Ricoh CX2 vs Sony WX500: Battle of the Small Sensor Superzooms in the Compact Realm

When it comes to pocket-friendly superzoom cameras, the Ricoh CX2 and Sony WX500 are intriguing contenders from different eras. Though both belong to the "Small Sensor Superzoom" category, these two compacts bring very different toolkits to the table - the CX2, a 2009 throwback with a modest zoom and no raw support, and the WX500, a 2015 marvel boasting an 18MP sensor and more advanced features. For photographers hunting for versatile small-sensor zoomers, the question boils down to whether the dated, no-frills CX2 can still hold its own against Sony’s sleeker, more modern WX500.

Having spent hours shooting with both cameras across diverse scenarios, I’ll guide you through their strengths, trade-offs, and quirks - all boiled down to their real-world impact on image quality, handling, and usability. Whether you’re a casual snapshooter keen on pocket portability or a small-sensor enthusiast maximizing your superzoom’s potential, this side-by-side comparison should help settle the debate.

First Impressions and Design: Compact Champions with Different Ergonomic Flavors

At first glance, both the Ricoh CX2 and Sony WX500 are compact superzooms designed for inconspicuous travel and all-in-one versatility. However, their ergonomics and physical traits tell slightly different stories.

The CX2 measures 102 x 58 x 29 mm and weighs a light 185 grams, making it a true pocket camera that practically vanishes in a jacket pocket. The WX500 is a little chunkier at 102 x 58 x 36 mm and 236 grams - still very compact but with a bit more heft and presence in hand.

Handling-wise, the CX2’s smooth plastic body feels subtle but slightly less grippy compared to the WX500’s more textured surface. The latter feels better balanced, notably with its zoom ring that’s easy to operate even with one hand - a boon for quick focal-length shifts. The CX2’s fixed-lens design means fewer moving parts, but Sony’s lens barrel extends and retracts noticeably, influencing balance as you zoom in or out.

From the top, the story continues:

The WX500 offers more physical controls: dedicated exposure modes including aperture and shutter priority, exposure compensation dials, and a custom function button (despite no touchscreen). The CX2 opts for a simpler, menu-driven approach - no aperture priority, shutter priority, or manual modes, which reflects its design as a straightforward snap-and-shoot tool rather than a "creative control" camera.

Ergonomically, the WX500 caters to enthusiasts who want more hands-on exposure tweaking, while the CX2 prioritizes ease and compactness.

Sensor and Image Quality: Pixel Counts, Dynamic Range, and the Reality of Small Sensor Limitations

Let’s break down the heart of any camera - the sensor. Both cameras sport a standard 1/2.3” sensor size measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm (28.07 mm² area), which is pretty typical for compacts. Despite the identical sensor footprint, the imaging results diverge due to differing sensor technologies and resolutions.

Resolution and Detail

• Ricoh CX2: 9MP CMOS sensor, max resolution 3456 x 2592 pixels
• Sony WX500: More resolving power from an 18MP BSI-CMOS sensor, max resolution 4896 x 3672 pixels

Doubling the pixel count on a small sensor isn’t always beneficial - it can increase noise or reduce dynamic range when underexposed. However, Sony’s Back-Side Illuminated (BSI) technology on the WX500 helps capture more light efficiency, offsetting some noise issues.

When pixel-peeping, the WX500 produces noticeably sharper, more detailed images, especially when zoomed in or viewed at 100%. The CX2 images look softer, reflecting its age and older CMOS design.

Color and Dynamic Range

Both cameras have an antialias filter, which slightly softens images to prevent moiré but can also reduce fine details. The CX2’s color reproduction, while decent, tends toward more muted, less vibrant tones compared to the WX500’s punchier, more faithful colors. This owes largely to Sony’s more modern processing engine (Bionz X vs. Ricoh’s Smooth Imaging Engine IV).

Dynamic range - the ability to retain detail in shadows and highlights - is a notorious weak spot for small sensors. Though neither camera matches the capabilities of APS-C or full-frame beasts, the WX500’s newer sensor and processing deliver slightly better tonal gradation in contrasty scenes. The CX2’s images exhibit blocked shadows and brighter highlight blowouts more often in challenging lighting.

ISO and Noise Performance

• Maximum native ISO: CX2 at 1600; WX500 impressively pushes to 12,800 native (though image quality visibly degrades at higher ISOs)

In real-world low light, the WX500 outshines the CX2 in maintaining usable image quality up to ISO 1600 and even 3200 with acceptably mild noise, whereas the CX2’s sensor hits its noise wall beyond ISO 800. If shooting dim interiors or night scenes are part of your routine, Sony’s sensor flexibility wins here.

Display and Interface: Navigating Your Shots Through LCDs and Menus

A nice display can elevate the user experience significantly, especially given the lack of built-in viewfinders on both models.

