Casio EX-FC150 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Compact Contenders from 2009

In the early days of the last decade, compact digital cameras were still holding strong against the rising tide of smartphone cameras. For enthusiasts wanting something pocketable yet capable enough to go beyond casual snapshots, models like the Casio EX-FC150 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220 offered compelling options. Although neither camera targets the pro market, their vintage specs and ergonomics still reveal instructive insights into design philosophies of that era - and they might intrigue collectors or budget-conscious buyers hunting affordable compacts.

Having personally tested compact cameras across decades, including many 1/2.3" sensor fixed-lens models, I’m placing these two side-by-side to dissect their quirks and competencies. We'll cover everything from sensor technology and ergonomics to photographic versatility and value proposition.

Let’s dive in.

Physicality and Ergonomics: Compactness That Fits Your Hand

At first glance, both the Casio EX-FC150 and Sony W220 fit comfortably in the palm. Small sensor compacts from 2009 mostly converged on this pocket-friendly approach.

The Casio weighs about 173 grams and measures 99×58×28 mm, while the Sony is slightly lighter at 147 grams and a bit more svelte with dimensions of 95×57×22 mm. These subtle differences make the Sony feel a tad more pocketable and less obtrusive for street or travel use. But the Casio’s marginally thicker body offers a more substantial grip, lending confidence when shooting one-handed, especially for those with larger palms.

Where the Casio somewhat misses points is in its control layout - there’s no illuminated button feedback, and the fixed 2.7-inch display is a modest 230K-dot screen, which is also Sony’s spec. Neither offers a viewfinder, so composing with the rear LCD is mandatory.

Looking at control surfaces, the Casio keeps it simple but lacks dedicated dials - there is no aperture or shutter priority mode, reflecting its beginner-focused design. The Sony offers a similar button array but includes a 9-point autofocus area selection, which gives a modicum of compositional control absent on the Casio.

Neither camera’s ergonomics impress for heavy use but suffice for casual shooting. One caveat: neither supports touchscreens or articulating displays - standard for the time but limiting by today’s standards.

Sensor and Image Quality: Vintage Small Sensor Battle

Both cameras wield a 1/2.3" sensor measuring 6.17x4.55 mm, yielding a sensor area of 28.07 mm². Notably, both employ back-illuminated sensor tech, with Casio using BSI-CMOS and Sony a CCD sensor, common before CMOS dominance.

Let's talk numbers: Casio’s EX-FC150 features a 10-megapixel resolution (3648×2736), while the Sony W220 packs 12 megapixels (4000×3000). Higher pixel count on a similarly sized sensor usually means smaller photodiodes, which in turn can yield more noise and reduced dynamic range. From my testing of similar models, the Sony's CCD sensor generally offers better color depth but often struggles more in low-light situations compared to Casio’s BSI-CMOS.

In real-world shooting, the Casio displayed cleaner shadows and higher ISO (up to ISO 1600 natively) with less grain. The Sony pushes ISO up to 3200 and includes a wider lower bound of ISO 80, but noise becomes disruptive beyond ISO 400 in most scenarios.

Shooting Experience: Autofocus, Speed, and Usability

Autofocus on both cameras relies on contrast detection, the norm for compacts pre-2010. The Casio offers single AF only, no continuous or tracking modes, and lacks face or eye detection. Sony W220 provides single AF plus multi-area AF with 9 focus points, offering somewhat better precision when framing a moving subject.

Continuous shooting speeds are another differentiator. Casio boasts a blistering 40 fps burst at lower resolution, thanks to sensor-shift stabilization and internal processing - great for action slices but limited to small JPEGs for such speeds. On the other hand, Sony W220 shoots at a modest 2 fps, sufficient for casual use but frustrating if sports or wildlife are in your ambitions.

Both cameras lack manual exposure controls. Aperture priority, shutter priority, and full manual modes are absent. The Casio’s lens is fixed aperture F3.6-4.5, while Sony’s lens is a bit faster on the wide end at F2.8 but slows dramatically to F7.1 at telephoto.

Lens and Zoom Capability: More Than Meets the Eye

Matching their compact nature, neither camera supports interchangeable lenses. Instead, they offer fixed zooms with moderate reach.

• Casio EX-FC150 zooms 37-185 mm in 35mm equivalent, a 5x zoom - helpful for portraits or semi-telephoto shots.
• Sony W220 offers 30-120 mm, a 4x zoom starting slightly wider at 30 mm, better for wide-angle shots and landscapes but less reach at telephoto.

Interestingly, Sony’s aperture starts brighter at wide-angle (F2.8) but closes rapidly at telephoto (F7.1), reducing low-light abilities when zoomed in. Casio holds steadier aperture but is slower overall.

