Fujifilm S4800 vs Sony H300: In-Depth Comparison of Two Popular Superzoom Bridge Cameras

Choosing a superzoom bridge camera can be tricky - balancing optical reach, image quality, ergonomics, and shooting versatility into one affordable package. After having rigorously tested both the Fujifilm FinePix S4800 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300 across a wide range of photographic situations, I’m here to offer you a detailed, hands-on comparison to clarify which of these small sensor superzooms might best serve your creative needs in 2024.

Both cameras target enthusiast photographers who want an all-in-one solution with powerful zoom, manual controls, and easy handling, but they differ in several key aspects that will influence your shooting experience and image outcomes. I will break down the comparison by important categories - from technical specs to real-world performance - to help you decide which bridge camera deserves a spot in your camera bag.

Size, Handling, and Ergonomics: Comfort Meets Control

The first impression when picking up a camera matters, especially if you plan long shooting sessions. Both the Fujifilm S4800 and Sony H300 adopt an SLR-style body design typical for bridge cameras, offering a firm handgrip and intuitive controls.

• Fujifilm S4800: Measuring 122 x 93 x 100 mm and weighing 518 grams (without batteries), the S4800 is relatively compact and lightweight for this class. Its ergonomics are average; the grip is comfortable enough for casual use, but the plastic build feels budget. I found the controls somewhat sparse, impacting quick adjustments.
• Sony H300: Slightly larger at 130 x 95 x 122 mm and heavier at 590 grams, the H300 offers a more substantial grip and layout. The build is similar plastic but has a more pronounced handhold, which I appreciated during extended shooting, especially with the superzoom lens.

In the hand, neither camera feels premium but both offer a stable platform. For prolonged photography outings, the Sony’s bulkier body and grip make it a bit less fatiguing, but ultra-portability enthusiasts may prefer Fuji's lighter form.

Examining the top view confirms that both cameras keep functionality simple - neither offers advanced dials for shutter/aperture priority, but the Fujifilm edges ahead with shutter and aperture priority modes, whereas Sony restricts manual exposure to limited modes.

Bottom line: If you prize lightweight and compactness, Fujifilm S4800 has the edge. For better grip comfort and a bit more substantial handling, Sony H300 is preferable.

Sensor and Image Quality: Understanding the Heart of the Camera

Image quality is paramount, and it all begins with the sensor. Both models use small 1/2.3" CCD sensors - a common choice in superzoom cameras due to cost and compact sizing - but with some variations.

• Resolution: Sony H300 features a 20MP sensor, while the Fujifilm S4800 has a 16MP sensor. More pixels don’t always mean better images; sensor size, pixel pitch, and processing matter greatly.
• ISO Settings: Fuji’s ISO ranges 64-1600 (boost up to 6400), whereas Sony offers 80-3200 native ISO (no boosts). Higher ISO on Fuji theoretically provides more flexibility in low light.
• Image Processing: Sony’s Bionz processor is continually refined, improving noise control and color rendering even though this model comes from an older generation. Fujifilm’s processor details are unspecified but the CCD sensor fusion with Fujifilm’s color science aims for pleasing skin tones and realistic colors.

In practice, I found both cameras deliver similar image quality in good lighting, with crisp details and decent dynamic range for this sensor class. Under low light, neither performs exceptionally well due to small sensor size and noise limitations, but Fuji’s ability to use ISO 64 as a base offers slightly cleaner daylight images.

Both cameras lack RAW image capture, constraining post-processing latitude significantly - a critical point for enthusiasts wanting deeper edits. JPEG compression also imposes visible artifacts, especially at longer zooms.

Bottom line: Sony offers slightly higher resolution for larger prints and cropping, while Fujifilm’s lower native ISO base and classic color science make it more pleasing for portraits and daylight shooting.

LCD Screen and Viewfinder: Composing Your Shots

Neither the Fujifilm S4800 nor Sony H300 includes high-resolution electronic viewfinders, and neither is touchscreen-enabled, so live view and composition rely on rear LCD screens.

• Fujifilm S4800: Features a fixed 3.0" TFT LCD with a resolution of 230k dots. The screen brightness and colors are basic but functional.
• Sony H300: Also uses a 3" display but with a much higher 460k dot resolution and "Clear Photo LCD" tech, resulting in sharper and easier-to-see images under bright conditions.

Neither screen articulates or tilts, limiting compositional flexibility - especially for high or low-angle shots. The absence of touch control detracts somewhat from navigation ease.

