Pentax WG-3 vs Samsung PL200: A Thorough Dive into Two Compact Cameras for Different Adventures

Choosing the right camera can be daunting, especially when faced with models as different as the Pentax WG-3 and the Samsung PL200. Though both fall under the compact category, they cater to markedly distinct shooting scenarios. Having tested a vast array of cameras over the last 15 years, including rugged models and fine small-sensor compacts, I’m excited to unpack what these two bring to the table, what compromises they demand, and ultimately who each serves best.

Whether you’re comparing them for casual everyday use, travel, or specialized photography fields, this detailed comparison will point you in the right direction, supported by hands-on insights, technical data, and practical testing.

Getting to Know the Contenders: Rugged vs. Refined

At first glance, these two cameras could not be more different. The Pentax WG-3, announced mid-2013, is a rugged, waterproof compact aimed at outdoorsy types who demand durability and decent imaging in harsh conditions. The Samsung PL200, released a few years earlier in 2010, fits snugly into the small sensor compact mold targeting users valuing a longer zoom range and conventional pocketability.

How does their size and handling compare in real life? Here’s a visual to set the tone:

The Pentax WG-3 is thicker and noticeably heavier at 230 grams compared to the PL200’s slim 170 grams, measuring 124x64x33mm against 100x60x21mm respectively. The WG-3’s extra bulk is a byproduct of its reinforced, weather-sealed body designed to be waterproof to depths, crushproof, shockproof, and freezeproof - a boon for adventure shooters. The Samsung, meanwhile, is sleeker and better suited for slipping into a jacket pocket or purse.

Bear in mind, ergonomics also extend to controls and usability - which we’ll get to shortly.

Sensor and Image Quality: Evolution or Preservation?

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3-inch sensor, a common size in compact cameras. But the WG-3 sports a more modern 16MP BSI-CMOS sensor while the PL200 packs a 14MP CCD sensor.

From a technical perspective, the WG-3’s BSI-CMOS stands to deliver better low-light performance and higher ISO capability (max ISO 6400 vs. PL200’s 3200), thanks to backside illumination that increases light-gathering efficiency. The PL200’s CCD sensor may retain a certain color rendition some photographers prefer, offering rich colors and moderate noise at low ISOs, but it tends to falter once light falls.

I ran comparative real-world tests to check these claims. Under daylight conditions, both produce realistic color and detail at base ISOs – but WG-3 offers slightly crisper images due to 16MP resolution and its newer sensor tech. The difference becomes more evident in dimmer environments or indoor scenes, where the WG-3 held onto detail at ISO 800 with manageable noise, whereas noise in the PL200 images soared around the same ISO level.

Neither camera supports RAW shooting, limiting post-processing flexibility - a clear trade-off given their focus on casual or adventurous users rather than professionals.

Lens and Zoom: What’s Your Reach?

The WG-3 features a 25-100mm equivalent zoom (4x) with a bright F2.0 aperture at wide-angle, which tapers to F4.9 telephoto. This fast wide end is advantageous for low-light and depth-of-field control. The PL200 offers a more ambitious 31-217mm equivalent (7x zoom) but starts at a slower F3.3 aperture, going to F5.5.

This difference changes the game depending on your subject. Need a longer reach for wildlife or distant street scenes? The PL200’s 7x zoom allows more framing flexibility in tight spaces or wildlife observation. Conversely, for macro, wide-angle landscapes, or interior shots, the WG-3’s brighter aperture and close focusing (down to 1cm) deliver significant advantages.

Touching on macro: the WG-3 excels with its aggressive close-focus distance - a mere 1 cm from the subject - helped by stable sensor-shift image stabilization. The PL200 does closer focusing around 5cm, less precise but typical for its class.

Additionally, the WG-3’s lens being part of a rugged, sealed camera means it can go underwater or into dusty environments without damage - a feature no telephoto zoom lens on any compact of this size offers normally.

Handling and User Interface: Controls and Screens

Ergonomics extend beyond just physical size. Let’s assess how each camera feels in your hands and how intuitive the controls are.

Looking at the top plate, the Pentax WG-3 features clearly labelled buttons around its mode dial, a dedicated video record button, and a clever push-to-focus release. Buttons are rubberized for grip in wet conditions, and their spacing means you can operate it with gloves - invaluable when out hiking or snorkeling.

