Casio EX-FH100 vs Ricoh CX2: A Detailed Comparison for Enthusiasts and Professionals

When exploring small-sensor compact cameras from the late 2000s and early 2010s, the Casio EX-FH100 and Ricoh CX2 often come up as noteworthy options for photographers wanting a lightweight, versatile solution with decent zoom ranges. Although these models come from different makers and embody distinct design philosophies, both aim to empower photographers with manual controls and quick shooting capabilities in a compact package.

In this comprehensive, hands-on comparison, we’ll walk you through the technical details, real-world performance, and use-case suitability for each camera across a wide variety of photographic genres. Our goal is to equip you with everything needed to choose the right camera for your creative journey, whether you are a beginner seeking solid flexibility or a seasoned enthusiast requiring nuanced control.

At a Glance: Physical Size and Ergonomics

Starting with how they feel in the hand and how they integrate into your workflow is always a practical approach. Ergonomics shape your shooting experience on every level - from quick snaps on the street to deliberate setups in the studio.

Both cameras are pocket-friendly and share the compact body philosophy. However, the Casio feels marginally larger and a little heavier but rewards you with dedicated exposure mode dials that appeal to hands-on photographers. The Ricoh’s lighter weight supports comfortable street photography sessions but leans toward semi-automatic shooting modes, reducing complexity for casual users.

Casio's control layout offers more tactile engagement with traditional dials and buttons, giving you full manual exposure capabilities - a rarity in this segment. Ricoh CX2 keeps it simpler and may feel more approachable if you prefer an uncomplicated interface.

Design Details and Control Layout

Looking closely at the user interface reveals another layer of comparison. Detailed control access directly affects how quickly you can react and fine-tune settings during shoots.

• EX-FH100: Features a prominent mode dial with Shutter Priority (S), Aperture Priority (A), and full Manual modes, plus exposure compensation buttons and a handy zoom lever. There's no viewfinder but a modest rear screen that initiates live view operation.
• CX2: Drops manual exposure controls; instead, it offers Auto and Scene modes with easy toggling through the rear dial and buttons. Its standout feature is the smoother imaging processor and a significantly higher resolution rear LCD for composing shots more clearly.

The Ricoh’s additional advantage is a more refined rear screen based on pixel density, which aids in visual confirmation, especially under challenging lighting.

Sensor Specifications and Image Quality

Understanding sensor technology is fundamental to evaluating a camera’s image-making potential. Both cameras share a common sensor size - the 1/2.3-inch segment - which intrinsically limits noise performance and dynamic range but remains adequate for casual and some enthusiast applications.

Sensor Technology Insight: The Casio’s Back-Side Illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor theoretically offers better low-light sensitivity compared to traditional CMOS sensors due to its improved photodiode architecture. This manifests in slightly cleaner images at higher ISOs, which is quite useful since its max ISO is 3200 versus Ricoh’s 1600 cap.

Resolution: The Casio edges out by 1-megapixel, but more importantly, its RAW shooting capability provides unrivaled post-processing leeway - essential for professionals or enthusiasts wanting deeper control over tone mapping and noise reduction.

Ricoh’s sensor is competent in daylight or controlled lighting situations; nonetheless, absence of RAW support and a narrower ISO spread limits flexibility in difficult lighting.

Rear LCD Screen and Live View Use

Screen usability doubles as a creative facilitator, especially when more traditional viewfinders are absent.

• Casio EX-FH100: Comes with a 3-inch 230p fixed LCD. The resolution and brightness are modest, resulting in less sharp previews and slightly awkward framing in very bright conditions.
• Ricoh CX2: Offers the same 3-inch size but an impressive 920p resolution screen - the difference is clear, especially when checking focus or framing details.

Although neither camera has touch capabilities, Ricoh’s well-resolved screen aids more precise manual focusing and composition, a big plus when working in the field.

Lens and Optical Performance

The lens has an outsized influence on creative possibilities. Both cameras employ fixed lenses but with different focal ranges and apertures.

The Casio’s wider wide-angle of 24mm equivalent slightly improves landscape and architectural compositions by capturing broader scenes. Meanwhile, Ricoh pushes the telephoto reach out to 300mm, better serving wildlife and distant subject photography.

Macro comparison: Ricoh’s 1 cm macro focusing distance enables extreme close-ups with crisp detail - ideal for nature enthusiasts and intricate product shots. Casio’s 7 cm limit is less competitive but still practical for casual macro work.

Both lenses are optically stabilized with sensor-shift IS, crucial given the small sensor size and long zoom ranges, reducing camera shake affordably.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance

Autofocus speed and accuracy are critical in many scenarios. These two cameras rely on contrast detection AF systems, common in compact models.

Neither camera supports continuous autofocus or subject tracking, which impacts fast-action capture significantly.

The Casio’s 4 fps burst mode is an encouraging feature for casual sports photography or moments demanding multiple frames, whereas Ricoh’s burst rate is unspecified, likely slower.

In practice, both systems are responsive but show weaknesses in low-contrast or low-light scenarios. Users will need to pre-focus and anticipate moments carefully, especially with fast-moving subjects.

Photographic Genre Suitability

Let's examine how each camera performs across the main photography genres.

Portrait Photography

• Casio’s wider aperture at 24mm f/3.2 helps deliver subject separation in close-up portraits, capturing natural skin tones with 10MP detail and the benefit of RAW flexibility.
• Ricoh’s lack of RAW and narrower aperture limits creative control. The higher resolution screen aids framing but difficult low-light autofocusing detracts.
• Neither have face or eye detection, so manual focus and thoughtful composition are necessary.

