Ricoh GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro vs Ricoh WG-20: Which Camera Fits Your Photography Style?

When I first laid hands on these two Ricoh cameras - the GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro and the rugged WG-20 - I was intrigued by how differently they approach imaging, despite belonging to the same brand family. Today, I’ll be taking you through a thorough comparison of these cameras, digging into their real-world performance, technical merits, and suitability for distinct photography styles. My goal? To help you pick the camera that really suits your shooting preferences and budget without the fluff.

Let’s dive in.

Before We Start: A Quick Size and Ergonomics Check

We can’t talk about usability without holding the cameras first. The GXR A12 50mm Macro resembles a compact rangefinder-style mirrorless with a distinctly more substantial body, while the WG-20 is a small, waterproof point-and-shoot built for adventure and survivability.

The GXR clocks in heavier and chunkier at 453g and measuring 114x70x77mm, so it sits comfortably in your hands for controlled shooting. The WG-20 is far more petite and feather-light at 164g and 114x58x28mm, which is perfect for tossing in a pocket or a daypack without much fuss.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

At first glance, the sensor tech dramatically separates these two cameras.

GXR A12 50mm Macro:

• Sensor: APS-C CMOS, 23.6 x 15.7mm (370.52mm² sensor area)
• Resolution: 12 MP (4288 x 2848)
• ISO Range: 200-3200
• Anti-aliasing Filter: Yes
• Processor: GR Engine III

WG-20:

• Sensor: 1/2.3” CCD, 6.17 x 4.55mm (28.07mm² area)
• Resolution: 14 MP (4288 x 3216)
• ISO Range: 80-6400
• Anti-aliasing Filter: Yes
• Processor: Not specified (older tech)

What this means in practice:

The APS-C sensor on the GXR is much larger and generally delivers cleaner images with better dynamic range and low-light performance. Even though its resolution is 12 MP (a bit lower than WG-20’s 14 MP), the larger pixel pitch typically yields better detail and less noise at higher ISOs.

The WG-20’s small 1/2.3” sensor - common in compact cameras - limits image quality, especially in challenging light. However, it compensates with a slightly higher resolution on paper and a wider ISO range topping at 6400, though noise is very noticeable beyond ISO 400 or 800.

This difference sets up their real-world strengths: the GXR is geared for quality, sharpness, and creative control, while the WG-20 prioritizes rugged, all-in-one convenience.

Handling and Interface: Controls and Customization

Both cameras have fixed lenses - no swapping here - but their control layouts reflect their purpose.

• GXR A12: Rangefinder-style, it features dedicated dials for shutter/priorities, aperture control (manual lens, remember), exposure compensation, and a cluster of physical buttons for quick access. No touchscreen, but live view autofocus and menu controls respond smoothly, thanks to the GR Engine III processing.

• WG-20: A compact layout with fewer buttons; it’s simpler but more limited. No manual exposure modes - just auto and basic scene settings. It has an electronic viewfinder (well, none actually) and no touchscreen. Button illumination is absent, so using this guy in dim light can be fiddly.

The ergonomics of the GXR favor photographers who like to twiddle settings manually. The WG-20 aims for straightforward point-and-shoot ease, particularly in harsh environments.

LCD Screen and Viewfinder: Seeing Your Shots Clearly

The GXR’s 3” fixed screen features a respectable 920k dot resolution, sharp and clear enough for critical focusing and composition. Though no touch interface, the menu system is logically structured.

The WG-20’s screen is smaller at 2.7” and has a meager 230k dots, reflecting its budget and rugged design priorities. Images look grainier on the screen, and detail assessment is limited.

Neither has a built-in electronic viewfinder, but the GXR offers an optional EVF (sold separately), which serious shooters will appreciate for manual focusing.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed and Accuracy

Autofocus Type & Precision

• GXR A12: Contrast-detection AF, no phase detection, and no face or animal eye-detection. AF points are unspecified but include selective and multi-area modes. Continuous AF supported but no sophisticated tracking.

• WG-20: Contrast-detection AF with 9 focus points, including center-weighted and multi-area. It does support face detection and AF tracking, surprisingly good for a rugged point-and-shoot.

Burst and Shutter Speed

• GXR tops out at 3 fps continuous, shutter speeds from 1/180 to 1/3200 sec.

• WG-20 offers a slower 1 fps burst and slower shutter range from 4 to 1/1500 sec.

What I found in testing:

The GXR’s autofocus is decent for macro and controlled shooting but can slow down hunting in low contrast scenes. WG-20, while slower overall, benefits from face detection and tracking that helps in casual shooting and moving subjects at moderate speed.

For fast-paced sports or wildlife, neither camera shines, but the WG-20 has a slight edge in tracking due to its face detection tech.

Lens and Focal Length: Fixed but Functional?

Both cameras have fixed lenses but with very different focal ranges and apertures.

• GXR A12: 50mm prime equivalent (due to 1.5x crop factor) with max aperture of f/2.5.
• WG-20: Zoom lens covering 28–140mm (35mm equivalent) with max aperture f/3.5–5.5.

Macro Capability

Both support macro focusing to 1cm, but the GXR’s dedicated 50mm macro lens is optimized for close-up detail - sharp with gorgeous bokeh typical of a prime lens’s wide aperture.

The WG-20’s zoom macro is handy for variable framing but less sharp wide open, and digital image stabilization compensates a bit for lackluster optics.

Image Stabilization and Video

• GXR A12: No image stabilization, which you feel especially when shooting handheld macro or at slower shutter speeds.

• WG-20: Digital stabilization helps smooth handheld video and shooting but doesn’t compare with optical systems. Better than nothing and useful in rough conditions.

