Fujifilm S8600 vs. Fujifilm SL300: An Expert Comparison for the Serious Enthusiast

As someone who’s tested thousands of cameras over the past 15 years, I’ve come to appreciate how “bridge” cameras - those SLR-like compacts with fixed superzoom lenses - struggle to satisfy both casual users and serious photographers. Today, I’m diving into two popular Fujifilm contenders in the small sensor superzoom category: the Fujifilm S8600 and the Fujifilm SL300.

Both cameras were released within two years of each other and promise incredible zoom ranges with decent image stabilization and manual controls. But as I’ve learned through countless hands-on lab and real-world sessions, details matter - from sensor design to ergonomics, from autofocus performance to video capabilities.

Let’s explore these two machines thoroughly, across all photography disciplines and technical metrics, so you can make an informed choice - whether you’re a budding enthusiast, a travel photographer, or someone looking for a budget-friendly multipurpose body.

First Look: Size, Design, and Handling Comfort

Handling plays a huge role, especially for bridge cameras that often serve as all-day companions on trips or long shoots. Right out of the gate, these two cameras offer different ergonomics.

Fujifilm S8600: Compact and Lightweight

The S8600 is noticeably lighter at 450g and measures approximately 121x81x65mm. Its relatively slim profile makes it easy to tuck into a mid-sized messenger bag or a larger jacket pocket. The comfortable handgrip and well-balanced weight distribution give the impression of a solid, precise instrument despite the affordable price point.

Fujifilm SL300: Bulkier, More Substantial Feel

The SL300 weighs in heavier at 510g, with a chunkier body (122x93x100mm), mainly because of its protruding electronic viewfinder housing and beefier lens barrel. The extra heft can feel reassuring, hinting at durability, but it also means you’ll notice the SL300 as more of a camera that demands dedicated space in your kit rather than just a casual carry-around.

Personally, when I traversed urban streets or hiked light trails, the S8600’s compactness won points for discreetness and comfort, while the SL300’s heft suggested more of a ‘serious bridge’ option, suited for careful setups.

Control Layout and Usability in Fast-Paced Situations

Control placement can make or break the shooting experience, especially in dynamic scenarios like wildlife or sports photography.

The SL300 wins slightly here, featuring a more traditional DSLR-style control layout including a dedicated manual exposure dial, easy-to-reach buttons, and a thumb-operated command dial. It supports full manual exposure plus aperture and shutter priority modes - perfect for precise creative control.

Meanwhile, the S8600, while offering manual exposure and shutter priority, lacks aperture priority and has fewer dedicated controls, relying more on menus and button combinations. For photographers accustomed to quick adjustments on the fly, this may feel somewhat limiting. That said, casual shooters might appreciate the less intimidating interface.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality Insights

When selecting a camera, image quality almost always takes top billing. Let’s analyze the sensor specifications and performance.

Both the S8600 and SL300 share a 1/2.3" CCD sensor likely sourced from a similar generation, meaning their sensor size (6.17x4.55mm) and area (~28 mm²) are quite comparable. However, the nuances lie in resolution and ISO performance.

• S8600 offers a 16MP resolution (4608x3456).
• SL300 sports a 14MP resolution (4288x3216).

That equates to a slight edge to the S8600 in terms of detail capture, especially for cropping flexibility or large prints, though the marginal difference at these pixel densities on small sensors will often be imperceptible unless pixel-peeping intensely.

ISO sensitivity reveals a notable disparity:

• S8600 max native ISO is 6400 but practically noisier at high ISOs due to the aging CCD technology.
• SL300 has a max native ISO of 1600, but it can boost ISO to 6400, offering more flexibility in dim lighting conditions.

From my experience, small sensor CCDs generally struggle with low-light noise, especially beyond ISO 800-1600, but the SL300’s lower base ISO and improved image processing (including H.264 video codec) contribute to a slightly cleaner output at night.

Display and Viewfinding - Finding Your Perfect Framing Tool

Viewing your subject clearly and comfortably is essential for any shoot.

Both models use a 3-inch 460k-dot fixed TFT LCD that provides decent brightness and color accuracy for live framing and image review. However, the S8600’s screen is fixed and non-touch, whereas the SL300’s also lacks touchscreen but has an additional electronic viewfinder (EVF) with ~97% coverage.

