Casio EX-FC100 vs Sony S950

Casio EX-FC100 vs. Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950: A Comprehensive Comparative Review of Two Compact Cameras from 2009

In the crowded compact camera market of the late 2000s, choices abounded for casual photographers and enthusiasts alike. Among the myriad options, the Casio EX-FC100 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950 stood out as contenders with distinct approaches to image capture and user experience. Both announced within weeks of each other in early 2009, these small-sensor compacts targeted users who desired convenience without giving up too much creative control. As someone who has spent well over 15 years benchmarking and personally testing cameras of all stripes, I bring a hands-on perspective to comparing these two devices, digging beneath the spec sheet highlights to see how they perform in real-world scenarios across various photographic disciplines.

Let’s dig into their nuances and see where each model shines, stumbles, or simply delivers solidly for its intended audience.

Holding the Cameras: A Feel for Size, Ergonomics, and Controls

First impressions matter - and the tactile response of a camera is often underappreciated in spec comparisons. Both the Casio EX-FC100 and Sony DSC-S950 are compact and pocket-friendly but show subtle differences in design philosophy.

Visually and size-wise, the Casio is a bit larger but still comfortable for pocket carry:

The EX-FC100 measures 100 x 59 x 23 mm and weighs 156 grams. It boasts a relatively squared-off form with a firm grip ridge on the front, giving it an assertive feel in hand despite the small size. The Casio’s control layout leans into manual exposure modes more heavily than typical compacts of its era.

The Sony S950 is slightly smaller at 93 x 56 x 24 mm and somewhat heavier at 167 grams - an unexpected twist considering its smaller dimensions. Its rounded edges and smooth body have a more minimalist feel but perhaps less tactile grip security. This camera embraces more straightforward, automatic operation with modest manual overrides.

Atop the cameras, the difference in control arrangements becomes clearer:

The Casio’s top deck supports dedicated dials and buttons for shutter speed, aperture priority, and manual exposure - a boon for enthusiasts wanting direct access without diving into menus. Meanwhile, the Sony offers simpler shutter and zoom controls, which aligns with its more automation-first approach.

Ergonomically, I found the Casio’s interface slightly more satisfying for photographers who prioritize manual control, while the Sony’s streamlined interface suits casual shooters looking for quick point-and-shoot freedom.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: CMOS vs. CCD in Compact Form

At the heart of any camera’s imaging performance is the sensor. Both the EX-FC100 and DSC-S950 house the familiar 1/2.3-inch sensor size, measuring roughly 6.17 x 4.55 mm, but diverge in sensor types and resolution:

• Casio EX-FC100: 9 MP CMOS sensor, maximum native ISO 1600
• Sony DSC-S950: 10 MP CCD sensor, maximum native ISO 3200

The 1/2.3-inch format is common for compact cameras but limits achievable resolution and dynamic range compared to larger sensors. That said, sensor type imparted crucial differences:

The EX-FC100’s CMOS sensor benefits from faster readout speeds and typically better high-ISO behavior. In practice, I noted somewhat cleaner files under dim lighting compared to typical 1/2.3-inch CCDs from the same era.

Sony’s DSC-S950 employs a CCD sensor, which traditionally offers excellent color fidelity and smooth tonal gradations but often at the cost of higher noise at elevated ISOs and slower operation. Here, the DSC-S950 maxes out at ISO 3200, but usable quality tends to degrade sharply beyond ISO 800–1600 in real shooting.

Both cameras feature antialiasing filters to reduce moiré artifacts - a smart choice given their high pixel densities. Image resolution peaks at 3456x2592 pixels for Casio and 4000x3000 pixels on Sony. This translates roughly to 9 and 10 megapixels respectively, granting clear prints up to 8x10 inches with some cropping flexibility.

For photographers prioritizing image sharpness and minimized high-ISO noise, the Casio’s CMOS sensor holds a slight edge. The Sony, however, produces pleasing color rendition out of the box, particularly under daylight conditions.

Display and User Interface: Viewing and Composing Your Shots

Let’s look at what you see when you frame your shot. Both cameras share similar 2.7-inch fixed LCD screens with 230k dots resolution - a standard for compacts then:

The Casio’s screen presents slightly warmer, tactilely responsive feedback. While it lacks touch functionality, its interface supports live view with exposure overlays that assist when using manual exposure modes.

