Bridging the Gap in Superzoom Cameras: Fujifilm S9200 vs Sony HX300

In the realm of bridge cameras with powerful zoom capabilities, the Fujifilm FinePix S9200 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX300 stand as popular contenders. Both offer a striking 50x zoom lens covering an expansive 24mm to 1200mm focal range on a compact 1/2.3-inch sensor, but beyond these headline specs, their performance and handling diverge in meaningful ways. Having put both cameras through extensive hands-on testing - across landscapes, wildlife, video capture, and more - I’m excited to share a detailed, no-nonsense comparison to help you find the right fit for your photographic journey.

Let’s embark on this journey by looking at their physical presence and day-to-day usability.

Size and Ergonomics: Which is Easier to Handle in the Field?

Physical handling is often overlooked in spec sheets but can make or break your shooting experience during extended sessions. The Fujifilm S9200 measures approximately 123 x 87 x 116 mm and weighs 670 grams including batteries. The Sony HX300 is slightly larger at 130 x 103 x 93 mm and lighter at 623 grams.

Right away, you’ll notice that while the S9200 is a bit more compact in width and height, it is deeper front-to-back. The Sony HX300’s profile is broader but is less thick, which can affect grip style. Both feature DSLR-style bridge bodies with comfortable handgrips, but the S9200 benefits from a more contoured right-hand grip - particularly advantageous when using heavier telephoto zooms for long periods.

From my experience, the Fujifilm’s ergonomics promote better one-handed operation despite being marginally heavier. It feels planted and secure, reducing wrist strain when tracking wildlife or sports subjects. The Sony’s body, due to its wider but flatter design, requires a firmer hold with the left hand supporting the lens, especially at the long end of the zoom range.

In terms of button layout, it’s about how these cameras put their controls within reach.

The Sony HX300 excels with a tilt screen and a slightly larger, higher-resolution LCD, which I’ll detail later. Its physical buttons are spaciously arranged and intuitive for quick changes mid-shoot.

The Fujifilm opts for a fixed screen with fewer physical dials but includes an electronic viewfinder (EVF) with good eye placement and reasonably quick refresh rates, which is a must when shooting in bright outdoor conditions.

Bottom line: If handheld comfort and a sturdy grip edge your priority, the Fujifilm S9200 wins that round. For flexible screen angles and touch-free framing, Sony HX300 is appealing.

Imaging Power: Sensor and Image Quality Head-to-Head

Understanding sensor characteristics is crucial, especially with small-sensor superzooms where image quality differences can be subtle but impactful.

Both cameras sport a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring about 6.17 x 4.55 mm in the Fuji and 6.16 x 4.62 mm in the Sony - essentially neck and neck in physical size.

The Sony HX300 packs a higher resolution sensor at 20 megapixels with a backside-illuminated CMOS design, theoretically offering better light gathering to combat noise. In contrast, the Fujifilm S9200 uses a 16-megapixel conventional CMOS sensor.

In real-world use, this design difference equates to slightly better detail retrieval and cleaner images at moderate ISOs from the Sony camera. The 20MP Sony files exhibit marginal sharpening edge finesse and reduced high-ISO noise from ISO 800 to ISO 1600, which is quite vital for low-light wildlife or indoor sports shots.

However, Fujifilm’s rendering tends to produce more natural color tones - especially skin tones in portraits - owing to its color science heritage. Here, Fuji’s advantage is more subjective but noteworthy if you favor warm and pleasant skin rendering without much post-processing.

A quick note on dynamic range: both cameras are limited by sensor size, but Sony’s BSI technology edges ahead slightly in shadow recovery tests, allowing a bit more detail in high contrast scenes such as landscapes with bright skies and dark foregrounds.

In summary, if resolution and low-light performance are paramount, the Sony HX300 offers an edge. Fujifilm S9200 excels in natural colors and daylight shooting fidelity.

Screen and Viewfinder: Your Window to the World

Working through the frame on these bridge models is either on the rear LCD or the viewfinder. These paths shape how photographers interact visually with their subject.

The Sony HX300 boasts a 3-inch OLED tilting screen with a crisp 921k-dot resolution, offering ample flexibility for compositions from awkward angles like ground level or overhead. Its brightness and contrast remain commendable under strong sunlight. Unfortunately, it lacks touchscreen functionality, which would have been a welcome bonus.

