Fujifilm XQ2 vs Ricoh WG-60
The Fujifilm XQ2 and the Ricoh WG-60 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2015 and October 2018. Both the XQ2 and the WG-60 are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a 2/3 (XQ2) and a 1/2.3-inch (WG-60) sensor. The Fujifilm has a resolution of 12 megapixels, whereas the Ricoh provides 15.9 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Fujifilm XQ2 and the Ricoh WG-60? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
The physical size and weight of the Fujifilm XQ2 and the Ricoh WG-60 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The XQ2 can be obtained in three different colors (black, silver, white), while the WG-60 is available in two color-versions (black, red).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Ricoh WG-60 is notably larger (29 percent) than the Fujifilm XQ2. However, the WG-60 is markedly lighter (6 percent) than the XQ2. It is noteworthy in this context that the WG-60 is splash and dust-proof, while the XQ2 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the WG-60 is water-proof up to 14m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.
|1.||Fujifilm XQ2||100 mm||59 mm||33 mm||206 g||240||n||Jan 2015||399|
|2.||Ricoh WG-60||123 mm||62 mm||30 mm||193 g||300||Y||Oct 2018||279|
|3.||Canon S120||100 mm||59 mm||29 mm||217 g||230||n||Aug 2013||449|
|4.||Fujifilm XP140||110 mm||71 mm||28 mm||207 g||240||Y||Feb 2019||229|
|5.||Fujifilm XP130||110 mm||71 mm||28 mm||207 g||240||n||Jan 2018||229|
|6.||Fujifilm XP120||110 mm||71 mm||28 mm||203 g||210||Y||Jan 2017||229|
|7.||Fujifilm X70||113 mm||64 mm||44 mm||340 g||330||n||Jan 2016||799|
|8.||Fujifilm X-A3||117 mm||67 mm||40 mm||339 g||410||n||Aug 2016||399|
|9.||Fujifilm X-A10||117 mm||67 mm||40 mm||331 g||410||n||Dec 2016||399|
|10.||Fujifilm X30||119 mm||72 mm||60 mm||423 g||470||n||Aug 2014||599|
|11.||Fujifilm X20||117 mm||70 mm||57 mm||353 g||270||n||Jan 2013||599|
|12.||Fujifilm XQ1||100 mm||59 mm||33 mm||206 g||240||n||Oct 2013||499|
|13.||Fujifilm X10||117 mm||70 mm||57 mm||350 g||270||n||Sep 2011||599|
|14.||Nikon W300||112 mm||66 mm||29 mm||231 g||280||Y||May 2017||389|
|15.||Sony WX800||102 mm||58 mm||36 mm||233 g||370||n||Oct 2018||399|
|16.||Sony HX80||102 mm||58 mm||36 mm||245 g||390||n||Mar 2016||349|
|17.||Sony HX90V||102 mm||58 mm||36 mm||245 g||360||n||Apr 2015||429|
|Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.|
The price is, of course, an important factor in any camera decision. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The WG-60 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 30 percent) than the XQ2, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Fujifilm XQ2 features a 2/3 sensor and the Ricoh WG-60 a 1/2.3-inch sensor. The sensor area in the WG-60 is 52 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 3.9 and 5.6. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the WG-60 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 12 MP of the XQ2. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.33μm versus 2.20μm for the XQ2). However, it should be noted that the WG-60 is much more recent (by 3 years and 9 months) than the XQ2, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Ricoh WG-60 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the WG-60 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 23 x 17.3 inches or 58.5 x 43.9 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 18.4 x 13.8 inches or 46.8 x 35.1 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 15.4 x 11.5 inches or 39 x 29.3 cm. The corresponding values for the Fujifilm XQ2 are 20 x 15 inches or 50.8 x 38.1 cm for good quality, 16 x 12 inches or 40.6 x 30.5 cm for very good quality, and 13.3 x 10 inches or 33.9 x 25.4 cm for excellent quality prints.
The XQ2 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
The Fujifilm XQ2 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 12800. The corresponding ISO settings for the Ricoh WG-60 are ISO 125 to ISO 6400 (no boost).
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration have a sensor with sufficiently fast read-out times for moving pictures, but the XQ2 provides a higher frame rate than the WG-60. It can shoot video footage at 1080/60p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/60p.
