Head-to-Head: Casio EX-FH100 vs Sony WX50 – Which Compact Camera Packs More Punch for Enthusiasts?

When budget-conscious enthusiasts and casual pros start hunting for a reliable compact camera, the choices - even in small sensor compacts - can be surprisingly nuanced. Today, I put two fairly affordable, fixed-lens compacts head-to-head: the Casio EX-FH100, released in 2010, and Sony’s WX50 from 2012. At first glance, they may look like straightforward point-and-shoot competitors, but dig beneath the specs sheet and real-world performance diverges quite a bit. Having spent dozens of field shoots and lab tests on both, I’ll share a hands-on, no-frills comparison to help you pick the right sidekick for your creative pursuits.

Getting a Feel: Size, Ergonomics, and Build

Let’s start with the basics: how does each camera feel in your mitts during a day out shooting? Physical handling is often overlooked but can make or break your experience, especially for street or travel photography where quick, natural manipulation counts.

The Casio EX-FH100 is a bit chunkier - with dimensions of 104x60x28 mm and weighing 201 grams, it offers a solid grip and feels sturdier in hand. It sports a very conventional, utilitarian design with button layouts that cater to those who like manual control options (more on that soon). The body doesn’t scream premium but balances weight and size well, allowing a secure hold that’s not too tiring.

Sony’s WX50, on the other hand, slims down significantly at 92x52x19 mm and 117 grams. We’re talking extremely pocketable here, almost borderline “throw it in your sunglasses case” compact. The smaller footprint translates to less hand fatigue but also a lighter, somewhat plasticky feel - great for casual travel or street photography where discreetness is key, but less reassuring for rugged pro use.

I spent a full afternoon with both cameras in the city, and the Casio’s heft gave me confidence for more deliberate shooting, while the Sony’s compactness was a blessing when roaming crowded markets. If you’re a “clubs for thumbs” shooter who prefers physical buttons to touchscreen fiddling, Casio’s layout is friendlier, boasting traditional dials and exposure compensation buttons. Sony leans more entry-level with fewer manual overrides.

Behind the Glass: Sensor Insights and Image Quality

Image quality ultimately comes down to the sensor and processing pipeline. Both sport 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensors, a common size for compacts balancing cost and decent performance indoors and out. However, the devil’s in the details.

The Casio has a 10MP sensor, while the Sony boasts 16MP, offering tighter resolution and the ability to crop more aggressively in post. The sensor size and effective area (about 28 mm²) are identical, so pixel pitch (size of individual light-sensing elements) is smaller on the Sony. This often means slightly noisier images at high ISO but more detail resolution at low-to-mid ISO settings.

Looking at key image quality metrics like dynamic range and color depth (though neither camera is DXO Mark tested officially), practical tests showed:

• Dynamic Range: Casio’s more limited aperture range and older sensor tech rendered its shadows less detailed in tricky lighting compared to Sony’s marginally better handling of highlights and shadows.
• Color Reproduction: Both cameras favor punchy colors, but Sony’s Clearfoto TFT LCD and processing yielded more natural skin tones, particularly for portraiture.
• High ISO Noise: Sony goes all the way up to ISO 12,800, though usable images mostly stay under ISO 800. Casio maxes at ISO 3200, but image quality dips faster in low light.

I ran comparative tests on both cameras shooting the same scenes, indoors under tungsten bulbs and outdoors in harsh sunlight. The Sony’s higher resolution and superior processor gave sharper, more detailed images with less color fringing. Still, neither is a low-light beast - both cameras perform best in daylight or well-lit conditions.

Viewing and Framing: Screens and Interface

Neither camera sports a viewfinder (electronic or optical), so the LCD screen is the only way to compose shots. This is a dealbreaker or non-issue depending on your style.

The Casio sticks with a 3" fixed, low-res 230k-dot screen - serviceable but far from crisp. It has no touchscreen capability, so menu navigation is button-based and sometimes clunky. Since it lacks live histogram and focus peaking, nail-sharp manual focus requires patience.

Sony’s WX50 offers a smaller 2.7" screen but with 461k dots and Clearfoto TFT technology, resulting in a noticeably clearer, brighter display. Again, no touchscreen, but the interface is intuitive, with quick-access menus and better feedback for exposure and focus.

Neither camera supports articulation, which hampers shooting from odd angles or selfies. Also, without any EVF, sunny outdoor framing relied heavily on angling the camera and guessing composition - less than ideal, but standard for budget compacts back then.

