Casio EX-FC100 vs EX-H15: A Deep Dive into Compact Camera Classics

In the early 2010s, the compact camera market was a crowded, competitive arena. Smartphone photography was growing, but for those who appreciated dedicated point-and-shoot devices, cameras like the Casio EX-FC100 and EX-H15 represented compelling choices. Both launched around a year apart, these two cameras come from the same brand and family but deliver subtly different approaches to compact imaging. I've spent considerable time testing both models - a delightful throwback to a simpler digital camera era - and here’s a detailed, no-nonsense comparison to help you understand what each offers, how they perform in real-world scenarios, and which might still hold relevance for enthusiasts today.

First Impressions: Look, Feel, and Handling

Before pixel-peeping or getting into sensor tech, the tactile experience sets the tone for user satisfaction. The EX-FC100 and EX-H15 are both in Casio’s compact category, designed for portability - but let’s not kid ourselves: compact doesn’t mean pocket-dial size. Measuring roughly 100x59x23 mm and 101x60x28 mm respectively, these cameras claim your pocket but feel sturdier in hand than ultra-slim designs.

When holding both cameras side-by-side, the FC100 feels slightly slimmer and lighter at 156g compared to the H15’s 161g. This marginal difference is enough to notice over extended handheld use. Ergonomics-wise, neither camera sports a pronounced grip, so if you have larger hands, your fingers might stretch a bit during operation.

Top controls embrace simplicity - with dedicated physical buttons rather than touch interfaces, which weren’t yet mainstream. Yet, the EX-H15’s control layout feels a little more spacious on top… more on that when we zoom in later.

For those who prefer cameras that do not demand a degree in buttonology, both are straightforward, although neither will win awards for ergonomic innovation.

A Peek from Above: Control Layout and User Interface

Looking at the top plate reveals the slight stylistic and functional evolution from the FC100 to the H15. Both cameras lack an electronic viewfinder and instead rely on rear LCDs for composing shots. The H15’s power button and shutter release feel marginally more accessible, and its mode dial includes an auto mode, while the older FC100 leans more on manual exposure options.

That’s a salient difference: the FC100 can switch into shutter priority, aperture priority, manual exposure modes, and exposure compensation - a thrill for photography purists who like to micromanage settings. The H15 simplifies things with fewer manual modes, favoring casual shooters who prefer "set it and forget it" operation.

Neither camera has touchscreen functionality - out of the question for cameras of this era - but their menus follow logical hierarchies.

Having personally toggled between these systems, I find the FC100’s dedicated manual controls satisfying when you want to experiment; in contrast, the H15 shines for point-and-shoot simplicity. Neither camera uses illuminated buttons, which can make low-light adjustments less convenient.

Sensor Showdown: Image Quality Fundamentals

One of the key differentiators between these models lies under the hood - the sensor technology. Both sport 1/2.3" sized sensors measuring 6.17x4.55 mm, which is typical for compacts in this class and era. However, the EX-FC100 uses a 9MP CMOS sensor, whereas the EX-H15 opts for a 14MP CCD sensor.

Now, this is more than just a numbers game. CMOS and CCD sensors have distinct characteristics. CMOS sensors like the one in the FC100 generally offer better noise control at higher ISOs and typically handle dynamic range more efficiently - thanks to advances in sensor readout speeds and on-chip processing. CCD sensors in cameras like the H15 tend to produce good color accuracy and image detail at base ISO values but may struggle more in low-light noise and dynamic range.

The FC100 maxes out at ISO 1600 (native), while the H15 extends to ISO 3200 - on paper, that sounds advantageous. However, in my hands-on testing, the FC100’s CMOS sensor delivered cleaner, less grainy images at ISO 800 and above. The H15’s higher ISO settings quickly become noisy, muddying details and requiring significant post-processing restraint.

Both cameras employ an anti-aliasing filter, smoothing moiré patterns but slightly reducing sharpness.

Resolution-wise, 9MP on the FC100 yields a maximum image size of 3456 x 2592 pixels, whereas 14MP on the H15 offers up to 4320 x 3240 pixels. So, if you need bigger prints or want flexibility for cropping, the H15 has a pixel advantage.

Interestingly, neither supports RAW capture - a serious limitation for professionals or enthusiasts who want extensive exposure latitude. JPEGs are the only output. That means reliance on in-camera processing quality, which for Casio’s 2009-2010 era sensors and processors, is competent but unremarkable.

On balance, the FC100’s CMOS sensor tends to edge the day in usable image quality, especially in varied lighting, while the H15 delivers slightly higher resolution favored for large prints or detailed crops but at a cost in low-light performance.

Composing Your Shots: The Viewing Experience

Both cameras skip on electronic viewfinders, instead offering rear LCD displays with fixed positioning. The FC100 boasts a 2.7" screen with 230k pixels, while the H15 upgrades to a larger 3" screen with 461k pixels.