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. The XQ2 and the WG-60 are similar in the sense that neither of the two has a viewfinder. The images are, thus, framed using live view on the rear LCD. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Fujifilm XQ2 and Ricoh WG-60 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
|1.||Fujifilm XQ2||none||n||3.0 / 920||fixed||n||1/4000s||12.0/s||Y||Y|
|2.||Ricoh WG-60||none||n||2.7 / 230||fixed||n||1/4000s||8.0/s||Y||n|
|3.||Canon S120||none||n||3.0 / 922||fixed||Y||1/2000s||12.1/s||Y||Y|
|4.||Fujifilm XP140||none||n||3.0 / 920||fixed||n||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|5.||Fujifilm XP130||none||n||3.0 / 920||fixed||n||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|6.||Fujifilm XP120||none||n||3.0 / 920||fixed||n||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|7.||Fujifilm X70||optional||n||3.0 / 1040||tilting||Y||1/4000s||8.0/s||Y||n|
|8.||Fujifilm X-A3||none||n||3.0 / 1040||tilting||Y||1/4000s||6.0/s||Y||n|
|9.||Fujifilm X-A10||none||n||3.0 / 1040||tilting||n||1/4000s||6.0/s||Y||n|
|10.||Fujifilm X30||2360||n||3.0 / 920||tilting||n||1/4000s||12.0/s||Y||Y|
|11.||Fujifilm X20||optical||n||2.8 / 460||fixed||n||1/4000s||12.0/s||Y||Y|
|12.||Fujifilm XQ1||none||n||3.0 / 920||fixed||n||1/4000s||12.0/s||Y||Y|
|13.||Fujifilm X10||optical||n||2.8 / 460||fixed||n||1/4000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|14.||Nikon W300||none||n||3.0 / 921||fixed||n||1/4000s||7.0/s||Y||Y|
|15.||Sony WX800||none||n||3.0 / 922||tilting||Y||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|16.||Sony HX80||638||n||3.0 / 922||tilting||n||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|17.||Sony HX90V||638||n||3.0 / 921||tilting||n||1/2000s||10.0/s||Y||Y|
|Notes: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.|
The Ricoh WG-60 has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.
Both the XQ2 and the WG-60 have zoom lenses built in. The XQ2 has a 25-100mm f/1.8-4.9 optic and the WG-60 offers a 28-140mm f/3.5-5.5 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the Fujifilm provides a wider angle of view at the short end than the Ricoh, but less tele-photo reach at the long end. The XQ2 offers the faster maximum aperture.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the XQ2 and the WG-60 write their files to SDXC cards. The XQ2 supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the WG-60 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Fujifilm XQ2 and Ricoh WG-60 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Mic / Speaker
|1.||Fujifilm XQ2||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|2.||Ricoh WG-60||-||mono / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||-||-||-|
|3.||Canon S120||-||stereo / mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||-||-|
|4.||Fujifilm XP140||-||mono / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y|
|5.||Fujifilm XP130||-||mono / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y|
|6.||Fujifilm XP120||-||mono / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|7.||Fujifilm X70||Y||stereo / mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|8.||Fujifilm X-A3||Y||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|9.||Fujifilm X-A10||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|10.||Fujifilm X30||Y||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|11.||Fujifilm X20||Y||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||-||-||-|
|12.||Fujifilm XQ1||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-|
|13.||Fujifilm X10||Y||stereo / mono||-||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-|
|14.||Nikon W300||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y|
|15.||Sony WX800||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-|
|16.||Sony HX80||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-|
|17.||Sony HX90V||-||stereo / mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-|
It is notable that the XQ2 offers wifi support, while the WG-60 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.
Both the XQ2 and the WG-60 are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The XQ2 replaced the earlier Fujifilm XQ1, while the WG-60 followed on from the Ricoh WG-50. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Fujifilm and Ricoh websites.
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Fujifilm XQ2 or the Ricoh WG-60 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Advantages of the Fujifilm XQ2:
- Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/60p).
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.7") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 230k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (12 vs 8 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.8 vs f/3.5).
- Wider view: Has a wider-angle lens that facilitates landscape or interior shots.
- More compact: Is smaller (100x59mm vs 123x62mm) and thus needs less room in the bag.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
- More heavily discounted: Has been available for much longer (launched in January 2015).
Reasons to prefer the Ricoh WG-60:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (15.9 vs 12MP), which boosts linear resolution by 15%.
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- More tele-reach: Has a longer tele-lens for perspective compression and subject magnification.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (300 versus 240) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 14m).
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (30 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 3 years and 9 months of technical progress since the XQ2 launch.
If the count of individual advantages (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the XQ2 is the clear winner of the match-up (12 : 8 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.
How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Fujifilm XQ2 and the Ricoh WG-60 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Travel-Zoom Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the XQ2 or the WG-60. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.
