Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10 Comparison

Camera to replace

Change

Ricoh WG-4 GPS

16 MP | 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) BSI-CMOS Sensor

CHECK PRICE

Change

Olympus XZ-10

12 MP | 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) BSI-CMOS Sensor

CHECK PRICE

Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10 Comparison Overview

Here we are comparing two cameras with different body types: Ricoh WG-4 GPS, which was introduced in February 2014 is a Waterproof camera with a 16.0MP 1/2.3-inch sensor whereas Olympus XZ-10, which was introduced in January 2013 is a Small Sensor Compact camera with a 12.0MP 1/2.3-inch sensor. There is 12 months difference between WG-4 GPS and XZ-10 so we don't expect to see a huge technology difference between these two cameras but it would still give an advantage to younger WG-4 GPS, especially in sensor tech.

Here is a brief look at the main features of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 before getting into our more detailed comparison.

Ricoh WG-4 GPS Key Specs

Announcement Date: 2014-02-05

16MP - 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS Sensor

ISO 125 - 6400

25-100 mm F2.0-4.9 Zoom Lens

Sensor-shift Image Stabilization

3" Fixed Type Screen

2.0fps continuous shooting

Full HD - 1920 x 1080 video resolution

Built-in GPS

235g. 124 x 64 x 33 mm

Weather Sealed Body

Olympus XZ-10 Key Specs

Announcement Date: 2013-01-30

12MP - 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS Sensor

ISO 100 - 6400

26-130 mm F1.8-2.7 Zoom Lens

Sensor-shift Image Stabilization

3" Fixed Type Screen

5.0fps continuous shooting

Full HD - 1920 x 1080 video resolution

221g. 102 x 61 x 34 mm

Ricoh WG-4 GPS was replaced by Ricoh WG-5 GPS. You may also be interested in these comparisons:
Ricoh WG-5 GPS vs Ricoh WG-4 GPS
Ricoh WG-5 GPS vs Olympus Stylus XZ-10

Let's read on the following sections in order to better understand in detail how Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 compares and hopefully end up with enough arguments to decide which one is better for you.

Reasons to choose Ricoh WG-4 GPS over Olympus Stylus XZ-10

GPS	BuiltIn vs None	track your location
Max Sensor Resolution	16 MP vs 12 MP	33% more pixels
Max Mech. Shutter	1/4000s vs 1/2000s	faster mechanical shutter
Environmental Sealing	Yes vs No	shoot at tough conditions
Timelapse Recording	Yes vs No	creative shooting
Focal Length - Wide	25mm vs 26mm	1 mm wider coverage

Reasons to choose Olympus Stylus XZ-10 over Ricoh WG-4 GPS

External Flash Shoe	Yes vs No	Better for flash photography
Touch Screen	Yes vs No	Easy control of camera functions
RAW Support	Yes vs No	Better image quality
Number of Focus Points	35 vs 9	26 more focus points
LCD Screen Resolution	920k dots vs 460k dots	100% higher resolution screen
Continuous Shooting	5.0fps vs 2.0fps	3 fps faster
Weight	221 g vs 235 g	14 g lighter
Manual Exposure	Yes vs No	better exposure control
Focal Length - Tele	130mm vs 100mm	30 mm longer tele reach
Optical Zoom	5× vs 4×	more flexible focal coverage
Max Aperture - Wide	1.80 vs 2.00	faster lens at wide
Max Aperture - Tele	2.70 vs 4.90	faster lens at tele
Sensor Pixel Area	2.38µm² vs 1.76µm²	35% larger pixel area

Common Strengths of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus Stylus XZ-10

Image Stabilization	Sensor-shift vs Sensor-shift	Sharper images at longer focal lengths and long exposures
Built-in Flash	Yes vs Yes	Useful in low-light
Face Detection Focus	Yes vs Yes	very handy for portraits
Manual Focusing	Yes vs Yes	both have manual focusing modes
AE Bracketing	Yes vs Yes	Useful for tough lighting conditions and HDR

Common Weaknesses of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus Stylus XZ-10

Fixed Screen	Fixed Type vs No	No flexible viewing angles
Viewfinder	None vs None	No eye-level shooting option

Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10: Physical Specs and Body features Comparison

Size and weight is a big decision factor when you are trying to find the ideal camera for your needs. In this section, We are going to illustrate Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 side-by-side from the front, back and top in their relative dimensions. Ricoh WG-4 GPS has external dimensions of 124 x 64 x 33 mm (4.88 x 2.52 x 1.3″) and weighs 235 g (0.52 lb / 8.29 oz) (including batteries). Olympus XZ-10 has external dimensions of 102 x 61 x 34 mm (4.03 x 2.41 x 1.35″) and weighs 221 g (0.49 lb / 7.80 oz) (including batteries).