Macro focus distance is equal at 5 cm for both, enabling decent close-ups with fine detail reproduction under good lighting.

Stabilization: Keeping Your Shots Crisp

Both cameras feature image stabilization, but the technology differs:

• Casio employs sensor-shift stabilization, physically moving the sensor to compensate for camera shake - effective across focal lengths and a boon at telephoto.
• Sony uses optical stabilization, moving lens elements to correct shake. Optical IS is generally effective but Sony’s longer exposure range (shutter speeds up to 1/1600s) indicates possible tradeoffs in stabilization effectiveness.

In practice, Casio offered more reliable blur prevention at longer focal lengths and slower shutter speeds, particularly useful for handheld telephoto shooting. Given the compact bodies, both deliver better results with stabilization active, but the Casio’s system wins points in steadiness.

Display and Viewfinder: What You See Is What You Get

Neither camera sports a viewfinder, so live view on the rear screen is your sole compose method.

With 2.7-inch fixed displays rated at 230K resolution, visual clarity and color reproduction are comparable. Both screens reflect outdoor light heavily - a challenge for shooting in bright conditions.

Neither camera offers touchscreen functionality, illuminated buttons, or articulating screens, so shooting from unusual angles or making autofocus point changes on-screen is cumbersome. The Sony W220's multi-area AF somewhat compensates for this by letting you change focus points via buttons, while Casio provides no such quick AF selection.

Video Capabilities: Niche Slow-Mo Versus Basic HD

Video quality on compact cameras in this segment is usually a secondary consideration, and here the Casio EX-FC150 flexes an interesting muscle: slow-motion video.

• Casio supports HD video at 1280×720 @ 30 fps, plus multiple slow-motion modes ranging up to an astonishing 1000 fps in extremely low resolutions.
• Sony W220 restricts video to 640×480 @ 30 fps, which is simon-pure standard definition and less useful today.

Both record footage in Motion JPEG format - heavy files with limited editing flexibility.

For casual video or creative slow-mo attempts, Casio edges out Sony markedly. However, no microphone jacks, no headphone monitoring, and limited frame rates restrict serious videography uses on both.

Battery and Storage: The Power to Shoot On

Both units use proprietary battery packs with modest life. Neither manufacturer publishes official CIPA ratings.

Casio EX-FC150 comes with an NP-40 battery, while Sony W220’s battery model isn’t specified, but it typically uses an NP-BN1 or similar.

Storage-wise,

• Casio uses SD/SDHC cards.
• Sony leverages Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo cards, a format that's increasingly obsolete and less flexible.

SD card compatibility on the Casio offers more versatility and easier card swaps.

Connectivity: Sharing Photos in a Connected Era

In 2009, Wi-Fi on cameras was rare. The Casio EX-FC150 includes Eye-Fi wireless compatibility, allowing some wireless image transfer with an Eye-Fi SD card (a neat feature for its vintage). Sony W220 lacks any wireless connectivity.

Neither model has Bluetooth, NFC, GPS, HDMI, or modern wireless features.

Toughness and Environmental Resistance: Built for Everyday, Not Extremes

Neither camera offers weather sealing, waterproofing, dustproofing, or shock resistance - very common at the time and category. You would not entrust these to harsh environments without protection.

Real-World Performance in Different Photography Genres

Let’s look more deeply at how these cameras stack across photographic genres.

Portrait Photography

The Casio’s longer telephoto zoom (37-185 mm equivalent) grants tighter framing without disturbing subjects, helping nicely isolate backgrounds. Its sensor-shift IS aids in stabilizing long focal length shots handheld, ensuring sharper results.

Sony starts wider at 30 mm and is faster at wide aperture (F2.8), potentially better for environmental portraits or group shots in dim light. However, Mixture of the narrow aperture at telephoto (F7.1) limits shallow depth of field and bokeh quality.

Both cameras lack face or eye detection autofocus - frustrating for portraits. Focus speed is slow in low contrast, so subjects must be cooperative.

Landscape Photography

Sony’s wider 30 mm equivalent angle benefits landscapes that demand broad coverage. Casio’s 37 mm is slightly tighter, restricting expansive compositions.

Neither camera delivers excellent dynamic range, limiting recovery in high contrast scenes. The CCD sensor in Sony may render slightly richer colors, but at the cost of noisier shadows.

Lack of weather sealing raises caution for shooting outdoors in inclement weather conditions.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Here, the Casio’s 40 fps burst shooting (even at reduced resolution) gives it a distinct edge for capturing fast action such as birds or sports moments. Sony’s 2 fps burst is simply too slow.

Autofocus systems on both are slow to lock focus in moving situations, and neither supports continuous AF tracking.

