As well as being compared against other ultra compacts and travel zooms, the Samsung WB30F is also often compared to compacts, digicams and super zooms. The Samsung WB30F's top rivals come from Samsung (such as the ST200F and the DV300F) and Sony (such as the Cyber-shot DSC-W370 and the Cyber-shot DSC-W80)

compared toUltra compact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Samsung WB30F compared to other ultra compact competitors include: it has a slightly wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 26 mm), has better image stabilization (lens vs digital), is newer (january 2013 vs february 2011) and is slightly less expensive ($177.20 vs $457.39).

However, on average it has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.1 vs f/2.5) and has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Samsung DV300F

Samsung DV300F
1 year older

Significant advantages of the DV300F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DV300F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the DV300F and WB30F

  • None found

Samsung SH100

Samsung SH100
1 year older

Significant advantages of the SH100 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SH100 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the SH100 and WB30F

  • None found

Samsung ST150F

Samsung ST150F
similar age

Significant advantages of the ST150F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the ST150F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the ST150F and WB30F

  • None found

Samsung DV150F

Samsung DV150F
similar age

Significant advantages of the DV150F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DV150F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the DV150F and WB30F

  • None found

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX1

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX1
3 years older
$457

Significant advantages of the DSC-WX1 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-WX1 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the DSC-WX1 and WB30F

  • None found

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W320

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W320
3 years older
$171

Significant advantages of the DSC-W320 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-W320 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

common strengths of the DSC-W320 and WB30F

  • None found

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Samsung WB30F compared to other travel zoom competitors include: it is significantly smaller (ultra compact (98×58×17 mm) vs compact (105×62×35 mm)), is thinner (0.7" vs 1.1"), is slightly lighter (128 g vs 214 g) and is slightly less expensive ($177.20 vs $359.99).

However, on average it has a slightly lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 921k dots) and has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS50
2 years newer
$279

Significant advantages of the DMC-ZS50 (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly more zoom: 30x vs 10x
  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD
  • Much higher resolution screen: 1,040k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-ZS50 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much larger: Compact (111×65×34 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Much thicker: 1.3" vs 0.7"
  • Much heavier: 243 g vs 128 g

common strengths of the DMC-ZS50 and WB30F

  • Fairly small: Compact (111×65×34 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 1.3" vs 0.7"
  • Light weight: 243 g vs 128 g

Canon PowerShot ELPH 140 IS

Canon PowerShot ELPH 140 IS
1 year newer

Significant advantages of the ELPH 140 IS (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the ELPH 140 IS (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Thicker: 0.9" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the ELPH 140 IS and WB30F

  • Very small: Super compact (95×54×22 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 0.7"
  • Very light: 130 g vs 128 g

Samsung WB35F

Samsung WB35F
1 year newer
$425

Significant advantages of the WB35F (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the WB35F (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly larger: Compact (101×61×28 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Much thicker: 1.1" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the WB35F and WB30F

  • Very small: Compact (101×61×28 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 1.1" vs 0.7"
  • Very light: 144 g vs 128 g

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W690

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W690
10 months older

Significant advantages of the DSC-W690 (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly longer exposures: 30 seconds vs 8 seconds

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-W690 (vs the WB30F)

  • Thicker: 0.9" vs 0.7"
  • Significantly slower max shutter speed: 1/1600 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second

common strengths of the DSC-W690 and WB30F

  • Very small: Super compact (94×56×22 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 0.7"
  • Very light: 142 g vs 128 g

Samsung WB200F

Samsung WB200F
similar age

Significant advantages of the WB200F (vs the WB30F)

  • Has a touch screen

Significant disadvantages of the WB200F (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly heavier: 226 g vs 128 g
  • Thicker: 0.9" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the WB200F and WB30F

  • Very small: Compact (107×62×22 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 0.7"
  • Light weight: 226 g vs 128 g

Nikon Coolpix S9100

Nikon Coolpix S9100
1 year older
$360

Significant advantages of the S9100 (vs the WB30F)

  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD
  • Much higher resolution screen: 921k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the S9100 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much larger: Compact (105×62×35 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Much thicker: 1.4" vs 0.7"
  • Worse image stabilization:
    1. Sensor shift
    vs
    1. Lens

common strengths of the S9100 and WB30F

  • Fairly small: Compact (105×62×35 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Thin: 1.4" vs 0.7"
  • Very light: 214 g vs 128 g

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Samsung WB30F compared to compact competitors include: it has a much wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 34 mm), has a slightly larger screen (3" vs 2.7"), is slightly smaller (ultra compact (98×58×17 mm) vs compact (100×57×26 mm)), has better image stabilization (lens vs digital) and is newer (january 2013 vs march 2010).

