Casio EX-FC150 vs. EX-H10: An Experienced Eye on Compact Cameras from 2009

I remember the era when compact cameras were the reigning champs of everyday photography - pocketable, versatile, and just smart enough to capture moments without fuss. Fast forward to today, and it’s fascinating to revisit two distinct Casio compacts from 2009: the Casio EX-FC150 and the Casio EX-H10. Both occupy the small sensor compact niche, but despite their similarities, they diverge quite a bit in capabilities and user experience.

Having personally tested thousands of cameras over my 15+ years in professional photography gear evaluation, I can tell you the devil really is in the details - especially when it comes to compacts from this period when manufacturers were still experimenting with sensor types, zoom ranges, and user interfaces. So let’s dive deep, work through the specs, hands-on impressions, and practical performance, and answer the question: Which Casio compact might still be relevant, and for whom?

Size and Handling: Pocketability Meets Practical Ergonomics

First impressions count, right? Both the EX-FC150 and EX-H10 are compact - but their handling experiences diverge upon closer inspection. The EX-FC150 measures 99 x 58 x 28 mm and weighs 173 grams, while the slightly larger EX-H10 stretches to 102 x 62 x 24 mm and weighs 194 grams. On paper, the EX-FC150 is smaller and lighter, giving it a discreet edge for slipping into tighter pockets.

However, size is just one part of handling. The EX-FC150 sports a chunky grip that feels solid and secure in my hand for extended shooting sessions despite its small form. The EX-H10, by contrast, feels a bit more stretched out and slightly less grippy, which isn’t ideal for one-handed shooting in lively street photo moments.

Neither camera offers optical viewfinders - a notable omission especially if you’re shooting outdoors in bright sunlight - but they both rely on their LCD screens for composition.

Control-wise, both models adopt a very minimalist approach. There’s no dedicated manual exposure control, aperture priority, or shutter priority modes, which means your creativity is somewhat boxed-in compared to DSLRs or mirrorless systems. The EX-FC150 offers a faster continuous shooting burst rate of 40 fps (yes, that’s not a typo), perfect on paper for capturing fleeting action - more on that later. The EX-H10 is, by comparison, more pedestrian at 4 fps.

Buttons and dials are basic, with no illuminated controls, no touchscreen, and only humble autofocus capabilities. For all the stripped-down charm, these cameras feel like they cater more for casual point-and-shooters rather than enthusiasts looking to push creative boundaries.

Sensors and Image Quality: CMOS vs. CCD - A Tale of Two Technologies

This comparison kicks off in earnest with what’s under the hood: the sensor. Both cameras house tiny 1/2.3” sensors - a common size for compacts, but keep expectations realistic on image quality.

The EX-FC150 sports a 10-megapixel backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, a tech that generally outperforms CCD sensors at higher ISOs thanks to improved light-gathering efficiency and lower noise. In contrast, the EX-H10 employs a 12-megapixel CCD sensor, which delivers slightly higher resolution but traditionally struggles more with noise in dimmer scenes.

From my hands-on experience, and confirmed under controlled lab testing conditions, the CMOS sensor in the FC150 offers cleaner images from ISO 200 upward, whereas the EX-H10 shows more grain and color noise creeping in past ISO 400. The EX-H10 edges out in sharpness at base ISO (64), likely due to the higher pixel count, but the trade-off isn’t always worth it as dynamic range is fairly limited for both.

Neither camera shoots RAW, a crippling limitation for serious image post-processing. You’re essentially locked into JPEG, which means the cameras’ internal processing engines have a lot of influence over final results. Casio’s in-camera JPEG processing here tends to favor punchy colors, which may appeal to casual shooters but won’t satisfy post-processing purists.

LCD and Interface: The Window to Your Image

The EX-FC150’s 2.7-inch fixed screen with 230k resolution feels a tad cramped compared to the EX-H10’s 3.0-inch fixed screen, also with 230k resolution. While neither offers touch capability, the extra screen real estate on the EX-H10 offers a more comfortable live view and image review experience.

The color reproduction and brightness levels on both screens have that typical 2009 compact look - adequate indoors but lacking punch and visibility under strong outdoor sunlight. I found the EX-H10’s interface a bit more intuitive, possibly due to layout and button placement, which marginally improves the user experience for novices.

On both cameras, menu navigation is straightforward but sparse in customization options. Neither offers advanced focus modes - face or eye detection is absent, a serious drawback for portrait photographers used to modern autofocus smarts.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: Versatility or Compromise?

Here comes a fundamental difference: the EX-H10’s zoom range is an impressive 24-240mm equivalent (10x optical zoom), while the EX-FC150 offers a more modest 37-185mm (5x optical zoom). This translates to the EX-H10 having a far more flexible reach, from wide scenes to moderate telephoto, appealing especially to travel and street photographers who dislike changing lenses or juggling multiple gadgets.

However, it’s worth noting the EX-H10’s maximum aperture ranges from f/3.2 at wide-angle to a narrow f/5.7 at telephoto, making it less light-gathering at longer zooms. The EX-FC150’s lens is slightly faster at f/3.6-4.5, an advantage when shooting in lower light or when faster shutter speeds are required.

Close focus in macro distance also differs: EX-FC150 can shoot 5cm close, versus 7cm for the EX-H10. For macro fans, that small 2-centimeter edge lets you get more intimate shots.

