Nikon W300 vs Olympus XZ-2
The Nikon Coolpix W300 and the Olympus XZ-2 are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in May 2017 and September 2012. Both the W300 and the XZ-2 are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on a 1/2.3-inch (W300) and a 1/1.7-inch (XZ-2) sensor. The Nikon has a resolution of 15.9 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 11.8 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 Nikon Coolpix W300 and the Olympus XZ-2? 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.
Body comparison
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Nikon W300 and the Olympus XZ-2 is provided 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 width, height and depth measures are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
The W300 can be obtained in three different colors (black, orange, yellow), while the XZ-2 is only available in black.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Nikon W300 and the Olympus XZ-2 are of equal size. However, the XZ-2 is substantially heavier (50 percent) than the W300. It is worth mentioning in this context that the W300 is splash and dust resistant, while the XZ-2 does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the W300 is water-proof up to 30m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The power pack in the W300 can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, you can navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from a broad list of cameras there.
Camera Model |
Camera Width |
Camera Height |
Camera Depth |
Camera Weight |
Battery Life |
Weather Sealing |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Nikon W300 | 112 mm | 66 mm | 29 mm | 231 g | 280 | Y | May 2017 | 389 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 113 mm | 65 mm | 48 mm | 346 g | 340 | n | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
3. | Nikon A1000 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 41 mm | 330 g | 250 | n | Jan 2019 | 429 | ebay.com | |
4. | Nikon B600 | 122 mm | 82 mm | 99 mm | 500 g | 280 | n | Jan 2019 | 349 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon P1000 | 146 mm | 119 mm | 181 mm | 1415 g | 250 | n | Jul 2018 | 999 | amazon.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | 114 mm | 72 mm | 42 mm | 362 g | 280 | n | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | 110 mm | 64 mm | 37 mm | 313 g | 300 | n | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 116 mm | 87 mm | 57 mm | 402 g | 410 | n | Oct 2013 | 699 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus TG-5 | 113 mm | 66 mm | 32 mm | 250 g | 340 | Y | May 2017 | 449 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus XZ-1 | 111 mm | 65 mm | 42 mm | 275 g | 320 | n | Jan 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic TS7 | 117 mm | 76 mm | 37 mm | 319 g | 300 | Y | May 2018 | 449 | ebay.com | |
12. | Pentax MX-1 | 122 mm | 61 mm | 51 mm | 391 g | 290 | n | Jan 2013 | 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Ricoh WG-60 | 123 mm | 62 mm | 30 mm | 193 g | 300 | Y | Oct 2018 | 279 | ebay.com | |
14. | Sony HX80 | 102 mm | 58 mm | 36 mm | 245 g | 390 | n | Mar 2016 | 349 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony HX95 | 102 mm | 58 mm | 36 mm | 242 g | 370 | n | Aug 2018 | 429 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony HX99 | 102 mm | 58 mm | 36 mm | 242 g | 370 | n | Aug 2018 | 449 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony WX800 | 102 mm | 58 mm | 36 mm | 233 g | 370 | n | Oct 2018 | 399 | ebay.com | |
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 manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The W300 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 35 percent) than the XZ-2, 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.
Sensor comparison
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units 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 associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Nikon W300 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Olympus XZ-2 a 1/1.7-inch sensor. The sensor area in the XZ-2 is 54 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 4.4. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.
Despite having a smaller sensor, the Nikon W300 offers a higher resolution of 15.9 megapixels, compared with 11.8 MP of the Olympus XZ-2. 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 1.91μm for the XZ-2). However, it should be noted that the W300 is much more recent (by 4 years and 8 months) than the XZ-2, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.
The resolution advantage of the Nikon W300 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the W300 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 Olympus XZ-2 are 19.8 x 14.9 inches or 50.4 x 37.8 cm for good quality, 15.9 x 11.9 inches or 40.3 x 30.2 cm for very good quality, and 13.2 x 9.9 inches or 33.6 x 25.2 cm for excellent quality prints.
The Nikon Coolpix W300 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 125 to ISO 1600, which can be extended to ISO 125-6400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Olympus XZ-2 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800 (no boost).
In terms of underlying technology, the W300 is build around a BSI-CMOS sensor, while the XZ-2 uses a CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.
