Nikon Coolpix L840 vs. Ricoh CX3: Hands-On Comparison of Two Small Sensor Superzooms

When it comes to superzoom cameras with small sensors, budget-conscious photographers often find themselves wading through a sea of older models and quirky niches. The Nikon Coolpix L840 and Ricoh CX3 are two such cameras - each with unique traits, but both targeting users who want versatile zoom reach without breaking the bank. Having spent many hours testing small sensor superzooms throughout my career, I find these two a fascinating study in contrasts, especially when viewed through the lenses of ergonomics, image quality, and practical performance.

In this deep dive, I’ll walk you through how these cameras perform across multiple photography genres, what their technical highlights and limitations mean in real world use, and finally who should consider each model. Let’s get started.

What Are We Comparing? Form and Function at a Glance

Before jumping to image quality, it’s worth sizing up the cameras’ physicality and handling, as this greatly affects shooting comfort and usability.

The Nikon L840 is a bridge-style superzoom, sized like a compact DSLR with an SLR-like design. It boasts a massive 38x zoom lens spanning 23-855mm equivalent focal length and a tilting 3-inch screen. The Ricoh CX3, by contrast, is a much smaller compact fixed-lens camera with a 10.7x zoom from 28-300mm equivalent and a fixed 3-inch screen. Weighing just 206 grams, it’s far lighter and pocket friendlier.

Size matters: the L840 clubs for your thumbs while the CX3 quietly slips into a jacket pocket.

Ergonomically, the L840 boasts larger controls and a grip that would appeal to those used to DSLR-style cameras - it’s comfortable to hold and offers decent manual focus (rare for this class). The CX3 sticks to basics: tiny buttons, no manual exposure modes, and mostly automatic operation.

The top view comparison lets you see how Nikon spaced buttons for dial adjustments and quick access, while Ricoh keeps things minimal.

For photographers who want to actively engage with controls and zoom fingers, the L840’s design is much more inviting.

Image Quality Showdown: Sensor Tech and Resolution

Both cameras use the same tiny sensor size (1/2.3-inch CMOS), which dictates many limitations in image quality especially in low light or when pushing dynamic range. However, the Nikon packs 16 megapixels while the Ricoh offers 10 megapixels, a difference that matters for resolution and cropping potential.

Why does size matter? The 1/2.3” sensor has a surface area of about 28 mm², quite small compared to APS-C or full-frame sensors. This limits detail, noise control, and dynamic range, especially with high megapixels crammed in (the L840’s sensor pixels are smaller, meaning more noise at high ISO). The Ricoh’s fewer pixels ensure slightly cleaner images at similar sensor size, but with less detail for large prints or cropping.

In practical shooting, the L840 handled landscapes and daylight scenes with sharp, detailed results - colors were vibrant, but slightly prone to oversaturation in vivid modes (which can be toned down). The CX3 produced pleasantly clean images but with less punch and fine detail visible.

The LCD and Viewfinder Experience

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder, so composing through the rear LCD is a must: good visibility and flexibility here make all the difference.

Nikon’s tilting screen beats Ricoh fixed any day for perspective flexibility.

The tilting 3-inch LCD on the Nikon is a real plus, especially for awkward angles - street photography or macro shots become easier. The Ricoh’s fixed screen offers no such luxury, making tricky framing tougher.

Touchscreens are absent from both, so you’re stuck with physical buttons and dials - a pain point in today’s touchscreen-heavy environment. Still, Nikon’s interface felt less dated thanks to clear menus and some customizable buttons.

Real-World Image Samples: What Do They Look Like?

Hands-on use always trumps specs alone. Let’s look at side-by-side image samples from both cameras.

Nikon L840 front Nikon L840 screen back Ricoh CX3 front Ricoh CX3 screen back

Portraits captured by the L840 show better skin tone fidelity and a pleasing soft bokeh from the long telephoto end, thanks to the longer focal length range (usually 855mm equivalent softens backgrounds nicely). Eye detection autofocus worked decently in good light but struggled in low light, as expected for contrast detection AF.

