Canon ELPH 180 vs Casio EX-S5

Comparing the Canon PowerShot ELPH 180 and Casio Exilim EX-S5: An Ultracompact Camera Analysis

As an experienced photography equipment reviewer with over 15 years of extensive hands-on examination of digital cameras, I present a comprehensive analysis of two ultracompact cameras: the Canon PowerShot ELPH 180, announced in early 2016, and the Casio Exilim EX-S5, dating back to 2009. Both cameras appeal primarily to casual photographers seeking small, pocketable cameras, but despite the similarity in their body types, their technical specifications and operational capabilities diverge significantly. This article scrutinizes their sensors, image quality, autofocus, ergonomics, shooting versatility, and overall value from the perspective of photography enthusiasts and professionals needing informed purchasing decisions.

Form Factor and Handling: Ergonomics of Ultracompact Design

Both the Canon ELPH 180 and Casio EX-S5 embrace a slim, ultracompact profile conducive to portability. The ELPH 180 measures a compact 95 x 54 x 22 mm and weighs 126 grams including its NB-11LH battery, while the EX-S5 is marginally larger in two dimensions, at 102 x 35 x 22 mm, but lighter at 100 grams.

The difference in thickness and weight has practical implications. The Canon’s slightly higher mass supports better grip stability, though both lack dedicated handgrips or textured surfaces, which may affect handling during extended shoots or in situations requiring precise framing, such as macro or telephoto work. The Casio’s elongated horizontal footprint and notably thinner profile lend it a more discreet carry profile, optimizing it for street and travel photography requiring low visual impact.

Neither camera includes a built-in electronic viewfinder, meaning all composition tasks rely on their rear LCDs or, in bright sunlight, on trial-and-error framing. The Canon’s marginally wider physical body also accommodates a more ergonomically placed shutter button and zoom rocker.

Referencing the control layout in the next section helps clarify user interaction complexities.

Control Layout and User Interface: Top-View Comparison

The Canon ELPH 180 employs a minimalistic top button arrangement, typical for entry-level ultracompact cameras. Controls include a power button, shutter release with integrated zoom toggle, and a dedicated flash pop-up button. The simplicity aims to streamline user focus on framing and shooting rather than extensive menu diving - a design that suits casual point-and-shoot users but may frustrate those desiring manual exposure control or quick access to advanced settings.

Conversely, the Casio EX-S5 presents a more complex, albeit dated, layout with a manual focus ring absent on the Canon, indicating Quasi-manual focusing capability. While the EX-S5 lacks dedicated buttons for ISO or exposure compensation, its reliance on manual focus and multiple self-timer modes (including triple self-timer) reflects slightly more nuanced user engagement, favoring users willing to manage focus actively - a rarity in ultracompacts.

Both cameras lack touchscreens and articulating displays, creating limitations in live-view focusing and menu navigation, compounded by the lower resolution displays discussed subsequently.

Imaging Sensor and Resolution: Technical Foundations of Image Quality

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3" CCD sensor format, measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, with an active sensor area approximately 28.07 mm² and an effective crop factor around 5.8x. The sensor technology and dimensions are identical; however, important differentiators include resolution and image processing.

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • 20 megapixels (5152 x 3864 max resolution)
  • Native ISO range: 100 – 1600
  • Antialias filter presence: yes
  • Image processor: DIGIC 4+
• Casio EX-S5:
  • 9 megapixels (3648 x 2736 max resolution)
  • Native ISO range: 64 – 1600
  • Antialias filter presence: yes
  • Image processor: unspecified

The Canon’s 20MP count affords greater resolution for cropping flexibility and large-print outputs, though the relatively small sensor size inherently limits dynamic range and high-ISO performance compared to larger sensor cameras. The DIGIC 4+ image processor represents a modest improvement over earlier chips, assisting noise control and color fidelity boosted by Canon’s long experience optimizing JPEG rendering.

The Casio’s lower 9MP resolution reduces file sizes and improves noise control due to larger individual photosites but limits cropping latitude and detail capture. The older sensor and processor architecture signal older noise reduction and color science, likely rendering less vibrant images with higher noise floors at elevated ISO.