Consistent information on actual sensor performance is available from DXO Mark for many cameras. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
Camera Model |
Sensor Class |
Resolution (MP) |
Horiz. Pixels |
Vert. Pixels |
Video Format |
DXO Portrait |
DXO Landscape |
DXO Sports |
DXO Overall |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Nikon W300 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 20.5 | 12.0 | 938 | 50 | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 216 | 49 | |
3. | Nikon A1000 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 20.7 | 12.2 | 1095 | 52 | |
4. | Nikon B600 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/30p | 20.7 | 12.2 | 1095 | 52 | |
5. | Nikon P1000 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.1 | 1044 | 51 | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 720/30p | 21.4 | 10.2 | 573 | 55 | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Four Thirds | 12.2 | 4032 | 3024 | 1080/60i | 20.9 | 10.3 | 499 | 52 | |
8. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 1/1.7 | 11.8 | 3968 | 2976 | 1080/30p | 20.7 | 11.6 | 179 | 51 | |
9. | Olympus TG-5 | 1/2.3 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 4K/30p | 20.5 | 11.9 | 934 | 50 | |
10. | Olympus XZ-1 | 1/1.7 | 10.1 | 3664 | 2752 | 720/30p | 18.8 | 10.4 | 117 | 34 | |
11. | Panasonic TS7 | 1/2.3 | 20.2 | 5184 | 3888 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.1 | 1028 | 51 | |
12. | Pentax MX-1 | 1/1.7 | 12.0 | 4000 | 3000 | 1080/30p | 20.4 | 11.3 | 208 | 49 | |
13. | Ricoh WG-60 | 1/2.3 | 15.9 | 4608 | 3456 | 1080/60p | 20.6 | 12.2 | 1072 | 51 | |
14. | Sony HX80 | 1/2.3 | 18.0 | 4896 | 3672 | 1080/60p | 20.4 | 11.8 | 822 | 48 | |
15. | Sony HX95 | 1/2.3 | 18.0 | 4896 | 3672 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.1 | 1057 | 51 | |
16. | Sony HX99 | 1/2.3 | 18.0 | 4896 | 3672 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.1 | 1058 | 51 | |
17. | Sony WX800 | 1/2.3 | 18.0 | 4896 | 3672 | 4K/30p | 20.6 | 12.2 | 1070 | 51 | |
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. The two cameras under consideration both have sensors whose read-out speed is fast enough to capture moving pictures, but the W300 provides a higher video resolution than the XZ-2. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Olympus is limited to 1080/30p.
Feature comparison
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The W300 and the XZ-2 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. That said, the XZ-2 can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the VF-2. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Nikon W300 and Olympus XZ-2 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
Camera Model |
Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots) |
Control Panel (yes/no) |
LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots) |
LCD Attach- ment |
Touch Screen (yes/no) |
Max Shutter Speed * |
Max Shutter Flaps * |
Built-in Flash (yes/no) |
Built-in Image Stab |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Nikon W300 | none | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 5.0/s | Y | Y | |
3. | Nikon A1000 | 1166 | n | 3.0 / 1036 | tilting | Y | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
4. | Nikon B600 | none | n | 3.0 / 921 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 7.4/s | Y | Y | |
5. | Nikon P1000 | 2359 | n | 3.2 / 921 | swivel | n | 1/4000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 3.0/s | Y | Y | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | optional | n | 3.0 / 460 | tilting | n | 1/4000s | 5.5/s | n | Y | |
8. | Olympus Stylus 1 | 1440 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 7.0/s | Y | Y | |
9. | Olympus TG-5 | none | n | 3.0 / 460 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 20.0/s | Y | Y | |
10. | Olympus XZ-1 | optional | n | 3.0 / 614 | fixed | n | 1/2000s | 2.0/s | Y | Y | |
11. | Panasonic TS7 | 1170 | n | 3.0 / 1040 | fixed | n | 1/1300s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
12. | Pentax MX-1 | none | n | 3.0 / 920 | tilting | n | 1/8000s | 1.0/s | Y | Y | |
13. | Ricoh WG-60 | none | n | 2.7 / 230 | fixed | n | 1/4000s | 8.0/s | Y | n | |
14. | Sony HX80 | 638 | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
15. | Sony HX95 | 638 | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | n | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
16. | Sony HX99 | 638 | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
17. | Sony WX800 | none | n | 3.0 / 922 | tilting | Y | 1/2000s | 10.0/s | Y | Y | |
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one. |
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The XZ-2 has a touchscreen, while the W300 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.
The Olympus XZ-2 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 W300 and the XZ-2 have zoom lenses built in. The W300 has a 24-120mm f/2.8-4.9 optic and the XZ-2 offers a 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the Nikon provides a wider angle of view at the short end, as well as more tele-photo reach at the long end than the Olympus. The XZ-2 offers the faster maximum aperture.
Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the W300 and the XZ-2 write their files to SDXC cards.
Connectivity comparison
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 Nikon Coolpix W300 and Olympus XZ-2 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
Camera Model |
Hotshoe Port |
Internal Mic / Speaker |
Microphone Port |
Headphone Port |
HDMI Port |
USB Port |
WiFi Support |
NFC Support |
Bluetooth Support |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Nikon W300 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
3. | Nikon A1000 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
4. | Nikon B600 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
5. | Nikon P1000 | Y | stereo / mono | Y | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | Y | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | Y | stereo / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
8. | Olympus Stylus 1 | Y | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
9. | Olympus TG-5 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
10. | Olympus XZ-1 | Y | mono / - | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
11. | Panasonic TS7 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | - | - | |
12. | Pentax MX-1 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | mini | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
13. | Ricoh WG-60 | - | mono / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | - | - | - | |
14. | Sony HX80 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - | |
15. | Sony HX95 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | Y | |
16. | Sony HX99 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | Y | |
17. | Sony WX800 | - | stereo / mono | - | - | micro | 2.0 | Y | Y | - |
It is notable that the W300 offers wifi support, while the XZ-2 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.
Travel and landscape photographers will find it useful that the W300 has an internal geolocalization sensor and can record GPS coordinates in its EXIF data.
Both the W300 and the XZ-2 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. Neither of the two has a direct successor, so they represent the end of the respective camera lines from Nikon and Olympus. Further information on the features and operation of the W300 and XZ-2 can be found, respectively, in the Nikon W300 Manual (free pdf) or the online Olympus XZ-2 Manual.
Review summary
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Nikon W300 or the Olympus XZ-2 – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Advantages of the Nikon Coolpix W300:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (15.9 vs 11.8MP) with a 16% higher linear resolution.
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/30p).
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (7 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Wider view: Has a wider-angle lens that facilitates landscape or interior shots.
- More tele-reach: Has a longer tele-lens for perspective compression and subject magnification.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 115g or 33 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 30m).
- Easier geotagging: Features an internal GPS sensor to log localization data.
- Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (35 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 4 years and 8 months of technical progress since the XZ-2 launch.
Reasons to prefer the Olympus XZ-2:
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
- Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/1.8 vs f/2.8).
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (340 versus 280) out of a single battery charge.
- Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2012).
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the W300 is the clear winner of the match-up (15 : 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 wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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 Nikon W300 and the Olympus XZ-2 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 the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it says little about, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance of the W300 and the XZ-2 in practical situations. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.
Expert reviews
This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular 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.
Camera Model |
AP score |
CL score |
DCW score |
DPR score |
EPZ score |
PB score |
Camera Launch |
Launch Price (USD) |
Street Price |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. | Nikon W300 | .. | + | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | May 2017 | 389 | ebay.com | |
2. | Olympus XZ-2 | 4/5 | + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Sep 2012 | 599 | ebay.com | |
3. | Nikon A1000 | .. | + + | 3.5/5 | .. | 3.5/5 | 3/5 | Jan 2019 | 429 | ebay.com | |
4. | Nikon B600 | .. | + | .. | .. | 3.5/5 | 3/5 | Jan 2019 | 349 | ebay.com | |
5. | Nikon P1000 | .. | + | 3.5/5 | 73/100 | 3.5/5 | 3.5/5 | Jul 2018 | 999 | amazon.com | |
6. | Olympus E-PL2 | 3/5 | 83/100 | .. | 71/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
7. | Olympus E-PL3 | 3/5 | + + | .. | 72/100 | 4.5/5 | 4/5 | Jun 2011 | 599 | ebay.com | |
8. | Olympus Stylus 1 | .. | + + | .. | .. | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Oct 2013 | 699 | ebay.com | |
9. | Olympus TG-5 | .. | + + | 4.5/5 | .. | 4/5 | 4/5 | May 2017 | 449 | ebay.com | |
10. | Olympus XZ-1 | 4/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4.5/5 | 4.5/5 | Jan 2011 | 499 | ebay.com | |
11. | Panasonic TS7 | .. | + | .. | .. | .. | 3.5/5 | May 2018 | 449 | ebay.com | |
12. | Pentax MX-1 | 3/5 | .. | .. | 74/100 | 4/5 | 4/5 | Jan 2013 | 499 | ebay.com | |
13. | Ricoh WG-60 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Oct 2018 | 279 | ebay.com | |
14. | Sony HX80 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Mar 2016 | 349 | ebay.com | |
15. | Sony HX95 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Aug 2018 | 429 | ebay.com | |
16. | Sony HX99 | .. | .. | .. | .. | 4/5 | 4.5/5 | Aug 2018 | 449 | ebay.com | |
17. | Sony WX800 | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | .. | Oct 2018 | 399 | ebay.com | |
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available. |
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. A score, therefore, has to be seen in close connection to the price and market introduction time of the camera, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. Alternatively, you can follow any of the listed hyperlinks for comparisons that others found interesting.
- Hasselblad X1D II vs Nikon W300
- Nikon 1 V2 vs Nikon W300
- Nikon W300 vs Olympus E-420
- Nikon W300 vs Olympus E-520
- Nikon W300 vs Sony A7 IV
- Nikon W300 vs Sony RX100 VI
- Olympus E-PL2 vs Olympus XZ-2
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Panasonic GX800
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Panasonic LX15
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Pentax K-3
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Sony A77
- Olympus XZ-2 vs Sony RX10 III
Specifications: Nikon W300 vs Olympus XZ-2
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 | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
---|---|---|
Camera Type | Fixed lens compact camera | Fixed lens compact camera |
Camera Lens | 24-120mm f/2.8-4.9 | 28-112mm f/1.8-2.5 |
Launch Date | May 2017 | September 2012 |
Launch Price | USD 389 | USD 599 |
Sensor Specs | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Sensor Technology | BSI-CMOS | CMOS |
Sensor Format | 1/2.3" Sensor | 1/1.7" Sensor |
Sensor Size | 6.17 x 4.55 mm | 7.6 x 5.7 mm |
Sensor Area | 28.0735 mm2 | 43.32 mm2 |
Sensor Diagonal | 7.7 mm | 9.5 mm |
Crop Factor | 5.6x | 4.4x |
Sensor Resolution | 15.9 Megapixels | 11.8 Megapixels |
Image Resolution | 4608 x 3456 pixels | 3968 x 2976 pixels |
Pixel Pitch | 1.33 μm | 1.91 μm |
Pixel Density | 56.73 MP/cm2 | 27.26 MP/cm2 |
Moiré control | Anti-Alias filter | Anti-Alias filter |
Movie Capability | 4K/30p Video | 1080/30p Video |
ISO Setting | 125 - 1,600 ISO | 100 - 12,800 ISO |
ISO Boost | 125 - 6,400 ISO | no Enhancement |
DXO Sensor Quality (score) | .. | 49 |
DXO Color Depth (bits) | .. | 20.4 |
DXO Dynamic Range (EV) | .. | 11.3 |
DXO Low Light (ISO) | .. | 216 |
Screen Specs | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Viewfinder Type | no viewfinder | Viewfinder optional |
LCD Framing | Live View | Live View |
Rear LCD Size | 3.0inch | 3.0inch |
LCD Resolution | 921k dots | 920k dots |
LCD Attachment | Fixed screen | Tilting screen |
Touch Input | no Touchscreen | Touchscreen |
Shooting Specs | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Focus System | Contrast-detect AF | Contrast-detect AF |
Continuous Shooting | 7 shutter flaps/s | 5 shutter flaps/s |
Time-Lapse Photography | no Intervalometer | Intervalometer built-in |
Image Stabilization | Lens-based stabilization | In-body stabilization |
Fill Flash | Built-in Flash | Built-in Flash |
Storage Medium | SDXC cards | SDXC cards |
Single or Dual Card Slots | Single card slot | Single card slot |
UHS card support | no | no |
Connectivity Specs | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
External Flash | no Hotshoe | Hotshoe |
USB Connector | USB 2.0 | USB 2.0 |
HDMI Port | micro HDMI | mini HDMI |
Wifi Support | Wifi built-in | no Wifi |
Bluetooth Support | Bluetooth built-in | no Bluetooth |
Geotagging | GPS built-in | no internal GPS |
Body Specs | Nikon W300 | Olympus XZ-2 |
Environmental Sealing | Waterproof body (30m) | not weather sealed |
Battery Type | Nikon EN-EL12 | Olympus Li-90B |
Battery Life (CIPA) | 280 shots per charge | 340 shots per charge |
In-Camera Charging | USB charging | no USB charging |
Body Dimensions |
112 x 66 x 29 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.1 in) |
113 x 65 x 48 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.9 in) |
Camera Weight | 231 g (8.1 oz) | 346 g (12.2 oz) |
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.