The Lens Factor: Zoom Range, Aperture, and Macro

Both cameras feature fixed zoom lenses with respectable reach, but different philosophies.

• Casio EX-FH100: 24-240 mm equivalent (10x zoom), aperture f/3.2 to f/5.7
• Sony WX50: 25-125 mm equivalent (5x zoom), aperture f/2.6 to f/6.3

Casio’s 10x zoom is impressive, letting you capture distant subjects without swapping lenses - a big plus for wildlife or travel photography where you want versatility in one package. Conversely, Sony’s shorter 5x zoom means you’ll need to get closer to subjects but benefits from a wider aperture at the wide end (f/2.6) that allows cleaner backgrounds and better low-light performance, especially for portraits or indoor shooting.

Both cameras support macro focusing close to the lens: 7cm for Casio and 5cm for Sony. This means you can get decent close-up shots, but the Casio’s sensor-shift stabilization helps reduce blur from tiny hand shakes when shooting macros or telephoto.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: How Fast and Accurate?

Unless you’re strictly shooting landscapes or posed portraits, autofocus speed and accuracy can make or break a camera.

The Casio uses contrast-detect AF with single-point focusing only - no face or eye detection, no continuous tracking. It’s reliable for stationary subjects but often hunts in low light or on moving targets.

Sony WX50 adds face detection and AF tracking (continuous AF not supported, unfortunately), giving it an advantage in portrait and casual action shooting, especially under decent lighting. However, neither camera dazzles with sports or wildlife autofocus performance; they both lag behind entry-level DSLRs or mirrorless systems.

Continuous shooting rates also differ:

• Casio: 4 fps max (modest but okay for casual bursts)
• Sony: 10 fps max (surprisingly quick, though buffer depth is limited)

In practice, I tested both shooting kids at play and snapping street scenes. Sony’s faster frame rate increased the odds of catching sharp shots in action sequences. Casio’s slower burst rate felt more suited for composed shots or slow-moving subjects.

Video Capabilities: Beyond Still Photography

If you occasionally want to shoot videos - whether travel vlogging or documenting a family event - capabilities here matter.

• Casio EX-FH100 maxes out at 1280x720 HD at 30fps with Motion JPEG compression. Not stellar by today’s standards and large file sizes due to MJPEG inefficiency.
• Sony WX50 delivers 1920x1080 Full HD up to 60fps (MPEG-4, AVCHD), much more versatile for smooth, sharp video and compliant with modern editing workflows.

Neither camera has microphone or headphone inputs, limiting audio quality control. Neither offers in-body stabilization special for video, but both rely on their optical or sensor-shift IS to help reduce shake.

In my field test recording a sunny beach walk, Sony’s video impressively handled fast movements with little blur or jitter, compared to the softer and noisier footage from Casio. Bottom line: if video is a priority, Sony takes it reasonably seriously.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Will They Last?

Battery life is often a hidden pain point. Shooting for hours only to run out halfway through kills the vibe, especially on trips without charging options.

• Casio uses a NP-90 lithium-ion battery (official battery life not specified), but practical estimates are around 250 shots per charge.
• Sony’s NP-BN battery offers about 240 shots per charge, according to CIPA standards.

Both are average performers, not stellar endurance runners. Consider carrying spares if you plan heavy shooting days.

Storage-wise:

• Casio stores images on SD/SDHC cards or internal memory.
• Sony supports SD, SDHC, SDXC, and also Memory Stick Duo formats, lending some flexibility but at the cost of confusing media choices and possible premium pricing.

Connectivity and Extras

• Casio supports Eye-Fi wireless card connectivity, a niche option to transfer images wirelessly if you have the right card.
• Sony offers no wireless connectivity options like Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.

Neither has GPS or advanced wireless features, meaning post-shoot image management relies on wired USB or card readers.

Putting It All Together: How Do These Cameras Perform Across Photography Genres?

Let’s break down strengths and weaknesses according to popular photography types and actual user demands.

Casio EX FH100 front Casio EX FH100 screen back Sony WX50 front Sony WX50 screen back

Portrait Photography

• Sony WX50 takes this crown easily, thanks to better color reproduction, face detection AF, and a wider aperture f/2.6 on the wide end. It produces pleasing skin tones and richer background blur at shorter focal lengths.
• Casio EX-FH100 with less precise AF and slower lens struggles for shallow depth of field portraits, good for casual shots but not flattering close-ups.

Landscape Photography

• Both cameras cap out at modest resolutions (10MP vs 16MP), with Sony’s higher pixel count giving more cropping and printing flexibility.
• Casio’s larger zoom can reach distant scenic details, which may be handy. However, neither has weather sealing or advanced dynamic range capabilities.
• For landscapes, Sony’s slightly better dynamic range and sharper images provide a slight edge.