The H15’s bigger, denser screen is an undeniable improvement for framing and reviewing photos. In bright sunlight, however, neither display gets remarkably bright or anti-reflective, meaning you’ll often find yourself squinting or struggling with reflections - a common limitation of fixed, non-touch LCDs in this class.

Moreover, neither camera’s screen is touchscreen-enabled, meaning menu navigation and focusing rely on buttons and numeric controls - a nostalgic experience for those of us who've steered away from touchscreens to achieve precision.

For casual use or travel photos, the H15’s screen superiority makes composing and reviewing images a more pleasant experience.

Zoom and Optics: Focal Range and Aperture

Cameras in this category rarely allow users to swap lenses, and both models feature fixed lenses, limiting flexibility but delivering convenient, pocketable packages.

The EX-FC100 offers a 5.8x equivalent zoom with an unspecified focal length range and a lens that opens at f/3.6 at the widest. The H15 ups the ante with a 10x optical zoom spanning from 24mm wide-angle to 240mm telephoto (35mm equivalent), starting at a slightly brighter f/3.2 aperture at the wide end.

In practical terms, the H15 is the more versatile zoom companion. Its 10x zoom lets you get closer to distant subjects - potentially useful for casual wildlife, street, or travel photography. The trade-off here is that the longer zooms at 240mm come with increased lens shake risk, as neither camera offers particularly sophisticated stabilization for telephoto reach.

Still, both models incorporate sensor-shift stabilization, which helps counter vibration. It’s not perfect, but for compact cameras of this vintage, it’s a solid inclusion.

Auto-Focus and Shooting Performance

Contrast-detection autofocus systems drive both cameras, with single-shot AF being supported. No continuous AF or face detection modes are present - so tracking moving subjects isn't their forte.

In real-world use, focusing speed is leisurely but acceptable for static subjects or casual scenes. Repeated trial captures confirm a slight edge to the FC100’s focusing speed and reliability, likely helped by its CMOS sensor and newer processing cycles. However, neither camera feels snappy enough for dynamic or sports photography.

Regarding burst rates and shutter speeds, the FC100 ranges up to 1/1000 sec shutter speed, while the H15 extends to 1/2000 sec. Neither supports very fast electronic shutter modes or silent shooting - a feature that has become more popular in later models.

Unfortunately, continuous shooting is not a highlight of either camera, which cuts them out of the running for those needing speedy capture sequences.

Practical Photography Scenarios: Where Do They Shine?

Having reviewed their specs and tested performance, let’s unpack their suitability across various popular photography genres.

Portraits: Skin Tones and Bokeh

Neither camera offers eye detection autofocus or subject tracking, which modern mirrorless counterparts boast. However, the FC100’s manual aperture control allows some creative leeway in depth of field to produce background blur, albeit limited by the small sensor and lens aperture range.

In practice, both deliver competent portraits under good lighting, with natural skin tones thanks to decent color reproduction. The H15’s improved resolution helps capture fine texture detail on faces, but its noise at higher ISO dilutes this advantage in indoor or dim settings.

The lack of RAW support is felt here, where post-processing flexibility can be a dealbreaker for portraitists who tweak skin tones and exposure precisely.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range and Resolution

Landscape photographers appreciate wide dynamic range and high resolution for crisp, detailed images. The H15’s 14MP sensor shows clear detail advantage, with images holding up well when printed or cropped.

But here, the FC100’s CMOS sensor and better noise control deliver more usable files at higher ISOs - important for shooting in variable light or twilight. Both cameras rely on multisegment metering and center-weighted exposure, with spot metering offering limited precision.

Weather sealing and environmental robustness aren’t part of these cameras’ portfolios, meaning landscape expeditions into rough or wet conditions require care.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus Speed and Burst Rates

I won’t sugarcoat it - the FC100 and H15 are not built for fast-paced action. Their single-shot contrast AF systems are too slow for quick animals or athletes, and continuous shooting is missing.

The H15’s 10x zoom may tempt you to try wildlife photography, but the sluggish AF and lack of tracking severely limit effectiveness. Additionally, no mechanical shutter speed faster than 1/2000 sec on the H15 and 1/1000 sec on FC100 restricts freezing ultra-fast motion.

For serious sports or wildlife work, investing in cameras with phase-detection AF and high frame rates is essential.

Street Photography: Discretion and Low-Light

In street photography, discretion and portability are key. Both cameras are compact but not ultra-compact.

In quieter environments, their modest shutter sound is less intrusive than DSLRs. The small lenses and lack of viewfinders encourage candid shooting styles. The FC100’s manual exposure modes can help adapt quickly to changing urban lighting.

However, low-light capability is limited by sensor size. The FC100’s CMOS sensor again slightly outperforms the H15’s CCD in shadow recovery and high ISO noise, enhancing its street performance at dusk or indoors.

Macro Photography: Close-up Potential

Neither camera excels at macro work. They lack specific macro focus ranges, and front element lens designs limit focusing distance.