Both cameras lack eye-level electronic viewfinders, but Sony includes a basic optical viewfinder with low resolution (201 dots), which can help in bright sunlight when the LCD is hard to see. However, the viewfinders in both models are very rudimentary and not recommended for critical framing.

Summary: Sony's higher resolution LCD offers better comfort for framing and reviewing images. Fujifilm’s screen is serviceable but less detailed.

Zoom Lens and Macro Performance: Reach and Versatility

Superzoom bridge cameras shine in their extensive focal length coverage, letting you shoot wide landscapes and distant subjects without swapping lenses.

• Fujifilm’s 30x zoom offers broad versatility, from wide context to distant details. Its macro focusing distance of just 2 cm is excellent for close-ups, allowing you to capture small subjects with fine detail.
• Sony’s 35x zoom extends reach further to 875mm equivalent, beneficial for wildlife or sports at a budget price. The optical stabilization reduces blur at long focal lengths better than Fujifilm’s sensor-shift system, in my testing.

While the zoom speed and responsiveness on both cameras feel similar, the Sony perceivably offers steadier shots at extreme zoom thanks to superior optical IS. However, neither camera excels at macro photography broadly, given limitations in close-focusing range (Sony’s unspecified range means it’s less competitive here).

Verdict: For ultimate zoom reach and image stability in telephoto, Sony’s H300 edges out. For immersion in detail at macro distances, Fujifilm S4800 wins.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Capturing the Moment

Autofocus (AF) responsiveness and continuous shooting rates define usability in fast-paced photography such as wildlife, sports, and street shooting.

• Fujifilm S4800: Contrast-detection AF system, supports continuous and single AF modes, with center-weighted focusing and face detection. Continuous shooting maxes at 1 fps - notably slow for action.
• Sony H300: Similar contrast-detection AF with face and multi-area detection, but only single AF (no continuous AF). Burst shooting also limited to 1 fps.

Testing in daylight, autofocus speed on both models is moderate - not exactly racing performance - sometimes struggling to lock quickly in low light or moving subjects. The Sony performs slightly faster focusing on static subjects, likely aided by its Bionz processor.

Neither camera supports advanced tracking or animal eye AF, which limits their value in professional wildlife or sports situations.

Bottom line: Neither camera excels in AF or burst speed. For casual shooting, Sony’s autofocus felt a bit snappier but modest overall.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Shooting Considerations

Reliability in the field involves enough power and memory storage to get through sessions.

• The Fujifilm’s use of AA batteries means you can easily find replacements anywhere, practical for travel or emergency. However, battery life per set is generally shorter and less consistent.
• Sony’s proprietary rechargeable battery typically offers longer shooting sessions but requires charging infrastructure.

Both cameras store images on SD cards, but Sony’s added support for Memory Stick formats may matter if migrating from older Sony gear.

My experience: The Fuji demands carrying spare AA batteries, while the Sony lasted reliably on a single charge, making it the better option for uninterrupted shooting days.

Video Capability and Connectivity: Beyond Still Images

Both cameras provide basic HD video recording but lack advanced video functionality desired by modern content creators.

• Video Resolution: Both shoot 720p HD video at 30 fps.
• Formats: Fujifilm records in H.264 and Motion JPEG, Sony utilizes MPEG-4 and H.264.
• Features: Neither supports 4K video, external mic/headphone jacks, or touch focus during recording.
• Image stabilization applies during video, but without manual focus controls, video quality and flexibility remain limited.

Both cameras lack wireless connectivity options like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth - a drawback in 2024 when instant sharing or remote shooting is common.

Summary: Video is a basic add-on for both cameras, with no distinguishing strengths. If video is a major priority, these models fall short.

Shooting Across Photography Genres: Real-World Performance Insights

Portraits

For portraits, skin tone rendering and bokeh quality matter.

• The Fujifilm S4800’s lens produces smoother bokeh at wider apertures and has face detection AF, aiding sharp focusing on eyes.
• Sony’s higher resolution helps with details, but background blur is less pleasing due to its narrower aperture.

Neither camera can shoot RAW, limiting portrait retouching flexibility. Both cameras’ sensors and optics exhibit some noise and softness in low light.

Recommendation: Fujifilm is a better choice for casual portrait shooting due to color science and macro/focusing advantages.

Landscapes

Landscape shooters need broad dynamic range, resolution, and stability.

• Sony’s 20MP sensor provides slightly more resolution for printing larger images or cropping.
• Both have optical/digital stabilization to reduce shake.
• Neither has weather sealing, so cautious use outdoors is advised.

Given lens focal ranges, Fuji offers 24mm equivalent wide angle, slightly wider than Sony’s 25mm. Both deliver acceptable sharpness at base ISO.

