OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Cameras Methodology v1.0
Cameras Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Cameras Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Cameras Methodology v1.0

Ricoh WG-4 Review | 108 Data compared

Avg. price:~£120Sensor size:1/2.3"Weight:229 gBattery life (CIPA):240 shots

Ricoh WG-4 Review: Compare 108 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Cameras category and whether it is worth buying.

4.6

Overall score

Score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the camera's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best cameras on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
Score components

90%

4.6

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–¼Worse than 72% of cameras
4.6

Technical score

Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Cameras category across these key areas: Sensor & Image, Photo Features, Video & Audio, Display & Design, Battery & Power, Connectivity & Storage.
When it matters
When you want to compare cameras based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components

28%

5.2

Sensor & Image

25%

4.2

Photo Features

18%

4.7

Video & Audio

14%

5.7

Display & Design

8%

3.5

Battery & Power

7%

2.8

Connectivity & Storage

â–¼Worse than 65% of cameras
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the camera.
When it matters
When real-world owner satisfaction and review volume matter to your decision.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £120

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of camera Ricoh WG-4

Technical score
Technical score
4.6/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Cameras category across these key areas: Sensor & Image, Photo Features, Video & Audio, Display & Design, Battery & Power, Connectivity & Storage.
When it matters
When you want to compare cameras based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
Score components:

28%

5.2

Sensor & Image

25%

4.2

Photo Features

18%

4.7

Video & Audio

14%

5.7

Display & Design

8%

3.5

Battery & Power

7%

2.8

Connectivity & Storage

4.6
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the camera.
When it matters
When real-world owner satisfaction and review volume matter to your decision.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the camera.
When it matters
When you want to see which cameras attract the most buyer attention and review activity.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Ricoh WG-4 has a popularity score of 1, which is lower than 51.3% of cameras.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the camera's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you want to know how much overall quality you get for the price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
Score components:

60%

4.6

Overall score

40%

9.9

Price

6.2
Sensor size
1/2.3"
Sensor size
1/2.3"
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
This camera uses a sensor classified as 1/2.3"; it is smaller than the sensor in 60.5% of cameras and the same size as the sensor in 38.1% of cameras.
Main camera megapixels
16 MP
Main camera megapixels
16 MP
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
This camera has a sensor resolution of 16 MP, which is lower than that of 61.9% of cameras and equal to that of 10.1% of cameras.
Main camera pixel size
1.34 µm
Main camera pixel size
1.34 µm
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Market range: <1.33 µm – >5.94 µm
This camera has sensor pixels measuring 1.34 µm, which are smaller than those in 74.1% of cameras and the same size as those in 14% of cameras.
Base ISO
125
Base ISO
125
â–² Better than 72% of models
Market range: <80 – >200
This camera has a base ISO of 125 which is higher than that of 72.4% of cameras and equal to that of 8.1% of cameras.
Max ISO
ISO 6400 ISO
Max ISO
ISO 6,400
â–¼ Worse than 47% of models
This camera reaches a maximum sensitivity of ISO 6,400, which is higher than that of 37.3% of cameras and equal to that of 16.2% of cameras.
Show more
Lens mount
N/A
Built-in focus motor
no
Built-in focus motor
no
â–¼ Worse than 11% of models
This camera does not have a built-in focus motor. 11% of cameras have a built-in focus motor.
N. of focus points
9
N. of focus points
9
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <9 – >399
This camera has 9 focus points, fewer than the number offered by 67.1% of cameras and equal to the number offered by 26% of cameras.
Phase-detection autofocus (photos)
no
Phase-detection autofocus (photos)
no
â–¼ Worse than 37% of models
This camera does not support phase-detection autofocus for photos. 37.5% of cameras support phase-detection autofocus for photos.
AF tracking
yes
AF tracking
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This camera supports AF tracking. This feature is available on 88% of cameras.
Show more
Max video resolution
1920 px
Max video resolution
1920 px
â–² Better than 29% of models
This camera supports 1920 px video recording which is higher quality than that of 28.7% of cameras and equal to that of 47.1% of cameras.
Video bitrate
17 Mbps
Video bitrate
17 Mbps
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Market range: <12 Mbps – >237 Mbps
This camera has a video bitrate of 17 Mbps which is lower than that of 77.1% of cameras and equal to that of 3.6% of cameras.
Video bit depth
8 bit
Video bit depth
8 bit
â–¼ Worse than 12% of models
This camera supports video at 8 bit, a bit depth higher than that of 7.8% of cameras and equal to that of 80.6% of cameras.
Video chroma subsampling
4:2:0
Video chroma subsampling
4:2:0
â–¼ Worse than 22% of models
This camera supports 4:2:0 video chroma subsampling which is more advanced than that of 7.8% of cameras and equal to that of 69.9% of cameras.
Video codecs
H.264
Show more
Type
compact
Weight
229 g
Weight
229 g
â–² Better than 72% of models
Market range: <142 g – >812 g
This camera weighs 229 g which is lighter than 72.3% of cameras and equal to the weight of 0.1% of cameras.
Width
124 mm
Width
124 mm
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Market range: <96 mm – >142.6 mm
This camera has a width of 124 mm which is wider than 58.9% of cameras and equal to that of 1.9% of cameras.
Height
64.5 mm
Height
64.5 mm
â–² Better than 68% of models
Market range: <57.6 mm – >105.8 mm
This camera has a height of 64.5 mm which is shorter than 67.8% of cameras and equal to that of 0.5% of cameras.
Thickness
33 mm
Thickness
33 mm
â–² Better than 71% of models
Market range: <21.9 mm – >92 mm
This camera has a thickness of 33 mm which is thinner than 71.1% of cameras and equal to that of 1.2% of cameras.
Show more
Battery life (CIPA)
240 shots
Battery life (CIPA)
240 shots
â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Market range: <210 shots – >700 shots
This camera has a CIPA-rated battery life of 240 shots, which is shorter than that of 76.6% of cameras and equal to that of 2.1% of cameras.
Battery capacity
925 mAh
Battery capacity
925 mAh
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Market range: <700 mAh – >2.2k mAh
This camera has a battery capacity of 925 mAh which is smaller than the batteries in 74.3% of cameras and equal to those in 2.6% of cameras.
Removable battery
yes
Removable battery
yes
â–² Better than 1% of models
This camera has a removable battery, and 98.7% of cameras include one.
USB Power Delivery (PD)
no
USB Power Delivery (PD)
no
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
This camera does not support USB Power Delivery. 10.1% of cameras support USB Power Delivery.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
â–¼ Worse than 48% of models
This camera does not support Wi-Fi. 47.9% of cameras include this feature.
Wi-Fi version
N/A
Bluetooth connectivity
no
Bluetooth connectivity
no
â–¼ Worse than 23% of models
This camera does not have Bluetooth. 22.7% of cameras support Bluetooth.
Bluetooth version
N/A
USB Type-C
no
USB Type-C
no
â–¼ Worse than 15% of models
This camera does not include USB Type-C. 14.6% of cameras use USB-C.
Show more