Sensor-based image stabilization helps minimize blur, but the maximum magnification doesn’t compete with dedicated macro lenses or cameras.

Night and Astrophotography: High ISO and Exposure Options

These compact cameras don’t offer bulb exposure modes or built-in intervalometers for long exposure photography, limiting night and astro usage.

ISO capabilities peak at ISO 1600 for FC100 and 3200 for H15, but image quality drastically degrades at these levels. Motion JPEG video also limits low-light video utility.

While modest astrophotographers might experiment with fixed tripod shots, compact sensor size and limited exposure flexibility cap success.

Video: What about Moving Pictures?

Both cameras shoot Motion JPEG format video, with maximum HD resolution (1280x720) at 30fps on the FC100 and 1280x720 at 30fps on the H15. Frame rates and compression reduce video quality compared to modern codecs and sensors.

Neither has microphone inputs or headphone jacks, limiting audio control. The FC100 supports HDMI output, while the H15 lacks it.

For casual home videos or personal travel logs, these cameras suffice, but professional or enthusiastic videographers should look elsewhere.

Travel Companion: Size, Battery Life, and Versatility

Both are appealing for travel due to compactness and modest weight. However, neither boasts exceptional battery life by today’s standards, and no standardized CIPA rating is available.

The H15’s wider zoom range and bigger screen suit versatile shooting, while the FC100’s manual controls appeal to enthusiasts who like creative freedom on the move.

Both use SD/SDHC cards, and wireless Eye-Fi card support allows limited image transfer - a nifty if outdated convenience.

Though rugged weather sealing is absent, their portability and adequate stabilization make them decent, lightweight travel tools.

Casio EX FC100 front Casio EX FC100 screen back Casio EX H15 front Casio EX H15 screen back

Above: Sample images showing daylight landscape, portrait, and street shots. Notice the noise in shadows on the H15 crops and softer micro contrast on the FC100.

Build Quality and Durability

Neither is built for heavy environmental challenges. No weather sealing, waterproofing, or shockproof certifications apply. They are standard consumer electronics from an era before ruggedness became a marketing priority in compacts.

Plastic-heavy construction balances price and weight but feels less durable than metal-bodied competitors. Still, both hold up well in normal daily use when handled with reasonable care.

Workflow and Connectivity: Modern Needs?

Connectivity is limited. Both cameras offer compatibility with Eye-Fi wireless cards, which allow Wi-Fi-enabled image transfer - a feature that was innovative at launch but now largely superseded by native Wi-Fi modules.

USB 2.0 ports facilitate file transfer but not tethered shooting or remote control.

Neither includes GPS or Bluetooth. HDMI output is exclusive to the FC100, which helps if you want to playback images on HDTVs.

From a professional workflow standpoint, the lack of RAW capture, Bluetooth, built-in Wi-Fi, or tethering reduces utility for studio or on-location shoots requiring immediate file management or high flexibility.

Pricing and Value: What’s Your Best Bet Today?

Both launched at around $300, positioning them as affordable compacts with decent features for casual buyers at the time. Today, find them primarily on resale markets and vintage tech collections.

If budget is no object but curiosity about compact digital history is - these cameras can be fun collectors or teaching tools for those exploring foundational photography.

For serious quality or versatility, modern compacts or entry-level mirrorless options outperform these by a wide margin.

This comparative performance scorecard courtesy of aggregated specs and hands-on tests highlights the FC100’s modest edge in handling and image quality, while the H15 scores better in resolution and user interface.

Genre analysis supports the notion that neither camera is ideal for demanding genres like wildlife or sports but serves well for landscapes, casual portraits, and travel snapshots.

Final Verdict: Which Casio Compact is Right for You?

Selecting between the Casio EX-FC100 and EX-H15 depends on your photography priorities.

Choose the EX-FC100 if you:

• Want more manual control over exposure (shutter/aperture priority, manual modes)
• Prioritize better noise control and dynamic range from the CMOS sensor
• Prefer the lighter, slimmer form factor
• Shoot in varied lighting, including indoor or low-light environments
• Appreciate HDMI output and slightly faster autofocus

Choose the EX-H15 if you:

• Need more reach with a versatile 10x zoom lens (24-240mm equivalent)
• Desire a higher resolution sensor for large prints or cropping
• Value a larger, sharper rear LCD screen
• Are a casual shooter favoring simplicity over manual complexity
• Don’t mind limited high ISO performance and no HDMI

Neither camera supports RAW, continuous autofocus, or fast burst shooting, so neither is suitable for demanding professional workflows or fast-paced photography. They are relics best suited for enthusiasts nostalgic about early-2010s compact cameras or those wanting a very simple, budget-friendly secondary camera.

If your budget allows, exploring modern mirrorless or advanced compacts is generally the better investment for most photographic needs.

I hope this extensive comparison demystifies these two Casio compacts, blending technical insights with practical shooting experiences. Have you used either? Drop your stories and quirks below - revisiting old tech always uncovers surprises!