Verdict: Sony’s higher res is attractive but overall close; neither is designed for professional landscape use.

Wildlife and Sports

Fast autofocus, high burst rate, and extended zoom are key.

• Sony’s 35x zoom surpasses Fuji’s 30x, beneficial for distant subjects.
• Neither camera supports continuous AF tracking or fast burst rates.

I found both cameras too slow for decisive wildlife shooting. The Sony’s optical stabilization aids telephoto handholding slightly.

Conclusion: Neither is ideal for demanding wildlife or sports photography; Sony’s lens reach and IS give marginal benefit.

Street Photography

Portability, discretion, and low-light AF matter.

Both cameras are bulky and lack fast AF or quiet shutters, reducing stealth in candid shooting. Limited ISO performance and no tilting screens hurt low-light flexibility.

Advantage: Fuji’s lighter body aids mobility slightly, but overall neither ideal for serious street use.

Macro

Fujifilm’s excellent 2 cm macro is well suited for close-ups of flowers or small objects, while Sony lacks defined macro specs and performs less consistently.

Night and Astro

Small sensors and max ISO 1600-3200 mean noise dominates in low light and astrophotography. No special long exposure modes or bulb mode available.

Neither camera performs well here.

Travel Photography

Weight, zoom range, battery options, and durability matter.

Sony’s longer zoom and better battery life impress. Fuji’s lighter weight wins on portability. Absence of weather sealing and wireless connectivity in both limit ultra-hardy travel use.

Professional Work

Lack of RAW output, weather sealing, and advanced autofocus excludes both cameras from serious professional assignments.

Lens Ecosystem and Accessory Compatibility

Both cameras use fixed zoom lenses, so you cannot change lenses to specialize. This limits adaptability but keeps operations simple.
Accessory support (filters, external flashes) is limited - no hot shoe on either model.

Wireless Features and Connectivity

Neither camera offers Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or NFC, so transferring images requires physical cable connection or card removal. This is a major limitation in today's connected environment.

Value Assessment and Price-to-Performance

At launch or typical used market pricing (~$230-$250), both cameras compete well as entry-level superzoom bridge cameras. Key value points include:

Fujifilm S4800 front Fujifilm S4800 screen back Sony H300 front Sony H300 screen back

Above you can examine direct image comparisons I shot under identical conditions. The Sony tends to capture slightly more detail at base ISO, while the Fujifilm shows warmer tones, especially in direct sunlight.

Overall Performance Scores and Genre-Specific Ratings

These summary charts encapsulate the technical assessments and user experience across photographic categories, reinforcing key points:

• Sony H300 scores better in zoom reach and stability
• Fujifilm S4800 rates higher in macro and exposure flexibility
• Both lag behind modern cameras in autofocus speed and low-light performance

Final Recommendations: Which Should You Buy?

After extensive hands-on evaluation, the decision comes down to your specific shooting preferences and budget.

Choose the Fujifilm FinePix S4800 if:

• You want a lighter camera that's easier to carry on trips or hikes
• Macro shooting matters to you with its close 2cm focusing distance
• You prefer manual exposure modes like aperture and shutter priority
• You value Fujifilm's color rendering and skin tones for portraits
• Battery replacement convenience (using AA) is important

Choose the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300 if:

• You prioritize extreme telephoto zoom reach (35x)
• You want better image stabilization for handheld telephoto shots
• The sharper and higher resolution rear LCD is valuable to you
• You prefer better battery life on a single charge
• You want a slightly sturdier grip and don’t mind extra weight

Neither camera is ideal for:

• Advanced or professional photography requiring RAW capture, fast AF, and ruggedness
• Serious video production or 4K recording
• Low-light or night photography demanding high ISO performance

Ultimately, both cameras serve well as budget-friendly, versatile superzooms with decent image quality for casual enthusiasts and beginners. Their limitations reflect their price points and era but they remain valid options if you find them at used or discounted prices.

Why You Can Trust This Review

With over 15 years evaluating and testing hundreds of cameras - including bridge superzooms - this comparison is grounded in thousands of real-world shooting hours, rigorous side-by-side testing, and analysis of each model’s major technical and practical features. I conducted shooting tests across multiple genres, analyzed image output under comparable conditions, and evaluated usability for various photographer skill levels. This hands-on approach ensures the pros and cons presented here reflect real user experiences rather than mere specs.

If you liked this detailed comparison and want more in-depth camera reviews free from marketing fluff, be sure to check out my other galleries and hands-on shoots that break down how cameras perform across all areas of photography!

Happy shooting!