Telephoto reach benefits Casio again, with 185mm vs Sony’s 120mm equivalent. This stretch makes a difference in distant wildlife or sports.

Street Photography

Sony’s smaller, lighter build and wider focal range (30-120 mm) lend to flexibility in street shooting. The slightly more discreet profile helps candid shooting.

However, both cameras lack quick autofocus area selection (Sony somewhat better with 9 points), no eye detection, and no fast burst frame rates, which street photographers often prize.

Low-light autofocus is mediocre on both.

Macro Photography

Both models offer 5 cm macro focusing distance, respectable for their class.

Casio’s sensor-shift IS aids close-up stability, but neither camera includes focus stacking or bracketing features.

Night and Astro Photography

Low-light performance is limited on both, but Casio’s higher max ISO native (1600 vs 3200 on Sony) coupled with CMOS sensor gives better noise control at high ISO. Sony’s CCD tends to produce more chroma noise and less usable image quality in darkness.

Neither camera features long exposure controls beyond basic 30-second shutter speed max (Sony tops out at 1 second minimum shutter speed, Casio at 1/1000s max), nor dedicated astro modes.

Video Recording

Casio’s HD 720p video and slow-motion modes provide more novelty and creative options today than Sony’s standard definition VGA videos.

No microphone inputs reduce video quality potential, so I see these as supplemental video cameras at best.

Travel Photography

The smaller and lighter Sony W220 wins on portability, which is critical when traversing cities or natural sites for hours.

Casio’s longer zoom and better IS make it a better travel companion for varied shooting conditions but at cost of bulk and slightly higher weight.

Battery life on both is similar - relatively modest for extended excursions without spares.

Professional Use

Neither camera suits professional workflows. Both lack RAW support, manual exposure, and advanced autofocus. They generate JPEGs only, restricting post-processing latitude.

No fast tethering or robust connectivity further handicaps professional use.

From reliability perspectives, their plastic compact construction suggests average longevity, suitable for hobbyist but not daily pro demands.

Verdict: Which Should You Choose?

Time for the scorecard.

Casio EX FC150 front Casio EX FC150 screen back Sony W220 front Sony W220 screen back

Both cameras occupy the bottom end of compact cameras today, but their individual strengths emerge depending on use cases.

• Need wide-angle versatility and portability? Sony DSC-W220 delivers lighter design, wider zoom start, and slightly higher megapixels.
• Want more telephoto reach, better image stabilization, and unique slow-motion video? Casio EX-FC150 shines with 5x zoom, sensor-shift IS, and fun slo-mo features.
• Battery life and usability are neck and neck, though the Casio’s SD card compatibility is a practical plus.
• Both struggle in low light and sports autofocus demands but Casio’s burst shooting speed is an advantage.

Below is my summary score comparison, based on hands-on experience, tests, and feature weightings.

Performance Across Photography Genres: A Genre-Specific Analysis

Breaking down by photographic application:

• Portraits: Tie (Sony’s wider aperture balances Casio’s zoom advantage)
• Landscape: Sony edges (wider view, better color depth)
• Wildlife: Casio dominates (long zoom + burst rate)
• Sports: Casio closer to usable (burst speed wins)
• Street: Sony nudges ahead (smaller size + wider angle)
• Macro: Equal
• Night/Astro: Casio better ISO handling
• Video: Casio stronger (HD and slow-motion)
• Travel: Sony more pocketable, Casio more versatile
• Professional: Neither suitable

Final Thoughts: Aging Compacts with Lessons to Learn

After exhaustive comparison, what remains clear is that neither camera is a game-changer by current standards. But for their vintage class and budgets, each has a niche:

• The Casio EX-FC150 pushes creative video and telephoto shooting with competent stabilization. It feels more like a hybrid toy for enthusiasts who appreciate novelty in slow-motion and burst capabilities.

• The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W220 offers a clean, straightforward experience better suited to casual travelers preferring portability and wider angles.

One last look at their top-side design and physical features - you get the full picture.

If you’re upgrading from a smartphone or older compact and need modest zoom and basic features in cheap used condition, these cameras might fit. But if your budget stretches, consider newer models or moderately priced mirrorless cameras for better image quality and manual control.

In summary: Neither of these early-2009 small sensor compacts knocks it out of the park, but each carries its own charm. The Casio EX-FC150 is the more adventurous pick with its slow-mo, long zoom, and sensor-shift IS, suited for creative hobbyists and telephoto shooters on a budget. The Sony W220 is understated but reliable, packing more megapixels and wider zoom start, ideal for everyday snapshots and travel ease.

Hope this detailed hands-on analysis helps you make an informed choice by matching features to your shooting style and photographic ambitions.

Happy shooting!