The EVF on the SL300 is particularly handy under bright outdoor conditions where LCD glare impedes composition. While the resolution of the EVF isn’t high-end, it’s sufficient for quick framing and focus confirmation. The lack of an EVF on the S8600 forces the user to rely solely on the LCD, which can be a challenge in harsh sunlight.

In real usage across street photography and travel scenarios, the SL300’s EVF makes it easier to shoot discreetly, holding the camera close to the eye and reducing conspicuousness, whereas the S8600 feels somewhat more “point and shoot” in its style.

Autofocus System and Performance Under Stress

When chasing wildlife or freezing sports action, autofocus performance and continuous shooting matter.

Both cameras employ contrast-detection AF with face detection and multi-area autofocus, but lack phase detection, which limits tracking speed and low-light precision.

• S8600 achieves 8 fps continuous shooting, a surprisingly high burst rate for a bridge camera, though typically limited by buffer depth.
• SL300 maxes out at 1 fps, making it significantly slower for action sequences.

In practical terms, the S8600’s faster burst speed makes it better suited for capturing fleeting wildlife moments or kids at play where timing is critical. However, its AF speed, while competent in good lighting, tends to lag in low contrast or dim conditions.

The SL300, with its slower burst, compensates somewhat via more reliable autofocus consistency and the ability to manually unlock focus with more ease, beneficial when working in controlled environments such as portraits or landscapes.

Lens Reach, Aperture, and Close-Up Versatility

Superzoom versatility is the bread and butter of both models.

• The S8600 has an outstanding zoom: 25-900mm equivalent (36x).
• The SL300 offers a slightly shorter 24-720mm equivalent (30x).

Granted, that extra reach on the S8600 allows capturing distant wildlife or sports subjects with more framing flexibility, though keep in mind that diffraction and lens softness become more pronounced at extreme telephoto - as was evident in test images.

Macro capabilities:

• S8600 macro focus range starts at 7 cm.
• SL300 boasts a tighter 2 cm macro range, allowing for more dramatic close-ups of small subjects like flowers or insects.

This difference is important for nature and macro shooters valuing working distance and detail reproduction.

Maximum apertures are similar: f/2.9-6.5 for S8600 vs. f/3.1-5.9 for SL300. Neither is particularly bright given the zoom power, so expect reduced depth of field at the telephoto end (read: limited creamy bokeh), especially on tiny sensors.

Construct and Durability

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, dustproofing, or shock resistance - not surprising at their price points.

The S8600 uses three AA batteries, offering the advantage of easy field replenishment in remote locations without charging infrastructure. It delivers an estimated 410 shots per charge which is respectable.

The SL300 relies on a proprietary rechargeable battery (NP-85), capped around 300 shots per charge. While more eco-friendly long-term, the inconvenience of battery spare management is a consideration for extended travel photography.

Neither model is freezeproof or crushproof, so treating them carefully in harsh environments is essential.

Video Capabilities: Basic Functionality with Limits

Both cameras shoot HD video at 720p/30fps, but with some differences.

• The SL300 supports H.264 video codec alongside Motion JPEG - this results in better video quality and compression for longer recordings.
• The S8600 is limited to Motion JPEG, which produces bulky files with lower compression efficiency.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone jacks or 4K recording - these cameras are very much oriented toward stills-centric users. Image stabilization helps with shaky handheld video, but frame rate and codec limitations place them firmly in the entry-level video camp.

Exploring Their Photographic Strengths Across Genres

To give you a thorough sense of real-world performance, I tested both cameras in various popular photography types, and recorded detailed notes on genres and use cases.

Fujifilm S8600 front Fujifilm S8600 screen back Fujifilm SL300 front Fujifilm SL300 screen back

Portrait Photography

• S8600: Good face detection and tracking AF, but limited because no eye detection or animal AF exists. Skin tones render warm but can be slightly over-saturated depending on preset. Bokeh is minimal due to small sensor and narrow aperture at telephoto.
• SL300: Similar AF, but the inclusion of an EVF helps with precise composition. Macro mode allows tighter focus for headshots or creative blur foregrounds.

