Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320
69 Imaging
34 Features
37 Overall
35
94 Imaging
38 Features
33 Overall
36
Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 10MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 100 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 640 x 480 video
- 26-520mm (F2.8-4.5) lens
- 524g - 122 x 81 x 83mm
- Revealed July 2010
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Display
- ISO 80 - 1600
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-102mm (F3.5-5.1) lens
- 155g - 96 x 63 x 23mm
- Launched January 2012
Photography Glossary Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Overview
Below is a comprehensive analysis of the Casio EX-FH25 and Olympus TG-320, former being a Small Sensor Superzoom while the other is a Waterproof by competitors Casio and Olympus. There exists a considerable gap among the sensor resolutions of the EX-FH25 (10MP) and TG-320 (14MP) but both cameras offer the same sensor size (1/2.3").
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoThe EX-FH25 was launched 18 months earlier than the TG-320 making them a generation apart from one another. Each of these cameras have different body design with the Casio EX-FH25 being a SLR-like (bridge) camera and the Olympus TG-320 being a Compact camera.
Before getting into a in depth comparison, here is a brief synopsis of how the EX-FH25 matches up versus the TG-320 with respect to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD Cards Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Gallery
Following is a sample of the gallery pictures for Casio Exilim EX-FH25 & Olympus TG-320. The complete galleries are viewable at Casio EX-FH25 Gallery & Olympus TG-320 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Casio EX-FH25 over the Olympus TG-320
| EX-FH25 | TG-320 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manually focus |  | More exact focusing | ||
| Display dimensions | 3" |  | 2.7" | Larger display (+0.3") |
Reasons to pick Olympus TG-320 over the Casio EX-FH25
| TG-320 | EX-FH25 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Launched | January 2012 |  | July 2010 | More recent by 18 months |
Common features in the Casio EX-FH25 and Olympus TG-320
| EX-FH25 | TG-320 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Display resolution | 230k |  | 230k | Identical display resolution |
| Selfie screen |  | No selfie screen | ||
| Touch friendly display |  | Neither features Touch friendly display |
Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Physical Comparison
If you're looking to lug around your camera regularly, you'll need to consider its weight and volume. The Casio EX-FH25 enjoys outside dimensions of 122mm x 81mm x 83mm (4.8" x 3.2" x 3.3") along with a weight of 524 grams (1.16 lbs) and the Olympus TG-320 has sizing of 96mm x 63mm x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") accompanied by a weight of 155 grams (0.34 lbs).
Analyze the Casio EX-FH25 and Olympus TG-320 in our newest Camera plus Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Take into consideration, the weight of an ILC will differ dependant on the lens you have during that time. The following is a front view over all size comparison of the EX-FH25 and the TG-320.
Taking into account dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the EX-FH25 and TG-320 is 69 and 94 respectively.
Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Sensor Comparison
Typically, its difficult to visualize the gap in sensor measurements just by looking through a spec sheet. The visual underneath may provide you a greater sense of the sensor sizes in the EX-FH25 and TG-320.
As you can see, each of these cameras provide the same sensor dimensions but different resolution. You can anticipate the Olympus TG-320 to result in greater detail utilizing its extra 4 Megapixels. Greater resolution can also enable you to crop pics more aggressively. The older EX-FH25 will be behind when it comes to sensor technology.
Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Screen and ViewFinder
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next month Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modesStreet Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneSports Comparison
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banTravel Comparison
Body cameras now worn by bakery staff to deter stealingLandscape Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesVlogging Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firms
Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus TG-320 Specifications
| Casio Exilim EX-FH25 | Olympus TG-320 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Make | Casio | Olympus |
| Model type | Casio Exilim EX-FH25 | Olympus TG-320 |
| Type | Small Sensor Superzoom | Waterproof |
| Revealed | 2010-07-06 | 2012-01-10 |
| Body design | SLR-like (bridge) | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Processor Chip | - | TruePic III+ |
| Sensor type | BSI-CMOS | CCD |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 10 megapixels | 14 megapixels |
| Anti alias filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | - |
| Peak resolution | 3648 x 2736 | 4288 x 3216 |
| Highest native ISO | 3200 | 1600 |
| Lowest native ISO | 100 | 80 |
| RAW images | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Focus manually | ||
| Touch focus | ||
| AF continuous | ||
| Single AF | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| Selective AF | ||
| AF center weighted | ||
| Multi area AF | ||
| AF live view | ||
| Face detection AF | ||
| Contract detection AF | ||
| Phase detection AF | ||
| Cross type focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens support | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens zoom range | 26-520mm (20.0x) | 28-102mm (3.6x) |
| Max aperture | f/2.8-4.5 | f/3.5-5.1 |
| Macro focusing range | 1cm | 3cm |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Screen diagonal | 3" | 2.7" |
| Resolution of screen | 230 thousand dot | 230 thousand dot |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch capability | ||
| Screen technology | - | TFT Color LCD |
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | Electronic | None |
| Features | ||
| Min shutter speed | 30 seconds | 4 seconds |
| Max shutter speed | 1/2000 seconds | 1/2000 seconds |
| Continuous shutter speed | 40.0fps | 1.0fps |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Manually set exposure | ||
| Exposure compensation | Yes | - |
| Set WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash distance | 3.30 m | 5.80 m |
| Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in |
| External flash | ||
| AEB | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment metering | ||
| Average metering | ||
| Spot metering | ||
| Partial metering | ||
| AF area metering | ||
| Center weighted metering | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 640 x 480 (120, 30fps), 448 x 336 (30, 120, 240 fps), 224 x 168 (420 fps), 224 x 64 (1000 fps) | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 180 (30fps) |
| Highest video resolution | 640x480 | 1280x720 |
| Video format | Motion JPEG | MPEG-4, H.264 |
| Mic input | ||
| Headphone input | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | Eye-Fi Connected | None |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment seal | ||
| Water proofing | ||
| Dust proofing | ||
| Shock proofing | ||
| Crush proofing | ||
| Freeze proofing | ||
| Weight | 524g (1.16 lb) | 155g (0.34 lb) |
| Physical dimensions | 122 x 81 x 83mm (4.8" x 3.2" x 3.3") | 96 x 63 x 23mm (3.8" x 2.5" x 0.9") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO Overall rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | - | 150 shots |
| Battery format | - | Battery Pack |
| Battery ID | 4 x AA | LI-42B |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Triple) | Yes (2 or 12 sec, pet auto shutter) |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC card, Internal | SD/SDHC/SDXC |
| Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
| Launch pricing | $450 | $0 |
