As well as being compared against other travel zooms, the Ricoh CX2 is also often compared to mirrorless, pro digicams, entry-level DSLRs, super zooms, compacts, ultra compacts and digicams. The Ricoh CX2's top rivals come from Ricoh (such as the CX4 and the CX1) and Fujifilm (such as the X-Pro1 and the FinePix S602Z Pro)

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to other travel zoom competitors include: it is slightly less expensive ($247.89 vs $351.93).

However, on average it records lower quality movies (480p @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 30fps), takes significantly lower resolution photos (9 MP vs 9.8 MP), slightly lower maximum light sensitivity (1,600 ISO vs 6,400 ISO), is older (august, 2009 vs january, 2011) and slightly shorter exposures (8 seconds vs 60 seconds).

Ricoh CX4

Ricoh CX4
1 year newer
$249

Significant advantages of the CX4 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the CX4 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the CX4 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the CX4 vs the CX2

Ricoh CX6

Ricoh CX6
2 years newer
$481

Significant advantages of the CX6 (vs the CX2)

  • Higher resolution screen: 1,230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.7 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the CX6 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the CX6 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 1,230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the CX6 vs the CX2

Ricoh CX5

Ricoh CX5
1 year newer
$352

Significant advantages of the CX5 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the CX5 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the CX5 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the CX5 vs the CX2

Ricoh CX3

Ricoh CX3
5 months newer
$179 - $208

Significant advantages of the CX3 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the CX3 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the CX3 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the CX3 vs the CX2

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS3

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS3
6 months older

Significant advantages of the DMC-ZS3 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP
  • Has boost ISO: 6,400 ISO vs None

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-ZS3 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly lower resolution screen: 460k dots vs 920k dots
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS

common strengths of the DMC-ZS3 and CX2

  • None found
arrow Compare the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS3 vs the Ricoh CX2

Olympus SZ-31MR

Olympus SZ-31MR iHS
2 years newer
$394 - $482

Significant advantages of the SZ-31MR (vs the CX2)

  • Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 480p @ 30fps
  • Significantly more zoom: 24x vs 10.7x
  • Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 28 mm

Significant disadvantages of the SZ-31MR (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the SZ-31MR and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the Olympus SZ-31MR iHS vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toMirrorless interchangeable-lens competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to mirrorless interchangeable-lens competitors include: it has a much larger screen (3.0" vs 2.5"), has a slightly higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 230k dots), has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none), is newer (august, 2009 vs september, 2006) and is significantly smaller (compact 102x58x29 mm vs standard size 140x82x43 mm).

However, on average it records lower quality movies (480p @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 24fps), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs rangefinder), takes significantly lower resolution photos (9 MP vs 16 MP), doesn't record movies in 24p and has a much smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs APS-H 27.0x18.0mm).

Fujifilm X-Pro1

Fujifilm X-Pro1
2 years newer
$1,991 - $2,298 (body only)

Significant advantages of the X-Pro1 (vs the CX2)

  • Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 24fps vs 480p @ 30fps
  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None
  • Shoots RAW

Significant disadvantages of the X-Pro1 (vs the CX2)

  • No image stabilization: None vs Sensor shift
  • Much larger: Standard size 140x82x43 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Much heavier: 450 g vs 185 g

common strengths of the X-Pro1 and CX2

  • High resolution screens: 1,230k dots vs 920k dots
arrow Compare the Fujifilm X-Pro1 vs the Ricoh CX2

Leica M8

Leica M8
2 years older

Significant advantages of the M8 (vs the CX2)

  • Has a viewfinder: Rangefinder vs None
  • Much larger sensor: APS-H 27.0x18.0mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Shoots RAW

Significant disadvantages of the M8 (vs the CX2)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.0"
  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • No image stabilization: None vs Sensor shift

common strengths of the M8 and CX2

  • None found
arrow Compare the Leica M8 vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toPro digicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to pro digicam competitors include: it has significantly more zoom (10.7x vs 3.8x), has a significantly higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 230k dots), has a CMOS-family sensor (CMOS vs CCD), slightly closer macro focusing (1 cm vs 5 cm) and is slightly less expensive ($247.89 vs $369.99).