No raw capture is supported by either camera, restricting professionals from post-processing optimization - a significant workflow caveat.

In practical terms, image quality differences manifest primarily in detail acuity, fine texture rendition, and noise at ISO 800 and above, with Canon marginally outperforming the Casio in most lighting conditions yet both constrained by their sensor class.

Autofocus Performance and Manual Focus Capabilities

Focusing systems in ultracompacts are notoriously rudimentary due to package constraints and cost targets.

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • Focus type: Contrast-detection autofocus (CDAF) only
  • Focus modes: Single AF, continuous AF (slow at 0.8 fps), face detection enabled
  • No manual focus ring or ability
• Casio EX-S5:
  • Focus type: Contrast-detection autofocus
  • Single AF only (no continuous AF)
  • Manual focus option available via lens ring
  • No face detection

The Canon’s CDAF system supports face detection and multi-area AF, improving subject acquisition in portrait or casual shooting scenarios. Continuous AF can track subject movement but operates at a sluggish 0.8 fps burst framing rate, insufficient for action, sports, or wildlife.

In contrast, the Casio’s lack of continuous AF lessens suitability for moving subjects. However, the availability of manual focus via twisting the lens barrel (a rarity on ultracompacts) allows precision focus critical for macro scenes or low-contrast subjects that challenge contrast-based autofocus.

Neither camera supports phase-detection autofocus or dedicated eye detection, limiting portrait sharpness accuracy. Absence of autofocus assist lamps further complicates low-light focusing.

Due to slower AF and absence of tracking, both cameras are best suited for static or slow-moving subjects.

Lens Characteristics: Focal Range and Aperture Analysis

Both models employ fixed, non-interchangeable zoom lenses - standard among ultracompacts.

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • Zoom range: 28–224 mm (35mm equivalent)
  • Maximum aperture: f/3.2 (wide) to f/6.9 (tele)
  • Macro: Closest focus up to 1 cm
• Casio EX-S5:
  • Zoom focal length unspecified, but similar crop factor (no clear equivalent)
  • Maximum aperture: f/3.1 (wide) to f/5.6 (tele)
  • Macro capability unspecified

Canon’s lens offers a useful 8x optical zoom, suitable for general-purpose use including landscapes at wide-angle, portraits at short telephoto, and modest reach for wildlife or sport under appropriate conditions. Aperture narrowing to f/6.9 at 224 mm limits low-light and depth-of-field control at long focal lengths. The extremely short macro focusing distance (1 cm) is a strong point, allowing detailed close-ups without additional accessories.

The Casio, despite not specifying focal length, presumably offers roughly similar zooming capability commensurate with many early ultracompacts, favoring compactness over reach. The slightly faster aperture at telephoto (f/5.6) compared to Canon’s f/6.9 could yield better low-light performance at longer focal lengths. However, absence of macro information suggests limited close-up versatility.

Neither lens supports optical image stabilization except Canon’s explicit optical image stabilization (OIS) system, which compensates for camera shake and facilitates handheld telephoto use and low-light shooting. The Casio lacks stabilization, a critical technical drawback impacting sharpness and user experience.

Display and Viewfinder Usability: Rear Screen Considerations

The rear LCD is vital on cameras lacking viewfinders, as here.

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • Fixed, non-touch, 2.7-inch screen
  • Resolution: 230k dots
• Casio EX-S5:
  • Fixed, non-touch, 2.7-inch screen
  • Resolution: 115k dots

Despite identical screen sizes, the Canon’s display offers double the resolution of the Casio. This higher pixel count provides clearer image review and more accurate menu reading - valuable when confirming focus or exposure.

Neither unit has touch functionality, and both screens use older LCD technologies without anti-reflective coatings or brightness adjustment advanced features. This impacts outdoor usability in bright daylight but is a typical compromise at this price and class.

Neither device supports live histograms or focus peaking overlays, limiting exposure and focus accuracy feedback - significant considerations for discerning photographers.