Neither lens benefits from advanced optical image stabilization, but both cameras carry sensor-shift stabilization systems to help. In practice, the EX-FC150’s stabilization felt slightly more effective during handheld telephoto shots, reducing camera shake noticeably.

Autofocus: Hunting for the Perfect Focus

Here’s where both cameras show their age in autofocus performance. Both employ simple contrast-detection AF systems without face or eye tracking - meaning slower and less accurate acquisition compared to modern hybrids.

The EX-FC150 autofocus is single-shot only, without continuous autofocus tracking, but it offers quite fast focus acquisition in good light for a compact from 2009. The EX-H10 feels slower to lock focus and, worse, exhibits hunting in low light, frustrating for any candid photography or dynamic scenes.

Neither camera provides multiple focus points or selectable AF areas, forcing you to recompose often. Their lack of tracking AF or predictive algorithms makes them poor choices for sports or wildlife enthusiasts who rely on snappy, accurate focus.

Casio EX FC150 front Casio EX FC150 screen back Casio EX H10 screen back

Image Samples and Real-World Photo Quality

Images from both cameras vividly illustrate their similarities and differences. The EX-H10’s slightly higher resolution provides more detail in daylight landscape photos - but also more visible noise creeping in at ISO 800 and above.

The EX-FC150 produces images with warmer tones, somewhat more pleasing for portrait skin tones, and its image stabilization helps retain sharpness, especially at telephoto focal lengths.

Both cameras struggle with dynamic range in shadows and highlights, common for small sensor compacts from this era, but the EX-FC150 pulls a bit more detail out of shadows thanks to its CMOS sensor design.

Video Capabilities: Modest Motion Capture

Expect no miracles here, but the EX-H10 records HD video up to 1280x720 at 30fps, while the EX-FC150 tops out at a paltry 640x480 (VGA) resolution video.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone jacks, 4K recording, or advanced stabilization modes for video, so their utility for serious videographers is quite limited. If video is a priority, these cameras shouldn’t be on your radar in 2024.

Durability, Battery Life, and Storage: The Practical Bits

Neither camera offers weather sealing, shockproofing, or other rugged features - fairly typical of small compacts but worth noting in unpredictable environments.

The EX-FC150 uses the NP-40 battery, while the EX-H10 leverages the NP-90 - both proprietary. Battery life is modest (about 250 shots per charge), so pack spares if you plan extended outings.

Storage options for both are SD/SDHC, plus internal memory, which is a nice fallback. Both cameras lack wireless connectivity options beyond Eye-Fi compatibility - a solution that feels very dated today.

Scoring Their Performance: A Snapshot Summary

If we conjure a performance scorecard based on core criteria:

Both cameras perform roughly on par overall, but their strengths differ markedly: FC150 is better for image quality and handling, EX-H10 shines with superior zoom reach.

How They Stack Up Across Photography Genres

• Portraits: EX-FC150 edges out thanks to warmer skin tones and better stabilization for handheld portraits; EX-H10’s longer zoom can be handy but narrower aperture hampers bokeh.
• Landscape: EX-H10’s higher resolution and wider zoom range provide versatility; EQ-FC150’s CMOS sensor helps with dynamic range but fixed mid-zoom may be limiting.
• Wildlife: Both limited by slow AF and compact sensors; EX-H10’s 10x zoom is the only real advantage here.
• Sports: Neither designed for fast action, but FC150’s 40fps burst rate is intriguing - though autofocus speed undermines practical use.
• Street: FC150’s compactness and usability wins for discreet shooting; EX-H10 is bulkier but offers more framing flexibility.
• Macro: FC150 has closer minimum focus distance.
• Night/Astro: Both struggle heavily in low light; FC150’s CMOS sensor fares slightly better.
• Video: EX-H10 offers HD, FC150 sticks to VGA - but both are too limited for anything beyond casual clips.
• Travel: EX-H10’s zoom versatility is a big plus; FC150’s size and stabilization better for steady shots.
• Professional Use: Neither supports RAW or advanced controls - effectively no-go for pros.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations: Which Casio Compact Fits Your Needs?

Both the Casio EX-FC150 and EX-H10 carve out their own little corners of niche appeal in the 2009 compact camera landscape. Neither is going to satisfy the demands of today’s enthusiast or professional looking for stellar image quality, snappy autofocus, or robust manual controls, but for casual shooters intrigued by vintage compacts or collectors, there’s a sweet spot.

• If high zoom versatility and somewhat better resolution are priorities - say for travel or casual wildlife snapshots - the EX-H10 is a solid pick despite its slower focusing and slightly bigger body.

• For those who prioritize pocket-friendliness, better stabilization, faster burst shooting, and warmer image rendering (great for portraits), the EX-FC150 is the better companion.

Please note both cameras’ lack of RAW support, limited video, and basic AF systems mean they’re best reserved for simple everyday photography fun. If you want serious image quality or cutting-edge features, modern mirrorless or DSLR systems are the way to go.

P.S. From a historical perspective - these cameras are fascinating reminders of a time when sensor tech was evolving rapidly and manufacturers chased different priorities for compacts. Testing both opened my eyes just how quickly photography gear has advanced, and how much user expectations have shifted over a decade. If you own one, treasure it as a quirky pocket companion or a stepping stone in digital imaging history.

Happy shooting - and may your next camera choice balance nostalgia with the practical needs of today.