This is why expert reviews are important. The following table reports the overall ratings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.
|1.||Fujifilm XQ2||..||..||..||..||4/5||4/5||Jan 2015||399|
|2.||Ricoh WG-60||..||..||..||..||..||..||Oct 2018||279|
|3.||Canon S120||..||+ +||..||..||4.5/5||4.5/5||Aug 2013||449|
|4.||Fujifilm XP140||..||+||..||..||3.5/5||4/5||Feb 2019||229|
|5.||Fujifilm XP130||..||o||..||..||3.5/5||4/5||Jan 2018||229|
|6.||Fujifilm XP120||..||o||..||..||3.5/5||4/5||Jan 2017||229|
|7.||Fujifilm X70||4.5/5||..||..||76/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2016||799|
|8.||Fujifilm X-A3||..||..||..||74/100||4.5/5||4/5||Aug 2016||399|
|9.||Fujifilm X-A10||..||..||..||..||4/5||4/5||Dec 2016||399|
|10.||Fujifilm X30||4/5||..||..||76/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||Aug 2014||599|
|11.||Fujifilm X20||4/5||+ +||..||77/100||4.5/5||5/5||Jan 2013||599|
|12.||Fujifilm XQ1||..||..||..||..||4.5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2013||499|
|13.||Fujifilm X10||..||..||..||76/100||4/5||4.5/5||Sep 2011||599|
|14.||Nikon W300||..||+||..||..||4/5||4/5||May 2017||389|
|15.||Sony WX800||..||..||..||..||..||..||Oct 2018||399|
|16.||Sony HX80||..||..||..||..||..||..||Mar 2016||349|
|17.||Sony HX90V||4/5||+ +||..||..||4/5||4.5/5||Apr 2015||429|
|Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you are interested in seeing how other cameras pair up, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon G12 vs Fujifilm XQ2
- Fujifilm X-A10 vs Fujifilm XQ2
- Fujifilm X-A3 vs Fujifilm XQ2
- Fujifilm X-T2 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Fujifilm XQ2 vs Leica V-LUX 4
- Fujifilm XQ2 vs Nikon 1 J5
- Fujifilm XQ2 vs Panasonic TZ95
- Nikon B600 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Nikon Z6 II vs Ricoh WG-60
- Panasonic G95 vs Ricoh WG-60
- Ricoh WG-60 vs Sigma fp
- Ricoh WG-60 vs Sony A6000
Specifications: Fujifilm XQ2 vs Ricoh WG-60
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
|Camera Model||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|Camera Type||Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|Camera Lens||25-100mm f/1.8-4.9||28-140mm f/3.5-5.5|
|Launch Date||January 2015||October 2018|
|Launch Price||USD 399||USD 279|
|Sensor Specs||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|Sensor Format||Two Thirds Sensor||1/2.3" Sensor|
|Sensor Size||8.8 x 6.6 mm||6.17 x 4.55 mm|
|Sensor Area||58.08 mm2||28.0735 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||11 mm||7.7 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||12 Megapixels||15.9 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||4000 x 3000 pixels||4608 x 3456 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||2.20 μm||1.33 μm|
|Pixel Density||20.66 MP/cm2||56.73 MP/cm2|
|Moiré control||no AA filter||no AA filter|
|Movie Capability||1080/60p Video||1080/60p Video|
|ISO Setting||100 - 12,800 ISO||125 - 6,400 ISO|
|Screen Specs||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|Viewfinder Type||no viewfinder||no viewfinder|
|LCD Framing||Live View||Live View|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0inch||2.7inch|
|LCD Resolution||920k dots||230k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Fixed screen||Fixed screen|
|Shooting Specs||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|Focus System||On-Sensor Phase-detect||Contrast-detect AF|
|Manual Focusing Aid||Focus Peaking||no Peaking Feature|
|Continuous Shooting||12 shutter flaps/s||8 shutter flaps/s|
|Time-Lapse Photography||no Intervalometer||Intervalometer built-in|
|Fill Flash||Built-in Flash||Built-in Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||SDXC cards|
|Second Storage Option||Single card slot||Single card slot|
|UHS card support||UHS-I||no|
|Connectivity Specs||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|External Flash||no Hotshoe||no Hotshoe|
|USB Connector||USB 2.0||USB 2.0|
|HDMI Port||micro HDMI||micro HDMI|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||no Wifi|
|Body Specs||Fujifilm XQ2||Ricoh WG-60|
|Environmental Sealing||not weather sealed||Waterproof body (14m)|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||240 shots per charge||300 shots per charge|
100 x 59 x 33 mm
(3.9 x 2.3 x 1.3 in)
123 x 62 x 30 mm
(4.8 x 2.4 x 1.2 in)
|Camera Weight||206 g (7.3 oz)||193 g (6.8 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.