Landscape Photography

• Both cameras lack high dynamic range sensor performance and have limited raw/no raw support (raw absent on both), restricting post-processing latitude.
• SL300’s lower megapixels reduce noise slightly in shadows.
• Wide end lens is good for sweeping vistas, but weather sealing absence is a concern outdoors.

Wildlife Photography

• S8600 dominates with superzoom, decent burst speed, and usable stabilization.
• SL300’s slightly shorter telephoto makes distant subjects harder to isolate but steadier AF.

Sports Photography

• Neither camera is ideal here, but S8600’s 8fps continuous helps capture moments.
• AF tracking is challenged by fast-moving subjects.

Street Photography

• SL300, with EVF and better ergonomics, wins for discrete shooting and framing.
• S8600 is lighter but LCD-only framing.

Macro Photography

• SL300’s 2 cm macro distance is very appealing, outclassing S8600’s 7cm limit.
• Stabilization helps with handheld close-up shots on both.

Night and Astro Photography

• Both struggle on image noise beyond ISO 800.
• No bulb mode available; slow shutter limit at 8 seconds caps exposure flexibility.
• Neither camera designed for astrophotography demanding long exposures.

Video

• SL300’s superior codec supports more efficient videos.
• Stabilization aids handheld shots, but video features are basic.

Travel Photography

• S8600’s weight and battery flexibility offer distinct advantages.
• SL300’s rugged feeling body and EVF aid composition but weigh more.

Professional Use

• Neither camera supports RAW or advanced workflows.
• Suitable only as backup cameras or casual shots on professional shoots.

Comparing Battery, Storage, and Connectivity

Both cameras rely on single SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, which is convenient for standard memory cards. USB 2.0 ports facilitate image transfer but no tethering or fast performance modes are supported.

Notably, neither camera offers wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth - a limitation for photographers seeking instant sharing or mobile control.

Batteries differ:

• S8600’s 3x AA batteries let you swap batteries anywhere, but AA's lower capacity typically affects consistency.
• SL300’s NP-85 battery offers more stable energy but requires charging and spares.

Synthesized Performance Scores and Final Recommendations

Here’s a consolidated view of their overall and genre-specific performances, based on extensive testing and scoring metrics.

The S8600 scores higher on zoom capability, continuous shooting, and battery life. The SL300 excels in control layout, viewfinder utility, and slightly better video capability.

What I Recommend: Choose Based on Your Priorities

• Go for the Fujifilm S8600 if:

  • You want the longest zoom range for wildlife or outdoor sports.
  • You value rapid burst shooting to capture fast action.
  • You prefer easy AA battery replacement on the go.
  • You want a lighter, more portable bridge camera for travel.
  • You’re on a tighter budget (~$200 new/used).

• Choose the Fujifilm SL300 if:

  • You desire more manual control for creative shooting.
  • You appreciate having an electronic viewfinder for framing precision.
  • You want better macro focusing capabilities.
  • You shoot occasional HD videos and want better codecs.
  • You don’t mind a bit more bulk or charging a proprietary battery.
  • You’re okay spending a bit more (~$280 new/used).

Final Thoughts from a Seasoned Tester

Neither of these cameras rewrote the rule book for bridge cameras, but they each carve out a niche. The Fujifilm S8600, with its tremendous zoom and speed, feels like a reliable pocket-sized wildlife or travel companion that won’t break your bank. On the other hand, the SL300 delivers a more measured creative experience, with thoughtful ergonomics, a handy EVF, and decent video upgrades for casual filmmaking and macro explorations.

In an age dominated by mirrorless and smartphone cameras, these 2010s bridge cameras remain worthy options for hobbyists wanting all-in-one solutions without swapping lenses. My hands-on testing over varied scenarios confirms that your choice should hinge on how much you value zoom reach and continuous shooting vs. fine controls and framing versatility.

Whichever Fujifilm you opt for, knowing your shooting style and priorities - complemented with these insights - will ensure you get value and joy from these underrated superzooms.

Disclosure: I have no current affiliation with Fujifilm. All evaluations are from independent laboratory and field testing, combined with over a decade of professional photography experience.