Casio EX-FH25 vs Fujifilm F750EXR: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Small Sensor Superzoom Cameras

When sifting through the compact superzoom camera category, especially models released in the early 2010s, the Casio EX-FH25 and Fujifilm F750EXR stand out as intriguing options. Both pack long zooms, respectable sensor tech for their class, and some notable feature sets aimed at versatile shooting conditions. But which one performs better in practice? And for whom?

Having spent considerable time testing these two cameras side by side in various real-world scenarios - and digging into their technical underpinnings - I'm looking to unravel their respective strengths, limitations, and overall value. Whether for casual travel, wildlife attempts, or creative experimentation, this comparison draws on my hands-on experience and technical evaluation to provide a cohesive, actionable guide.

First Impressions and Handling: Size, Weight, and Ergonomics

Let’s start with the physicalities, since these often influence shooting comfort and practical usability more than specs sheets indicate.

The Casio EX-FH25 is a bridge-style superzoom with an SLR-like body design. Its dimensions (122 x 81 x 83 mm) and weight (524 grams with batteries) give it a solid, confidently gripped presence. This heft translates to a feeling of stability, especially at its super-tele end (520mm equivalent). The camera’s rubberized grip and well-spaced physical buttons contribute to firm hold and intuitive control, though its somewhat blocky bulk can be a hindrance for all-day carry.

In contrast, the Fujifilm F750EXR is much more compact and lightweight (105 x 63 x 36 mm, weighing merely 234 grams). This makes it ideal for those prioritizing portability and discretion. However, the smaller form factor also means tighter controls and a less substantial grip, which might be less comfortable during longer sessions or when zooming in on distant subjects.

Casio’s more substantial size favors wildlife or sports shooters who benefit from added stability, whereas Fujifilm’s sleek compactness serves street photographers and casual travelers better, trading off some ergonomic refinements for mobility.

User Interface & Control Layout: From Button Feel to Menus

Peeling back the layers to control experience, the EX-FH25’s SLR-like button and dial layout facilitates quick mode shifts. You’ll find dedicated shutter speed and aperture priority modes, alongside manual exposure and exposure compensation - features that photographers expect for creative flexibility. The camera lacks touchscreen input, but the physical controls compensate well for quick adjustments without diving too deep in menus.

In contrast, the F750EXR opts for a simpler, compact design. Although it also includes shutter/aperture priority and manual modes, its smaller body means buttons are closer together and sometimes less tactile. Crucially, it offers face detection autofocus (something Casio omits), which can reduce time fiddling in portrait modes. The lack of an electronic viewfinder (EVF) on the Fujifilm pushes reliance solely on its rear LCD for composition and review.

Speaking of screens…

Viewing Experience: LCD Screen and Viewfinder Differences

The Casio EX-FH25 sports a 3-inch fixed, non-touch LCD with a modest 230k-dot resolution, rather underwhelming compared to modern standards even for 2010. Combined with no EVF, this can make composition and focusing a bit of a challenge in bright light.

Conversely, the Fujifilm F750EXR's 3-inch LCD flaunts a much finer 460k-dot TFT color display, which provides greater clarity and color accuracy. Though it also lacks a viewfinder, this better screen helps in manual focusing and image review, especially in challenging lighting.

If you often work outdoors in bright conditions, both cameras' lack of EVF is a downside, but Fujifilm's higher-res screen offers a noteworthy advantage.

Sensor and Image Quality: Hardware Under the Hood

Here we hit a sizable technical split that frames much of what these cameras can deliver.

The Casio EX-FH25 houses a 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensor that measures approximately 6.17 x 4.55 mm. This sensor produces 10 megapixels native resolution and is paired with a fixed lens with a 26-520 mm 35mm equivalent zoom at f/2.8–4.5 aperture range.

The Fujifilm F750EXR packs a slightly larger 1/2-inch EXR CMOS sensor measuring 6.4 x 4.8 mm with 16 megapixels of resolution. Fujifilm’s EXR tech is notable; it dynamically adapts sensor operation modes to prioritize high resolution, dynamic range, or low noise depending on scene conditions. This dual-gain pixel approach is particularly advantageous in landscapes or challenging light where widening dynamic range is critical.

Though the difference in sensor size seems marginal, Fujifilm’s combination of sensor tech and higher resolution gives it an edge in capturing more detail and handling highlight/shadow separation with greater finesse.

In practice, this translates to:

• Slightly cleaner shadows and less highlight clipping in landscapes on the Fujifilm.
• More versatile ISO range with Fujifilm extending usable ISO up to 3200 natively with a boosted 12800 option (albeit noisy).
• Casio maxes out at ISO 3200 but generally exhibits more noise due to smaller sensor size and older processing.

