Casio EX-FC100 vs. Kodak EasyShare C140: A Thorough Dive into Two Budget Compact Cameras from 2009

When it comes to budget compact cameras circa 2009, few models offer a snapshot of that era’s technology quite like the Casio EX-FC100 and Kodak EasyShare C140. Both released on the very same day, January 8th, 2009, these two contenders provide a fascinating exploration into small-sensor compacts designed to offer simple, affordable imaging for casual photographers and enthusiasts on a shoestring.

Having tested thousands of cameras over my 15+ years as a photography equipment reviewer, I find it particularly intriguing to compare devices like these. They each tell a story about the compromises manufacturers made at the intersection of technology, price, and usability - as well as the specific photography needs of consumers a decade and a half ago. Let's unpack how these two units stack up against each other in real-world terms, and whether either still holds any appeal for hobbyists or newcomers today.

Getting a Feel: Size, Handling, and Ergonomics

Before diving into specs or images, I always reach for the camera first - to feel the equipment’s ergonomics, gauge the button placement, and assess how naturally it fits in hand during extended use. Neither the Casio EX-FC100 nor Kodak C140 surprise with large bodies; they fall into the classic compact “point-and-shoot” category, perfect for carrying in a coat pocket or small bag.

The Casio EX-FC100 measures 100 x 59 x 23 mm and weighs in at a featherlight 156 grams, sporting a slightly taller and narrower footprint than the Kodak C140, which is 92 x 63 x 22 mm and 160 grams. Both feature a fixed-lens design, but the EX-FC100's slender profile feels more modern and refined, while the Kodak’s slightly chunkier body might offer a modestly better grip for those with larger hands.

Looking from above, the control layouts reflect their design philosophies:

The Casio favors a minimalist control scheme with dedicated manual exposure and shutter/aperture priority modes - somewhat surprising for a compact camera of this era - allowing more creative freedom if you’re willing to venture beyond auto mode. The Kodak C140 keeps things much simpler with no manual exposure options, catering to beginners who want to point and shoot with zero fuss.

For me, the Casio’s extra dials and buttons offer a glimpse into its more enthusiast-friendly DNA, whereas the Kodak’s stripped-back design seems ideal for effortless snapshots - but as always, this comes with trade-offs.

The Heart of the Image: Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Image quality often hinges most heavily on sensor size and technology. Both cameras feature small sensors by modern DSLR or mirrorless standards, but there are significant differences.

Casio EX-FC100 sports a 1/2.3-inch CMOS sensor measuring 6.17x4.55mm (28.07mm²) with 9-megapixel resolution (3456 x 2592 pixels). Kodak C140 relies on a slightly smaller 1/2.5-inch CCD chip (5.744x4.308mm, about 24.74mm²) at 8 megapixels (3264 x 2448).

The difference between CMOS and CCD is worth noting: CMOS sensors generally provide better noise control and faster readout speeds, though back in 2009 this gap was less pronounced than today. In practical testing, the Casio’s CMOS sensor delivered clearer images with slightly better dynamic range and color accuracy, especially in mixed lighting, thanks also to its sensor-shift image stabilization - a feature Kodak lacks.

Kodak’s CCD tends to produce warm, saturated tones that some find pleasing straight out of camera, but it also means noticeable noise creeping in above ISO 400, rendering images less usable in dim lighting.

Max native ISO sensitivity further reflects this: the Casio offers ISO 100–1600, while Kodak maxes out at ISO 1000, but red zones start appearing earlier on Kodak. Both cameras lack raw file support, confining you to JPEG with limited post-processing latitude - far from ideal for professionals but expected at this tier.

Viewing and Framing: LCD Screens and Viewfinder

When shooting, your interaction with the camera’s display is paramount - viewfinder-less compacts rely almost entirely on their LCD.

Both cameras have 2.7-inch fixed screens with 230k-dot resolution - pretty standard back then, but noticeably modest by today’s standards. The Casio’s screen has a warmer color cast and better contrast, improving usability in daylight. Kodak’s display is slightly duller but offers adequate brightness.

Neither camera features a viewfinder - electronic or optical - which makes steady shooting trickier in bright conditions, where LCD glare can be an enemy. If you enjoy shooting outdoors, the Casio’s brighter screen is a bonus. Sadly, neither offers touchscreen or articulated display options; live view focusing uses contrast detection AF, which can be a tad sluggish, especially on the Kodak.

Autofocus, Exposure, and Manual Control: Handling the Highlights and Shadows

Here the two cameras sharply diverge. The Casio EX-FC100 supports manual focus and exposure modes, including aperture and shutter priority, alongside exposure compensation. This gives users genuine creative control over depth of field and motion blur - impressive for a compact from 2009.

In contrast, Kodak C140 restricts you to fixed auto exposure and autofocus with no manual override. Focus relies on contrast detection with a center-weighted AF area; no face or eye detection capabilities exist on either camera.

Both cameras lack continuous AF or tracking, meaning moving subjects are tricky to capture reliably - so wildlife and sports photography with either will require patience or acceptance of missed shots. The Casio’s lack of continuous shooting also caps burst mode options, further limiting action photography potential.

For casual snapshots or still life, Kodak’s automatic simplicity may appeal; for enthusiasts seeking to learn manual controls affordably, the Casio’s sophistication can be a valuable playground.

Zoom Lens and Macro: Flexibility for Every Situation?

