wear.

For outdoor photographers frequently shooting in unpredictable conditions, the Fuji offers better durability and confidence. For everyday casual indoor or city use, the Ricoh’s build is sufficient.

Battery Life and Storage Handling: How Long and How Much?

Practicality partly hinges on endurance and workflow.

The HS50 EXR employs a rechargeable battery pack rated for about 500 shots per charge, which in my tests generally held up well through extended shooting days. Storage relies on a single SD/SDHC/SDXC slot, allowing high-capacity cards friendly for RAW files and burst shooting.

Ricoh’s CX3 battery uses a proprietary DB-100 lithium-ion with no official shot count listed. In typical use, I experienced the smaller battery draining quicker than the Fuji - expected given its compact size and older technology. It has one storage slot for SD/SDHC cards, plus internal memory for emergency shots.

If long battery life matters or you plan prolonged shoots without frequent recharges, the Fujifilm gives more confidence. The Ricoh is best for shorter sessions or backup photography.

Connectivity and Additional Features: Modern Conveniences

Neither model surprises in connectivity: both have no WiFi, Bluetooth, or NFC. The HS50 EXR supports HDMI out for direct display connection, while the CX3 offers USB 2.0 for file transfer but lacks HDMI.

The Fuji adds microphone input for enhanced video recording audio, an edge for hybrid shooters pursuing better sound. The Ricoh records video capped at 720p, whereas the Fuji records sharp 1080p Full HD at 60fps.

Neither camera supports advanced video features like 4K or in-camera timelapse controls (though the CX3 surprisingly includes timelapse functionality). For video-conscious users, the Fuji’s higher specs make it the better choice.

Real-World Photography Disciplines: Where Does Each Shine?

Now let’s sift through some specialized use cases based on my extensive shooting trials with both cameras.

Portrait Photography

The HS50 EXR’s face and eye AF (though limited by today’s standards) combined with its aperture range let you achieve subject isolation with smoother bokeh - even from a bridge lens. Skin tone rendition is generally natural with vibrant yet accurate colors, especially shooting RAW and adjusting in post.

The CX3 struggles to produce pleasing backgrounds at wider apertures given smaller sensor and lens speed constraints. Its lack of face detection AF means manual care is required to nail focus on eyes, with JPEG-only output limiting postprocessing finesse.

For portraits, Fujifilm delivers more professional-friendly images.

Landscape Photography

Here the Fujifilm HS50 EXR, with its sharper images, wider zoom coverage, and articulated screen, truly excels. The dynamic range is adequate for capturing detailed skies and shadowed terrain. The lack of weather sealing requires caution in adverse conditions.

The Ricoh CX3 is competent at basic landscapes but limited by lower resolution and zoom reach.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

The Fuji’s fast shutter speeds (up to 1/4000s), quick autofocus, and high burst rate (11 fps) make it a decent choice for mid-level wildlife and sports shooters on a budget. The long 1000 mm equivalent zoom can get you close from afar.

The Ricoh’s slower AF and limited zoom make it unsuitable as a serious sports or wildlife camera.

Street and Travel Photography

The smaller Ricoh CX3 feels nimble, discreet, and less attention-grabbing - ideal for street shooting and casual travel snapshots. Its limitations in manual exposure and zoom range are offset by portability and ease.

The HS50’s bulk reduces spontaneity but provides greater photographic control and framing versatility for travelers prioritizing image quality over convenience.

Macro Photography

The CX3 can focus as close as 1 cm, a significant advantage for casual close-up shooters, albeit image quality is average. The Fuji’s macro focus starts virtually at zero; combined with manual focusing rings, its stabilization and reach offer better macro precision.

Final Scores and Genre-Based Strengths

Summing Up the Strengths and Weaknesses

Practical Recommendations: Who Should Choose Which?

Choose the Fujifilm HS50 EXR if you:

• Want a versatile bridge camera for diverse shooting styles including wildlife, sports, landscapes, and portraits.
• Value hands-on exposure control and RAW flexibility for advanced editing.
• Need a robust, all-in-one solution with long zoom range and steady handling.
• Plan to shoot Full HD video with external microphone input.

Choose the Ricoh CX3 if you:

• Prioritize compactness and portability for everyday snapshots and travel.
• Desire a simple, point-and-shoot camera with easy operation.
• Mostly photograph casual subjects in good light, without a need for extensive zoom or manual control.
• Have a limited budget but want decent image quality in a compact body.

Closing Thoughts

While both the Fujifilm HS50 EXR and Ricoh CX3 once catered to photographers seeking small sensor superzoom convenience, the HS50 EXR remains the more serious photographic tool due to its expanded control, sensor quality, and feature set. The CX3 holds value as a neat companion for casual shooters valuing simplicity and portability. In my extensive hands-on field testing, the Fuji’s blend of flexibility and performance justifies its heavier size and price, whereas the Ricoh offers a lighthearted entry point into the superzoom category.

Photography is, ultimately, a balance between gear capabilities and personal preferences. I hope this detailed, experience-based comparison helps you align your choice with your creative vision and shooting habits.

Image Gallery: Sample Shots From Both Cameras

Fujifilm HS50 EXR front Fujifilm HS50 EXR screen back Ricoh CX3 front Ricoh CX3 screen back

For those exploring in-depth superzoom options today, remember these models are dated but still offer valuable lessons in balancing size, control, and image quality in small sensor cameras. As always, I encourage hands-on testing to feel for ergonomics and trial shots under your preferred subjects before making your final choice.

Happy shooting!