The Fujifilm S9200’s LCD is a fixed 3-inch TFT panel with lower 460k-dot resolution, which can feel a bit underwhelming if you’re used to newer displays. Nonetheless, the real strength here lies in its electronic viewfinder, which delivers around 201k dots of clarity with about 97% frame coverage. It’s a decent compromise for composing in bright outdoor environments to avoid glare issues common with LCDs.

Personally, I find the Sony’s screen more practical for casual scene exploration and video framing, but dedicated still shooters who rely on a viewfinder may appreciate Fuji’s EVF option.

Autofocus Performance: Keeping Speed and Accuracy in Focus

Neither of these cameras features phase-detection autofocus - common in many bridge cameras - but both utilize contrast-detection AF systems. This difference in AF technology affects continuous tracking, speed, and predictability.

The Sony HX300 includes 9 focus points and supports selective autofocus area plus face detection (though no animal eye AF). The Fujifilm S9200’s focusing points aren’t publicized, but it offers face detection without animal AF.

In practice, the S9200’s AF system is decent for static subjects and handheld macro shots with its precise center AF area but tends to hunt under low light or fast motion. The HX300 can lock focus faster in daylight and employs a more versatile AF area selection via its 9 center-located points, improving tracking of moving subjects in general.

For continuous autofocus and burst sequence shooting (up to 10 fps on both), the Sony’s AF tends to lag behind slightly. The Fuji maintains consistent focus during bursts better due to its continuous AF support.

If you prioritize wildlife or sports photography requiring rapid AF adjustments and tracking, the Fujifilm has the edge here, despite a less sophisticated system on paper.

Lens Performance and Stabilization: Zooming with Confidence

Both cameras carry a fixed 24-1200 mm equivalent lens with maximum apertures ranging from f/2.8-6.3 on Sony and f/2.9-6.5 on Fujifilm, offering identical reach.

At the wide end, both are sufficiently bright for landscapes and group shots, though the slight aperture advantage in the Sony (f/2.8 vs f/2.9) is marginal.

The long 1200 mm reach is where image stabilization becomes crucial. Both cameras integrate optical image stabilization to counteract hand shake at such extreme zooms.

In daylight testing, both deliver impressively sharp shots with careful technique, although the stabilizer on the Fuji feels a touch more confident, resulting in fewer blurred frames at telephoto focal lengths around 600-800 mm.

Close focusing differs: the Fujifilm excels with a macro focus distance as close as 1 cm, enabling tight detail work. The Sony HX300 does not specify close focus distance, and macros require somewhat more working distance, making Fuji a better pick for macro enthusiasts on a budget.

Video Capabilities: Smooth Footage in a Compact Package

Bridge cameras often double as convenient video recorders, and quality varies widely.

Both Fujifilm S9200 and Sony HX300 provide 1080p Full HD recording at 60i or 50 fps, though the Sony offers additional 960x720 (HD) at 60p for smoother slow motion (albeit at lower resolution).

Neither camera supports 4K video capture or microphone/headphone input, limiting audio and image quality options for serious videographers.

The Sony HX300’s superior LCD provides easier framing during handheld shoots, and the tilting screen helps enormously for vlogging or creative angles.

Fujifilm’s lack of tilting screen can be frustrating when composing video off-axis, despite offering a clean HDMI output for external recording.

Stabilization during video is effective on both and generally produces steady handheld clips, though the Sony’s BSI sensor contributes to slightly better low-light video shooting.

If video is your secondary focus, and you want ease of use with respectable Full HD capture, the Sony HX300 pulls ahead.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity: Practical Considerations

Power and storage solutions influence how far you can push your camera during trips or shoots.

The Fujifilm S9200 runs on 4 AA batteries - not rechargeable lithium-ion packs. This design offers ubiquitous, easy-to-find power but can become costly over time and heavier to carry as batteries sit in your bag. Battery life is rated at about 500 shots per charge.

On the flip side, the Sony HX300’s proprietary battery model isn’t specified in the specs provided, but typically Sony bridge cameras have lithium-ion packs delivering roughly 400-450 shots per charge - a bit less than the Fuji’s rated endurance.

Storage-wise, both accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with single slots, supporting expandable memory practicality.

Connectivity is minimal on both, lacking Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC - this limits your ability to quickly transfer images or remote control via smartphone apps, a notable omission for 2024 standards.

If carrying AA batteries is not a dealbreaker and you prioritize longer shooting sessions without worrying about charging, Fuji’s approach wins. For a lighter, rechargeable battery setup, Sony is likely more convenient.

Durability and Build Quality: Will They Survive Outdoor Adventures?

Neither camera boasts weather sealing, dustproofing, or shock resistance. Both are standard bridge cameras intended primarily for fair weather shooting.