Ricoh WG-4 vs the average camera

246810TotalDisplay & DesignSensor & ImagePhoto FeaturesVideo & AudioBattery & PowerConnectivity & Storage
  • In-body stabilization
    Sensor-shift stabilization
    yes
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    This camera supports in-body stabilization, the average camera does not.
  • Uses a BSI sensor
    BSI sensor
    yes
    â–² Better than 65% of models
    This camera uses a BSI sensor, the average camera does not. 34.8% of cameras use a BSI sensor.
  • Supports slow-motion video
    Slow-motion video
    yes
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This camera supports slow-motion video, the average camera does not.
    Supports up to 120 fps high-speed video.
  • 166 g lighter
    Weight
    229 g
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <142 g – >812 g
    This camera is lighter than the average camera (229 g vs 395 g). The average camera weighs 395 g.
    229 g vs 395 g
  • Built-in timelapse
    Timelapse function
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This camera includes timelapse capture, the average camera does not.
  • 0.07 GB more storage
    Internal storage
    0.07 GB
    â–² Better than 88% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >0.07 GB
    This camera has a higher internal storage than the average camera (0.1 GB vs 0 GB). The average camera offers 0 GB of internal storage.
    0.07 GB vs 0 GB
  • 2.42x cheaper
    Ricoh WG-4 is cheaper than the average camera (£120 vs £290).
    £120 vs £290
  • 1 more customizable buttons
    Customizable button count
    1
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    Market range: <0 – >7
    This camera has more customizable buttons than the average camera (1 vs 0). The average camera offers 0 customizable buttons.
    1 vs 0
  • 2.42x cheaper
    Ricoh WG-4 is cheaper than the average camera (£120 vs £290).
    £120 vs £290
  • 166 g lighter
    Weight
    229 g
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <142 g – >812 g
    This camera is lighter than the average camera (229 g vs 395 g). The average camera weighs 395 g.
    229 g vs 395 g
  • 1 more customizable buttons
    Customizable button count
    1
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    Market range: <0 – >7
    This camera has more customizable buttons than the average camera (1 vs 0). The average camera offers 0 customizable buttons.
    1 vs 0
  • 13 mm thinner
    Thickness
    33 mm
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <21.9 mm – >92 mm
    This camera is thinner than the average camera (33 mm vs 46 mm). The average camera has a thickness of 46 mm.
    33 mm vs 46 mm
  • Uses a BSI sensor
    BSI sensor
    yes
    â–² Better than 65% of models
    This camera uses a BSI sensor, the average camera does not. 34.8% of cameras use a BSI sensor.
  • In-body stabilization
    Sensor-shift stabilization
    yes
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    This camera supports in-body stabilization, the average camera does not.
  • Supports slow-motion video
    Slow-motion video
    yes
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This camera supports slow-motion video, the average camera does not.
    Supports up to 120 fps high-speed video.
  • Built-in timelapse
    Timelapse function
    yes
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    This camera includes timelapse capture, the average camera does not.
  • 0.07 GB more storage
    Internal storage
    0.07 GB
    â–² Better than 88% of models
    Market range: <0 GB – >0.07 GB
    This camera has a higher internal storage than the average camera (0.1 GB vs 0 GB). The average camera offers 0 GB of internal storage.
    0.07 GB vs 0 GB
  • Smaller sensor
    Sensor size
    1/2.3"
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This camera has a smaller sensor than the average camera (1/2.3" vs APS-C).
    1/2.3" vs APS-C
  • 2 µm smaller sensor pixels
    Main camera pixel size
    1.34 µm
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <1.33 µm – >5.94 µm
    This camera has smaller sensor pixels than the average camera (1.3 µm vs 3.34 µm). The average sensor pixel size is 3.34 µm.
    1.34 µm vs 3.34 µm
  • 4.2 fps slower mechanical burst
    Continuous shooting (mechanical)
    1.5 fps
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <1.08 fps – >10 fps
    This camera has a slower mechanical burst than the average camera (1.5 fps vs 5.7 fps). The average camera reaches 5.7 fps.
    1.5 fps vs 5.7 fps
  • No hot shoe
    Hot shoe
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This camera does not have a hot shoe, the average camera does.
  • No RAW photo capture
    RAW photo capture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This camera does not support RAW photo capture, the average camera does. 62.8% of cameras support RAW formats.
