Casio EX-FH25 vs Olympus VG-120: A Detailed Comparison of Compact Cameras from a Seasoned Reviewer

In the realm of compact digital cameras, especially those released in the early 2010s, the Casio EX-FH25 and Olympus VG-120 stand out as intriguing options that target different use cases and user preferences. Over my 15 years testing thousands of cameras - everything from ultra-high-end full-frame monsters to pocketable point-and-shoots - I’ve come to appreciate how nuanced camera evaluations become when considering the intended photography disciplines, technical performance, ergonomics, and practical usability.

Today, I’ll walk you through a comprehensive, hands-on comparative review between these two models. While both are modestly priced and feature-packed for their category, their distinct engineering choices mean they appeal to very different photographers. Let's peel back the layers and see which one deserves your attention in 2024.

First Impressions: Handling, Body Design, and Ergonomics

The Casio EX-FH25 is a classic “bridge” style camera - SLR-like in form factor, with a hefty grip and a physically larger presence (122 x 81 x 83 mm, weighing about 524 grams). This size intuitively suggests a more serious approach to photography, designed for users who want something robust but don't want to juggle interchangeable lenses. For the Casio, the substantial body size contributes to balance, especially when paired with its long 20x zoom lens which extends notably during use.

In contrast, the Olympus VG-120 is an ultracompact model, resembling a traditional point-and-shoot camera. Measuring 96 x 57 x 19 mm and tipping the scales at just 120 grams, it’s tremendously pocket-friendly. It’s ideal for casual shooters or travelers wanting a no-fuss tool that fits in small bags or pockets.

Holding both cameras, the Casio feels more purposeful in hand, lending itself to extended shooting sessions without fatigue. The Olympus, while superb for portability, lacks the grip security for fast-paced photography, occasionally feeling plasticky and less rigid.

The control layout further highlights their philosophy. The Casio’s shutter button, zoom toggle, and mode dial are all prominently placed - easy to reach without looking - facilitating quick manual exposure adjustments such as aperture priority and shutter speed priority modes. In contrast, the Olympus drops manual controls entirely, limiting choices to automatic modes, emphasizing simplicity but sacrificing creative control.

For photographers prioritizing tactile feedback and dedicated controls, the Casio’s layout strikes a better balance between accessibility and functionality.

Under the Hood: Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Both cameras use a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, which is quite small by today's standards - but typical for compact cameras of their generation. This diminutive sensor size inherently limits dynamic range, low-light sensitivity, and ultimate resolution compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors. However, understanding their position in the market tempers expectations accordingly.

The Casio EX-FH25 sports a 10-megapixel backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor - a relatively advanced sensor tech for 2010 - aimed at improving light gathering efficiency and noise control. Meanwhile, the Olympus VG-120 utilizes a 14-megapixel CCD sensor from circa 2011. CCDs are renowned for excellent color rendition and image sharpness but tend to struggle in high ISO settings relative to CMOS.

In practical testing, the Casio’s sensor delivered cleaner images at ISO 800 and 1600 with better noise management. The backside-illuminated design was evident in higher dynamic range and somewhat better color depth, especially in shadow detail recovery. Conversely, the Olympus’s higher pixel count on the same sensor size led to more noise and detail loss beyond ISO 400, making it less suitable for dimly lit environments.

Image sharpness on both cameras is driven heavily by their lens quality, but the Casio’s lower megapixel count and more modern sensor design gave it a slight advantage in producing smoother gradients and more natural skin tones.

User Interface: Screen and Viewfinder Experience

Both cameras have a fixed 3-inch LCD screen with 230k dots, which was standard for their release period. The Casio features an electronic viewfinder (although no detailed specs available), allowing for composition without relying solely on the rear screen - a significant advantage in bright sunlight or for users who prefer framing with a traditional EVF.

The Olympus VG-120 lacks any viewfinder, pushing users to compose exclusively on the LCD. While adequate indoors or on overcast days, shooting outdoors in strong light is a challenge because the screen struggles with reflections and glare.

Neither camera offers touchscreen support, limiting interface flexibility. The Casio’s menus, while not modern by today’s standards, are logically laid out, providing exposure compensation, manual exposure modes, and sensor-shift image stabilization toggling. The Olympus opts for a simpler interface with fewer settings, focusing on automatic exposure and scene modes - suitable for total beginners or users wanting minimal fuss but frustrating for enthusiasts wanting to fine-tune their shots.

