Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205
91 Imaging
41 Features
34 Overall
38
![Ricoh WG-30 front Ricoh WG-30 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Ricoh-WG-30/Ricoh-WG-30-front.jpg)
![Samsung TL205 front Samsung TL205 front](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/cameras/gallery/medium/Samsung-TL205/Samsung-TL205-front.jpg)
94 Imaging
35 Features
17 Overall
27
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 125 - 6400
- Digital Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-140mm (F3.5-5.5) lens
- 192g - 123 x 62 x 30mm
- Released October 2014
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 3200
- 1280 x 720 video
- 35-105mm (F3.0-5.6) lens
- 177g - 99 x 59 x 20mm
- Introduced January 2010
- Additionally Known as PL100
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/samsung-evo-microsd-cards-featur-218x150.jpg)
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Overview
Its time to examine more closely at the Ricoh WG-30 versus Samsung TL205, one being a Waterproof and the other is a Ultracompact by brands Ricoh and Samsung. There exists a sizeable gap between the image resolutions of the WG-30 (16MP) and TL205 (12MP) but they feature the exact same sensor size (1/2.3").
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/No-Surprise-Pentax-17-Pre-Orders-218x150.jpg)
The WG-30 was introduced 4 years later than the TL205 and that is quite a large gap as far as technology is concerned. Both cameras come with different body type with the Ricoh WG-30 being a Compact camera and the Samsung TL205 being a Ultracompact camera.
Before getting straight into a in-depth comparison, below is a brief summary of how the WG-30 matches up vs the TL205 for portability, imaging, features and an overall rating.
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/LP3_cut_13f_0212-218x150.jpg)
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Gallery
Following is a sample of the gallery pictures for Ricoh WG-30 and Samsung TL205. The whole galleries are provided at Ricoh WG-30 Gallery and Samsung TL205 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-30 over the Samsung TL205
WG-30 | TL205 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Introduced | October 2014 | ![]() | January 2010 | Fresher by 58 months |
Reasons to pick Samsung TL205 over the Ricoh WG-30
TL205 | WG-30 |
---|
Common features in the Ricoh WG-30 and Samsung TL205
WG-30 | TL205 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Focus manually | ![]() | Lack of manual focusing | ||
Display type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed display |
Display dimension | 2.7" | ![]() | 2.7" | Identical display size |
Display resolution | 230k | ![]() | 230k | The same display resolution |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Lacking selfie screen | ||
Touch friendly display | ![]() | Lacking Touch friendly display |
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Physical Comparison
If you are going to carry your camera, you'll have to factor its weight and volume. The Ricoh WG-30 provides physical dimensions of 123mm x 62mm x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") accompanied by a weight of 192 grams (0.42 lbs) whilst the Samsung TL205 has sizing of 99mm x 59mm x 20mm (3.9" x 2.3" x 0.8") accompanied by a weight of 177 grams (0.39 lbs).
Check the Ricoh WG-30 versus Samsung TL205 in the new Camera with Lens Size Comparison Tool.![Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses](https://pxlmag.com/db/assets/camera-size-comparison-animation.gif)
Remember, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will vary dependant on the lens you have chosen at the time. Here is the front view scale comparison of the WG-30 vs the TL205.
![Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 size comparison Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Ricoh-WG-30-vs-Samsung-TL205-size-comparison.jpg)
Taking into consideration dimensions and weight, the portability score of the WG-30 and TL205 is 91 and 94 respectively.
![Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 top view buttons comparison Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 top view buttons comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Ricoh-WG-30-vs-Samsung-TL205-top-view-buttons-comparison.jpg)
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Sensor Comparison
Normally, it can be tough to envision the difference between sensor sizing purely by checking a spec sheet. The photograph underneath will help offer you a stronger sense of the sensor sizes in the WG-30 and TL205.
Clearly, both of the cameras posses the exact same sensor measurements but not the same resolution. You should anticipate the Ricoh WG-30 to give more detail using its extra 4 Megapixels. Greater resolution will enable you to crop pics somewhat more aggressively. The more recent WG-30 will have an advantage with regard to sensor innovation.
![Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 sensor size comparison Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 sensor size comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/sensor-compare/Ricoh-WG-30-vs-Samsung-TL205-sensor-size-comparison.png)
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Screen and ViewFinder
![Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Screen and Viewfinder comparison](https://pxlmag.com/db/images/camera-compare/Ricoh-WG-30-vs-Samsung-TL205-screen-back-comparison.jpg)
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Approach-to-AI-Generated-Content-218x150.jpg)
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/maxresdefault-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/snapchat-218x150.jpg)
Travel Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/tiktok-218x150.jpg)
Landscape Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/iphone-optical-stabilization-218x150.jpg)
Vlogging Comparison
![](https://pxlmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/ai-licence-218x150.jpg)
Ricoh WG-30 vs Samsung TL205 Specifications
Ricoh WG-30 | Samsung TL205 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Make | Ricoh | Samsung |
Model type | Ricoh WG-30 | Samsung TL205 |
Alternate name | - | PL100 |
Category | Waterproof | Ultracompact |
Released | 2014-10-09 | 2010-01-06 |
Body design | Compact | Ultracompact |
Sensor Information | ||
Sensor type | CMOS | CCD |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor measurements | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.08 x 4.56mm |
Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 27.7mm² |
Sensor resolution | 16 megapixels | 12 megapixels |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3 and 16:9 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
Peak resolution | 4608 x 3456 | 4000 x 3000 |
Highest native ISO | 6400 | 3200 |
Minimum native ISO | 125 | 80 |
RAW images | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Manual focusing | ||
Touch to focus | ||
Continuous AF | ||
Single AF | ||
Tracking AF | ||
AF selectice | ||
Center weighted AF | ||
AF multi area | ||
Live view AF | ||
Face detection AF | ||
Contract detection AF | ||
Phase detection AF | ||
Total focus points | 9 | - |
Lens | ||
Lens mount type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 28-140mm (5.0x) | 35-105mm (3.0x) |
Maximum aperture | f/3.5-5.5 | f/3.0-5.6 |
Macro focusing range | 1cm | 10cm |
Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.9 |
Screen | ||
Range of screen | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen size | 2.7" | 2.7" |
Resolution of screen | 230 thousand dot | 230 thousand dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch display | ||
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Minimum shutter speed | 4 seconds | 8 seconds |
Fastest shutter speed | 1/4000 seconds | 1/1500 seconds |
Continuous shutter speed | 1.0 frames/s | - |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Manual exposure | ||
Change WB | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Built-in flash | ||
Flash distance | 3.90 m (Auto ISO) | 3.40 m |
Flash options | Auto, flash off, flash on, auto + redeye | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in, Slow Sync |
External flash | ||
AEB | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment metering | ||
Average metering | ||
Spot metering | ||
Partial metering | ||
AF area metering | ||
Center weighted metering | ||
Video features | ||
Supported video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 720 | 1280 x 720 (30, 15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (60, 30 fps) |
Highest video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1280x720 |
Video data format | H.264 | Motion JPEG |
Microphone input | ||
Headphone input | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | None | None |
Bluetooth | ||
NFC | ||
HDMI | ||
USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
GPS | None | None |
Physical | ||
Environment seal | ||
Water proofing | ||
Dust proofing | ||
Shock proofing | ||
Crush proofing | ||
Freeze proofing | ||
Weight | 192 grams (0.42 pounds) | 177 grams (0.39 pounds) |
Dimensions | 123 x 62 x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") | 99 x 59 x 20mm (3.9" x 2.3" x 0.8") |
DXO scores | ||
DXO Overall 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 images | - |
Battery format | Battery Pack | - |
Battery ID | D-LI92 | - |
Self timer | Yes | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Double, Motion) |
Time lapse feature | ||
Storage media | SD/SDHC/SDXC, internal | MicroSD/ MicroSDHC, SD/SDHC Internal |
Storage slots | Single | Single |
Price at release | $428 | $180 |