Casio EX-H20G vs Ricoh CX3: A Hands-On Comparison for the Discerning Enthusiast

In the realm of compact travel and superzoom cameras from the early 2010s, two contenders stand out: Casio’s EX-H20G and Ricoh’s CX3. I've spent considerable time with both, pushing their limits across various photography disciplines, and today I’m going to share a thorough side-by-side assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. If you’re hunting for a solid compact camera - whether for landscapes, casual wildlife photo ops, or snapping street scenes - you’ll find plenty here to help navigate these two models thoughtfully.

Let’s start by looking at the cameras as tangible objects before zooming in on the nitty-gritty details.

Feel and Handling: Pocket Size, but Are They Pocket Friendly?

At first glance, the Casio EX-H20G and Ricoh CX3 are fairly close in size - both designed to slip unobtrusively into a jacket pocket or small bag. The EX-H20G measures 103 x 68 x 29 mm and weighs 216 grams, while the slightly more compact Ricoh CX3 is 102 x 58 x 29 mm and a hair lighter at 206 grams.

The Ricoh’s slimmer profile, especially in width, lends itself to a more discreet street photography setup, which might be a big plus if you prefer candid shots without drawing attention. The Casio’s slightly chunkier grip area, however, confers a little more confidence in your hold, especially during longer shoots or when using the full zoom range.

Both cameras have fixed lenses with a roughly 10x zoom range, but their focal length spreads differ - something I’ll explore shortly. For now, it’s important to note the ergonomics impact image stability and comfort during extended use.

Looking closer at the top control layouts, neither camera sports an extensive manual control system. There’s no aperture or shutter priority mode on either, nor full manual exposure, which limits their appeal for seasoned photographers wanting complete control. However, the EX-H20G’s mode dial feels a touch more intuitive with its dedicated settings for macro, panorama, and night scene modes. The CX3 relies more heavily on menus, which can slow you down when adjusting on the fly.

If tactile control and ergonomic confidence are a priority, the Casio edges out slightly here. On the other hand, Ricoh’s cleaner, minimalist top plate keeps distractions low for snapshooters who like to point and shoot.

Imaging Technology and Sensor Insights

Both cameras use a 1/2.3” sensor measuring roughly 6.17 x 4.55 mm, a standard size for compact superzooms from this era. But the similarity ends there - under the hood lies a crucial difference in sensor technology.

The Casio EX-H20G employs an older CCD sensor delivering 14 megapixels, while the Ricoh CX3 uses a 10MP back-illuminated CMOS sensor. The BSI-CMOS technology in the Ricoh improves low light sensitivity and tends to offer better dynamic range than CCDs, which is especially useful during dusk or indoor shots.

In practical shooting, I noticed the Ricoh generates slightly cleaner images with more detail retention in shadows and highlights. The Casio can suffer from noise at ISO 400 and above, and the 14MP resolution doesn’t translate straightforwardly to better detail due to increased grain and softer results at base ISO.

That said, Casio’s higher pixel count might tempt you looking for a bit more cropping latitude. Just temper expectations - it’s not raw support (neither camera shoots RAW), so you’ll want to be careful with exposure and white balance.

The Lens Duel: Focal Reach vs Macro Prowess

Here the cameras diverge interestingly. The EX-H20G offers a focal length range equivalent to 24-240 mm in 35mm terms, giving a wider start point. The Ricoh CX3 jumps in at 28-300 mm equivalent, sacrificing a touch of wide-angle for more telephoto reach.

That extra 60 mm on the long end helps Ricoh in wildlife or distant subjects, but if you’re leaning towards landscapes or architecture, Casio’s 24 mm is preferable to capture wider scenes without stepping back. Maximum aperture varies from F3.2-5.7 (EX-H20G) and F3.5-5.6 (CX3). In regular daylight shooting, the difference is negligible, but in dim conditions or for shallow depth-of-field effects, the wider aperture at the wide end gives Casio a slight edge.

On macro capabilities, Ricoh truly shines with a minimum focusing distance of just 1cm compared to Casio’s 7cm. This means the CX3 lets you get incredibly close to subjects for detailed foliage shots or product photography - a specialty use case that I found quite rewarding. The EX-H20G’s macro mode is useful but less dramatic in reach.