Casio EX FH25 front Casio EX FH25 screen back Olympus VG 120 front Olympus VG 120 screen back

Photography Disciplines: How Each Camera Performs in Real-World Scenarios

Portrait Photography

Here, the Casio EX-FH25 excels modestly over the Olympus VG-120, though neither camera can compete with newer mirrorless or DSLR systems.

The Casio's F2.8 aperture at the wide end and sensor-shift image stabilization facilitate sharper portraits in available light and better bokeh when zoomed. While its fixed lens focuses down to 1 cm, allowing interesting close portraits with soft backgrounds, autofocus remains contrast-detection only and slow.

The Olympus offers face detection autofocus (a welcome feature), which helps keep subjects sharp but the maximum aperture of F6.5 at telephoto limits natural background blur and performance under subdued lighting becomes compromised. Both cameras produce skin tones that are fairly neutral but the Casio’s improved sensor captures slightly richer, more natural flesh tones.

Landscape Photography

Landscape photographers often seek superb dynamic range, resolution, and weather resistance - none of which are hallmark strengths of these cameras.

The Casio’s sensor design and RAW support provide slightly more post-processing latitude, helping recover shadow detail in high-contrast scenes. Its broad zoom range allows creative framing from wide-angle 26 mm to an extreme 520 mm telephoto, though long zooms are less useful for landscape shooting because of sharpness degradation at extremes and the relatively small sensor limitations.

The Olympus's 14-megapixel resolution offers more detail capture at base ISO in well-lit conditions but its lack of RAW and limited ISO performance restrain editing leeway. No environmental sealing on either camera means adventurous outdoors shooting in rain or dust is ill-advised.

Wildlife Photography

Here, the Casio’s 20x zoom lens clearly claims dominance over the Olympus’s 5x zoom from 26-130 mm, providing scope to capture distant subjects.

Moreover, the Casio supports up to 40 frames per second continuous shooting - a staggering claim that exceeds even some professional cameras from the same era. Although in practice, buffer and autofocus speed limit burst use, this feature benefits capturing rapid action in wildlife scenarios.

Autofocus on both units is contrast-detection only, with no continuous tracking, which limits reliability on fast-moving animals. The Casio lacks face or eye detection entirely, making precise focus hunting more common in the field. The Olympus's face detection is helpful but less relevant for animals.

Sports Photography

Sports photography demands fast autofocus, high frame rates, and low-light handling. Neither camera completely satisfies these criteria, but the Casio again marginally outperforms Olympus.

The EX-FH25’s 40 fps burst speed, manual exposure modes, and image stabilization theoretically enable capturing sequences of athletes in motion better than the Olympus, which has no continuous shooting mode and limited control over exposure.

However, note that neither camera features phase-detection AF or reliable autofocus tracking; autofocus speed is slow, making them ill-suited for serious action photography.

Street Photography

Street photography thrives on portability, discretion, and quick responsiveness.

The Olympus VG-120’s slim, ultracompact design and subdued appearance make it ideal for unobtrusive candid shots or travel snapshots around urban environments. Snap focus and face detection support rapid framing.

The Casio’s bulkier body and longer lens make it conspicuous, less discreet, and potentially slower to bring into action. That said, it offers more creative control that enthusiasts may desire even in street contexts.

Macro Photography

Macro capabilities differ significantly: Casio delivers an impressively close minimum focus distance of 1 cm, letting users capture delicate details like insects or fine textures. Its wide aperture facilitates isolating subjects from backgrounds.

Olympus's macro limit is 7 cm, much less flexible for true macro work. Neither camera features focus stacking or bracketing, which are modern conveniences for macro shooters.

Night and Astrophotography

Both cameras falter in low-light extremes, but the Casio has a slight edge thanks to its BSI-CMOS sensor and higher max ISO (3200) compared to the Olympus's ISO 1600 cap.

Noise levels become objectionable past ISO 800 on both units, but Casio’s sensor design produces cleaner files. The Casio’s manual shutter exposure up to 30 seconds allows night or long exposure photography, a feature the Olympus lacks (max 4s shutter).