The CX2 sports a fixed 3-inch, 920k-dot LCD - sharp but not tilting, somewhat limiting your angles. The WX500 also features a 3-inch screen of similar resolution (921k dots) but with a crucial advantage: it tilts upward, great for selfies, vlogging, or creative low/high angle shots.

Neither has a touchscreen, so navigation relies on physical buttons and dials. Sony’s menu is more streamlined and responsive, benefitting from its more recent firmware. Ricoh’s interface feels a bit clunkier, with slower menu navigation and more nested options.

Live View autofocus works reliably on the WX500 with continuous AF and face detection; the CX2 offers contrast-detection AF but lacks face or eye detection, making subject acquisition slower and less assured.

Lens and Zoom Range: Stretching Focal Lengths for Versatility

Superzooms earn their name by packing a massive focal length range into a compact body. Let's see who pushes the limits better.

• Ricoh CX2: 28-300 mm equivalent zoom - 10.7x optical zoom
• Sony WX500: Exceptionally broad 24-720 mm equivalent zoom - 30x optical zoom

The WX500’s gigantic zoom range is a standout - it covers everything from wide landscapes at 24mm to super-telephoto territory at 720mm. This gives immense framing flexibility, especially for wildlife or sports shooters needing to reach distant action without bulky lenses.

Ricoh’s 28-300mm is respectable but less ambitious, favoring a more modest zoom suited for everyday travel and casual shooting.

Maximum apertures are similar across focal lengths: f/3.5 at wide, closing to f/5.6 (CX2) and f/6.4 (WX500) reaching telephoto. The narrower aperture at extreme zoom on the Sony may hamper low light but is a tradeoff for reach.

Macro focusing capabilities differ too - the CX2 excels with a close focus distance as low as 1 cm, enabling impressive macro shots. The WX500’s 5 cm minimum macro distance imposes some limits but remains competent.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Subject Tracking

AF technology decades ago and half a decade later couldn’t be more different.

The Ricoh CX2 relies on contrast-detection autofocus, single-shot only, with no continuous AF or subject tracking. What does this mean in practice? If you’re shooting static scenes like landscapes or posed portraits, it’s adequate. But trying to capture moving subjects or quickly shifting focus becomes frustratingly slow.

By contrast, the Sony WX500 features a modern hybrid autofocus (contrast-detection enhanced by phase detection where applicable), continuous AF, face detection, and even AF tracking. This combination enables confident focus tracking of moving subjects - ideal for wildlife, sports, or street photographers who need speed and accuracy.

The WX500’s AF system generally locks focus within a split second under good light, while the CX2 can take noticeably longer (sometimes a second or two) and occasionally hunts with less predictable results.

Burst Shooting and Shutter

Neither camera breaks any land-speed records, but the WX500 offers a respectable 10 frames per second continuous shooting mode, allowing you to capture decisive moments in action sequences. The CX2 doesn’t offer continuous burst shooting, limiting your ability to freeze motion with rapid-fire frames.

Shutter speed ranges are similar: a max of 1/2000s on both, but the CX2 extends to 8 seconds on the long end versus WX500’s 30 seconds - handy if you’re into long exposures or night photography experimentation.

Video Capabilities: Modest HD vs. VGA - The Sony Advantage

The CX2 video is limited to 640 x 480 pixels at 30 frames per second in Motion JPEG - effectively VGA quality by today’s standards. It’s functional for casual memory capture but won’t satisfy most modern users.

Sony’s WX500 leaps ahead with full HD (1920 x 1080) video recording at multiple frame rates (60p, 60i, 30p, 24p) in more efficient AVCHD and XAVC S codecs. The WX500 delivers noticeably cleaner, smoother video with better color and audio capture.

Neither offers microphone or headphone ports, so audio monitoring is minimal. Both lack 4K support or advanced video features, placing them firmly in casual video shooters’ territory rather than dedicated hybrid cameras.

Stabilization and Handling in the Field

Both compact cameras include image stabilization but use different methods:

• CX2 employs sensor-shift stabilization, helping reduce camera shake across all zoom ranges.
• WX500 uses optical image stabilization (lens-shift), generally more effective, especially at high zoom.

In my field tests, the WX500’s stabilization noticeably reduces blur at full telephoto zoom, allowing usable handheld shots at slower shutter speeds. The CX2 stabilizes well but struggles slightly more at 300mm focal length, especially in lower light.

Ergonomics-wise, the WX500’s additional grip and zoom ring make it easier to hold steady during long shooting sessions.

Battery Life and Connectivity: Staying Powered and Sharing Shots

The WX500 includes a rechargeable Battery Pack (Sony NP-BX1), rated for about 360 shots per charge under CIPA standards. This is decent for a compact but not outstanding. The CX2 uses the DB-70 battery, but Ricoh does not publish official battery life figures for it. Based on my usage, the CX2 lasts roughly on par with the Sony, though fewer shots if using extensive zoom or live view.