However, on average it has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Canon PowerShot A810

Canon PowerShot A810
1 year older

Significant advantages of the A810 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the A810 (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly larger: Compact (95×62×30 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Much thicker: 1.2" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the A810 and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Thin: 1.2" vs 0.7"
  • Light weight: 171 g vs 128 g

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W370

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W370
3 years older
$611

Significant advantages of the DSC-W370 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-W370 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much worse wide angle: 34 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly thicker: 1" vs 0.7"
  • Significantly slower max shutter speed: 1/1600 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second

common strengths of the DSC-W370 and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Fairly small: Compact (100×57×26 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Larger than average screens: 3" vs 3"

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W80

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W80
5 years older

Significant advantages of the DSC-W80 (vs the WB30F)

  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-W80 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much worse wide angle: 35 mm vs 24 mm
  • Smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3"
  • Significantly thicker: 0.9" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the DSC-W80 and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Fairly small: Super compact (91×58×23 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens

Canon ELPH 100 HS

Canon ELPH 100 HS
1 year older

Significant advantages of the 100 HS (vs the WB30F)

  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD

Significant disadvantages of the 100 HS (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly slower max shutter speed: 1/1500 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second

common strengths of the 100 HS and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Very small: Super compact (93×56×20 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Larger than average screens: 3" vs 3"

Olympus T100

Olympus T-100
2 years older

Significant advantages of the T100 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the T100 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much worse wide angle: 36 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly narrower aperture: f/4.6 vs f/3.1
  • Worse image stabilization:
    1. Digital
    vs
    1. Lens

common strengths of the T100 and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Fairly small: Compact (93×60×23 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Very thin: 0.9" vs 0.7"

Fujifilm FinePix AV200

Fujifilm FinePix AV200
1 year older

Significant advantages of the AV200 (vs the WB30F)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the AV200 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much worse wide angle: 32 mm vs 24 mm
  • Worse image stabilization:
    1. Digital
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Larger: Compact (93×60×28 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)

common strengths of the AV200 and WB30F

  • Each has a built-in flash
  • Fairly small: Compact (93×60×28 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Thin: 1.1" vs 0.7"

compared toDigicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Samsung WB30F compared to digicam competitors include: it has a significantly wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 27 mm) and is newer (january 2013 vs january 2012).

However, on average it has a slightly lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 460k dots).

Samsung ST200F

Samsung ST200F
1 year older

Significant advantages of the ST200F (vs the WB30F)

  • Higher resolution screen: 460k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the ST200F (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 27 mm vs 24 mm

common strengths of the ST200F and WB30F

  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Samsung WB30F compared to super zoom competitors include: it is slightly smaller (ultra compact (98×58×17 mm) vs prosumer size (114×78×95 mm)), is thinner (0.7" vs 3.7") and is slightly lighter (128 g vs 541 g).

However, on average it has a significantly lower resolution screen (230k dots vs 921k dots), doesn't have a screen which flips out, has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS), is older (january 2013 vs february 2016) and has a slower max shutter speed (1/2000 of a second vs 1/4000 of a second).

Kodak PixPro AZ361

Kodak PixPro AZ361
similar age
$160

Significant advantages of the AZ361 (vs the WB30F)

  • Higher resolution screen: 460k dots vs 230k dots

Significant disadvantages of the AZ361 (vs the WB30F)

  • Significantly thicker: 3" vs 0.7"

common strengths of the AZ361 and WB30F

  • Very small: Prosumer size (113×82×77 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Thin: 3" vs 0.7"
  • Very light: 416 g vs 128 g

Nikon Coolpix B500

Nikon Coolpix B500
3 years newer
$242 - $257

Significant advantages of the Coolpix B500 (vs the WB30F)

  • Much higher resolution screen: 921k dots vs 230k dots
  • Has a CMOS-family sensor: CMOS vs CCD
  • Has a flip-out screen

Significant disadvantages of the Coolpix B500 (vs the WB30F)

  • Larger: Prosumer size (114×78×95 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Significantly thicker: 3.7" vs 0.7"
  • Significantly heavier: 541 g vs 128 g

common strengths of the Coolpix B500 and WB30F

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (114×78×95 mm) vs Ultra compact (98×58×17 mm)
  • Thin: 3.7" vs 0.7"
  • Light weight: 541 g vs 128 g