Updated (January 2012): Compare the Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR vs Fujifilm FinePix S4200

Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR vs Fujifilm FinePix S4200

Winner
Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR

53

Fujifilm FinePix S4200

43

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR

High speed movies
High-speed framerate
320 fps
High ISO
Light sensitivity
12,800 ISO
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
CMOS Sensor
Sensor type
Better in low light
 

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm FinePix S4200

We are not aware of any reasons to consider buying the Fujifilm FinePix S4200 over the Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR.

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Fujifilm FinePix S4200.

competitors

Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR Competitors

Nikon D7100

Nikon D7100

Entry-level DSLR

$629 - $679 body only

$919 with 18-140mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Fujifilm FinePix HS30 EXR

Fujifilm FinePix HS30 EXR

Super zoom

External mic jack Has an external mic jack
Battery life Much longer battery life
Light sensitivity Worse maximum light sensitivity
Fujifilm FinePix S9200

Fujifilm FinePix S9200

Super zoom

$380

Zoom Significantly more zoom
Image stabilization Better image stabilization
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Fujifilm FinePix S4200 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix L810

Nikon Coolpix L810

Super zoom

$350

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Image stabilization Better image stabilization
Viewfinder No viewfinder
Fujifilm FinePix 3800

Fujifilm FinePix 3800

Digicam

Aperture Wider aperture
Size Smaller
Screen size Much smaller screen
Fujifilm FinePix S2950

Fujifilm FinePix S2950

Super zoom

$300

Size Smaller
Thickness Thinner
Wide angle Worse wide angle

discussion

Fujifilm FinePix HS20 EXR
FinePix HS20 EXR
Fujifilm

Report a correction
Fujifilm FinePix S4200
FinePix S4200
Fujifilm

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments