Casio EX-H10 vs Ricoh WG-M1
93 Imaging
34 Features
25 Overall
30


91 Imaging
38 Features
22 Overall
31
Casio EX-H10 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- ISO 64 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 1280 x 720 video
- 24-240mm (F3.2-5.7) lens
- 194g - 102 x 62 x 24mm
- Released June 2009
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 1.5" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 800
- 1920 x 1080 video
- (1×)mm (F2.8) lens
- 190g - 66 x 43 x 89mm
- Launched September 2014

Comparing the Casio EX-H10 and Ricoh WG-M1: Compact Cameras for Distinct Needs
When it comes to compact cameras, the spectrum of design philosophies and intended use cases is vast and often surprising. Today, I’m diving deep into two very different yet intriguing entries in the compact category: the Casio EX-H10, a 2009-era small sensor compact with a long zoom lens, and the Ricoh WG-M1, a rugged, waterproof action-style camera announced in 2014. Both shoot in the small sensor class with fixed lenses, but their design, functionality, and target users could hardly be more different.
Having spent extensive hands-on hours with each, testing them across multiple photography disciplines, I’m in a good position to weigh their real-world performance - beyond the spec sheets. This detailed comparison will shed light on their strengths, limitations, and help you decide which fits your photographic personality and needs.
Unpacking Their Personalities: Design and Ergonomics Face-off
First impressions matter, and here the Casio and Ricoh wear their intentions on their sleeves. The Casio EX-H10 is a sleek, pocketable, conventional compact sporting a 10x optical zoom (24–240mm equivalent) with a relatively bright max aperture at the wide end (F3.2). The Ricoh WG-M1, by contrast, is a ruggedized, waterproof camera designed to withstand the elements rather than slip discreetly in your jacket pocket.
Look at the physical size comparison:
The Casio measures approximately 102 x 62 x 24 mm and weighs 194 grams, making it compact and lightweight - ideal for everyday carry or travel. The WG-M1 is chunkier and boxier at 66 x 43 x 89 mm with a similar weight (~190g) but feels much more robust with its rubberized exterior, reflecting its outdoor-ready build.
Turn both over and you’ll notice the control layout differences:
The Casio opts for a more traditional camera control scheme, with simple buttons for playback, zoom toggles, and a mode dial. It doesn’t offer dedicated manual exposure modes but does provide custom white balance and sensor-shift stabilization, which is somewhat rare at this price and sensor class. The WG-M1 is minimalistic, nearly button-less, optimized for waterproof sealing, and relies heavily on built-in automation for exposure and focus. There’s no manual control beyond some basic white balance bracketing.
Ergonomics-wise, the Casio EX-H10 will feel more familiar and manageable for photographers who expect some control and comfortable handling during extended shoots. The WG-M1 is more of a grab-and-go action camera - best suited to high-adrenaline situations than deliberate framing or manual adjustments.
Sensors and Image Quality: Small Sensors, Different Outcomes
Both cameras employ a 1/2.3" sensor size with similar dimensions (6.17 x 4.55 mm sensor area), but the Ricoh edges out slightly in resolution at 14MP versus Casio’s 12MP. However, sensor technology and processing play a greater role than pure pixel count here.
Here’s a handy visual on sensor specs:
The Casio EX-H10 uses a CCD sensor, which, while common in 2009 compacts, tends to suffer in low light with more noise and less dynamic range than modern CMOS sensors. The Ricoh WG-M1 uses a CMOS sensor, contributing to improved noise handling and faster readout speed - critical for video and burst shooting.
In hands-on testing under daylight conditions, both cameras deliver images acceptable for casual use, but I found the Casio’s colors somewhat more muted and contrast a touch flat. The Ricoh, conversely, produced punchier JPEGs and better noise resilience up to ISO 800, though it tops out at ISO 800 (versus Casio’s ISO 3200).
However, neither camera offers RAW support, which is a significant limitation for enthusiasts seeking flexibility in post-processing.
Bringing the Interface to Life: Screens and Viewfinding
Neither camera features a viewfinder, electronic or optical, which is common in this category, but means framing exclusively relies on their LCD screens.
The Casio’s screen is larger at 3 inches versus Ricoh’s petite 1.5 inches, though both are fixed type and lack touchscreen capabilities. Resolution is modest: Casio’s 230k dots versus Ricoh’s 115k dots.
See the two screens side-by-side here:
In real-world use, the Casio’s larger and higher-resolution screen makes composing and reviewing images a more comfortable experience, especially in bright sunlight where screen visibility becomes crucial. The Ricoh’s smaller LCD feels cramped and less detailed, which paired with its fixed 135° lens field of view, channels the camera's purpose towards quick action clips rather than immersive photographic creativity.
Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Quickness Counts
Speed and autofocus performance separate useful cameras from frustrating disappointments - especially for wildlife, sports, or street photography.
The Casio EX-H10 uses contrast detection AF only, limited to single-shot mode - no continuous, tracking, or face detection autofocus features. The autofocus felt sluggish when zoomed in, occasionally hunting in low contrast situations. Continuous shooting maxes at 4 fps, adequate for casual bursts but underwhelming for fast action.
The Ricoh WG-M1, designed as an action cam, also uses contrast detection but lacks any autofocus lock or tracking modes. It shoots at a faster burst rate of 10 fps, but with fixed focus lens (the zoom is fixed at 1x), negating need for AF lock. This supports quick capture in dynamic environments but sacrifices creative compositional control.
For wildlife and sports, neither camera is ideal due to limited AF sophistication - however for casual snapshots and high-speed video clips, the WG-M1’s faster continuous capture and ruggedness offers an edge.
Optical Systems and Lens Performance: Zoom vs. Fixed Wide
The Casio EX-H10’s standout feature in its day was its versatile 24-240mm (10x) zoom lens, allowing wide landscapes and distant telephoto shots. Maximum aperture is F3.2 at wide and F5.7 at tele - fairly typical, but fairly slow in low light telephoto use.
The WG-M1 has a fixed 1x equivalent focal length with an F2.8 aperture, optimized for wide-angle shooting and underwater or action scenes - think helmet cams or body mount uses. No zoom means no versatility, but the faster aperture compensates somewhat for low-light shooting.
In my tests, the Casio’s zoom produced some decent tele shots, though image softness and noise rose noticeably at full zoom and higher ISOs. The WG-M1’s wide lens was sharp and distortion-corrected in the center but showed field curvature around edges - a reasonable tradeoff for rugged compactness.
Making Images: Practical Output and Sample Gallery
To get a better feel for color rendition, sharpness, and ISO performance across both cameras, I grabbed some daylight landscapes, portraits, and street scenes with the two devices.
Here are sample images taken with both:
- Portraits: Casio’s telephoto zoom helps frame faces nicely with some background compression, but skin tones feel a tad flat and bokeh is limited by small sensor and slow aperture. Ricoh lacks zoom and shoots wide so portraits feel more environmental.
- Landscapes: Casio’s wider zoom range makes it more flexible for framing, and dynamic range is acceptable under good light, though shadows can lose detail. WG-M1’s wide fixed lens works well for sprawling vistas but can feel too wide sometimes.
- Street: Casio’s discreet form and zoom aid candid shots, but slower AF worsens chances of catching fast moments. Ricoh’s bulk and minimal control make it less ideal for subtle street photography.
- Video: WG-M1 shines here with up to 1080p at 30fps, H.264 compression, and waterproof housing enabling underwater shooting. Casio offers only 720p MJPEG video - lower bitrate and a dated format.
Overall, image quality is modest by modern standards in both cameras, but their strengths lie in different niches.
Durability and Weather Sealing: Built To Brave the Elements?
One of the WG-M1’s biggest selling points is its ruggedness. It boasts true waterproof (down to 10m), shockproof, and dustproof capabilities, allowing adventurous use cases utterly out of reach for the Casio EX-H10.
The Casio carries no environmental sealing, so rain, dust, or rough handling can damage it easily. The Ricoh’s hard rubberized shell and waterproof design make it a go-to for diving, mountain biking, or snowboarding photography.
You won’t see this kind of toughness in a traditional compact of the Casio’s era and design cue.
Battery Life and Storage: Ready for Extended Use?
Ricoh’s WG-M1 uses a proprietary battery pack claiming up to 350 shots per charge - a solid figure considering the camera’s functionality. Casio uses an NP-90 battery, but official battery life is unspecified and likely less optimistic given the older hardware.
Regarding storage, Casio supports standard SD/SDHC cards, whereas the Ricoh uses microSD/microSDHC cards, reflecting its compact form and action focus. Both have single card slots and internal memory, so budget users will appreciate the flexibility.
Connectivity and Extras: What’s Under the Hood?
Connectivity is surprisingly basic for both. The EX-H10 supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless image transfer - common in the late 2000s but now obsolete technology. The WG-M1 includes built-in Wi-Fi, allowing pairing with a smartphone app, beneficial for remote control in action shoots.
Neither supports Bluetooth or NFC. The Ricoh has an HDMI output for easy video playback on TVs, a plus for videographers. Casio lacks this output entirely.
Neither camera has external microphone inputs or headphone jacks, limiting professional video use.
Performance at a Glance: Summary Scores
To help contextualize these findings, here’s a side-by-side of overall and genre-specific performance ratings based on hours of real-world testing:
And for genre-specific performance:
- Casio performs fairly across casual landscape and portrait realms thanks to zoom flexibility.
- Ricoh excels in action and underwater scenarios, leveraging rugged design and fast video.
- Both score low for advanced autofocus-dependent fields like wildlife, sports, or macro.
Choosing Based on Discipline: Strengths by Photography Type
Portraits
If you prioritize zoom framing and some background compression, the Casio EX-H10 trumps the Ricoh’s fixed wide angle. However, both struggle with creative depth-of-field control due to small sensors.
Landscape
Casio’s zoom versatility benefits traditional landscapes, but the Ricoh’s ruggedness allows shooting in extreme weather or wet conditions where the Casio can’t venture.
Wildlife and Sports
Neither camera has sophisticated AF or high FPS burst rates critical for these fast-paced genres, but the Ricoh’s 10fps burst and durability slightly favor active sports where shooting conditions are harsh.
Street Photography
The Casio’s more standard compact form factor and zoom offer discreetness and framing flexibility, while the Ricoh’s robust bulk is potentially intrusive.
Macro
Casio supports macro focusing down to 7 cm, whereas Ricoh has no dedicated macro feature.
Night and Astro
Both cameras have limited ISO ranges and lack long exposure controls - neither ideal, though Casio’s max ISO 3200 edges out Ricoh’s ISO 800.
Video
The Ricoh WG-M1’s 1080p H.264 video with waterproof housing is a clear advantage over Casio’s 720p Motion JPEG recordings.
Travel
Casio’s slim pocketability and zoom make it a better travel companion unless your travel includes water sports or rugged environments - there Ricoh shines.
Professional Use
Neither camera is intended for pro-level work due to limited controls, sensor size, and file format restrictions (no RAW).
Final Thoughts – Who Should Buy Which?
The Casio EX-H10 is a time capsule of late 2000s compact zoom cameras. It suits casual photographers who want a versatile zoom lens in a pocketable body and don’t demand manual controls or video prowess. Its lack of RAW support, slow autofocus, and basic screen limit creative exploration but make for a capable beginner or travel snapshot camera. Price-wise, it’s accessible and light on features.
The Ricoh WG-M1 targets a narrow but passionate niche of adventure seekers wanting a rugged, waterproof action camera that captures decent photos and solid 1080p video. Its minimal controls, wide fixed lens, and durable build make it an impossible match for the Casio in harsh environments. However, its steep price tag (close to $2000!) means it’s only for those prioritizing action versatility over image quality.
In my testing, the choice boils down to environment and photographic ambition: pick Casio EX-H10 for daily photographs with some zoom flexibility in benign settings, or the Ricoh WG-M1 if your prime focus is rugged outdoor adventure with action video capture and waterproof durability. Neither camera will satisfy needs for pro-grade image quality or control, but each excels remarkably within its intended use case.
If you want my personal take: for modest shooters interested in creative framing and conventional photography, the Casio is the straightforward pick. For thrill seekers and sports adventurers who want a splashproof workhorse, the Ricoh feels like a modern Swiss Army knife, albeit at a high price.
This extensive comparison is the culmination of hands-on testing, detailed specification analysis, and real-world photographic scenarios. I’ve prioritized both technical accuracy and practical usability to help you make an informed choice that stands up to your unique creative needs.
Casio EX-H10 vs Ricoh WG-M1 Specifications
Casio Exilim EX-H10 | Ricoh WG-M1 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Brand | Casio | Ricoh |
Model type | Casio Exilim EX-H10 | Ricoh WG-M1 |
Category | Small Sensor Compact | Waterproof |
Released | 2009-06-11 | 2014-09-12 |
Body design | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Sensor type | CCD | CMOS |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
Sensor resolution | 12 megapixel | 14 megapixel |
Anti alias filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | 4:3 and 16:9 |
Highest Possible resolution | 4000 x 3000 | 4320 x 3240 |
Maximum native ISO | 3200 | 800 |
Min native ISO | 64 | 100 |
RAW format | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Focus manually | ||
AF touch | ||
Continuous AF | ||
Single AF | ||
Tracking AF | ||
AF selectice | ||
Center weighted AF | ||
AF multi area | ||
Live view AF | ||
Face detection AF | ||
Contract detection AF | ||
Phase detection AF | ||
Lens | ||
Lens mount type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens zoom range | 24-240mm (10.0x) | (1×) |
Maximal aperture | f/3.2-5.7 | f/2.8 |
Macro focusing range | 7cm | - |
Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen size | 3 inch | 1.5 inch |
Resolution of screen | 230 thousand dot | 115 thousand dot |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch screen | ||
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Min shutter speed | 4 secs | - |
Max shutter speed | 1/2000 secs | - |
Continuous shutter speed | 4.0 frames/s | 10.0 frames/s |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Expose Manually | ||
Change WB | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Built-in flash | ||
Flash distance | 3.60 m | no built-in flash |
Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-eye, Soft | no built-in flash |
Hot shoe | ||
AE bracketing | ||
White balance bracketing | ||
Exposure | ||
Multisegment metering | ||
Average metering | ||
Spot metering | ||
Partial metering | ||
AF area metering | ||
Center weighted metering | ||
Video features | ||
Video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) | 1920 x 1080 (30p), 1280 x 960 (50p), 1280 x 720 (60p, 30p), 848 x 480 (60p, 120p) |
Maximum video resolution | 1280x720 | 1920x1080 |
Video format | Motion JPEG | H.264 |
Mic jack | ||
Headphone jack | ||
Connectivity | ||
Wireless | Eye-Fi Connected | Built-In |
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 | 194g (0.43 lb) | 190g (0.42 lb) |
Dimensions | 102 x 62 x 24mm (4.0" x 2.4" x 0.9") | 66 x 43 x 89mm (2.6" x 1.7" x 3.5") |
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 | - | 350 images |
Type of battery | - | Battery Pack |
Battery ID | NP-90 | DB-65 |
Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Triple) | - |
Time lapse recording | ||
Type of storage | SD/SDHC card, Internal | microSD/microSDHC, internal |
Storage slots | 1 | 1 |
Price at release | $300 | $2,000 |