Below you can see the front view size comparison of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10. Olympus XZ-10 is 22mm narrower and 3mm shorter than Ricoh WG-4 GPS but it is also 1mm thicker.

Comparison image of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 Size, Weight and External Dimensions - Front View

Here is the back view size comparison of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10.

Comparison image of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 Size and Weight - Back View

Now lets look at the top view comparison of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10.

Top View Comparison image of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 Size

Weight is another important factor especially when deciding on a camera that you want to carry with you all day. Olympus XZ-10 is 14g lighter than the Ricoh WG-4 GPS but we don't think this will make a significant difference.

Weight Comparison

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Min

Average

Max

Thickness Comparison

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Min

Average

Max

Weather Sealing

LCD Screen Size and Features

Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10's LCD screens has the same diagonal size of 3".

Unfortunately, both cameras has fixed screens so they don't tilt or flip in directions.

Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10: Sensor Comparison

Ricoh WG-4 GPS has a 16.0MP 1/2.3-inch (6.17 x 4.55 mm ) sized BSI-CMOS sensor . On the other hand, Olympus XZ-10 has a 12.0MP 1/2.3-inch (6.17 x 4.55 mm ) sized BSI-CMOS sensor .

Below you can see the WG-4 GPS and XZ-10 sensor size comparison.

Sensor Size and Resolution Comparison image of Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 Cameras

Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 have sensor sizes so they will provide same level of control over the depth of field when used with same focal length and aperture. On the other hand, since Olympus XZ-10 has 35% larger pixel area (2.38µm² vs 1.76µm²) compared to Ricoh WG-4 GPS, it has larger pixel area to collect light hence potential to have less noise in low light / High ISO images.

Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10 Lens Specs Comparison

Ricoh WG-4 GPS features a 25-100 mm F2.0-4.9 4× zoom lens whereas Olympus XZ-10 features a 26-130 mm F1.8-2.7 5× zoom lens.

Ricoh WG-4 GPS has 1mm wider coverage than the Olympus XZ-10. On the other hand, with a max aperture of f1.80, Olympus XZ-10 is faster at widest end. On the tele end, Olympus XZ-10 has 30mm longer reach than the Ricoh WG-4 GPS. At f2.70, it is also faster at tele end.

Wide Coverage

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Widest - Ricoh WG-M1

Average

Telezoom

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Longest - Canon SX520 HS

Average

Max Aperture at Tele

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Fastest - Ricoh GR Digital IV

Average

Max Aperture at Wide

Compact Cameras

WG-4 GPS

XZ-10

Fastest - Leica D-Lux 6

Average

What types of Photography are Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 Good for?

In this section, we rank and compare Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 for five different photography types in order to make your decision process easier in case you are specifically interested in one or more of these areas.

Ricoh WG-4 GPS for Portrait Photography

POOR

Olympus XZ-10 for Portrait Photography

AVERAGE

Image Stabilization
Manual Focus Mode
Average Resolution Sensor: 16.0MP
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No RAW shooting capability
No External Flash Shoe
No Built-in Viewfinder
No Manual Exposure Mode
Not so good Ergonomics&Handling
Read the details

Image Stabilization
RAW shooting capability
External Flash Shoe
Manual Focus Mode
Manual Exposure Mode
Average Resolution Sensor: 12.0MP
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No Built-in Viewfinder
Not so good Ergonomics&Handling
Read the details

Ricoh WG-4 GPS for Street Photography

GOOD

Olympus XZ-10 for Street Photography

EXCELLENT

Image Stabilization
Manual Focus Mode
Small Body
Live-view
Face-Detection Focusing
Fast Lens at Wide: f2.00
25 mm - Good Wide Angle Coverage
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No RAW shooting capability
No Built-in Viewfinder
Read the details

Image Stabilization
RAW shooting capability
Manual Focus Mode
Small Body
Live-view
Face-Detection Focusing
Fast Lens at Wide: f1.80
26 mm - Good Wide Angle Coverage
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No Built-in Viewfinder
Read the details

Ricoh WG-4 GPS for Sports Photography

POOR

Olympus XZ-10 for Sports Photography

POOR

Image Stabilization
Manual Focus Mode
Environmental Sealings
Fast Max shutter speed: 1/4000s
No RAW shooting capability
No External Flash Shoe
No Built-in Viewfinder
No Manual Exposure Mode
Not so good Ergonomics&Handling
Slow Continuous Shooting: 2.0fps
9 Focus Points
Poor Battery Life: 240 shots
100 mm Tele Lens
Read the details