That said, build quality is robust on both, with solid plastic and metal alloy bodies designed to withstand casual knocks and everyday handling.

If you plan to shoot outdoors frequently, consider investing in protective cases or lenses hoods to safeguard your gear.

Real-World Performance in Photography Genres

Let’s synthesize this information through the lens of practical shooting scenarios.

Fujifilm S9200 front Fujifilm S9200 screen back Sony HX300 front Sony HX300 screen back

Portrait Photography

Skin tone reproduction is crucial. Fuji’s natural rendering wins in this category, offering pleasing warmth and subtle gradation. Sony’s images can sometimes edge toward cooler tones, requiring slight edits. Neither camera offers advanced eye-detection autofocus, though Fuji’s face detection is steadier.

Background blur or bokeh is limited by sensor and lens aperture; both produce similarly controlled background separation at wide apertures, though wide zoom range diminishes this effect fast.

Landscape Photography

Sony brings the higher resolution and slightly better dynamic range to landscapes shot in varied lighting. The tilting, high-res LCD aids composition, especially at odd angles. Fuji’s lower resolution is offset by superior color vibrancy but slightly reduced detail.

Wildlife Photography

Both cameras offer 50x zoom and 10fps burst shooting, but Fuji’s continuous autofocus offers steadier tracking on wildlife in motion. Sony’s 9 AF points are decent but not optimized for fast, erratic movements. Battery life with AAs on Fuji is a plus for all-day shooting.

Sports Photography

Fast-moving action demands rapid AF and frame rates. Fuji’s continuous AF mode combined with better burst accuracy suits sporting events better. Sony’s slower AF re-acquisition limits its effectiveness here.

Street Photography

Here, portability and discretion matter. Both cameras are relatively bulky for street photography; however, Fujifilm’s compact grip aids quick shots. The fixed screen on Fuji hampers flexibility; Sony’s tilt screen is helpful but the bulkier body weighs on extended handheld use.

Macro Photography

Fuji’s 1cm close focusing distance dramatically edges Sony, enabling tight detail on small subjects. Combined with optical stabilization, the S9200 is the clear macro-friendly winner here.

Night and Astrophotography

Sony’s BSI CMOS sensor has better high ISO performance, reaching cleaner images up to ISO 1600 or 3200, crucial for night shots. Shutter speed range on Sony extends to 1/4000s but only down to 30s minimum shutter; Fuji covers 8s to 1/1700s, limiting very long exposures astrophotographers might want.

Video Shooting

Sony’s nicer LCD, improved video frame rates, and slightly better low-light video quality make it my pick for casual movies. Lack of microphone or headphone ports limits advanced video.

Travel Photography

For travel, weight and battery convenience come into play. Fuji’s AA battery system is perfect when access to chargers is limited. Sony’s slightly lighter body and advanced screen tilt serve photographers wanting framing versatility. Both offer notable 50x zoom range - ideal for diverse scenes from grand landscapes to remote details.

Professional Workflows

Neither camera supports RAW format, severely limiting post-processing flexibility. Reliance on JPEG output confines professional usage to casual or documentation contexts.

The Bottom Line: Recommendations Based on Your Needs

If you want:

• Natural color tones, macro capability, longer battery endurance, and steady continuous autofocus: Go with the Fujifilm S9200.
• Higher resolution, better low-light and video performance, tilting display, and versatility for travel videography: The Sony HX300 is preferable.

Both cameras present good value under $350, targeting enthusiasts stepping into superzoom bridge cameras without breaking the bank. Neither is perfect, but each carries unique strengths worth weighing for your priorities.

My Final Thoughts

After extensive field tests, I find myself reaching for the Fujifilm S9200 when shooting portraits, macros, or extended outdoor wildlife days - thanks to its ergonomics, natural color rendition, and reliable continuous autofocus.

The Sony HX300 finds its place when packing light and needing a flexible shooting angle, higher resolution for landscapes, or better handheld video recording. Its sensor technology and sharper LCD screen enhance those use cases.

Both are solid choices shaping the small sensor superzoom category - lean on this analysis, consider your shooting habits, and you’ll capture moments with confidence.

If you’re curious to see my video review discussing these aspects in action or want tips on maximizing either camera's capabilities, just let me know.

Happy shooting!

Image Credits:

• size-comparison.jpg
• top-view-compare.jpg
• sensor-size-compare.jpg
• back-screen.jpg
• cameras-galley.jpg
• camera-scores.jpg
• photography-type-cameras-scores.jpg