Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W
90 Imaging
40 Features
43 Overall
41
90 Imaging
34 Features
31 Overall
32
Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 125 - 6400
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 25-100mm (F2.0-4.9) lens
- 235g - 124 x 64 x 33mm
- Launched February 2014
- Updated by Ricoh WG-5 GPS
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-240mm (F3.3-5.8) lens
- 249g - 105 x 61 x 37mm
- Revealed February 2009
- Also Known as WB550
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a Landslide Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Overview
Its time to take a closer look at the Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W, former being a Waterproof while the other is a Small Sensor Compact by manufacturers Ricoh and Samsung. There exists a large gap among the resolutions of the WG-4 GPS (16MP) and HZ15W (12MP) but both cameras have the same sensor size (1/2.3").
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firmsThe WG-4 GPS was brought out 5 years later than the HZ15W and that is a fairly serious difference as far as camera technology is concerned. The two cameras have the same body design (Compact).
Before diving into a in depth comparison, here is a brief synopsis of how the WG-4 GPS matches up versus the HZ15W with regard to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Gallery
Following is a sample of the gallery pictures for Ricoh WG-4 GPS & Samsung HZ15W. The entire galleries are viewable at Ricoh WG-4 GPS Gallery & Samsung HZ15W Gallery.
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-4 GPS over the Samsung HZ15W
| WG-4 GPS | HZ15W | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revealed | February 2014 |  | February 2009 | More recent by 61 months |
Reasons to pick Samsung HZ15W over the Ricoh WG-4 GPS
| HZ15W | WG-4 GPS |
|---|
Common features in the Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Samsung HZ15W
| WG-4 GPS | HZ15W | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual focus |  | More accurate focusing | ||
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Display dimensions | 3" |  | 3" | Equal display size |
| Display resolution | 460k |  | 460k | Same display resolution |
| Selfie screen |  | Neither offers selfie screen | ||
| Touch friendly display |  | Neither offers Touch friendly display |
Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Physical Comparison
When you are planning to lug around your camera regularly, you have to factor its weight and measurements. The Ricoh WG-4 GPS offers exterior measurements of 124mm x 64mm x 33mm (4.9" x 2.5" x 1.3") with a weight of 235 grams (0.52 lbs) whilst the Samsung HZ15W has proportions of 105mm x 61mm x 37mm (4.1" x 2.4" x 1.5") having a weight of 249 grams (0.55 lbs).
Examine the Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W in our brand new Camera plus Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Bear in mind, the weight of an ILC will differ depending on the lens you are utilising at the time. Following is a front view dimensions comparison of the WG-4 GPS and the HZ15W.
Factoring in dimensions and weight, the portability score of the WG-4 GPS and HZ15W is 90 and 90 respectively.
Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Sensor Comparison
Typically, it is difficult to visualise the contrast in sensor measurements only by researching specs. The graphic below should offer you a better sense of the sensor measurements in the WG-4 GPS and HZ15W.
All in all, both cameras have the same sensor dimensions but not the same megapixels. You can anticipate the Ricoh WG-4 GPS to result in more detail having its extra 4 Megapixels. Greater resolution will also enable you to crop images a bit more aggressively. The fresher WG-4 GPS is going to have an edge with regard to sensor technology.
Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Screen and ViewFinder
Photography Glossary Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthStreet Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsSports Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesTravel Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneLandscape Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoVlogging Comparison
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or ban
Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Samsung HZ15W Specifications
| Ricoh WG-4 GPS | Samsung HZ15W | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Manufacturer | Ricoh | Samsung |
| Model | Ricoh WG-4 GPS | Samsung HZ15W |
| Also called as | - | WB550 |
| Class | Waterproof | Small Sensor Compact |
| Launched | 2014-02-05 | 2009-02-23 |
| Physical type | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Sensor type | BSI-CMOS | CCD |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.08 x 4.56mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 27.7mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 16 megapixels | 12 megapixels |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3 and 16:9 | 16:9, 4:3 and 3:2 |
| Maximum resolution | 4608 x 3456 | 4000 x 3000 |
| Maximum native ISO | 6400 | 3200 |
| Lowest native ISO | 125 | 80 |
| RAW format | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Autofocus touch | ||
| Autofocus continuous | ||
| Autofocus single | ||
| Autofocus tracking | ||
| Autofocus selectice | ||
| Center weighted autofocus | ||
| Multi area autofocus | ||
| Live view autofocus | ||
| Face detect autofocus | ||
| Contract detect autofocus | ||
| Phase detect autofocus | ||
| Number of focus points | 9 | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mount | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens focal range | 25-100mm (4.0x) | 24-240mm (10.0x) |
| Highest aperture | f/2.0-4.9 | f/3.3-5.8 |
| Macro focus distance | 1cm | 5cm |
| Focal length multiplier | 5.8 | 5.9 |
| Screen | ||
| Display type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Display size | 3" | 3" |
| Resolution of display | 460 thousand dots | 460 thousand dots |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch operation | ||
| Display technology | TFT LCD | - |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder type | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 4 seconds | 16 seconds |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/4000 seconds | 1/2000 seconds |
| Continuous shooting rate | 2.0 frames per sec | - |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Expose Manually | ||
| Custom white balance | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Inbuilt flash | ||
| Flash range | 10.00 m (Auto ISO) | 4.70 m |
| Flash options | Auto, flash off, flash on, auto + redeye, on + redeye | Auto, Auto & Red-eye reduction, Fill-in flash, Slow sync, Flash off, Red eye fix |
| Hot shoe | ||
| Auto exposure bracketing | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 720 (60p, 30p) | 1280 x 720 (30, 15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 15 fps), 320 x 240 (60, 30, 15 fps) |
| Maximum video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1280x720 |
| Video format | H.264 | Motion JPEG |
| Mic support | ||
| Headphone support | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | None |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | BuiltIn | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environmental sealing | ||
| Water proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 235 gr (0.52 lb) | 249 gr (0.55 lb) |
| Physical dimensions | 124 x 64 x 33mm (4.9" x 2.5" x 1.3") | 105 x 61 x 37mm (4.1" x 2.4" x 1.5") |
| 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 life | 240 shots | - |
| Style of battery | Battery Pack | - |
| Battery model | D-LI92 | - |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 secs) | Yes (10 sec, 2 sec, Double, Motion Timer) |
| Time lapse recording | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC, internal | SC/SDHC/MMC/MMCplus, internal |
| Card slots | 1 | 1 |
| Cost at launch | $210 | $330 |