Updated (January, 2012): Compare the Samsung WB150F vs Samsung WB750

vs

Samsung WB700

57

Samsung WB700

Tie
     
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung WB150F

Zoom
Great zoom
18x
 

Reasons to buy the Samsung WB700

Zoom
Great zoom
18x
 
Differences | Recommendations | Cast your vote | Similarities | Competitors | Appearance | Discussion

differences

Advantages of the Samsung WB150F

Report a correction
Panorama Can create panoramas in-camera Yes vs No
Help
Stitches together multiple photos for a wide perspective
Screen resolution Higher resolution screen 460k dots vs 213k dots
Help
More than 2x higher resolution screen
Weight Lighter 188 g vs 245 g
Help
More than 20% lighter
Samsung WB150F Learn more about
the Samsung WB150F

Advantages of the Samsung WB700

Report a correction
Size Smaller 99x59x22 mm vs 106x59x23 mm
Help
More than 10% smaller
Macro focus Better macro capability 3 cm vs 5 cm
Help
Focus on subjects 40% closer to the lens
Thickness Slightly thinner 0.9" vs 0.9"
Help
Around 10% thinner
Samsung WB700 Learn more about
the Samsung WB700
vs

recommendations

Which camera do we recommend? Relative to the best recent travel zooms, and ignoring price

Samsung WB150F Samsung WB150F 58
Retailer
    Style
      Color
        You save

        vs

        57 Samsung WB700 Samsung WB700

        similarities

        Compared to recent compacts

        Common Strengths Common Weaknesses
        Zoom Great zoom Help
        18x
        Image stabilization Good image stabilization Help
        Lens
        Thickness Thin Help
        0.9"
        Sensor type Lower-end sensor types Help
        CCD
        Supports RAW No RAW support Help
        Less editing fidelity
        HDR Neither has in-camera HDR Help
        You could do HDR manually
        Movie format Both shoot high resolution HD movies Help
        720p @ 30fps

        Compared to recent travel zooms

        Common Strengths Common Weaknesses
        Size Fairly small Help
        WB150F:106x59x23 mm
        WB700:99x59x22 mm
        High-speed framerate No high speed movie support Help
        Not supported
        GPS No built-in GPS Help
        Missing geo-tagging

        competitors

        Shared Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Samsung WB200F

        Samsung WB200F

        Travel zoom

        $110 - $150

        Touch screen Has a touch screen
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Samsung WB350F

        Samsung WB350F

        Travel zoom

        $163 - $199

        Zoom Has slightly more zoom
        Aperture Has a slightly wider aperture
        Weight Is slightly heavier
        Size Is slightly larger
        Samsung DV300F

        Samsung DV300F

        Ultra compact

        Aperture Has a slightly wider aperture
        Size Is slightly smaller
        Macro focus Slightly worse macro focusing
        Zoom Has significantly less zoom
        Sony CyberShot DSC-W730

        Sony CyberShot DSC-W730

        Travel zoom

        $138

        Weight Is significantly lighter
        Longest exposure Slightly shorter exposures
        Macro focus Slightly worse macro focusing
        Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX50

        Sony Cyber-shot WX50

        Ultra compact

        $138

        Aperture Has a slightly wider aperture
        Movie format Records higher quality movies
        Longest exposure Slightly shorter exposures
        Macro focus Slightly worse macro focusing
        Samsung WB850F

        Samsung WB850F

        Travel zoom

        $397

        Zoom Has slightly more zoom
        Aperture Has a slightly wider aperture
        Lowest price Is significantly more expensive
        Size Is slightly larger

        Samsung WB150F Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Samsung WB250F

        Samsung WB250F

        Travel zoom

        $118 - $169

        Movie format Higher resolution movies
        Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
        Weight Heavier
        Samsung WB30F

        Samsung WB30F

        Ultra compact

        $98 - $99

        Size Smaller
        Weight Lighter
        Zoom Less zoom
        Screen resolution Lower resolution screen
        Samsung ST150F

        Samsung ST150F

        Ultra compact

        $75 - $90

        Aperture Wider aperture
        Size Smaller
        Zoom Significantly less zoom
        Image stabilization Worse image stabilization
        Samsung WB35F

        Samsung WB35F

        Travel zoom

        $74 - $119

        Aperture Slightly wider aperture
        Weight Lighter
        Zoom Less zoom
        Screen size Smaller screen

        Samsung WB700 Competitors

        Advantages

        Disadvantages

        Olympus Stylus XZ-10

        Olympus Stylus XZ-10

        Pro digicam

        $182 - $399

        Aperture Much wider aperture
        Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
        Zoom Significantly less zoom
        Size Significantly larger
        Samsung WB650

        Samsung WB650

        Travel zoom

        GPS Has a GPS
        Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
        Size Larger
        Zoom Less zoom
        Canon PowerShot SX260 HS

        Canon PowerShot SX260 HS

        Travel zoom

        $200 - $300

        GPS Has a GPS
        Supports 24p Supports 24p
        Size Significantly larger
        Aperture Narrower aperture
        Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ7

        Travel zoom

        Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
        Light sensitivity (boost) Has boost ISO
        Zoom Less zoom
        Size Significantly larger
        Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ8

        Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ8

        Travel zoom

        Light sensitivity (boost) Has boost ISO
        Weight Lighter
        Zoom Less zoom
        Size Significantly larger

        appearance

        Samsung WB150F Samsung WB700
        Samsung WB150F
        Samsung WB150F Samsung WB700

        discussion

        Samsung WB150F
        WB150F
        Samsung

        Report a correction
        Samsung WB700
        WB700
        Samsung

        Report a correction

        Showing 0 comments