However, on average it has a much smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs 1/1.7" 7.6x5.7mm), doesn't shoot RAW, has a much narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/2.0), records lower quality movies (480p @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 24fps) and has a slightly narrower wide angle lens (28 mm vs 24 mm).

Canon PowerShot S95

Canon PowerShot S95
1 year newer
$364 - $389

Significant advantages of the S95 (vs the CX2)

  • Much larger sensor: 1/1.7" 7.6x5.7mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Shoots RAW
  • Much wider aperture: f/2.0 vs f/3.5

Significant disadvantages of the S95 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly lower resolution screen: 461k dots vs 920k dots
  • Less zoom: 3.8x vs 10.7x
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS

common strengths of the S95 and CX2

  • Very small: Compact 99x58x29 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Very light: 193 g vs 185 g
  • Very thin: 1.2" vs 1.1"
arrow Compare the Canon PowerShot S95 vs the Ricoh CX2

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX150

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX150
1 year older

Significant advantages of the DMC-FX150 (vs the CX2)

  • Much larger sensor: 1/1.8" 7.4x5.6mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Shoots RAW
  • Much higher true resolution: 14.2 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FX150 (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Less zoom: 3.6x vs 10.7x
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.0"

common strengths of the DMC-FX150 and CX2

  • Very small: Compact 97x54x25 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Very thin: 1" vs 1.1"
  • Very light: 179 g vs 185 g
arrow Compare the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX150 vs the Ricoh CX2

Canon Powershot S100

Canon Powershot S100
2 years newer
$370 - $430

Significant advantages of the S100 (vs the CX2)

  • Much larger sensor: 1/1.8" 7.5x5.5mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Shoots RAW
  • Much wider aperture: f/2.0 vs f/3.5

Significant disadvantages of the S100 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly lower resolution screen: 461k dots vs 920k dots

common strengths of the S100 and CX2

  • Very small: Compact 99x60x28 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Very thin: 1.1" vs 1.1"
arrow Compare the Canon Powershot S100 vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toEntry-level DSLR competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to entry-level DSLR competitors include: it has a much higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 230k dots), has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none), is newer (august, 2009 vs january, 2008), is much smaller (compact 102x58x29 mm vs prosumer size 129x98x62 mm) and is thinner (1.1" vs 2.4").

However, on average it takes slightly lower resolution photos (9 MP vs 12.2 MP), has a much smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs APS-C 22.2x14.8mm), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs pentamirror), users slower contrast detection autofocus (contrast detection vs phase detection) and doesn't shoot RAW.

Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi

Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi
1 year older
$468 (body only)
$499 18-55mm lens

Significant advantages of the Rebel XSi (vs the CX2)

  • Much larger sensor: APS-C 22.2x14.8mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Has a viewfinder: Pentamirror vs None
  • Faster autofocus: Phase detection vs Contrast detection

Significant disadvantages of the Rebel XSi (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • No image stabilization: None vs Sensor shift
  • Much larger: Prosumer size 129x98x62 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm

common strengths of the Rebel XSi and CX2

  • Very small: Prosumer size 129x98x62 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Very thin: 2.4" vs 1.1"
  • Light weight: 524 g vs 185 g
arrow Compare the Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a slightly higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 230k dots), is much smaller (compact 102x58x29 mm vs prosumer size 115x83x92 mm), has a CMOS-family sensor (CMOS vs CCD), is thinner (1.1" vs 3.6") and is much lighter (185 g vs 544 g).

However, on average it has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/2.8), has much less zoom (10.7x vs 25.4x), records lower quality movies (480p @ 30fps vs 1440 x 1080 @ 30fps), has a slightly narrower wide angle lens (28 mm vs 25 mm) and has worse image stabilization (sensor shift vs lens).

