Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5
91 Imaging
40 Features
40 Overall
40
![Olympus TG-830 iHS front Olympus TG-830 iHS front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Olympus-TG-830-iHS/Olympus-TG-830-iHS-front.jpg)
![Ricoh CX5 front Ricoh CX5 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Ricoh-CX5/Ricoh-CX5-front.jpg)
92 Imaging
34 Features
35 Overall
34
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 6400
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-140mm (F3.9-5.9) lens
- 214g - 109 x 67 x 28mm
- Revealed January 2013
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 100 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-300mm (F3.5-5.6) lens
- 205g - 102 x 59 x 29mm
- Launched July 2011
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/maxresdefault-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Overview
Following is a thorough analysis of the Olympus TG-830 iHS and Ricoh CX5, former is a Waterproof while the latter is a Small Sensor Superzoom by competitors Olympus and Ricoh. There exists a large gap between the sensor resolutions of the TG-830 iHS (16MP) and CX5 (10MP) but they possess the same exact sensor sizes (1/2.3").
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/tiktok-218x150.jpg)
The TG-830 iHS was brought out 18 months after the CX5 which makes the cameras a generation away from one another. Each of these cameras offer the identical body type (Compact).
Before going in to a complete comparison, below is a brief highlight of how the TG-830 iHS scores versus the CX5 in regards to portability, imaging, features and an overall score.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/snapchat-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Gallery
Below is a preview of the gallery photos for Olympus TG-830 iHS & Ricoh CX5. The entire galleries are available at Olympus TG-830 iHS Gallery & Ricoh CX5 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Olympus TG-830 iHS over the Ricoh CX5
TG-830 iHS | CX5 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Launched | January 2013 | ![]() | July 2011 | More modern by 18 months |
Reasons to pick Ricoh CX5 over the Olympus TG-830 iHS
CX5 | TG-830 iHS | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Manually focus | ![]() | More exact focusing | ||
Screen resolution | 920k | ![]() | 460k | Clearer screen (+460k dot) |
Common features in the Olympus TG-830 iHS and Ricoh CX5
TG-830 iHS | CX5 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Screen type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed screen |
Screen sizing | 3" | ![]() | 3" | Equivalent screen dimensions |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Neither comes with selfie screen | ||
Touch screen | ![]() | Neither comes with Touch screen |
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Physical Comparison
In case you're intending to carry around your camera frequently, you have to factor its weight and size. The Olympus TG-830 iHS comes with physical measurements of 109mm x 67mm x 28mm (4.3" x 2.6" x 1.1") along with a weight of 214 grams (0.47 lbs) while the Ricoh CX5 has specifications of 102mm x 59mm x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") having a weight of 205 grams (0.45 lbs).
Contrast the Olympus TG-830 iHS and Ricoh CX5 in our brand new Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.![Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses](https://pxlmag.com/db/assets/camera-size-comparison-animation.gif)
Always remember, the weight of an ILC will differ based on the lens you use at that time. Following is the front view scale comparison of the TG-830 iHS and the CX5.
![Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 size comparison Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-830-iHS-vs-Ricoh-CX5-size-comparison.jpg)
Taking into account dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the TG-830 iHS and CX5 is 91 and 92 respectively.
![Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 top view buttons comparison Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 top view buttons comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-830-iHS-vs-Ricoh-CX5-top-view-buttons-comparison.jpg)
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Sensor Comparison
Typically, it's tough to visualise the contrast between sensor sizes merely by looking at technical specs. The image below should offer you a better sense of the sensor sizing in the TG-830 iHS and CX5.
As you have seen, the 2 cameras enjoy the same exact sensor sizing albeit not the same megapixels. You can count on the Olympus TG-830 iHS to resolve more detail having its extra 6MP. Higher resolution will also make it easier to crop pictures far more aggressively. The newer TG-830 iHS is going to have an edge with regard to sensor technology.
![Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 sensor size comparison Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 sensor size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/sensor-compare/Olympus-TG-830-iHS-vs-Ricoh-CX5-sensor-size-comparison.png)
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Screen and ViewFinder
![Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Screen and Viewfinder comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Olympus-TG-830-iHS-vs-Ricoh-CX5-screen-back-comparison.jpg)
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/LP3_cut_13f_0212-218x150.jpg)
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/No-Surprise-Pentax-17-Pre-Orders-218x150.jpg)
Street Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/photography-glossary-218x150.jpg)
Sports Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Approach-to-AI-Generated-Content-218x150.jpg)
Travel Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/iphone-optical-stabilization-218x150.jpg)
Landscape Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/samsung-evo-microsd-cards-featur-218x150.jpg)
Vlogging Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ai-licence-218x150.jpg)
Olympus TG-830 iHS vs Ricoh CX5 Specifications
Olympus TG-830 iHS | Ricoh CX5 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Manufacturer | Olympus | Ricoh |
Model type | Olympus TG-830 iHS | Ricoh CX5 |
Type | Waterproof | Small Sensor Superzoom |
Revealed | 2013-01-08 | 2011-07-19 |
Physical type | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Powered by | - | Smooth Imaging Engine IV |
Sensor type | CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
Sensor resolution | 16 megapixel | 10 megapixel |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 4:3 and 16:9 | 1:1, 4:3 and 3:2 |
Highest resolution | 4608 x 3456 | 3648 x 2736 |
Highest native ISO | 6400 | 3200 |
Lowest native ISO | 100 | 100 |
RAW data | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Focus manually | ||
AF touch | ||
AF continuous | ||
AF single | ||
AF tracking | ||
Selective AF | ||
AF center weighted | ||
Multi area AF | ||
AF live view | ||
Face detect AF | ||
Contract detect AF | ||
Phase detect AF | ||
Cross type focus points | - | - |
Lens | ||
Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 28-140mm (5.0x) | 28-300mm (10.7x) |
Largest aperture | f/3.9-5.9 | f/3.5-5.6 |
Macro focusing range | 1cm | 1cm |
Focal length multiplier | 5.8 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Display type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Display diagonal | 3 inches | 3 inches |
Resolution of display | 460 thousand dots | 920 thousand dots |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch display | ||
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder | None | None |
Features | ||
Lowest shutter speed | 4s | 8s |
Highest shutter speed | 1/2000s | 1/2000s |
Continuous shooting rate | - | 5.0fps |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Expose Manually | ||
Exposure compensation | - | Yes |
Custom WB | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Inbuilt flash | ||
Flash distance | - | 4.00 m |
Flash settings | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Slow Sync |
Hot shoe | ||
AEB | ||
WB bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment | ||
Average | ||
Spot | ||
Partial | ||
AF area | ||
Center weighted | ||
Video features | ||
Video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (60 fps), 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 180 (30fps) | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) |
Highest video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1280x720 |
Video format | H.264 | Motion JPEG |
Mic port | ||
Headphone port | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | None |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | BuiltIn | None |
Physical | ||
Environmental sealing | ||
Water proofing | ||
Dust proofing | ||
Shock proofing | ||
Crush proofing | ||
Freeze proofing | ||
Weight | 214 grams (0.47 lb) | 205 grams (0.45 lb) |
Dimensions | 109 x 67 x 28mm (4.3" x 2.6" x 1.1") | 102 x 59 x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO All around rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
Other | ||
Battery life | 300 photos | - |
Battery type | Battery Pack | - |
Battery ID | LI-50B | DB-100 |
Self timer | Yes (2 or 12 sec, pet auto shutter) | Yes (2, 10 or Custom) |
Time lapse feature | ||
Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | SD/SDHC card, Internal |
Card slots | 1 | 1 |
Retail cost | $0 | $399 |