Image Stabilization and Burst Rates

Both cameras feature sensor-shift image stabilization, critical when pushing those telephoto ends or shooting handheld in low light. Neither has in-lens stabilization, unsurprising given their fixed-lens compact design.

In my tests, stabilization performance on both models is adequate, compensating well for camera shake at moderate zoom. Neither superbly handles movement during fast action, but it’s enough to get steady shots at 1/100 sec or slower shutter speeds around 1/30 sec if you brace well.

Unfortunately, neither camera supports continuous burst shooting - meaning capturing fast sequences isn’t really an option. For wildlife or sports photography, this is a clear limitation.

Autofocus Systems: Contrast Detection at Work

Both cameras rely on contrast-detection AF with no phase detection autofocus. The EX-H20G has a simpler system without multi-area AF modes or face detection, resulting in slower AF speeds especially under low light.

Ricoh’s CX3 offers multi-area AF which helps with better focus locking across the frame and is slightly faster in my experience. Neither has continuous autofocus tracking, eye detection, or animal detection features you’d find in more modern models.

If quick, reliable autofocus is your priority - say for street or sports photography - neither camera will delight, but Ricoh’s system moves a bit quicker and more accurately in daylight.

Screen and Interface: Comfortable Framing and Playback

The 3-inch LCD is standard on both, with Casio’s screen offering 461k-dot resolution and Ricoh’s notably crisper at 920k dots.

This difference is immediately apparent in bright outdoor use - the Ricoh CX3 screen is far brighter and renders images with better contrast and color fidelity during playback. The Casio can feel a bit washed out under direct sunlight, forcing you to guess exposure or framing occasionally.

Both lack electronic viewfinders, which is common to this class, so you’re dependent on composing purely via the LCD.

The camera menu interfaces are straightforward, with Ricoh’s smoother and more logically laid out menus being easier to navigate in the field. Casio’s can feel a bit dated with multiple nested options.

Image Quality and Real-World Results

Let’s look at how these differences manifest in actual pictures.

Casio EX H20G front Casio EX H20G screen back Ricoh CX3 front Ricoh CX3 screen back

Portrait Photography

Neither camera has face or eye detection autofocus, so precision focusing on eyes is a matter of your patience and good technique. Skin tone reproduction slightly favors Ricoh, which renders more natural and warm tones due to its CMOS sensor and Smooth Imaging Engine IV processor tweaking.

Bokeh (background blur) is limited in both cameras due to their small sensor size and slower maximum apertures. You won’t magically get creamy backgrounds, but shooting at the longest telephoto end and stepping back can give moderate subject separation.

Landscape Photography

Casio’s wider 24 mm starting focal length gives it an edge in landscapes - you can capture more expansive scenes without a dedicated wide-angle lens.

Dynamic range feels somewhat better on Ricoh thanks to the CMOS sensor, retaining more detail in shadows and highlights, which is critical when shooting high-contrast scenes such as sunrise or backlit clouds.

Weather sealing is non-existent on either camera, so you’ll want to guard them carefully in harsh environments. Both pack decent megapixels to produce prints sized up to A3.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

This is certainly an area where these two struggle. Neither camera offers tracking autofocus, high burst rates, or significantly fast shutter speeds to freeze motion crisply.

Ricoh’s longer zoom (300 mm equivalent) offers more reach, but AF speed and burst capability limit utility. Casio falls short with its slower AF and no continuous shooting.

For casual backyard birdwatching or slow-moving subjects, Ricoh might serve better. Sports enthusiasts should look elsewhere.

Street Photography

Both cameras are compact, but again, Ricoh’s slimmer body and faster AF make it a more practical travel companion for street shooters. The silent shutter modes lacking here mean camera noise could draw attention.

Low-light focusing favors Ricoh due to better sensor sensitivity and AF algorithm, but you may struggle in complex lighting regardless.

Macro Photography

Ricoh’s impressive 1cm macro focus range is a standout at this price point, allowing creative close-ups impossible for EX-H20G.

If macro or product photography excites you, the Ricoh CX3 is the go-to.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither camera is designed for astrophotography. Limited ISO performance (max 3200) and older sensor tech hinder low-light capture.

Exposure flexibility is limited with no manual modes. Still, built-in stabilization helps reduce shake during night exposures but only to a degree.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras record HD video at 1280x720 (30 fps), which was solid in 2010 but modest now.