  • 90 shots fewer shots per charge
    Battery life (CIPA)
    240 shots
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <210 shots – >700 shots
    This camera has shorter battery life than the average camera (240 shots vs 330 shots). The average camera delivers 330 shots per charge.
    240 shots vs 330 shots
  • 14 fewer AF points
    N. of focus points
    9
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <9 – >399
    This camera has fewer focus points than the average camera (9 vs 23). The average camera offers 23 focus points.
    9 vs 23
  • Lower sensor resolution
    Main camera megapixels
    16 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This camera has a lower sensor resolution than the average camera (16 MP vs 16.2 MP). The average camera has a sensor resolution of 16.2 MP.
    16 MP vs 16.2 MP
  • 93% less popular
    Ricoh WG-4 is less popular than the average camera (1 vs 1.9).
    1 vs 1.93
  • No hot shoe
    Hot shoe
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 54% of models
    This camera does not have a hot shoe, the average camera does.
  • 14 m shallower water resistance
    Waterproof depth rating
    14 m
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    Market range: <0 m – >0 m
    This camera has a lower waterproof depth rating than the average camera (14 m vs 0 m). The average camera has a waterproof depth rating of 0 m.
    14 m vs 0 m
  • Smaller sensor
    Sensor size
    1/2.3"
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models
    This camera has a smaller sensor than the average camera (1/2.3" vs APS-C).
    1/2.3" vs APS-C
  • 2 µm smaller sensor pixels
    Main camera pixel size
    1.34 µm
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <1.33 µm – >5.94 µm
    This camera has smaller sensor pixels than the average camera (1.3 µm vs 3.34 µm). The average sensor pixel size is 3.34 µm.
    1.34 µm vs 3.34 µm
  • Lower sensor resolution
    Main camera megapixels
    16 MP
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This camera has a lower sensor resolution than the average camera (16 MP vs 16.2 MP). The average camera has a sensor resolution of 16.2 MP.
    16 MP vs 16.2 MP
  • 4.2 fps slower mechanical burst
    Continuous shooting (mechanical)
    1.5 fps
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <1.08 fps – >10 fps
    This camera has a slower mechanical burst than the average camera (1.5 fps vs 5.7 fps). The average camera reaches 5.7 fps.
    1.5 fps vs 5.7 fps
  • No RAW photo capture
    RAW photo capture
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    This camera does not support RAW photo capture, the average camera does. 62.8% of cameras support RAW formats.
  • 14 fewer AF points
    N. of focus points
    9
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <9 – >399
    This camera has fewer focus points than the average camera (9 vs 23). The average camera offers 23 focus points.
    9 vs 23
  • No manual exposure control
    Manual exposure
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    This camera does not support manual exposure, the average camera does. 72% of cameras support manual exposure controls.
    No true manual exposure mode.
  • 26 s shorter maximum exposure
    Longest shutter speed
    4 s
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <4 s – >1.8k s
    This camera supports a shorter maximum exposure than the average camera (4 s s vs 30 s s). The average camera supports a longest shutter speed of 30 s s.
    4 s vs 30 s
  • 13 Mbps lower video bitrate
    Video bitrate
    17 Mbps
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <12 Mbps – >237 Mbps
    This camera has a lower video bitrate than the average camera (17 Mbps vs 30 Mbps). The average camera records at 30 Mbps.
    17 Mbps vs 30 Mbps
  • 5 min shorter recording time
    Max video recording time
    25 min
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <25 min – >60 min
    This camera records continuously for less time than the average camera (25 min vs 30 min). The average camera records for 30 min.
    25 min vs 30 min
  • 90 shots fewer shots per charge
    Battery life (CIPA)
    240 shots
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <210 shots – >700 shots
    This camera has shorter battery life than the average camera (240 shots vs 330 shots). The average camera delivers 330 shots per charge.
    240 shots vs 330 shots
  • 195 mAh smaller battery capacity
    Battery capacity
    925 mAh
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <700 mAh – >2.2k mAh
    This camera has a lower battery capacity than the average camera (925 mAh vs 1120 mAh). The average camera has a battery capacity of 1120 mAh.
    925 mAh vs 1,120 mAh