Casio EX FH25 front Casio EX FH25 screen back Fujifilm F750EXR front Fujifilm F750EXR screen back

Real-World Image Quality: The Pixel-Peeping and Creative Use

Photographing portraits indoors with controlled lighting exposed some of the Casio’s noise and softness, especially at longer focal lengths. Fujifilm’s improved sensor and EXR modes helped retain more detail in skin textures and natural-looking colors.

Bokeh quality leans in Casio’s favor slightly at its wide aperture (f/2.8 at 26mm) for shallow depth-of-field effects, but limited autofocus sophistication and lack of face detection make nail-biting focusing necessary. Fujifilm provides face detection and better autofocus algorithms, easing portrait work.

Landscape photography showcases Fujifilm’s dynamic range benefits convincingly. While neither camera challenges premium compacts or mirrorless bodies here, Fujifilm’s ability to better preserve shadow detail and color gradations in highlights is evident, particularly in sunset or forest scenes. Casio delivered acceptable images with punchier saturation but comparatively narrower tonal latitude.

At telephoto extremes (over 400mm equivalent), image sharpness softens on both cameras due to lens design and sensor limits, but image stabilization helps mitigate shake. Casio’s longer zoom extends to 520mm, giving flexibility for wildlife or sports snapshots - though autofocus sluggishness impacts performance in these fast-paced contexts.

Autofocus, Burst Rates, and Action Photography

The Casio’s autofocus relies on contrast detection only, and the camera lacks multi-point or tracking autofocus capabilities. This is a real bottleneck for sports, wildlife, or any fast-moving subject. Continuous autofocus is unsupported, so this camera is best suited for well-lit, static subjects.

Meanwhile, Fujifilm’s F750EXR offers contrast detection autofocus with face detection and continuous AF modes, as well as center and multi-area AF points. While still modest by modern standards, this equips the Fujifilm better for subjects in motion, tracking a face in casual sports or pets.

Burst shooting rates further reinforce this divide: Casio impressively claims 40 fps continuous shooting, but this only applies at reduced image resolutions and under limited conditions, mainly for ultra-high-speed capture of fleeting moments (e.g., its 1000 fps super slow motion video mode). On standard resolution, its continuous rate is slower and buffer depth limited.

Fujifilm manages an 11 fps burst rate at full resolution, which, coupled with its better AF, serves general sports shooting and casual action photography more effectively.

Video Capabilities: Resolution, Formats, and Features

Video remains an area where these cameras diverge in modern relevance.

Casio EX-FH25 supports only VGA (640 x 480) resolution at 30 fps and various ultra-high frame rates at much lower resolutions (up to 1000 fps for slow motion). Its video is recorded as Motion JPEG - a bulky and dated codec - with no microphone input for sound quality improvement. The absence of HD video and HDMI out feels dated even in 2010’s standards.

In stark contrast, the Fujifilm F750EXR shoots Full HD (1920 x 1080) at 30 fps, along with 720p and VGA modes. It uses modern MPEG-4 H.264 compression, producing smaller files with better quality. It also includes HDMI output for easier connection to external monitors or TVs. However, like Casio, it lacks mic or headphone jacks.

For casual video work or basic HD capture, Fujifilm wins hands down. Casio’s video system is better reserved for novelty slow-motion effects rather than practical filmmaking.

Battery Life and Storage: Supplies and Longevity

A practical point seldom glamorous but crucial: battery performance.

Casio runs on four AA batteries, a traditional and convenient choice allowing users to swap batteries instantly while out shooting, a boon for travelers and outdoor photographers on multi-day trips. However, AA alkaline batteries typically yield limited shots - expect to carry spares.

Fujifilm employs a proprietary NP-50A lithium-ion rechargeable battery. While lighter and fitting its compact body, this design demands access to power for recharge and backup batteries for extended shooting. Based on my testing, the FUJI tends to hold up to moderate use well but will need recharging after a day’s worth of heavy shooting.

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC memory cards - with Fujifilm also supporting SDXC - and both have only one card slot. No dual slots or UHS speed ratings are found, matching their entry-level superzoom status.

Lens Sharpness and Versatility: Focal Length and Macro

The Casio’s lens zooms from 26 to 520mm (20x zoom) with a comparatively fast aperture of f/2.8-4.5. This aperture range enables slightly more light gathering at the wide end over Fujifilm's f/3.5-5.3 lens, beneficial in low-light or portrait settings to achieve subject isolation.

Macro focusing is impressive on Casio down to 1cm, allowing very close-up detail shots - a nice bonus for still life or insect photography. Fujifilm’s minimum macro distance is 5cm, less intimate.

Conversely, Fujifilm’s 25-500mm (20x zoom) offers a bit shorter maximum reach but still ample for most casual telephoto needs. The smaller aperture limits light gathering and bokeh potential in dim conditions.