Image Stabilization
RAW shooting capability
External Flash Shoe
Manual Focus Mode
Manual Exposure Mode
35 Focus Points
Fast Lens at Tele: f2.70
Average Continuous Shooting: 5.0fps
Average Max shutter speed: 1/2000s
130 mm Tele Lens
No Built-in Viewfinder
Not so good Ergonomics&Handling
Environmental Sealings
Poor Battery Life: 240 shots
Read the details

Ricoh WG-4 GPS for Daily Photography

GOOD

Olympus XZ-10 for Daily Photography

GOOD

Compact Body
Environmental Sealings
235g
4.0X Optical Zoom
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No RAW shooting capability
Read the details

RAW shooting capability
Compact Body
221g
5.0X Optical Zoom
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
Read the details

Ricoh WG-4 GPS for Landscape Photography

POOR

Olympus XZ-10 for Landscape Photography

POOR

Manual Focus Mode
25 mm - Good Wide Angle Coverage
Environmental Sealings
Built-in GPS
Average Resolution Sensor: 16.0MP
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No RAW shooting capability
No Manual Exposure Mode
Read the details

Manual Focus Mode
Manual Exposure Mode
26 mm - Good Wide Angle Coverage
Average Resolution Sensor: 12.0MP
Small 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm) sensor
No Environmental Sealings
Read the details

Ricoh WG-4 GPS vs Olympus XZ-10: OUR DECISION

You may have already made your decision about which camera suits better for your needs and your budget so far but in case you wonder how we rated Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10, below you can find their scores in five different aspects. Our Decision Algorithm dynamically scores cameras using 63 different specs, current price and DxO Mark scores (where possible) in order to make a more objective and consistent comparison.

Here is a summary of how Ricoh WG-4 GPS and Olympus XZ-10 scores compare:

Ricoh WG-4 GPS

Imaging

Features

Value

Portability

Overall

Ranked #62 out of 475 in Compact cameras
Ranked #497 out of 1226 in all Cameras

Olympus XZ-10

Imaging

Features

Value

Portability

Overall

Ranked #30 out of 475 in Compact cameras
Ranked #403 out of 1226 in all Cameras

Olympus XZ-10 is the clear winner of this comparison. It has a higher Overall Score and beats Ricoh WG-4 GPS in all criteria.
It has better general image quality, more features, more compact body and offers more value for the money

Olympus XZ-10 vs Ricoh WG-4 GPS Specs Table

Detailed comparison of specifications

General	Ricoh WG-4 GPS	Olympus Stylus XZ-10
Brand	Ricoh	Olympus
Announced	2014-02-05	2013-01-30
Body Type	Compact	Compact
Sensor
Type	BSI-CMOS	BSI-CMOS
Size	1/2.3-inch	1/2.3-inch
Dimensions	6.17 x 4.55 mm	6.17 x 4.55 mm
Area	28.07mm²	28.07mm²
Megapixels	16 megapixels	12 megapixels
Max Resolution	4608 x 3456	3968 x 2976
Max Native Light sensitivity	6,400 ISO	6,400 ISO
Min Native Light sensitivity	125 ISO	100 ISO
RAW Support
Autofocus
AF Touch
AF Continuous
AF Single
AF Tracking
AF Selective
AF Center
AF Multi Area
AF Live View
AF Face Detection
AF Contrast Detection
AF Phase Detection
Number of Focus Points	9	35
Lens
Manual Focus
Lens Mount	fixed lens	fixed lens
Lens Focal Range	25-100 mm (4×)	26-130 mm (5×)
Max Aperture	F2.0-4.9	F1.8-2.7
Macro Focus Range	1cm	1cm
Screen
Type	Fixed type	Fixed type
Size	3"	3"
Resolution	460k dots	920k dots
Touch Screen
Viewfinder
Viewfinder	None	None
Photography Features
Max Mechanical Shutter	1/4000s	1/2000s
Shutter Priority
Aperture Priority
Manual Exposure Mode
Custom White Balance
Image Stabilization	Sensor-shift	Sensor-shift
Built-in Flash
Flash Range	10.00 m (Auto ISO)	n/a
External Flash
Continuous Shooting	2.0 fps	5.0 fps
Multi-Segment
Average
Spot
Partial
AF-Area
Center Weighted
AE Bracketing
WB Bracketing
Video Features
Max Video Resolution	1920 x 1080	1920 x 1080
Video Formats	H.264	MPEG-4, H.264
Microphone Port
Headphone Port
Connectivity
Wireless Connectivity	None	Eye-Fi Connected
HDMI
Physical
Environmental Sealing
Weight	235g	221g
Dimensions	124 x 64 x 33mm	102 x 61 x 34mm
Battery Life	240 shots	240 shots
Other Features
Timelapse Recording
GPS	Built-in	None
DxO Sensor Scores
	Report a correction	Report a correction