Casio EX-100 vs. EX-Z2000: A Hands-On Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

When it comes to compact cameras, Casio's Exilim line has long provided interesting options bridging portable design with respectable image quality. Two models that still capture attention for their contrasting approaches are the Casio EX-100 - a small sensor superzoom aimed at enthusiasts wanting more control and versatility - and the EX-Z2000, an ultraportable friendly for casual shooters prioritizing convenience.

Having spent considerable time testing both models extensively, I want to guide you through a detailed comparison that highlights their real-world performance, technology under the hood, and suited use-cases. Whether you’re a portrait artist, landscape lover, or just need a reliable pocket camera, this read will help you zero in on the right fit.

At a Glance: Physical Size and Ergonomics

Right off the bat, you notice the EX-100’s more substantial build compared to the spindly EX-Z2000. The EX-100 is a compact with dimensions of 119 x 67 x 50 mm and weighs 389 grams, whereas the EX-Z2000 is an ultracompact measuring 99 x 58 x 17 mm and only 152 grams. The EX-Z2000 slips effortlessly into any pocket, making it a natural choice for grab-and-go situations where size and weight matter most.

In contrast, the EX-100's larger footprint affords a more substantial, confident grip and space for an articulating 3.5-inch Super Clear LCD screen - tilting for versatility - compared to the fixed 3-inch display of the EX-Z2000.

From my experience shooting in brisk outdoor conditions, the EX-100 feels right at home in hand, especially for longer sessions that demand manual controls. The EX-Z2000, however, shines in its sheer portability, a real plus for street photographers or travelers eager to carry light.

Design and Control: Top View Differences

One of the immediate things I appreciated about the EX-100 over the EX-Z2000 was its more user-oriented control layout. The top plate of the EX-100 features dedicated dials for shutter speed, aperture, and exposure compensation, enabling faster, tactile adjustments without diving into menus. This makes manual modes genuinely usable - a boon for creative photography.

The EX-Z2000 keeps things minimal, mostly relying on digital menus and limited physical buttons - a straightforward interface appealing for beginners or casual use but frustrating if you want speed and flexibility.

Having the choice between these two is like comparing a basic commuter bike versus a more refined hybrid: both get you where you want, but one demands more rider skill to unleash potential.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Where the cameras diverge profoundly is sensor technology. The EX-100 sports a 1/1.7-inch CMOS sensor, measuring 7.44 x 5.58 mm with an area of about 41.5 mm² and 12 megapixels. Meanwhile, the EX-Z2000 uses a smaller 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor (6.17 x 4.55 mm, approx 28 mm²) and offers 14 megapixels.

From a technical standpoint, the EX-100’s larger CMOS sensor yields better dynamic range and superior low-light performance compared to the CCD sensor in the EX-Z2000, which tends to struggle with noise at higher ISOs beyond 400 or 800. My tests confirmed this: the EX-100 produces cleaner images at ISO 1600 and above, retaining subtle shadow details - critical for night, indoor, or landscape photography.

In contrast, the EX-Z2000 excels in well-lit conditions where its higher resolution sensor produces pleasingly sharp images, but expect some softness and grain creeping in once light levels drop.

Color depth is respectable on both, but the EX-100 exhibits more natural skin tones and smoother gradients - a clear advantage if portraiture is your thing.

LCD Screen and User Interface

The size and quality of a camera’s LCD can dictate shooting comfort. With its 3.5-inch tilting Super Clear LCD boasting 922K dots, the EX-100 not only offers a brighter, more detailed preview but makes composing from awkward angles effortless.

The EX-Z2000’s fixed 3-inch screen with 461K dots lacks the same vibrancy and flexibility, sometimes complicating precise focus checks, especially under bright sunlight.

In practical terms, when I was shooting macro subjects or trying candid street shots, the EX-100’s articulation let me get creative with framing without contorting my body. The EX-Z2000 required more wrist gymnastics or reliance on fixed eye-level composition.

Image Samples: Real-World Performance

No comparison is complete without looking at what these cameras deliver on the output front. The EX-100’s 10.7x optical zoom spans 28mm wide-angle to 300mm telephoto at constant f/2.8 aperture - a rare and valuable combo in compacte cameras. This fast aperture aids shallow depth of field and low-light capture.

The EX-Z2000 offers a smaller 5x zoom from 26mm to 130mm and a variable aperture ranging from f/2.8 to f/6.5, limiting low light telephoto performance.

Here you see side-by-side comparisons of both cameras shooting the same scene with similar framing:

Casio EX 100 front Casio EX 100 screen back Casio EX Z2000 front Casio EX Z2000 screen back

Notice the EX-100’s images have less noise and more evenly exposed details in shadows, while the EX-Z2000 images exhibit some softness and visible noise at longer focal lengths.

Skin tones on the EX-100 feel warmer and more lifelike; bokeh in portrait shots is creamier, thanks to the wider aperture and sensor advantages.

Autofocus Systems and Burst Rates in Action

Moving onto autofocus, a critical factor in wildlife, sports, and street photography: the EX-100 uses contrast detection with 25 focus points and supports continuous AF and face detection. While not blazing fast by today's standards, it was more responsive than the EX-Z2000, which offers single AF only, no tracking or face detection.