Wildlife Photography

• Casio’s 10x zoom and image stabilization make it appealing for casual wildlife snaps, though sluggish autofocus hampers tracking moving animals.
• Sony’s 5x zoom is limiting here, though its faster burst rate helps in a pinch.

Sports Photography

• Neither camera was built for professional sports shooting: Casio’s 4 fps burst is sluggish, Sony’s 10 fps faster but hampered by focus lag and no continuous AF.
• Sony’s face detection and tracking help, but real enthusiasts should look beyond these for meaningful sports capture.

Street Photography

• Sony’s tiny size and quiet operation make it more discreet and carry-friendly, winning favor for street shooters who prize lightweight gear.
• Casio’s heft and slower AF might slow you down on fast moments.

Macro Photography

• Casio’s 7cm macro minimum focus distance plus sensor-shift stabilization supports cleaner close-ups, though true macro enthusiasts will want dedicated gear.
• Sony’s 5cm focus distance gets you closer but lacks the same stabilization.

Night and Astro Photography

• Both cameras show noisy high ISO images after ISO 800; Sony pushes to 12,800 but generally not usable above ISO 800 without strong noise.
• Lack of long exposure modes or bulb mode limits serious night photography. Casio’s manual settings help a little.

Video

• Sony’s Full HD 60fps video, AVCHD format, and better processing outperform Casio’s low-res MJPEG video.
• Both lack audio inputs and advanced video features.

Travel Photography

• Sony scores with portability, decent zoom, and video quality; great for lightweight travel setups.
• Casio offers more zoom versatility but bulkier size.

Professional Use

• Neither camera meets reliability or workflow standards for pro use.
• Casio’s raw support is nice; Sony shoots JPEG-only.
• For casual pros or second camera, Sony’s modern interface and better video may win.

Tech Deep Dive: Autofocus, Stabilization, and Processing

Autofocus technology on both cameras is contrast-detection only, meaning slower focusing compared to hybrid or phase detection autofocus found on DSLRs or mirrorless cameras. The Casio lacks face/eye detection, while Sony tries to compensate with faces and tracking modes. However, neither camera excels in low light - expected in budget compacts but frustrating if your subjects move fast.

Image stabilization types differ:

• Casio’s sensor-shift stabilization helps reduce both macro and telephoto shake.
• Sony uses optical image stabilization (OIS) built into the lens group, effective especially at wide angles.

Processing-wise, Sony’s BIONZ engine is more effective, producing better noise reduction and clearer images. Casio’s older processor and MJPEG video compression are dated even by 2010 standards.

Value Analysis: Which Gives You More Bang for the Buck?

Both cameras launched at around $250-$300 used market price (or thereabouts).

• The Sony WX50 offers better resolution, video, faster burst shooting, and a generally sleeker, more modern package at a slightly lower price. It’s a real bargain for users who prioritize portability and multimedia.
• The Casio EX-FH100 offers a longer zoom range and raw image capture, plus manual exposure modes making it somewhat better for photography learners wanting to experiment, but feels dated and bulky for casual use.

If you want snapshots straight out of the box, Sony’s higher pixel count and better video make it a more versatile companion. But if you’re after flexibility in zoom and manual exposure control, Casio rewards the tinkerer willing to compromise portability.

Summing It Up: Which Compact Camera Should You Buy?

After exhaustive hands-on testing, here’s how I’d break down recommendations:

Final Thoughts: Eyes Wide Open

Both the Casio EX-FH100 and Sony WX50 bring strengths and compromises. Neither will replace a DSLR or mirrorless the pros swear by, but each can spark your creativity depending on priorities.

Casio’s EX-FH100 appeals with long zoom and experimentation controls but feels bulkier and dated by today’s standards. Sony’s WX50 is sleeker, shoots better video, and offers sharper photos but limits aperture and zoom reach.

If I had to pick one to toss in a day bag for walks, city snaps, or casual travel vlogging, I gravitate toward the Sony WX50 for its balanced capabilities and ease of use. However, for those who like cheapskate versatility and manual fiddling, Casio remains a surprising contender.

Whichever route you take, these cameras show modest compacts still have room for fun and creative exploration - just don't expect miracles under all conditions.

Whether you’re a bearded pro or weekend clicker, armed with these insights, you can now make a confident, user-focused choice to match your photography style, budget, and dreams.

Happy shooting!