Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F
92 Imaging
34 Features
35 Overall
34
92 Imaging
40 Features
51 Overall
44
Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-300mm (F3.5-5.6) lens
- 206g - 102 x 58 x 29mm
- Introduced June 2010
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 100 - 3200
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 23-483mm (F2.8-5.9) lens
- 218g - 111 x 65 x 22mm
- Launched January 2013
Body cameras now worn by bakery staff to deter stealing Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Overview
Its time to take a more detailed look at the Ricoh CX3 versus Samsung WB800F, both Small Sensor Superzoom digital cameras by competitors Ricoh and Samsung. There exists a sizable gap between the sensor resolutions of the CX3 (10MP) and WB800F (16MP) but they possess the exact same sensor size (1/2.3").
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banThe CX3 was unveiled 3 years prior to the WB800F and that is quite a significant difference as far as technology is concerned. Each of the cameras come with the identical body type (Compact).
Before going straight into a thorough comparison, below is a concise overview of how the CX3 scores vs the WB800F with regards to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music video Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Gallery
Below is a preview of the gallery images for Ricoh CX3 & Samsung WB800F. The full galleries are available at Ricoh CX3 Gallery & Samsung WB800F Gallery.
Reasons to pick Ricoh CX3 over the Samsung WB800F
| CX3 | WB800F | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Screen resolution | 920k |  | 460k | Sharper screen (+460k dot) |
Reasons to pick Samsung WB800F over the Ricoh CX3
| WB800F | CX3 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Launched | January 2013 |  | June 2010 | More recent by 31 months |
| Touch screen |  | Quickly navigate |
Common features in the Ricoh CX3 and Samsung WB800F
| CX3 | WB800F | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual focus |  | Dial precise focus | ||
| Screen type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed screen |
| Screen dimension | 3" |  | 3" | Identical screen size |
| Selfie screen |  | Lack of selfie screen |
Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Physical Comparison
If you're going to lug around your camera, you will need to think about its weight and volume. The Ricoh CX3 features external dimensions of 102mm x 58mm x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") accompanied by a weight of 206 grams (0.45 lbs) and the Samsung WB800F has sizing of 111mm x 65mm x 22mm (4.4" x 2.6" x 0.9") having a weight of 218 grams (0.48 lbs).
Examine the Ricoh CX3 versus Samsung WB800F in our newest Camera & Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Remember that, the weight of an ILC will change depending on the lens you are utilising at that time. Below is the front view size comparison of the CX3 vs the WB800F.
Using dimensions and weight, the portability score of the CX3 and WB800F is 92 and 92 respectively.
Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Sensor Comparison
Sometimes, it is very tough to envision the contrast between sensor measurements simply by checking specifications. The graphic below will provide you a stronger sense of the sensor sizes in the CX3 and WB800F.
Plainly, both of those cameras have got the exact same sensor measurements albeit not the same megapixels. You can expect the Samsung WB800F to give greater detail having an extra 6 Megapixels. Higher resolution will make it easier to crop photographs much more aggressively. The older CX3 is going to be behind with regard to sensor technology.
Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Screen and ViewFinder
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firms Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesStreet Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneSports Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthTravel Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modesLandscape Comparison
Photography GlossaryVlogging Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD Cards
Ricoh CX3 vs Samsung WB800F Specifications
| Ricoh CX3 | Samsung WB800F | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Brand Name | Ricoh | Samsung |
| Model | Ricoh CX3 | Samsung WB800F |
| Type | Small Sensor Superzoom | Small Sensor Superzoom |
| Introduced | 2010-06-16 | 2013-01-07 |
| Physical type | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Chip | Smooth Imaging Engine IV | - |
| Sensor type | BSI-CMOS | BSI-CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor measurements | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 10 megapixels | 16 megapixels |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3 and 3:2 | - |
| Maximum resolution | 3648 x 2736 | 4608 x 3456 |
| Maximum native ISO | 3200 | 3200 |
| Min native ISO | 80 | 100 |
| RAW support | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch focus | ||
| Continuous AF | ||
| AF single | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| AF selectice | ||
| AF center weighted | ||
| AF multi area | ||
| Live view AF | ||
| Face detect AF | ||
| Contract detect AF | ||
| Phase detect AF | ||
| Cross focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens focal range | 28-300mm (10.7x) | 23-483mm (21.0x) |
| Largest aperture | f/3.5-5.6 | f/2.8-5.9 |
| Macro focus distance | 1cm | - |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Type of display | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Display diagonal | 3 inches | 3 inches |
| Resolution of display | 920k dots | 460k dots |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch screen | ||
| Display tech | - | TFT LCD |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Lowest shutter speed | 8 secs | 16 secs |
| Highest shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | 1/2000 secs |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manual mode | ||
| Exposure compensation | - | Yes |
| Change WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash range | 4.00 m | - |
| Flash modes | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Slow Sync | - |
| Hot shoe | ||
| AE bracketing | ||
| White balance bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Supported video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) | 1920 x 1080 (30 fps), 1280 x 720 (30, 15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (30, 15fps) |
| Maximum video resolution | 1280x720 | 1920x1080 |
| Video data format | Motion JPEG | MPEG-4, H.264 |
| Microphone support | ||
| Headphone support | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | Built-In |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment sealing | ||
| Water proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 206 gr (0.45 lbs) | 218 gr (0.48 lbs) |
| Dimensions | 102 x 58 x 29mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 1.1") | 111 x 65 x 22mm (4.4" x 2.6" x 0.9") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light score | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery model | DB-100 | - |
| Self timer | Yes (2, 10 or Custom) | Yes |
| Time lapse shooting | ||
| Storage type | SD/SDHC card, Internal | SD/SDHC/SDXC |
| Card slots | 1 | 1 |
| Price at launch | $329 | $300 |