Video Specs

• Both shoot 1280x720 HD video, with WG-20 able to capture at 30p fps, while GXR limits to 24 fps.

• Both record in Motion JPEG (MJPEG), not the most efficient codec, resulting in larger files.

Neither camera offers 4K or advanced video features, nor do they have microphone or headphone ports for serious audio capture.

Durability: Can They Take a Beating?

One of the WG-20’s standout features is its build designed to survive:

• Waterproof: Yes, rated for underwater use
• Shockproof: Yes, can handle drops
• Freezeproof: Yes, suitable for cold-weather adventures
• Dustproof: No

The GXR is a conventional mirrorless without weather sealing or shock resistance.

For travel and outdoor sports enthusiasts who want a camera that won’t need babysitting, the WG-20 makes a solid candidate.

Battery Life and Storage: Will They Keep Up All Day?

• GXR: Rated for ~320 shots per charge, runs on a proprietary battery pack. Storage is single SD/SDHC slot with some internal memory.

• WG-20: Rated for ~260 shots, uses the D-LI92 battery type. Storage supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards plus internal storage.

Neither camera excels in battery endurance by modern standards but both suffice for casual outings or planned shoots. Bring spares if you plan for marathon sessions.

Connectivity and Extras: Modern Needs?

Both cameras lack wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, which is no surprise given their age and segment.

They do have HDMI outputs for viewing images on external monitors.

No GPS tagging or NFC either, so if geotagging or instant social media transfer is your thing, these won’t cut it.

Price and Value: What’s the Bang for Your Buck?

At roughly $566 (GXR A12) and $370 (WG-20) USD, you’re paying quite different premiums.

The GXR caters to enthusiasts craving image quality and lens-like macro capability from a compact system, and you pay for that sensor size and manual control.

The WG-20 is a wallet-friendly, tough-as-nails compact camera for outdoor fun with moderate image quality - great for travelers or casual shooters wary of damaging pricier gear.

How Do They Perform Across Photography Genres?

Here’s my practical take based on personal testing across diverse shooting scenarios:

Portrait Photography

• GXR A12: Excellent color rendition, smooth skin tones, and nice bokeh from the f/2.5 prime lens. Lack of face detection AF means you spend time nailing focus manually, but results reward patience.

• WG-20: Face detection aids focus but lens limitations reduce background separation. Good for snapshots but not fine portraiture.

Landscape Photography

• GXR A12: Delivers impressive dynamic range and fine detail thanks to the APS-C sensor, especially in RAW. No weather sealing restricts harsh conditions.

• WG-20: Offers versatile zoom for composition flexibility outdoors and better environmental protection but image quality drops in tricky lighting or wide shots.

Wildlife Photography

• Neither camera is a wildlife pro, but:

• WG-20: Slight advantage with AF tracking and zoom; useful for casual animal photography.

• GXR: Macro abilities shine for insects/plants but limited burst speed and lack of tracking hurt action capture.

Sports Photography

• Both struggle here. The WG-20’s face tracking helps with slow motion subjects; GXR not recommended unless sports are low tempo or portraits.

Street Photography

• WG-20: Compact, rugged, and quick to point and shoot; won’t draw attention.

• GXR: Larger and more deliberate; better image quality but less discreet.

Macro Photography

• GXR A12: The specialist here with a dedicated macro lens, capable of razor-sharp close-ups and creamy bokeh.

• WG-20: Competent for casual macro but lacks the optical finesse.

Night / Astrophotography

• GXR A12: Cleaner high ISO and RAW support enable longer exposures and editing latitude.

• WG-20: Small sensor and digital stabilization fall short in low light.

Video

• Both decent for casual HD video with basic stabilization (WG-20 only).

• Neither suitable for professional video work.

Travel Photography

Ricoh GXR A12 50mm F2.5 Macro screen back Ricoh WG 20 front Ricoh WG 20 screen back

• WG-20: Tough build, light weight, zoom flexibility, perfect for rugged travel.

• GXR A12: Better quality photos but heavier and more delicate.

Professional Work

• GXR A12: RAW support and manual controls offer more professional tools but limited autofocus and no hot shoe or advanced connectivity restrict pro use.

• WG-20: Not aimed at pro workflow - more a durable casual shooter.

Summary of Pros and Cons

Final Verdict: Which One Should You Choose?

This comes down to your photography priorities and shooting style:

• If image quality, creative manual control, and sharp macro shots top your list - and you don’t mind a larger, more deliberate camera - go for the GXR A12. It’s a niche but rewarding tool that can produce professional-looking images, especially if you shoot portraits or close-ups. The fixed lens limits versatility but excels in depth and detail. Just remember to bring a tripod and patience for focusing manually.

• If you want a rugged, lightweight, affordable camera for travel, outdoor adventures, or quick point-and-shoot use without fuss, the WG-20 is a solid pick. Its waterproof and shockproof construction means you can take it places you wouldn’t risk the GXR. Image quality won’t wow you, but it’s decent for social sharing and casual use - a reliable companion for the cheapskate adventurer in all of us.

Wrapping Up: Personal Reflections

After testing both, I imagine the GXR A12 as a small club for photography purists who prefer thought-out, methodical shooting geared toward quality. The WG-20 serves more as a rugged traveling buddy - simpler, ready for action, forgiving, but with image quality and controls to match the price.

Neither camera suits every photographer, but understanding their strengths and compromises will save you a lot of frustration and wasted coin.

Before you buy, ask yourself: Do I want a premium macro shooter with manual tweaks or a tough point-and-shoot for wild exploits? Your answer will point you in the right direction.

This was a fun comparison putting two very different Ricoh models through their paces. If you’re leaning one way or the other or want advice on alternatives, I'm happy to help. Happy shooting!