Casio saves video in efficient H.264 format, whereas Ricoh uses Motion JPEG which results in larger file sizes, less compression efficiency.

Both lack external microphone inputs and headphone jacks, restricting audio control. Neither offers 4K or slow motion.

Stabilization aids video steadiness slightly but can’t fully smooth handheld footage.

Travel Photography: The All-Rounder Test

Battery life data is incomplete for both, but considering similar compact sensor cameras from the era, expect around 250-350 shots per charge.

Ricoh’s lighter weight and slimmer profile make it easier for long carry, plus its broader zoom and superior macro add value.

Casio offers GPS tagging, a rare plus for travel photographers wanting geolocation metadata embedded automatically.

Both take SD cards for storage, reliable and widely available.

Professional Work and Workflow Considerations

Neither camera supports RAW formats, a professional showstopper if you intend extensive post-processing.

Both produce JPEGs only, with limited exposure and white balance control options - adequate for snapshots but not professional-grade editing or high-stakes projects.

No weather sealing, minimal manual controls, and average build quality also restrict their appeal to pros.

Build Quality and Durability

Neither camera provides environmental sealing - dust and moisture will be potential hazards on tough assignments.

Both chassis are plastic-heavy, light but less substantial than metal-bodied alternatives.

The EX-H20G’s somewhat bulkier shape affords better grip but adds to pocket bulk. The CX3 feels more fragile but sleek.

Connectivity and Extras

The Casio EX-H20G supports Eye-Fi wireless cards, allowing photo transfer over Wi-Fi networks - quite innovative for the time. Unfortunately, this requires an aftermarket Eye-Fi SD card, not built-in wireless.

Ricoh CX3 has no wireless features at all, relying solely on USB 2.0 for file transfer.

Only Casio offers HDMI output for display on external screens.

Neither offers Bluetooth or NFC.

Price and Value: What Will Your Money Buy?

At launch, these cameras occupied a similar price point - Casio around $300, Ricoh about $330.

Given this, Ricoh’s sharper screen, better sensor tech, longer zoom, and superior macro capabilities arguably deliver better value for photogs seeking versatility.

Casio gains points for wide-angle lens start and GPS geotagging, plus slightly better ergonomics.

If you want a straightforward compact with decent zoom and moderate low light ability, Ricoh edges slightly ahead.

Performance Summaries in Numbers

Looking at genre-specific scores, both cameras perform modestly across the board, bottoming out in action shooting due to AF and burst constraints, and macro for Casio due to focus distance. Ricoh excels marginally in street and wildlife with sensor and AF advantages.

Final Thoughts: Which One Should You Pick?

If you prioritize:

• Macro Photography and Zoom Reach: Ricoh CX3 is your champion with 1 cm macro focus and longer tele lens.
• Wide-Angle Landscapes and GPS Tagging: Casio EX-H20G’s 24 mm lens start and built-in GPS weigh in.
• Screen Usability: Ricoh’s higher resolution LCD makes framing and reviewing images easier.
• Ergonomics and Controls: Casio feels a bit more solid in the hand and offers clearer direct mode options.
• Video Shooting: Casio’s H.264 format and HDMI out might sway you.
• Connectivity: Casio supports Eye-Fi wireless for photo transfer if you invest in the appropriate card.

If you want a true multi-purpose compact that handles close-ups, travel snaps, and general photography better - Ricoh CX3 arguably offers a more well-rounded package. For more precise framing in landscapes and a touch of better handling plus GPS data, Casio is still competitive.

My Personal Take

Having shot extensively with both, I lean slightly toward the Ricoh CX3 for everyday versatility and superior sensor benefits. Its sharper screen and macro focus point let me experiment creatively on the go, especially in travel scenarios.

That said, if I needed GPS tagging and a few extra panoramic or night scene shooting modes, Casio would be worth the trade-off.

Neither will satisfy the professional who depends on RAW files, fast autofocus, or rugged build - but for enthusiasts wanting a travel-friendly superzoom capable of varied shooting, both have merit.

In the end, consider what photographic disciplines you favor, what features you value most, and balance that with your budget. Both cameras hold value as capable compacts from their generation.

Feel free to dive deeper using my provided images and scorecards to explore visual examples and technical details throughout this comparison.

Happy shooting!