Video Capture Capabilities: Practical Shooting Considerations

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • Max video resolution: 1280 x 720 (HD) at 25 fps
  • Formats: MPEG-4, H.264
  • No microphone or headphone ports
  • No image stabilization during video beyond optical IS
• Casio EX-S5:
  • Max video resolution: 640 x 480 (VGA) at 30 fps
  • Format: Motion JPEG
  • No audio ports
  • No IS

The Canon delivers superior video quality, providing HD 720p at 25 fps utilizing efficient H.264 compression resulting in relatively smaller files with better quality. Video stabilization via optical IS further enhances handheld footage usability.

The Casio’s video maxes out at standard definition VGA resolution, producing lower quality, noisier footage, and less efficient MJPEG compression generating significantly larger files. No stabilization or audio input limits practical shooting flexibility for vloggers or multimedia creators.

Neither camera offers advanced video features such as 4K, slow-motion, or external microphone support, restricting video utility to casual clips.

Battery Performance and Storage Flexibility

• Canon ELPH 180:
  • Battery: NB-11LH lithium-ion pack
  • Rated battery life: approx. 220 shots per charge (CIPA standard)
  • Storage: SD, SDHC, SDXC card support
  • Single card slot
• Casio EX-S5:
  • Battery: NP-80 lithium-ion pack
  • Official battery life data unavailable; real-world usage suggests shorter lag due to older technology
  • Storage: SD, SDHC, proprietary Eye-Fi wireless card compatibility
  • Single card slot

The Canon benefits from moderately modern battery technology with respectable longevity for casual shooting, facilitating day trips without frequent recharge. SDXC compatibility ensures support for large capacity cards necessary for higher megapixel images and HD video.

The Casio’s older battery technology may necessitate more frequent recharging, potentially limiting extended use. The limited storage flexibility and optional Eye-Fi wireless card support (now largely obsolete) provide minimal modern connectivity or backup solutions.

Neither camera supports USB charging; battery replacement or external chargers are required.

Connectivity and Expansion Potential

Both cameras lack contemporary wireless connectivity like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. The Casio’s Eye-Fi compatibility was a forward-thinking feature in 2009, facilitating wireless transfer via special SD cards, but now impractical due to discontinued services and hardware. Neither camera supports GPS tagging or HDMI outputs.

USB 2.0 ports enable wired downloading but not tethered shooting, a feature professional photographers often expect for studio or workflow efficiency.

Weather Sealing and Durability

No weather sealing or environmental protection is present in either model. These cameras are vulnerable to dust, moisture, and physical shocks, making them unsuitable for harsh outdoor adventures or professional-purpose fieldwork without additional protective measures.

Practical Photography Use Cases Comparison

A holistic view of performance across photography genres clarifies where these cameras serve best.

Portrait Photography

• Canon ELPH 180: Face detection autofocus improves ease of capturing sharp, flattering portraits. The 20MP sensor allows detailed skin texture reproduction and cropping flexibility. However, limited control over aperture and fixed lens aperture values restrict creative depth-of-field manipulation and bokeh quality.
• Casio EX-S5: Absence of face detection and single AF mode necessitates more manual user input, complicated by no dedicated eye AF or selective AF points. Lower resolution images yield less detail and potential compromise in skin tone reproduction.

Conclusion: Canon provides clearly superior portrait shooting convenience and quality.

Landscape Photography

• Both cameras’ small sensors limit dynamic range and pushing shadow/highlight recovery, but Canon’s higher resolution offers more image detail critical for landscapes.
• Lack of aperture priority mode and manual exposure limit control over depth-of-field and long exposures.
• Neither camera has weather sealing, often essential for outdoor shooting.
• Canon’s optical stabilization allows steadier handheld shots in low light but tripod use remains recommended.

Conclusion: Canon is modestly better but still only suitable for casual landscapes.

Wildlife Photography

• Both cameras lack continuous autofocus performance optimized for moving subjects.
• Canon’s slow 0.8 fps burst rate inhibits action sequences capture.
• Casio lacks continuous AF and image stabilization.
• Focal length on both is insufficient for serious wildlife reach.

Conclusion: Neither suitable for professional wildlife photography; Canon edges ahead marginally.

Sports Photography

Similar to wildlife, continuous tracking and fast burst rates are essential but lacking in both cameras, excluding them from serious sports use.