Neither offers bulb mode or advanced controls needed by serious astrophotographers, and lack of RAW on the Olympus limits noise reduction options.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras record video in Motion JPEG format, an older compression standard causing large files and less detail retention compared to modern H.264 or HEVC codecs.

The Casio records up to 640 x 480 at 120 fps with high frame rate slow-motion up to 1000 fps in lower resolutions - an experimental feature good for creative slow-motion capture but limited in practical use.

The Olympus VG-120 shoots HD 1280 x 720 at 30 fps, suitable for casual use but with no microphone or headphone ports on either camera restricting audio control.

Neither features 4K recording or in-body electronic stabilization for video, placing them behind today’s video-capable compacts.

Technical Analysis: Build Quality, Stabilization, and Connectivity

Build quality on both cameras is typical of consumer compacts. The Casio’s bridge-style body offers more sturdiness with its bulk, but lacks weather sealing or ruggedization. The Olympus is lighter and plasticky, less durable but easier for casual carry.

Image stabilization is sensor-shift on the Casio, improving hand-held shooting at longer focal lengths and lower shutter speeds. The Olympus lacks any image stabilization, putting it at a disadvantage for handheld return sharpness, especially at telephoto or low shutter speeds.

Connectivity-wise, the Casio supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless image transfer, albeit an outdated standard now, and USB 2.0 for tethered connection. The Olympus offers only USB 2.0 and no wireless features.

Battery life is better on the Olympus, offering around 160 shots per charge via a rechargeable Li-ion battery, while the Casio uses four AA batteries, convenient but heavier. Neither camera pushes endurance boundaries by modern expectations.

Lens Ecosystem and Workflow Compatibility

Both cameras employ fixed lenses: Casio with a 26-520 mm 20x zoom, Olympus with a 26-130 mm 5x zoom. Neither supports interchangeable lenses, limiting versatility but simplifying use.

The Casio's longer zoom is attractive for telephoto tasks, wildlife, and sports, while Olympus’s shorter zoom favors everyday snapshots and moderate telephoto.

Image files support RAW only on Casio, enhancing post-processing flexibility crucial for professional or enthusiast workflows. Olympus supports only JPEG, limiting editing latitude.

Workflow integration with modern software is straightforward for Casio RAW files, while Olympus’s older JPEG files are standard but less flexible.

Summing Up: Which Camera Suits Which Photographer?

Both cameras hail from the early 2010s compact arena with their share of strengths and compromises. Here's how I would recommend them based on real-world usage:

• Choose the Casio EX-FH25 if:

  • You desire a more robust, bridge-style camera with manual controls for creative exploration.
  • Telephoto reach is important - wildlife or sports enthusiasts on a budget.
  • RAW image capture and sensor-shift stabilization matter.
  • You want extended shutter speed control for night photography.
  • You prioritize a viewfinder for better composition in bright conditions.

• Choose the Olympus VG-120 if:

  • You need an ultracompact, pocketable camera primarily for casual travel or street photography.
  • Simplicity with basic face detection autofocus and auto modes is preferred.
  • You’re okay with JPEG-only files and moderate zoom range.
  • Battery life and lightweight design take precedence over manual controls.
  • You want a low-commitment camera to carry daily without bulk.

Final Thoughts

While neither the Casio EX-FH25 nor Olympus VG-120 compare to today’s mirrorless or flagship compact cameras, both represent thoughtful designs aimed at specific user niches. The Casio is an ambitious bridge camera packing extended telephoto reach and manual functionality that remains appealing to budget-conscious hobbyists. The Olympus, meanwhile, excels as a simple, pocketable companion for casual shooters prioritizing convenience.

If you’re investing in a camera today, these may serve niche or collector purposes rather than being top contenders, but understanding their features - and weaknesses - is essential to appreciate how compact camera technology evolved over the past decade.

For any photographer evaluating these in secondhand markets or nostalgic collections, I hope this detailed comparison arms you with the knowledge to choose wisely based on your shooting style, control appetite, and portability needs.

Thank you for joining me on this in-depth look - and may your next camera capture many excellent images, whatever its make or model!

Image Credits

1. 
2. 
3. 
4. 
5. Casio EX FH25 front Casio EX FH25 screen back Olympus VG 120 front Olympus VG 120 screen back