The Samsung PL200 opts for a more minimalist design with fewer external controls, relying heavily on menus accessed via buttons on the rear. This approach keeps the shell slim but at a cost: slower adjustment times in the field. If you’re someone who likes quick access to ISO, white balance, or exposure compensation, the WG-3’s tactile controls will feel substantially more efficient.

Speaking of rear interfaces, both have 3-inch fixed LCD screens.

The WG-3’s screen sports a higher resolution 460k-dot display with an anti-reflective coating, resulting in better visibility outdoors, especially in bright conditions. The PL200’s screen resolution is lower at 230k dots and can feel dimmer in direct sunlight.

Neither camera has an electronic viewfinder. For framing in strong daylight, the WG-3’s screen technology helps more with visibility.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed and Accuracy

When capturing fast-moving subjects or dealing with challenging focus situations, autofocus performance is vital.

• The Pentax WG-3 employs a 9-point contrast-detect AF system with face detection and tracking, allowing continuous AF during shooting although limited to single AF mode per shot. It also offers AF area options (multi-area and center weighted), and interestingly, has face detection that helps with portraits.

• The Samsung PL200, by contrast, uses a less sophisticated contrast-detect AF with no face detection and only center-weighted AF. Continuous autofocus is not supported.

In practical terms, the WG-3 stops focus and shoots more quickly than the PL200, especially in low light or tricky scenes. It also offers a slightly faster continuous burst mode at 10fps versus no official burst rate for the PL200, which can be a dealbreaker for action or wildlife photography.

For portrait enthusiasts, the WG-3’s face detection offers a useful assist in tight framing, helping maintain focus on your subject’s eyes. The PL200’s AF system isn’t quite up to that task.

Durability and Environmental Sealing: The Heart of the WG-3 Advantage

Speaking frankly, ruggedness is where the Pentax WG-3 truly stands apart. With fully weather-sealed construction, waterproof depth rating, shock, dust, crush, and freeze-proof certifications, its resilience is unmatched by the Samsung PL200, which lacks any such protection.

If you often find yourself shooting in rough conditions - beach trips, mountain hikes, or winter sports - the WG-3 provides peace of mind where the PL200 could be vulnerable to accidental damage or elements intrusion.

This isn’t just marketing fluff. I tested the WG-3 underwater and in dusty trails without protective cases, and it kept functioning flawlessly, highlighting the value of its robust engineering.

Video Capabilities: Modest but Functional vs. Basic

For video, the Pentax WG-3 can record Full HD 1080p footage at 30fps and HD 720p at 60fps, using MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs. The exposure isn't adjustable during video recording, but steady shots are aided by the sensor-shift image stabilization.

The Samsung PL200 is limited to VGA (640x480) at 30fps maximum, quite low resolution by modern standards, and missing HDMI output restricts external monitor connectivity.

Neither camera features microphone or headphone inputs, limiting audio capture quality for serious videographers. But for casual, point-and-shoot footage, the WG-3’s video options are clearly superior, offering usable high-definition videos for social sharing or travel diaries.

Battery Life and Connectivity

Battery life is decent for both, albeit leaning more towards moderate usage.

• The WG-3 uses the D-LI92 battery pack, rated for approximately 240 shots per full charge.
• The PL200 relies on the BP70A with unspecified official life but in my testing, hovered around similar usage - enough for a day of casual photography but expect to carry spares if out all day.

Connectivity-wise, the WG-3 supports Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless image transfer, a handy feature to get photos off-camera without cables. The PL200 lacks any wireless functions, depending only on USB 2.0 for data transfer.

Neither offers Bluetooth or NFC.

Who Shines Where? Genre-Specific Performance Points

Let’s narrow things down by photography genre, referring to my compiled performance analysis:

Portraiture

If your focus is portraits, the WG-3 has edge with face detection AF and a relatively wide aperture (F2.0) allowing pleasant background separation - even on a compact sensor. Skin tones render naturally, and the built-in stabilization aids steady hand-held shots.

The PL200’s AF is basic, with slower acquisition times, and its narrower maximum aperture (F3.3) limits bokeh potential and low light performance.

Winner: Pentax WG-3

Landscape

Landscape photographers need high resolution and wide dynamic range. The WG-3’s 16 MP CMOS sensor holds an advantage, though the sensor size remains small. Despite no official weather sealing claims for the PL200, the WG-3 is also better suited to shoot in adverse weather without worry.

Both lack RAW support, so dynamic range tweaking post-capture is limited.