The Ricoh CX3 struggled with portraits - skin tones were less smooth and bokeh was largely non-existent due to shorter telephoto length and smaller aperture. Macro shots fair better on Ricoh thanks to competent focusing down to 1cm, but Nikon’s lens offered more versatility due to its focal range.

Autofocus and Burst Shooting: Who Keeps Up with the Action?

For wildlife and sports photographers craving speed and accuracy, autofocus and burst rate are life or death. Nikon’s Coolpix L840 features contrast-detection autofocus with face detection, tracking, and continuous AF modes - a rarity at this price point. It can shoot bursts at about 7.4 frames per second, respectable for fast action capture.

Ricoh CX3 falls short, offering only single AF, no tracking, and no continuous shooting mode, which limits its appeal for moving subjects.

In controlled tests, the L840’s AF was snappy in good light but sluggish in dim conditions. The Ricoh had longer AF lag, making it unsuitable for fast-moving wildlife or sports.

Durability and Weather Resistance

Neither camera sports environmental sealing or ruggedized build - it’s worth emphasizing that both should be treated delicately and avoided in harsh weather. Nikon’s larger body gives a more secure grip and a more robust feel, but Ricoh’s compactness means it can be more easily stashed and risked during travel.

Specialized Shooting Scenarios: Portraits Through to Night Photography

Let me share how these two handled specialized genres I tested for:

• Portraits: Nikon’s longer zoom lens enabled better background separation and pleasing compression. Skin tones rendered naturally with some tweaking. Eye detection autofocus improved hit rate but was never flawless. Ricoh was too limited here due to shorter zoom at portrait distances and weaker AF.

• Landscape: Both cameras performed better in daylight landscape shooting, but Nikon’s higher resolution gave an edge in detail. Limited dynamic range was evident and HDR was not built-in, so care was needed to avoid blown highlights. Ricoh’s lower resolution and sensor quality meant less crisp results.

• Wildlife: Nikon’s zoom and autofocus capabilities offered a usable package for casual wildlife – just keep expectations realistic. Ricoh’s AF and zoom range limited it seriously here.

• Sports: Nikon again led with burst mode and AF tracking, though performance was still modest relative to dedicated sport cameras. Ricoh was a non-starter for sports.

• Street: Ricoh’s compact size would benefit discrete street shooting, but slow AF and fixed screen hinder responsiveness. Nikon’s bulk, tilting screen, and faster AF make it less discreet but more capable when you have the room to carry it.

• Macro: Both cameras offer close focusing to 1cm with optical image stabilization - good news for macro novice shooters. Nikon’s versatility with zoom combined with stabilization made it more adaptable.

• Night/Astro: Both cameras suffered from noise past ISO 400-800 and lacked RAW support (limiting editing latitude). Nikon’s higher ISO cap offered more flexibility but results were noisy.

• Video: Nikon records Full HD 1080p at up to 60i interlaced, Ricoh capped at 720p. Neither has microphone input or 4K, limiting uses for videographers.

• Travel: Ricoh excels in portability and weight, an advantage for light packing and spontaneity. Nikon requires a dedicated bag but offers more versatility and battery endurance (590 shots vs. unspecified on Ricoh).

• Professional Work: Both are firmly consumer-level cameras with no RAW support, basic connectivity, and limited file control, so pros will likely find them lacking for critical workflows.

Operating System, Connectivity, and Storage

Wireless presence is key these days - Nikon offers built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for quick image transfer and remote control - useful features for instant sharing or social media hobbyists. Ricoh lacks any wireless connectivity entirely.

Storage-wise, both use SD card slots and have no dual slots. Nikon uses AA batteries, a double-edged sword: widely available but heavier and less eco-friendly. Ricoh uses a proprietary DB-100 lithium-ion battery (no official life rating provided), which may strain long-day usage unless fully charged backups come along.