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

E
ephotozine.com
07/05/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 GPS Waterproof Review - ePHOTOzine
R
reviewed.com
16/07/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 Digital Camera Review - Reviewed
D
dpreview.com
17/06/2014
Summary of the review
2014-15 Waterproof Camera Roundup - DPReview
T
techradar.com
17/07/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 GPS review - TechRadar
U
uk.pcmag.com
14/10/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 Review - PCMag UK
A
au.pcmag.com
15/10/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 Review - PCMag Australia
P
pentaxforums.com
No specific date listed
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 GPS Review - Performance - Pentax Forums DPReview
D
digitalkamera.de
11/06/2014
Summary of the review
Review: Ricoh WG-4 GPS - Digitalkamera.de
(Translated)Show original
N
netzwelt.de
21/10/2026
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 Review
(Translated)Show original
C
connect-living.de
22/10/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 GPS review - outdoor camera - connect-living
(Translated)Show original
D
das-abenteuer-fotografie.de
26/10/2015
Summary of the review
Is the RICOH WG-4 any good for my needs?
(Translated)Show original
D
dkamera.de
05/05/2016
Summary of the review
Tech | Pentax WG-4 GPS Review - DKamera
(Translated)Show original
C
clubic.com
10/06/2014
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 GPS: The most stylish waterproof compact camera
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
06/02/2014
Summary of the review
The Pentax WG-3 and WG-10 become the Ricoh WG-4 and WG-20
(Translated)Show original
O
onderwatercamerakopen.com
06/08/2015
Summary of the review
Ricoh WG-4 Review
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Ricoh WG-4

  • Excellent image quality, particularly in macro mode
  • Robust and ultra-resistant design (waterproof up to 14 m, shockproof up to 2 m, anti-freeze and crush resistant)
  • Very satisfactory battery life for this type of device
  • Lens offering good versatility with a bright f/2.0 wide-angle aperture
  • Convenient on-board features for outdoor activities (GPS, electronic compass, pressure sensor)

What we don't like about Ricoh WG-4

  • Absence of induction charging (a feature present on the previous model)
  • Slower charging time with cable compared to other solutions
  • Image quality in low light sometimes limited, typical of small sensors
  • Fewer advanced customization options for expert photographers

Verdict

The Ricoh WG-4 is a rugged, adventure-proof compact camera featuring a 16-megapixel 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensor and a bright 25-100mm equivalent f/2.0-4.9 lens. Built for extreme conditions, it is waterproof to 14 metres, shockproof from 2 metres, freezeproof to -10°C, and crushproof up to 100kgf. Notable for its six LED macro lights surrounding the lens, it excels in close-up photography and includes sensor-shift image stabilisation alongside Full HD 1080p video recording. Main pros include its class-leading f/2.0 maximum aperture for low light, exceptional macro capabilities, and a distinctively durable design. However, its primary cons are a limited 4x optical zoom range, a slow 1.5 fps full-resolution burst shooting rate, and the absence of built-in GPS in the standard model.

Compare Ricoh WG-4 with other products in the Cameras category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Ricoh WG-4 and other products in the Cameras category

No results found