Winner: Pentax WG-3 (for resilience and sensor tech)

Wildlife

Neither camera is ideal for serious wildlife - but if you must, the PL200’s longer 7x zoom reaches subjects farther away, while the WG-3’s 4x zoom may feel limiting.

That said, the WG-3 autofocus is faster and offers tracking, which means more keepers once you frame your shot. Also, its 10fps burst can capture moments the slower PL200 cannot.

Winner: Tie, with PL200 for reach, WG-3 for speed.

Sports

Fast AF and high burst rate are critical here. WG-3’s AF tracking and 10fps burst gives it a clear edge. PL200’s slow AF and absence of burst mode make it ill-suited.

Winner: Pentax WG-3

Street

Portability and discretion are king. The PL200 is smaller, lighter, and less obtrusive - ideal for candid shots. However, limited low-light capability can hinder night scenes.

WG-3’s bulk and rugged look may draw attention, but its better high-ISO handling can be a plus if lighting dims.

Winner: Samsung PL200 for unobtrusiveness; WG-3 for low-light edge.

Macro

The WG-3’s exceptional 1cm close focus and image stabilization make it a compact macro powerhouse. The PL200’s 5cm minimum is good but less flexible.

Winner: Pentax WG-3

Night/Astro

High ISO performance is pivotal, and the WG-3’s CMOS sensor outperforms the PL200’s CCD with less noise and better image clarity at ISO 800 and above.

Winner: Pentax WG-3

Video

WG-3 offers Full HD recording, while PL200 tops out at sub-HD VGA. Stabilization on the WG-3 further enhances video quality.

Winner: Pentax WG-3

Travel

Here, size and weight matter, but so does versatility. The Samsung PL200’s lighter and slimmer frame wins in portability, yet the WG-3’s durability, image quality, and EVF (no EVF on either), plus better battery life for active shooting, favor it for rugged travel.

Winner: Close call, depending on priority between size (PL200) and durability + quality (WG-3).

Sample Images in the Field

Nothing convinces like real results. Side-by-side snapshots show the WG-3’s sharper images, better color rendition in low light, and more natural background blur in macro shots. Meanwhile, the PL200 shows respectable detail at good lighting and excels in reach.

Pentax WG 3 front Pentax WG 3 screen back Samsung PL200 front Samsung PL200 screen back

Final Performance Ratings Overview

For an at-a-glance comparison, see the overall scores based on my standardized field tests and lab measurements.

The WG-3 scores higher in image quality, focus speed, and versatility, while the PL200 offers decent optics and compactness.

Making Your Choice: Who Should Buy Which?

So, what’s my recommendation after all this detail?

• Choose the Pentax WG-3 if you are:

  • An outdoors adventurer needing a tough camera that won’t be sidelined by rain, dust, or accidental drops
  • Interested in macro, underwater, or close-up photography with good low-light ability
  • Wanting fast autofocus, burst shooting, and face detection for portraits and action
  • Looking for Full HD video recording with stabilization
  • Okay with a slightly bulkier, heavier camera for durability and better image quality

• Go with the Samsung PL200 if you:

  • Prioritize a compact, slim camera that fits discreetly in your pocket or bag
  • Need a longer zoom range (7x) for travel or casual wildlife shooting
  • Shoot mostly in good light and can accept slower autofocus
  • Are on a budget and want simple automatic operation
  • Don’t require video beyond basic VGA and have no need for environmental sealing

Summing Up

While both are compacts in outward form, the Pentax WG-3 and Samsung PL200 cater to very different photographer profiles. The WG-3 shines in ruggedness, modern imaging, and versatile shooting disciplines, whereas the PL200 appeals with its lightweight design and extended zoom range for relaxed everyday shooting.

If you’re after reliability in tough environments and strong image performance, the WG-3 is a worthwhile choice. But if size, simplicity, and reach are your priorities, the PL200 still holds some charm despite its age.

Ultimately, your decision hinges on where and how you shoot. I hope this deep dive helps you weigh the trade-offs with clear eyes. Happy shooting!

If you want an in-depth video walkthrough, my full hands-on review highlights operational nuances to help you get a feel beyond the specs.

Appendix: Technical Specs at a Glance

I hope this comparison clarified the strengths and compromises so you can confidently pick the compact camera that best suits your shooting passions and adventures. For any further questions or detailed hands-on testing tips, feel free to reach out!