For photographers who prioritize macro flexibility and wide aperture zooms, Casio offers a slight advantage. However, optical quality and sharpness in the mid-zoom range lean reasonably balanced between both cameras.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Casio’s EX-FH25 supports Eye-Fi connectivity for wireless memory card transfers, an innovative feature back in 2010, though now fairly antiquated with modern Wi-Fi standards.

Fujifilm’s model has no built-in wireless connectivity. Neither includes Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS.

The absence of contemporary wireless data features is a limitation, particularly for fast image sharing, but within expectations for their release era.

Putting It All Together: Overall Performance and Scores

Combining all technical and practical facets, the Fujifilm F750EXR emerges with an edge in image quality, autofocus versatility, video capabilities, and usability for people who value compactness.

Casio EX-FH25 offers greater zoom reach, faster aperture at wide end, intriguing super slo-mo video options, and robust SLR-like ergonomics at the cost of size and dated image quality.

Your priorities will heavily influence the pick: portability and video quality lean Fujifilm; zoom range and physical control lean Casio.

What About Specific Photography Genres?

Let’s zoom into how these cameras perform across popular genres. Keep in mind both cameras belong to the small-sensor superzoom category, inherently limited by sensor size, lens compromises, and autofocus sophistication.

Portrait Photography

• Fujifilm: Advantageous autofocus with face detection and continuous AF. Higher resolution helps with detail. However, smaller apertures limit bokeh quality.
• Casio: Slightly faster aperture at wide angle aids background blur; macro focusing enables close-up creative portraits. Autofocus less reliable - manual focus needed for best results.

Landscape Photography

• Fujifilm: Superior sensor tech and EXR dynamic range modes capture wider tonal range, handling shadows and highlights better. Higher resolution allows decent prints.
• Casio: Acceptable but narrower dynamic range, somewhat limited by noisier shadows.

Wildlife and Sports

• Fujifilm: Continuous AF and moderate burst shooting aid casual wildlife snapshots; shorter zoom range often sufficient for beginners.
• Casio: Longer 520mm zoom benefits reach but focus tracking and burst speed limitations curtail fast-action shots.

Street Photography

• Fujifilm: Compact size and lighter weight aid discretion and portability. Face detection helps candid portraits.
• Casio: Bulkier, less convenient for unobtrusive shooting.

Macro Photography

• Casio: Excellent minimum focusing distance (1cm) and sensor-shift stabilization make it a better option for macro enthusiasts.
• Fujifilm: Longer minimum focusing distance reduces macro flexibility.

Night and Astrophotography

• Fujifilm: Max ISO 3200 with boosted 12800 option plus better noise handling gives it the upper hand.
• Casio: More limited ISO range and noisier results.

Video Work

• Fujifilm: Clear winner with Full HD 1080p video, modern codecs, and HDMI output.
• Casio: Limited to low-res VGA video mainly useful for slow motion effects.

Travel Photography

• Fujifilm: Compact size, light weight, and decent zoom make it travel-friendly.
• Casio: Larger size but versatile zoom range. AA batteries are a plus on long trips without chargers.

Professional Use

• Neither camera meets professional demands for high-end image quality, rugged weather sealing, or advanced workflow options. They’re best for enthusiasts, casual shooters, and educational use.

Verdict: Which Camera Wins and Who Should Buy What?

For enthusiasts needing a compact, versatile travel camera with decent image quality and better video, the Fujifilm F750EXR is the smarter choice. Its superior sensor technology, face detection AF, and HD video surpass Casio’s offerings, while fitting easily into a jacket pocket or day bag.

If you want a bridge-style superzoom with longer reach, robust ergonomics for still subjects, and creative macro potential - and you don’t mind the bulk and older video specs - the Casio EX-FH25 fits the bill. Its unique ultra-high-speed shooting modes might amuse slow-motion experimenters, but the camera ultimately leans toward casual photography scenarios rather than fast action.

Given their similar pricing, it boils down to what you value most: compact portability plus smart autofocus (Fujifilm) or zoom reach plus SLR-like handling (Casio).

Summary

Both the Casio EX-FH25 and Fujifilm F750EXR remain interesting case studies in early 2010s small sensor superzooms. Though cornered by relatively aged technology today, each camera carves a niche:

• Casio for the enthusiast who prioritizes zoom length, manual controls, and novelty slow-motion modes.
• Fujifilm for those seeking image quality, autofocus sophistication, video capabilities, and pocketability.

As always, I recommend physically handling any camera before buy, as ergonomics often sway personal preference more than specs. These two cameras, while modest on paper, represent distinct philosophies in compact superzoom design and remain useful tools for specific shooting needs.

Happy shooting!

For additional context, this comparison was curated from rigorous side-by-side testing in diverse lighting and subject conditions, careful image quality assessment, and technical spec analysis derived from manufacturer data and independent testing resources.