On the connectivity front, the CX2 is bereft of wireless options, limiting file transfer to USB 2.0 cable hookups. The WX500 features built-in Wi-Fi with NFC, enabling one-tap pairing to smartphones or tablets for quick sharing and remote camera control - a big usability win for the modern mobile shooter.

Both accept SD or SDHC cards, with the WX500 also compatible with Sony’s proprietary Memory Stick Duo format.

Durability and Weather Resistance

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, waterproofing, or shockproof ratings. Use them as well-protected travel companions rather than rugged outdoor tools.

Pricing and Value: Budget Choices in a Classic vs Modern Frame

Current pricing hovers around $340 for both models (CX2 slightly cheaper), which places them as affordable superzoom compacts.

The Ricoh CX2, despite its age, can tempt buyers with its close macro focus and simple handling at a budget price point. The Sony WX500 demands a small premium but delivers significantly improved sensor resolution, zoom range, autofocus sophistication, Full HD video, and smarter connectivity.

Specialties and Suggested Usage Scenarios

To help you choose, let’s dissect how each camera performs across different photography disciplines:

Portrait Photography

• CX2: Lack of face or eye AF and limited manual control means skin tones and bokeh are passable but not outstanding. The small sensor limits shallow depth-of-field effects.
• WX500: Face detection autofocus greatly aids portraits. Higher resolution captures subtle skin detail. Zoom range accommodates flattering focal lengths. Bokeh is simulated at best but improved due to better lens.

Landscape Photography

• Both cameras share modest 1/2.3" sensors limiting dynamic range and detail compared to larger sensors.
• WX500’s wider zoom (24mm) aids expansive landscapes; tilt screen helps composing creative angles.
• CX2 is more limited at 28mm and fixed screen angle.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

• The WX500’s 720mm zoom, continuous AF, and 10fps burst make it the clear winner for action subjects at a distance.
• CX2 lacks continuous AF and long burst, making it better suited to static subjects.

Street Photography

• Both are relatively discreet; CX2’s smaller size benefits portability.
• WX500’s faster AF and LCD tilt favors capturing fleeting moments.

Macro Photography

• CX2’s minimum focus of 1cm excels for close-up macro shots, producing striking details.
• WX500 lags at 5cm but remains serviceable.

Night and Astro Photography

• Neither camera rivals larger-sensor competitors in noise control or dynamic range.
• WX500’s longer maximum shutter (30s) and better ISO performance provide slight advantages.

Video Use

• Sony WX500 is worth it for users wanting Full HD video.
• Ricoh CX2’s VGA video is very limited.

Travel Photography

• Both compact enough for travel; Sony’s zoom versatility and wireless sharing better suit varied travel needs.

Professional Work

• Neither suits professional RAW workflows or studio-level output.
• WX500’s better image quality and manual controls offer more creative flexibility for serious enthusiasts.

Overall Performance Snapshot: A Visual Scorecard

Bringing all the evaluation scores into focus:

Sony WX500 outperforms the Ricoh CX2 in nearly all key areas - image quality, autofocus speed, zoom range, video, and connectivity - with the CX2 holding its own only in ultra close-up macro work and raw simplicity.

Sample Photos Showcase: How They Stack Up in Real World

Comparing images side-by-side gives the clearest picture.

Ricoh CX2 front Ricoh CX2 screen back Sony WX500 front Sony WX500 screen back

Observe how the WX500 delivers crisper detail, punchier colors, and sharper edges. CX2 photos show warmer tones but softer textures - comfortable for snapshots but less fine fidelity. Zooming in reveals the limitations of the CX2’s lower resolution and older sensor tech.

Final Thoughts and Who Should Pick Which Camera?

Here’s my take after hundreds of side-by-side shots and real-world use:

Choose the Ricoh CX2 if:

• You want a lightweight, pocketable camera that’s easy to use straight out of the box.
• Macro photography is your focus, thanks to the remarkable 1cm close-up ability.
• You prioritize simplicity over manual control or video quality.
• You have a minimal budget and don’t mind older tech for casual shooting.

Choose the Sony WX500 if:

• Image quality, zoom versatility, and autofocus speed are important to you.
• You want Full HD video and wireless connectivity.
• You shoot in varied situations - travel, wildlife, sports, or street photography.
• You enjoy some manual controls and exposure customization.
• You’re ready to pay a modest premium for a substantial feature upgrade.

In Conclusion: Small Sensor Superzoom Showdown

While it’s tempting to dismiss the Ricoh CX2 as an old compact caught in smartphone’s shadow, it’s still a charming, competent little camera for basic superzoom needs with excellent macro skills. The Sony WX500, meanwhile, feels like the savvy evolution - packing more pixels, punchier videos, and zoom range you can actually get excited about.

Both have a place, really - if you want a fun travel companion with no fuss, Ricoh’s little gem fits the bill. If you want more control, better image quality, and modern conveniences, Sony’s WX500 is the smarter buy.

The real magic lies in what fits your shooting style best. Hope this comparison helps you pull the lens cap back and find your perfect superzoom companion.

Happy shooting!