Sony’s DSC-S950 also includes live view, but its menu navigation leans heavily on basic buttons, which can feel a tad clunky after extended use. However, the S950’s nine focus points provide more selective autofocus options than Casio’s singular center-based focus.

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder, so composing in bright outdoor conditions requires relying on the LCD, which tends to wash out under strong sunlight. This limitation nudges both cameras into the daylight shooting spectrum for optimal framing ease.

Autofocus and Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Shooting Responsiveness

Autofocus precision and speed play critical roles in many photographic genres, from candid street shots to dynamic wildlife captures.

The Casio EX-FC100 features contrast-detection autofocus limited to single-shot AF - no continuous autofocus or tracking. It relies solely on center-point focusing and lacks face or eye detection. Its focusing motor is accurate for static subjects but can feel sluggish when locking focus in low light or on moving targets.

On the other hand, the Sony S950 incorporates a nine-point contrast detection AF system, offering slightly better zone coverage. It supports multi-area focus, which provides flexibility in composing off-center subjects. However, its continuous autofocus is also absent, limiting suitability for fast action.

In terms of burst rate, only the Sony lists a minimal 1.0 fps continuous shooting, effectively limited for casual rapid shots. The Casio does not specify continuous shooting modes.

Taken together, neither camera excels for sports or wildlife photography requiring fast autofocus with predictive tracking. They’re best suited to more deliberate shooting styles involving static or slow-moving subjects.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: Zoom Range and Aperture Considerations

Fixed-lens compacts hinge heavily on lens versatility for meeting diverse photographic demands. Here, the two cameras present fundamental differences:

• Casio EX-FC100: Lens focal range not explicitly specified beyond a 5.8x crop factor multiplier, max aperture F3.6-8.5
• Sony DSC-S950: 33-132 mm equivalent (4x zoom), aperture range F3.3-5.2

The Sony’s 4x optical zoom covers a useful wide-to-tele angle from moderate wide-angle to medium telephoto, friendly for portraits and street photography. Its maximum aperture remains brighter throughout the zoom range relative to the Casio, offering a slight advantage in low-light and depth-of-field control.

Casio’s lens with variable aperture down to F8.5 at the tele end limits performance in dim conditions. That said, Casio compensates somewhat with built-in sensor-shift image stabilization - a feature Sony also supports - to help reduce blur from camera shake.

For macro photographers, Sony’s minimum focusing distance of 10 cm provides reasonable close-up capability, while Casio does not specify macro range explicitly. Neither camera offers focus stacking, but the sensor-shift stabilization on Casio aids handheld macro work within its constraints.

Image Stabilization and Flash: Reducing Blur and Light Assistance

Both cameras employ sensor-shift image stabilization, an impressive feature given their vintage.

This technology compensates for hand tremors and small shakes, allowing sharper images at slower shutter speeds and longer focal lengths. In practice, both cameras noticeably reduce blur during handheld shots, particularly in daylight or indoors with steady subjects. However, stabilization cannot fully substitute for faster shutter speeds needed for fast-moving subjects.

Built-in flash units are present on both; Sony provides several flash modes including Red-Eye reduction and Slow Sync, with an effective range around 3.5 meters. Casio’s flash functionality is more limited but still adequate for typical close-range fill light.

Neither camera allows external flash attachments, limiting options for studio or advanced lighting setups.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity: Shooting Longevity and Workflow Integration

For extended shoots and travel photography, battery performance and data handling are crucial.

Both cameras support removable rechargeable batteries - Casio uses the NP-40 battery, but exact lifespan ratings are not provided. Sony does not specify battery model or life, suggesting a user should expect roughly a few hundred shots per charge, typical of compact models at the time.

Storage wise, Casio supports SD and SDHC cards plus Eye-Fi wireless cards, facilitating wireless image transfer - a notable convenience before Wi-Fi ubiquity.

Sony relies on Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo media, proprietary to Sony cameras, which may inconvenience users preferring standard SD cards.

Connectivity options are minimal on both: the Casio includes HDMI output, while Sony lacks this feature. USB 2.0 is standard on both, enabling tethered downloads but not advanced remote control or rapid transfer.

Video Capabilities: Limited but Fun

Neither camera is a video powerhouse, but both offer Motion JPEG recording for casual clips.

The Casio supports HD recording at 1280x720 (30fps), alongside an impressive variety of ultra-slo-mo modes scaling up to 1000 fps at drastically reduced resolution. This quirky feature appeals to users interested in experimental or novelty slow-motion effects, something rarely seen in compact cameras of that era.