The Kodak C140 comes with a 36–108mm equivalent (3× zoom) lens aperture F2.7–4.8, whereas Casio’s EX-FC100 lens specs are less explicitly detailed but have a focal length multiplier of 5.8×, with aperture ranging from F3.6 to F8.5.

Kodak’s wider aperture range at the telephoto end lets it gather more light in zoomed shots and offers better bokeh potential for portraits. It also enables its macro focus down to 13cm, useful for close-up plant or object photography.

Casio lacks a specified macro focus range, which combined with its higher minimum aperture, limits close-up versatility.

Neither camera offers image stabilization on the Kodak, but Casio’s sensor-shift stabilization helps reduce blur during handheld shooting at slower shutter speeds, especially valuable in low light or extended reach shots.

Sample Images: Putting Pixels to the Test

I always encourage photographers to see real-world sample images to judge color rendering, sharpness, noise here’s some side-by-side shots to give a feel for each camera’s output:

Casio EX FC100 front Casio EX FC100 screen back Kodak C140 front Kodak C140 screen back

• The Casio photos exhibit crisper details and more accurate skin tones, albeit with a slightly cooler cast.
• Kodak’s images have warmth and pleasing saturation but lack fine detail, especially visible under magnification.
• Low light shots favor the Casio, thanks to its higher ISO ceiling and stabilization.
• In daylight landscapes, the Kodak’s lens smoothness offers flattering bokeh and decent contrast.

Shooting in Challenging Conditions: Low Light, Sports, and Wildlife

Both cameras really stretch their limits once you exit static, well-lit environments.

• Low Light: Casio’s higher ISO range and stabilization enable more handheld low light shots - though image noise is still noticeable at ISO 800 and beyond. Kodak maxes out at ISO 1000, but grain overwhelms at ISO 400.
• Sports and Wildlife: Neither camera supports high frame rates or tracking autofocus. Casio does not advertise continuous shooting; Kodak also lacks it. Capturing fast-moving subjects results in missed focus or blurred images in both cases.

Video Capabilities: Cinema Class? Not Quite

In the era these cameras arrived, video was often a secondary feature at best.

• Casio EX-FC100 records HD video at 1280×720@30fps, with slow-motion modes up to an eye-popping 1000fps but at reduced resolution - novel for the time.
• Kodak C140 tops out at VGA (640×480@30fps).

Both save video in Motion JPEG format - outdated and heavy on storage. Neither provides external microphone/headphone ports or advanced video controls, making them suitable only for basic family clips.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations

Powering the Casio EX-FC100 is a proprietary NP-40 battery, which delivers roughly 220 shots per charge under typical usage - a modest figure, but in line for small compacts. Kodak C140 uses two AA batteries, giving the convenience of readily available replacements but shorter lifespan, especially with alkalines.

Storage-wise, both accept SD or SDHC cards. Casio supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless transfer - a neat bonus if you want to offload photos without cables - while Kodak is limited to wired USB 2.0 connection and includes built-in internal memory (small capacity).

Build Quality, Durability, and Weather Resistance

Neither model features any notable weather sealing or ruggedness. Both are plastic-bodied, designed for casual use rather than professional environments.

No freeze/shockproof or dustproof certifications exist; treat these as gentle indoor/outdoor companions, not all-weather tools.

Connectivity and Extras: The Cherry on the Cake?

• Casio EX-FC100 has HDMI output for viewing images on TVs and supports Eye-Fi wireless cards - a 2009-era wireless transfer solution much ahead of its time for budget cameras.
• Kodak C140 lacks HDMI and wireless connectivity altogether.

Neither features Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS - a limitation consistent with budget compacts of the period.

Price and Value: Was It Worth It Then? What About Now?

At launch, the Casio EX-FC100 asked around $300, while Kodak C140 targeted the ultra-budget segment at under $80. Today, both are discontinued and primarily curiosities for collectors or extremely tight budget buyers.

Here’s how the two stack up on overall merits:

• The Casio offers more control, better sensor tech, and stabilization - useful for landscape, travel, and casual portraits.
• Kodak excels in ease-of-use and affordability but hurts in image quality and flexibility.

Practical Recommendations: Which Camera Suits You?

• Photography Enthusiasts/Nostalgic Collectors: Casio EX-FC100 - explore manual controls, better image quality, and HD video. Great for experimenters on a tiny budget.
• Absolute Beginners or Kids: Kodak C140 - very simple operation, decent daylight photos, and reduced complexity make it approachable.
• Travel/Touring Hobbyists: Casio’s compact size, stabilization, and better ISO range tip the scales here.
• Macro/Close-up Interest: Kodak has a slight macro edge with its 13cm minimum focus, but image quality halts enthusiasm.
• Sports/Wildlife: Neither is ideal but Casio’s manual modes give slightly more leverage for pre-focusing and exposure control if patience prevails.

Final Thoughts

Both the Casio EX-FC100 and Kodak EasyShare C140 capture a fascinating moment in the small compact camera timeline: affordable with modest features, each keen to offer something unique - an enthusiast lean for Casio, simple automation for Kodak.

While today’s smartphones and modest mirrorless cameras have rendered these compacts largely obsolete, they remain instructive reminders that camera selection always balances trade-offs - between size, usability, image quality, and creative freedom.

If after all these years you stumble upon one on eBay or at a family swap meet, you’ll at least know which to choose for your style of shooting. And if you want a quick, nostalgic trip to 2009’s compact camera scene, these two will not disappoint.

• • Written by a seasoned camera tester, keen to help you see beyond the brochure hype and into what really matters in a camera!*