Sony Cybershot DSC-HX100v

Sony Cybershot DSC-HX100v
1 year newer
$409

Significant advantages of the DSC-HX100v (vs the CX2)

  • Much more zoom: 30x vs 10.7x
  • Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 480p @ 30fps
  • Significantly wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/3.5

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-HX100v (vs the CX2)

  • Much larger: Prosumer size 122x87x93 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Much heavier: 577 g vs 185 g
  • Much thicker: 3.7" vs 1.1"

common strengths of the DSC-HX100v and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 921k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
arrow Compare the Sony Cybershot DSC-HX100v vs the Ricoh CX2

Nikon Coolpix L120

Nikon Coolpix L120
1 year newer
$180 - $220

Significant advantages of the L120 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly more zoom: 21x vs 10.7x
  • Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 28 mm
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.7 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the L120 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly larger: Prosumer size 110x77x78 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS
  • Much thicker: 3.1" vs 1.1"

common strengths of the L120 and CX2

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size 110x77x78 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Light weight: 406 g vs 185 g
arrow Compare the Nikon Coolpix L120 vs the Ricoh CX2

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX1

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX1
5 months older
$355

Significant advantages of the DSC-HX1 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/3.5
  • Higher resolution movies: 1440 x 1080 @ 30fps vs 480p @ 30fps
  • Has a flip-out screen

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-HX1 (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Much larger: Prosumer size 115x83x92 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Significantly lower true resolution: 8.1 MP vs 9 MP

common strengths of the DSC-HX1 and CX2

  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
arrow Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX1 vs the Ricoh CX2

Nikon Coolpix L810

Nikon Coolpix L810
2 years newer
$250 - $265

Significant advantages of the L810 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly more zoom: 25.4x vs 10.7x
  • Much better wide angle: 23 mm vs 28 mm
  • Takes 3D photos

Significant disadvantages of the L810 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly larger: Prosumer size 111x76x83 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS
  • Much thicker: 3.3" vs 1.1"

common strengths of the L810 and CX2

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size 111x76x83 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Very high resolution screens: 921k dots vs 920k dots
  • Light weight: 430 g vs 185 g
arrow Compare the Nikon Coolpix L810 vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to compact competitors include: it has slightly more zoom (10.7x vs 5x), has a slightly larger screen (3.0" vs 2.7"), has a significantly higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 460k dots), has a CMOS-family sensor (CMOS vs CCD) and is newer (august, 2009 vs february, 2008).

However, on average it has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/2.8), is slightly larger (compact 102x58x29 mm vs compact 95x53x26 mm), doesn't record high-speed movies (none vs 1,000 fps), doesn't have an OLED screen (LCD vs OLED) and is thicker (1.1" vs 0.9").

Ricoh CX1

Ricoh CX1
6 months older

Significant advantages of the CX1 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the CX1 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

common strengths of the CX1 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the CX1 vs the CX2

Ricoh R10

Ricoh R10
1 year older

Significant advantages of the R10 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the R10 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly lower resolution screen: 460k dots vs 920k dots
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS

common strengths of the R10 and CX2

  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the R10 vs the CX2

Samsung TL350

Samsung TL350
6 months newer

Significant advantages of the TL350 (vs the CX2)

  • Records high-speed movies: 1,000 fps vs None
  • Much wider aperture: f/2.4 vs f/3.5
  • Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 480p @ 30fps

Significant disadvantages of the TL350 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly worse macro capability: 5 cm vs 1 cm

common strengths of the TL350 and CX2

  • Very high resolution screens: 920k dots vs 920k dots
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
arrow Compare the Samsung TL350 vs the Ricoh CX2

Samsung SL820

Samsung SL820
6 months older

Significant advantages of the SL820 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/3.5
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP
  • Thinner: 0.9" vs 1.1"