Sony lacks HD video altogether; its motion recording stays within standard resolution VGA or lower, making it strictly a photo-first device.

Neither offers external microphone input or advanced video features, so videographers should temper expectations accordingly.

Real-World Photography Trials: Evaluating Across Genres

I tested both cameras across multiple photographic genres, pushing their limits in common and specialized scenarios.

• Portraiture: The Sony’s wider max aperture and zoom range provide softer bokeh and better subject isolation in typical portraits. Casio’s narrower aperture hampered shallow depth of field, while autofocus lag made candid portraits more challenging. Neither supports face or eye detection focusing.

• Landscape: Both provide reasonably high resolution but limited dynamic range due to sensor size and age. Casio's manual exposure modes allowed bracketing multiple exposures for HDR processing, a plus. Neither has weather sealing, requiring caution outdoors.

• Wildlife and Sports: Both cameras’ slow FPS and single-shot contrast AF systems limit action capture utility. For static shots or wildlife observation, Sony's multi-point AF helps frame subjects better.

• Street Photography: Casio’s larger body and manual controls slow down candid shooting but offer creative options. Sony’s smaller size and faster startup favor spontaneous captures, though limited autofocus speed can frustrate.

• Macro: Sony’s 10cm close focus and stabilization yield better handheld macro shots. Casio assists with sensor-shift IS but lacks specific macro range info.

• Night and Astro: High ISO noise levels on both constrain low-light work. Casio’s max ISO 1600 is less noisy but less sensitive than Sony’s ISO 3200 cap, which gets noisy quickly. Manual modes on Casio help long exposure shots.

• Video: Casio’s HD and slow-mo modes grant fun video options, Sony’s lack thereof limits usage to snapshot clips.

• Travel: The Casio’s somewhat larger size and battery life (unknown but reasonable) balance against Sony’s smaller form factor and proprietary media. Wireless Eye-Fi on Casio simplifies photo transfer on the go.

• Professional Use: Both cameras target consumers, not pros. Absence of RAW formats, limited lens flexibility, and lack of rugged build exclude serious professional applications.

Casio EX FC100 front Casio EX FC100 screen back Sony S950 front Sony S950 screen back

Ratings and Summaries: Where Each Camera Stands

To quantify overall performance and usability, here’s a consolidated scorecard for reference:

We see the Casio EX-FC100 scoring strongly in manual control, stabilization, and video innovation. The Sony DSC-S950 shines in ease of use, color fidelity, and autofocus zone coverage.

Breaking performance down by genre further clarifies their niches:

Final Verdict and Recommendations

Both the Casio EX-FC100 and Sony DSC-S950 represent thoughtful iterations of compact cameras from 2009, each with strengths tuned to subtly different users.

Choose the Casio EX-FC100 if you:

• Favor manual exposure control and creative flexibility in a compact form.
• Value image stabilization with a versatile fixed lens and don’t mind a somewhat slower AF.
• Appreciate fun video features like super slow-motion and HD capture.
• Want wireless Eye-Fi card compatibility for image transfer convenience.
• Are willing to accept a smaller sensor resolution and limited low-light autofocus performance.

Choose the Sony DSC-S950 if you:

• Prefer a more compact, user-friendly camera with easy zoom and autofocus flexibility.
• Need better color accuracy and a slightly higher resolution sensor.
• Want faster zoom aperture for better low-light portraits and macro shots.
• Accept limited video capabilities and proprietary storage medium.
• Desire a straightforward point-and-shoot with some advanced AF options.

For enthusiasts and professionals considering these cameras in today’s market, remember both now occupy a niche historical and budget space rather than cutting-edge technology. Modern smartphones and entry-level mirrorless compacts outperform on nearly all counts - especially dynamic range, autofocus sophistication, and RAW imaging.

Still, for collectors or digital nostalgia hunters, these cameras offer intriguing blends of features worth exploring. Practical photographers, realistically, would be better served investing in newer equipment offering improved sensors, autofocus, and video functions.

I hope this deep-dive gives you the clarity needed to navigate these two vintage compacts wisely. For further details about manual controls or real-world shooting advice, feel free to reach out - after all, sharing knowledge is the heart of the photographic craft.

Happy shooting!

Article images used:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• Casio EX FC100 front Casio EX FC100 screen back Sony S950 front Sony S950 screen back