Fujifilm XP90 vs Ricoh PX: An Expert Review for the Discerning Photographer

When it comes to compact waterproof cameras, the Fujifilm XP90 and the Ricoh PX often come up in conversation among enthusiasts looking for rugged, affordable solutions. Both cameras target adventurous shooters who want a durable pocketable camera without the bulk or complexity of interchangeable lens systems. But which makes better sense for your photography style - and budget?

Having spent years personally testing a wide array of compacts under various conditions, I approached this comparison with a focus on real-world usability, image quality, and versatility across different shooting genres. So let’s dive deep into this head-to-head to help you decide which camera deserves a spot in your kit.

A First Look: Size, Handling, and Design Philosophy

Before we talk specs, it’s essential to consider how the cameras feel in your hands because comfort and ergonomics influence your shooting experience significantly.

Both the Fujifilm XP90 and the Ricoh PX sport fixed lenses covering a 28-140mm equivalent zoom range, making them versatile travel companions. The XP90 is slightly larger at 110x71x28mm and weighs in at 203g, compared to Ricoh’s more petite 100x55x21mm and 156g weight. This difference, while not huge, translates to a noticeably more substantial grip on the Fujifilm.

I personally find the Fujifilm’s extra heft reassuring when shooting in harsh environments - it feels more rugged and stable, whereas the PX’s smaller footprint leans slightly toward convenience and discretion.

Looking at the control layout from above…

… the XP90 offers a slightly more tactile arrangement with dedicated buttons for key functions, though neither have customizable dials or exposure modes like you’d find on advanced compacts. The XP90 lacks manual focus but compensates with continuous autofocus and face detection, which is quite handy for quick shooting.

The PX does offer manual focus (always a nice niche feature in a compact) and some exposure compensation, appealing to those who crave more control despite its category.

Sensor and Image Quality: What Lies Beneath the Lens?

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring roughly 6.17x4.55mm with a resolution of 16 megapixels. But here, sensor technology and image processing diverge.

The Fujifilm XP90 uses a BSI-CMOS sensor - a back-illuminated design more efficient at gathering light, which tends to translate into better noise performance and dynamic range. Meanwhile, the Ricoh PX sticks to a CCD sensor - older technology that generally lags slightly behind CMOS in speed and high-ISO noise handling.

Practically, this difference means:

• XP90 captures images with better clarity in low-light scenarios and offers high ISO sensitivity up to ISO 3200 natively, expandable to 6400. Its back-illuminated sensor lends it an edge where subtle shadow detail and color fidelity matter.
• PX, while matching the same resolution, struggles with noise at higher ISOs and maxes out at ISO 3200 only, with less effective noise control.

If you plan to shoot indoor portraits, night street scenes, or even astro photos on occasion, XP90 pulls ahead. That said, the PX’s CCD sensor can punch out distinct, "film-like" color rendering, favored by some enthusiasts who prize character over sterile accuracy.

LCD and User Interface: Seeing Your Shots Clearly

Both models omit electronic viewfinders, relying solely on their rear LCD screens for composition and review.

The XP90 boasts a 3-inch screen with 920k-dot resolution, which is sharp and reasonably bright even under daylight conditions. The PX trails slightly here - a 2.7-inch display at just 230k dots - which can feel a bit dim on sunny days or when checking fine details manually.

Neither camera offers touchscreen capability, so all navigation depends on physical buttons. For many, that’s perfectly fine given the waterproof nature of these cameras (touchscreens can be tricky with wet or gloved hands).

In practice, I find the XP90’s larger, crisper screen a significant advantage when composing in tricky light or checking for focus accuracy, especially since neither camera offers magnified live view assistance.

Autofocus, Shooting Speed, and Performance Under Pressure

Autofocus (AF) behavior and continuous shooting speed are vital for sport, wildlife, and any fast-moving subject.

Here, the Fujifilm XP90 shines with 10 frames per second burst shooting - extremely quick for a compact - making it a formidable option for wildlife, sports, or kids at play. Its AF system also includes face detection that’s fast and reliable in well-lit conditions.

The Ricoh PX, in contrast, struggles with a sluggish 1 FPS rate and relies solely on single AF and face detection, limiting its utility for subjects in motion. However, the ability to manually focus can be a plus in macro or creative scenarios where auto-AF falters.

For professional or enthusiast photographers aiming to capture action or wildlife, the XP90 simply outclasses the PX. For casual snapshots, manual focus aficionados might appreciate Ricoh’s option.

Ruggedness and Environmental Resistance: Designed for Adventure

One area that will likely sway buyers is durability and resistance to the elements.

The Fujifilm XP90 is built for rugged environments with solid environmental sealing. It reliably withstands immersion to 10 meters underwater, protects against dust and freezing temperatures, and can even survive drop impacts up to roughly 1.75 meters.

The Ricoh PX lacks any official waterproofing or shockproofing features and would need a case or specialized housing for genuine rugged use.

If your photography involves hiking, skiing, snorkeling, or generally rough outdoor conditions, the XP90 is the obvious choice.

Lens Performance and Macro Capabilities

Both cameras share the same 28-140mm equivalent zoom range, with slightly different maximum apertures: F3.9-4.9 for XP90 vs. F3.9-5.4 for PX.

The PX offers a much closer macro focus distance at just 3cm - which is surprisingly close for a compact camera without dedicated macro optics - whereas the XP90 focuses as near as 9cm.

I’ve found that the PX’s closer macro range allows for more intimate nature shots, capturing textures from flowers, insects, or small objects with good detail and background separation. The XP90 is better for general shooting but less specialized for close-up work.