Significant disadvantages of the SL820 (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • No image stabilization: None vs Sensor shift
  • Less zoom: 3.6x vs 10.7x

common strengths of the SL820 and CX2

  • None found
arrow Compare the Samsung SL820 vs the Ricoh CX2

Ricoh Caplio R8

Ricoh Caplio R8
1 year older

Significant advantages of the R8 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.8 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the R8 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly lower resolution screen: 460k dots vs 920k dots
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.0"
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS

common strengths of the R8 and CX2

  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the Caplio R8 vs the CX2

Ricoh Caplio R4

Ricoh Caplio R4
3 years older

Significant advantages of the R4 (vs the CX2)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the R4 (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower true resolution: 5.9 MP vs 9 MP
  • Much lower resolution screen: 153k dots vs 920k dots
  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.0"

common strengths of the R4 and CX2

  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the Caplio R4 vs the CX2

compared toUltra compact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to ultra compact competitors include: it has slightly more zoom (10.7x vs 4x), has a much higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 230k dots), has a CMOS-family sensor (CMOS vs CCD), has a slightly larger sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs 1/2.7" 5.6x4.2mm) and much closer macro focusing (1 cm vs 8 cm).

However, on average it records lower quality movies (480p @ 30fps vs 720p @ 30fps), is significantly larger (compact 102x58x29 mm vs ultra compact 91x53x17 mm), takes slightly lower resolution photos (9 MP vs 9.7 MP), slightly lower maximum light sensitivity (1,600 ISO vs 3,200 ISO) and doesn't have a touch screen.

Nikon Coolpix S3100

Nikon Coolpix S3100
1 year newer
$104

Significant advantages of the S3100 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly smaller: Ultra compact 93x57x18 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Can create panoramas in-camera
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.7 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the S3100 (vs the CX2)

  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Significantly smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.0"
  • Much worse macro capability: 10 cm vs 1 cm

common strengths of the S3100 and CX2

  • None found
arrow Compare the Nikon Coolpix S3100 vs the Ricoh CX2

Samsung ST95

Samsung ST95
1 year newer
$193

Significant advantages of the ST95 (vs the CX2)

  • Much smaller: Ultra compact 91x53x17 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Has a touch screen
  • Significantly higher true resolution: 9.7 MP vs 9 MP

Significant disadvantages of the ST95 (vs the CX2)

  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS
  • Significantly worse macro capability: 5 cm vs 1 cm

common strengths of the ST95 and CX2

  • None found
arrow Compare the Samsung ST95 vs the Ricoh CX2

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1
similar age
$293

Significant advantages of the DSC-TX1 (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly smaller: Ultra compact 94x58x17 mm vs Compact 102x58x29 mm
  • Has a touch screen
  • Much thinner: 0.7" vs 1.1"

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-TX1 (vs the CX2)

  • Much worse wide angle: 35 mm vs 28 mm
  • Much lower resolution screen: 230k dots vs 920k dots
  • Much smaller sensor: 1/2.7" 5.6x4.2mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm

common strengths of the DSC-TX1 and CX2

  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
arrow Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1 vs the Ricoh CX2

compared toDigicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Ricoh CX2 compared to digicam competitors include: it has a much wider wide angle lens (28 mm vs 35 mm), has a much larger screen (3.0" vs 1.8"), has a much higher resolution screen (920k dots vs 110k dots), is much smaller (compact 102x58x29 mm vs prosumer size 121x82x97 mm) and has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none).

However, on average it has a significantly narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/2.8), has a much smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs 1/1.7" 7.6x5.7mm), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital), has fewer storage slots (1 vs 2) and doesn't support an external flash.

Fujifilm FinePix S602Z Pro

Placeholder
6 years older

Significant advantages of the S602Z Pro (vs the CX2)

  • Significantly wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/3.5
  • Much larger sensor: 1/1.7" 7.6x5.7mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Has more storage slots: 2 vs 1

Significant disadvantages of the S602Z Pro (vs the CX2)

  • Much smaller screen: 1.8" vs 3.0"
  • Much worse wide angle: 35 mm vs 28 mm
  • Much lower resolution screen: 110k dots vs 920k dots

common strengths of the S602Z Pro and CX2

  • Good macro capabilities: 1 cm vs 1 cm
arrow Compare the Fujifilm FinePix S602Z Pro vs the Ricoh CX2