Street Photography

• Casio’s slim profile and lower weight favor discreet shooting, beneficial in candid street scenarios.
• Canon’s better face detection and higher resolution provide image quality advantages.
• Both cameras’ larger fixed lenses compared to prime compact cameras limit compositional subtlety.

Conclusion: Both serve casual street photographers, with tradeoffs between stealth and image quality.

Macro Photography

• Canon’s 1 cm macro capability is exceptional, allowing detailed close-ups without auxiliary lenses.
• Casio’s macro capabilities are undefined, implying limited usage.
• Canon’s optical IS improves handheld macro sharpness.

Conclusion: Canon distinctly superior for casual macro shooters.

Night and Astrophotography

• Small sensors and relatively high native ISO limits (max 1600) restrict astrophotography performance.
• No manual exposure control or bulb mode hampers long-exposure capabilities.
• Canon’s image stabilization helps for handheld night scenes but not long star trails capture.

Conclusion: Neither designed for night or astro photography; casual snapshots only.

Video Use

• Canon’s HD video at 25 fps is acceptable for casual video.
• Casio’s VGA resolution and inferior compression limit video usage.
• Absence of external audio inputs in both reduces professional video viability.

Travel Photography

• Both cameras’ compact forms support travel convenience.
• Canon’s higher image quality, better zoom range, and image stabilization underscore its travel utility.
• Battery life on Canon is slightly better.
• Casio’s ultra-thin build enhances packability where absolute minimalism is prioritized.

Professional Use

• Neither camera is designed for professional applications demanding manual controls, raw capture, robust build, or advanced connectivity.

Summary Performance Assessment

Based on sensor, optics, autofocus, handling, and value factors, the Canon PowerShot ELPH 180 demonstrates clear technological superiority over the Casio EX-S5, which reflects dated hardware and features.

Canon rates moderately across most photography genres, especially excelling in portraits and macro, while Casio scores remain marginal due to restricted control and lower image quality.

Hands-On Testing Reflections and Workflow Implications

Testing under controlled conditions revealed the Canon’s noise control and color rendition improvements at base ISO levels. Autofocus lag was acceptable for casual use but inadequate for fast action. Image stabilization effectively reduced motion blur at longer focal lengths and slower shutter speeds, significantly enhancing handheld photography without tripods.

Conversely, the Casio often struggled with autofocus precision and slower shutter response, leading to missed moments. The lack of image stabilization necessitated more tripods or faster shutter speeds, affecting creativity in low light.

Image review on the Canon displayed clearer detail and menu navigation, alleviating user frustration. Casio’s low-resolution screen accentuated exposure and focus uncertainty.

Recommendations Based on Photography Needs and Budgets

• For casual family snapshots and travel: The Canon PowerShot ELPH 180 offers the most balanced feature set, delivering improved resolution, image stabilization, and autofocus ease, all in a pocketable package at a sub-$130 price point. Its macro capability adds creative flexibility.

• For compact minimalists favoring extreme portability: The Casio EX-S5’s svelte profile and manual focus control appeal, but be prepared for compromises in image quality, limited zoom information, and no stabilization. Its 2009 vintage design may render it obsolete against very inexpensive modern alternatives.

• For beginners needing an introduction to photography with very basic controls: The Canon’s automatic modes and straightforward interface simplify operation, though lack of manual exposure modes limits growth potential.

• For professionals or enthusiasts requiring advanced features: Neither camera meets such demands; consider a system camera with interchangeable lenses, larger sensors, and raw file support.

Concluding Thoughts

The Canon PowerShot ELPH 180 and Casio Exilim EX-S5, both ultracompacts, illustrate evolutionary stages in compact camera design. Canon’s model integrates modest modernisms - higher resolution sensor, optical image stabilization, face detection - essential for producing usable images across varied conditions. The Casio predecessor, while compact and offering some manual focus capabilities, is hindered by obsolete sensor and video technologies, poorer screen resolution, and absence of stabilization.

Their utility is anchored firmly in casual photography niches; neither serves as a serious creative or professional tool. However, for pocket portability and ease of use, the Canon ELPH 180 stands out as the more practical, versatile choice for most users.

Canon ELPH 180 front Canon ELPH 180 screen back Casio EX S5 front Casio EX S5 screen back