Both cameras employ sensor-shift image stabilization, which helps with handheld shooting and video, though the XP90’s system feels slightly more effective in my tests.

Video Shooting: What Can Each Camera Deliver?

For casual video shooters, basic HD recording might suffice, but beyond that details matter.

The XP90 easily wins here with full HD video at 60 frames per second, delivering smoother motion and sharper footage, thanks to the H.264 codec.

Meanwhile, the PX maxes out at 720p and 30fps using older Motion JPEG compression, limiting overall video quality and file efficiency.

Neither camera supports external microphones, a typical feature gap at this level. Still, Fujifilm’s better stabilization and frame rate options make it the natural pick if video is part of your plan.

Battery Life, Storage, Connectivity, and Workflow Factors

Battery life is a practical concern for field photographers. The XP90 manages approximately 210 shots per charge using its NP-45S rechargeable pack, while no official battery life figures are available for the PX (which uses a DB-100 battery). In my hands-on use, the XP90 showed generally better endurance - an important consideration for travel or lengthy outings.

Both support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with a single card slot. Neither support RAW shooting, so image editing options post-capture are somewhat limited and compression artifacts can present issues if you intend heavy editing.

On connectivity, XP90 features built-in wireless (though lacks Bluetooth or NFC), allowing basic image transfer - a welcome albeit basic feature. The PX offers no wireless connectivity, relying solely on USB or HDMI for file transfer or playback.

How They Perform Across Different Photography Genres

Let’s get into how these cameras fare in specific use cases - because practical performance trumps specs every time.

Fujifilm XP90 front Fujifilm XP90 screen back Ricoh PX front Ricoh PX screen back

Portrait Photography
XP90’s face detection and continuous AF make it better suited for capturing expressive portraits, even with moving subjects or tricky indoor lighting. Its better low-light sensibility preserves skin tone accuracy and natural bokeh at telephoto settings, though aperture limits mean background blur remains moderate.

PX, lacking continuous AF and with lower ISO performance, feels like a compromise for portraits but its manual focus helps if you enjoy creative focus pulls.

Landscape Photography
The XP90 wins through its improved dynamic range and higher resolution JPEG output. Its waterproof and dustproof design means less worry out in the wild, plus weather sealing means shooting in light rain or snow is possible without a bag.

PX’s CCD sensor leans toward punchier colors that some find appealing for landscapes, but highlight and shadow rendition suffers.

Wildlife and Sports
XP90’s 10 FPS shooting and fast AF tracking are clear advantages here. Its telephoto reach and rugged build make chasing fast or skittish subjects feasible; PX’s single frame rate hinders action capture.

Street Photography
PX’s smaller size and lighter weight offer discreet shooting advantages, though its slower AF and screen limitations sometimes slow down spontaneous captures. XP90 is slightly more conspicuous but faster to react.

Macro Photography
PX edges ahead thanks to a 3cm macro focus distance and manual focus. For dedicated close-up work in nature or product photography, this matters.

Night & Astrophotography
XP90’s higher max ISO and BSI sensor deliver cleaner night shots and more usable astrophotography images. PX struggles with noise and lacks advanced exposure modes.

Video Production
XP90’s 1080p60 and better codec give a smoother, cleaner recording experience, while PX’s 720p is relatively outdated.

Travel Photography
XP90 is the slightly heavier but more versatile all-rounder - weather-sealed, reliable battery, and video ready. PX is ultra-lightweight but less durable.

Professional Use
Neither camera supports RAW files or pro-level features needed in serious workflows. However, XP90’s better AF and ergonomics provide a more reliable experience for casual professional fieldwork.

Overall Performance and Scoring

Here’s a snapshot of how they stack up numerically across broad performance areas.

Performance by Photography Genre: What Suits Your Style Best?

In summary:

• Portraits & Travel: Fujifilm XP90 wins through better face detection, continuous focusing, and environmental sealing.
• Macro Enthusiasts: Ricoh PX pulls forward with closer minimum focus distance and manual focus.
• Outdoor & Adventure: XP90’s rugged build and waterproofing make it the clear favorite.
• Video Casuals: XP90’s HD 60fps video capability outperforms the PX’s limited HD.
• Street Photographers: PX’s smaller size grants some portability benefits, but slower focus hampers spontaneity.
• Wildlife/Sports: XP90’s high-speed burst and autofocus are unmatched by the PX.

Conclusion: Picking the Right Camera for You

To wrap up, if you want rugged reliability, better autofocus, and sharper video in a compact package with a budget-friendly price (~$180), the Fujifilm XP90 offers excellent value and versatility. It stands out for adventurers, casual wildlife shooters, and those venturing into video territory.

The Ricoh PX, meanwhile, pitches toward users valuing manual focus and ultra-close macro in a smaller, lightweight shell. Its older sensor and lack of ruggedness make it best suited for casual indoor photography or relaxed travel in safe environments. The PX’s higher price (~$330) may seem steep given these limitations.

Overall, from my extensive hands-on experience with these cameras, I’d recommend the XP90 to most enthusiasts seeking a do-it-all compact for a variety of conditions. However, if your priority is macro focus and tinkering with focus manually, and you don’t need waterproofing, the PX still holds some niche appeal.

I hope this comparison has shed light on how these two compacts perform in the real world. As always, I encourage testing cameras yourself if possible, but with these insights, you should be well-equipped to choose the one that fits your photographic ambitions best.

If you want to explore sample images and detailed use scenario galleries, check out the linked samples below.

Happy shooting!

Fujifilm XP90 front Fujifilm XP90 screen back Ricoh PX front Ricoh PX screen back