Landscape Photography

• Casio’s 24mm wide angle is better for expansive vistas.
• The 10MP sensor and RAW shooting enable detailed, high-quality landscapes that withstand digital editing.
• Ricoh’s longer zoom is less relevant here, but a brighter screen helps verify framing in bright outdoor conditions.

Wildlife and Telephoto Use

• Ricoh’s 300mm equivalent zoom and 10.7x range surpass Casio’s 240mm reach, crucial for distant wildlife.
• The lack of advanced AF tracking hampers action shots, yet telephoto reach remains a strong advantage.
• Casio’s faster burst rate supports capturing decisive moments better once you lock focus.

Sports and Action

• Casio’s 4 fps allows some burst action capture.
• Both cameras lack tracking autofocus, so faster subjects will challenge both.
• Ricoh’s slower shutter ceiling of 1/2000s is standard but adequate.

Street Photography

• Ricoh’s lighter weight and high-res screen make quick candid shooting comfortable.
• Casio’s more complex controls may slow street shooting but yield refined results when time is taken.

Macro Photography

• Ricoh’s 1 cm macro range and superior lens close-focus beat Casio’s.
• Ricoh allows creative close-ups - flowers, insects - with better detail.
• Casio is acceptable but less specialized.

Night and Astrophotography

• Casio’s max ISO 3200 and RAW capabilities offer more exposure latitude.
• Ricoh’s ISO 1600 cap and JPEG-only limit star field and nightscape results.
• Both have slow minimum shutter speeds (4s Casio, 8s Ricoh) - longer exposures require tripods and manual techniques.

Video Capabilities

Casio’s higher resolution video and slow-motion modes offer more creative video options, though the lack of external mic inputs confines it to casual or vlogging uses.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Neither camera offers weather sealing, waterproofing, or shock/freeze proofing, limiting use in tough environments. Both are compact and lightweight, designed primarily for casual outdoor and urban photography rather than rugged professional applications.

Battery Life and Storage

• Both utilize proprietary rechargeable batteries: Casio NP-90 and Ricoh DB-70.
• Official battery life ratings are not clearly specified; user reports indicate modest longevity suitable for a day’s outings but recommend spare batteries for extended shoots.
• Storage is supported with SD/SDHC cards in single slots, straightforward for users.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

• Casio features Eye-Fi connectivity support, which can facilitate wireless image transfers if you have compatible cards.
• Ricoh CX2 lacks wireless features.
• Both provide USB 2.0 transfer speeds; Casio uniquely outputs video via HDMI.
• No Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS on either, limiting remote control and geotagging functions.

Price-to-Performance and Value Analysis

At launch, the Casio provided more advanced manual exposure controls and video capabilities for a price slightly below the Ricoh, which offered better screen clarity and macro capabilities but fewer manual settings.

For photographers valuing post-processing flexibility and video, Casio still holds appeal. Ricoh is attractive for macro work and users prioritizing an excellent rear LCD.

Sample Image Showcase

To illustrate how these technical specs manifest in images, here is a gallery featuring sample shots captured by each:

Casio EX FH100 front Casio EX FH100 screen back Ricoh CX2 front Ricoh CX2 screen back

• Casio images exhibit strong detail retention and color depth, especially when shooting RAW files post-processed for noise reduction.
• Ricoh pictures showcase its sharp macro capabilities and vivid colors, with a slight tradeoff in low-light image quality.

Overall Performance Scores Summary

We synthesized key testing data into performance scores factoring sensor, autofocus, build, and features:

Casio EX-FH100 ranks higher in overall versatility and image quality, while Ricoh CX2 scores well for usability and lens reach.

Performance by Photography Genre

A quick view of how each camera fits key genres shows distinct strengths:

• Portraits: Casio preferred for skin tone fidelity and manual control.
• Landscape: Casio leads with wider lens and RAW.
• Wildlife: Ricoh favored due to zoom.
• Sports: Casio edges with burst speed.
• Street: Ricoh preferred for portability.
• Macro: Ricoh’s close-focusing excels.
• Night: Casio better for low light.
• Video: Casio superior.
• Travel: Both compact; choice depends on priority.
• Professional work: Casio’s manual and RAW support preferred.

Who Should Choose Which? Recommendations

Pick the Casio EX-FH100 if you:

• Want full manual exposure control on a compact camera.
• Need RAW capability for professional-editing flexibility.
• Value better high ISO and longer video options.
• Shoot a variety of genres including landscapes, portraits, or low light.
• Prefer zoom versatility with 24mm wide-angle.

Choose the Ricoh CX2 if you:

• Prioritize a high-resolution LCD screen for framing and live view.
• Need a long telephoto zoom to 300mm for wildlife or distant subjects.
• Want excellent macro reach down to 1 cm.
• Prefer simplified controls without manual exposure complexity.
• Favor a slightly smaller, lighter build for street or travel.

Final Thoughts: Exploring Small-Sensor Compacts with Purpose

While both the Casio EX-FH100 and Ricoh CX2 represent compact small-sensor cameras with a focus on zoom versatility, their divergent approaches reflect different philosophies - manual control and flexible output vs. user-friendly interfaces and specialized close-focus optics.

If image editing, exposure control, and video are core to your creative goals, we encourage hands-on testing with Casio’s EX-FH100 as it rewards those willing to engage with camera settings. Meanwhile, Ricoh’s CX2 remains an excellent travel companion with a sharper screen and macro prowess for users seeking spirited zooming and quick compositional checks.

We hope this deep dive clarifies their strengths and helps you find the camera that fits your personal shooting style. To fully grasp what each camera offers, we recommend trying both if possible and pairing them with lenses or accessories aligned with your photographic ambitions.

Happy shooting, and may your next camera open exciting new doors in your photography journey!