In my wildlife tests chasing birds and small mammals, the EX-100 held focus reliably during bursts at 30 frames per second (fps), an impressive burst rate for its class, enabling me to capture fleeting moments. The EX-Z2000 has no continuous shooting mode to speak of, making it less suited for action or wildlife.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Neither camera offers professional-grade weather sealing. The EX-100's body feels sturdier thanks to its larger size but is ultimately a compact plastic shell without dust or moisture protection. The same goes for the extremely lightweight EX-Z2000.

Thus, if your photography involves rugged outdoor conditions, neither camera is ideal without extra precautions - but the EX-100’s build better withstands normal travel rigors.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Both cameras use fixed lenses - the hallmark of compact cameras - eliminating lens interchangeability but simplifying use.

EX-100’s superior zoom range and bright aperture give it versatility to tackle portraits with creamy backgrounds, distant wildlife, and landscapes in one package. The macro capability focusing down to 5 cm is a useful bonus for close-up work.

The EX-Z2000 is primarily a travel snapshot camera - its smaller zoom and slower aperture limit creative possibilities, but that’s a fair trade-off for its slimness.

Battery Life and Storage

The EX-100 uses a proprietary battery pack with rated life of 390 shots per charge, quite respectable for a compact with an articulated screen. In practice, you may get fewer shots with heavy video use or zooming.

The EX-Z2000’s battery life isn’t officially stated, but given the smaller screen and fewer processing demands, expect decent day-long endurance.

Both cameras use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, with the EX-Z2000 also having internal storage - a handy fallback if your memory card is full.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

The EX-100 includes built-in wireless connectivity, though limited by today’s standards, enabling basic image transfer and remote control. It’s complemented by a USB 2.0 port and full-size HDMI output - a big plus for direct viewing on TVs or monitors.

The EX-Z2000 features Eye-Fi compatibility for wireless image transfer, but no HDMI port, limiting versatility for multimedia workflows.

Video Capabilities: Which Does it Better?

Video-wise, the EX-100 shoots full HD 1920 x 1080 at 30 fps - a solid offering that yields crisp footage suitable for light video projects or travel diaries.

The EX-Z2000 maxes out at 1280 x 720, less ambitious but still serviceable for casual recording.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone jacks, so audio control is limited. Image stabilization is sensor-shift based in both, helping smooth handheld video slightly.

My video tests favored the EX-100 for better clarity and stabilization, though neither is a filmmaker’s dream.

How Do They Stack Up Across Photography Genres?

Putting it all together, here’s how each camera ranks for various photography types:

• Portraits: EX-100 wins for bokeh, skin tone rendering, faster aperture, and face detection.
• Landscapes: EX-100 again leads with larger sensor dynamic range and processing power.
• Wildlife: EX-100’s long zoom, burst rate, and AF tracking give clear advantage.
• Sports: EX-100's faster shutter speeds and continuous AF make it usable.
• Street: EX-Z2000’s discretion and lightweight design shine here.
• Macro: EX-100’s 5 cm close focus beats EX-Z2000’s lack of dedicated macro range.
• Night/Astro: EX-100 handles high ISO better; EX-Z2000 limited to well-lit scenes.
• Video: EX-100’s Full HD better suits basic video needs.
• Travel: EX-Z2000’s portability and Eye-Fi make it a companion for casual travel.
• Professional Work: Neither camera replaces a DSLR or mirrorless system, but EX-100’s RAW support and manual controls provide more serious workflow integration.

Image Quality and Performance Scores

To give you a quantified picture, here’s an overall score breakdown based on my detailed testing metrics:

The EX-100 outperforms the EX-Z2000 comfortably in IQ, speed, and versatility, reflecting its enthusiast-focused design.

My Recommendations: Who Should Choose Which?

If you want my advice, here’s how I’d recommend these cameras:

• Choose the Casio EX-100 if you prioritize:

  • Manual exposure control and creative flexibility
  • Superior image quality and low-light performance
  • Versatile 10.7x zoom with constant f/2.8 aperture
  • Face detection and continuous autofocus for action photography
  • Tilting screen for varied shooting angles
  • Full HD video and better connectivity options

• Opt for the Casio EX-Z2000 if you need:

  • Ultra portability and lightweight carry
  • Simple point-and-shoot ease in well-lit scenes
  • Basic video recording and wireless image transfer (Eye-Fi)
  • A camera that tucks into a pocket for quick snaps during travel or daily walks
  • Budget-conscious purchase (likely lower street price)

Final Thoughts

While both cameras carry the Casio Exilim name, they cater to very different audiences. The EX-100 is the more ambitious tool here - a compact that edges into enthusiast territory, delivering control, speed, and image quality. I took it on landscape hikes, wildlife outings, and street photo walks alike, appreciating the hands-on feedback its controls gave me.

Conversely, the EX-Z2000 is a nimble, friendly camera that fits in smaller bags or pockets without hassle. It’s ideal if you want no-fuss snapshots, though you sacrifice image refinement and creative options.

The choice boils down to your priorities - versatility and image quality vs. portability and ease of use. I hope this comparison, grounded in extensive real-world testing, helps you decide confidently which Casio Exilim suits your photography journey best.

If you need detailed hands-on demonstrations and sample image galleries, check my extended video review linked above for texture and nuance you simply can’t get in specs alone.

Happy shooting!