Price and Value Comparison - Who Gets the Best Bang?

At street prices around $400 for the Nikon L840 and $330 for the older Ricoh CX3, the L840 justifies its premium with significantly better zoom, controls, AF capabilities, wireless features, and screen articulation.

Ricoh’s appeal lies in ultra-compact convenience and beginner-friendly automatic modes, suitable for very casual users or those strictly seeking a pocketable all-in-one.

Performance Ratings and Genre Scores

For a quick visual recap of strengths in different photography types, here’s my detailed rating chart.

To Pros and Cons Lists for a Clear Summary

Nikon Coolpix L840

Pros:

• Massive 38x zoom covering wide angle to super telephoto
• Tilting 3-inch LCD gives flexible composition options
• Decent burst rate and AF tracking for action photography
• Optical image stabilization reduces blur across zoom range
• Good battery life with AA batteries and built-in Wi-Fi + NFC
• Better suited for versatile photography including portraits, macro, landscapes

Cons:

• Bulkier and heavier, less pocketable for travel or street discreetness
• No RAW support limits post-processing options
• Smaller sensor with high megapixel count leads to noise at high ISO
• No viewfinder makes bright light shooting challenging

Ricoh CX3

Pros:

• Compact and lightweight, ideal for travel and casual outings
• Sensor-shift image stabilization provides steady shots
• Simple interface and manual focus support for beginners
• Closer minimum ISO supports daylight shooting with less noise
• Decent macro capability with 1cm focus range
• Affordable price point for entry-level superzoom users

Cons:

• Limited zoom (10.7x) range restricts versatility
• Weak autofocus with no continuous mode or tracking
• Fixed LCD limits framing options
• No wireless features and no HDMI output
• Limited video resolution (720p) and no microphone input
• No RAW or manual exposure modes, limiting creative control

Final Verdict: Which Camera Should You Buy?

If you’re seeking a versatile superzoom camera capable of covering a wide range of shooting scenarios - from casual portraits and landscapes to animal snapshots and some light sports - the Nikon Coolpix L840 stands out as the superior all-rounder despite its age. Its long zoom, tilting screen, better autofocus and decent burst rates make it a practical choice for hobbyists who want to step beyond point-and-shoot simplicity without shelling out for expensive mirrorless or DSLRs.

On the other hand, if ultra-portability and ease of use trump zoom range and manual controls, and your photography is mostly daylight snaps or travel snapshots, the Ricoh CX3 is still a capable compact with surprisingly good macro capabilities and image stabilization. Its compact size is no joke for those who want to carry a camera everywhere without discomfort.

In my experience, the L840's seasoned features and ergonomics provide enough performance upgrades to justify its higher price - especially when you want your bridges to feel more like “real cameras” than pocket companions. The Ricoh’s niche is tightly defined but meets that need admirably.

Parting Thoughts and Recommendations

• For beginner photographers on a budget looking for a straightforward, pocketable zoom, try the Ricoh CX3 if you find it new or used for a good price. It’s a decent way to start without confusion.

• For enthusiast hobbyists wanting more zoom, control, and better image quality in varied lighting, the Nikon L840 is a smarter buy - even if it’s a bit bulkier.

• For anyone serious about image quality, low light, or professional workflows - neither camera truly fits the bill. Consider stepping up to a larger sensor interchangeable lens system.

Having personally handled thousands of cameras, I can share that no camera is perfect. Both the Nikon L840 and Ricoh CX3 are relics by today’s standards, but represent strong value propositions in the small sensor superzoom category, especially for those mindful of price. Careful consideration of your shooting needs and style will guide you to the best fit.

Here’s hoping this detailed comparison helps you make an informed, confident choice on your next camera investment.

If you found this comparison helpful or want to hear my thoughts on similar cameras, drop a comment - always happy to share insights from the labs and the field. Happy shooting!