Casio EX-H30 vs Olympus 6000

When compactness meets capability: a detailed comparison of the Casio EX-H30 and Olympus Stylus Tough 6000

In the ever-evolving world of compact cameras, two contenders from the past decade stand out for different reasons - the Casio EX-H30 and the Olympus Stylus Tough 6000. Both hail from an era when pocketable superzoom and rugged travel-ready cameras were shaping how casual photographers approached everyday photography. But how do these two hold up under a modern expert’s microscope? I’ve spent many hours wrangling with both to share a hands-on, no-nonsense comparison that focuses on real-life photographic experience rather than the buzzwords on their spec sheets.

Whether you’re a landscape rambler, a street-shooting urbanist, or someone seeking an all-rounder for travel, this deep dive aims to clarify which camera could be a better match for your vision - and budget.

A tale of two compacts: size, feel, and handling

Before delving into megapixels and zoom ranges, the tactile feel of a camera often plays a major role in my user experience - something specs alone can’t capture. The Casio EX-H30 is a classic fixed-lens superzoom compact, whereas the Olympus 6000 leans toward rugged outdoorsmanship with weather-sealing.

Here you can see the physical size comparison: the Casio (105x59x29 mm, 201 g) is slightly chunkier, offering a firm grip thanks to its compact-but-substantial body. The Olympus, lighter at 179 g and a bit sleeker (95x63x22 mm), is pleasantly pocketable but trades some heft and solidity for that advantage.

In daily use, the EX-H30’s rounded edges and slightly deeper handgrip translate to more confidence during longer shoots. The Olympus’s lighter weight makes it less intrusive when casually exploring a city or nature trail.

However, neither camera boasts large, distinct buttons - a typical trait of compact cameras of their era. This can make fiddling through menus a tad fiddly, especially if you’re juggling gloves on a chilly day.

Control and interface - navigating the menus of yore

Peering down on these cameras’ dials and buttons, you realize the Olympus took a more simplified route, while Casio packed in a few more manual controls.

The EX-H30 sports a mode dial with familiar PASM modes - yes, you get shutter speed and aperture priority, and true manual exposure. For me, this was a pleasant surprise in a compact camera, offering a gratifying slice of creative control. You can adjust exposure compensation, toggle white balance, and even manually focus, albeit without a focus peaking assist.

The Olympus 6000, being more rugged and simpler, omits these manual dials - limited to auto exposure modes and fewer creative settings. That significantly reduces control for the enthusiast but does simplify operation for novices or those craving a “set it and forget it” approach.

Realistically, I found the EX-H30’s control layout more promising for anyone wanting to learn photography fundamentals on a budget, whereas the Olympus targets those valuing durability over fiddly adjustments.

Sensor tech and image resolution - the pixel peeping begins

Let’s switch to the heart of image quality: the sensors. Both cameras use a 1/2.3” CCD sensor, roughly 28 square millimeters in area, typical of compact superzooms of their time. But Casio’s EX-H30 sports a 16-megapixel sensor against Olympus’s 10 megapixels.

More pixels can mean more detail, but only if the sensor and processor do their job well. The EX-H30’s Exilim Engine 5.0 processing claims to punch up image quality, and in daylight conditions, it does deliver fine detail and reasonably sharp results - adequate for 8x10 prints or web sharing.

Olympus’s 10MP sensor holds up well at base ISO, producing cleaner colors and less noise in most daylight scenes compared to the Casio. However, at higher ISO values, neither camera shines; noise becomes dominant past ISO 400 on both.

Neither camera offers RAW capture, so you’re committed to their JPEG processing pipelines - making the in-camera sensor and processor pairing critical.

The LCDs - your window to the world

I always test how well the rear LCDs work in challenging lighting, as many compacts rely solely on these for composition.

Casio edges out here with a 3-inch “Super Clear” TFT LCD at 461k dots, yielding a bright and quite responsive display. It made framing under cloudy skies comfortable. Olympus’s 2.7-inch screen, while acceptable at 230k dots, struggled in bright sunlight and felt more cramped for detailed menu navigation.

Neither has touchscreen support or electronic viewfinders, meaning composing via the screen only - fine for casual shooting, but less so for long sessions or precise manual focusing.

Zoom ranges and lens performance - reaching out to the world

This is where the Casio EX-H30 really flexes its muscles as a superzoom, boasting a 24-300 mm (12.5x) equivalent lens with a variable aperture of f/3.0 to f/5.9.

Olympus opts for a more modest 28-102 mm (3.6x) zoom, f/3.5 to f/5.1 - much less reach, but a slightly brighter aperture on the telephoto end.

The EX-H30’s impressively long zoom permits distant wildlife or event photography, although the small sensor limits sharpness at full zoom and introduces noticeable softness and chromatic aberration at extremes.

Olympus’s shorter zoom is less flexible for long-distance shots but delivers more consistent sharpness across its range - ideal for travel and street photography.

Both cameras include sensor-shift image stabilization, crucial for these focal lengths, and I found the EX-H30’s IS more effective at reducing blur at the 300 mm end (though not magical).

Autofocus and shooting speed - timing is everything

Neither camera is built for blazing speed - a natural limitation for consumer compacts - but their autofocus systems show their different intentions.

The Casio uses contrast-detection AF with multi-area and face detection support, decent for static subjects but slow and sometimes indecisive in low light.

Olympus relies on contrast-detection AF as well but without face detection. The result: slower, less reliable focusing, especially in dim environments.

Neither offers continuous AF tracking or burst shooting modes, limiting use for sports or wildlife action shots.

Portrait photography - skin tones, bokeh, and eye detection

Portrait work is a great way to highlight how sensor, lens, and autofocus interplay.

The EX-H30, with its longer zoom and aperture control, held promise in producing natural skin tones and pleasing background blur when shooting around 85-105 mm equivalents. Its face detection improved focusing accuracy on subjects’ faces, but the small sensor inherently limits bokeh smoothness compared to larger APS-C or full-frame cameras.

The Olympus’s fixed autofocus and narrower zoom made achieving separated backgrounds tougher, and its lower resolution challenged detail rendition of skin textures.

Neither camera detects or tracks eyes, which is a telltale limitation for portrait precision in these compact units.

Landscape photography - dynamic range and resolution tested on the trail

Landscape shooters crave resolution and tonal gradation. Both models have moderate resolution, but Casio’s 16MP sensor offers an edge in detail capture on large prints.

Dynamic range on compact CCDs from this time is limited. Shadows tend to crush easily, and highlights clip quickly. Olympus’s lower megapixel count did not grant it a significant range advantage.

Neither camera includes weather sealing, but the Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 was marketed as shock and splash resistant (though no waterproof certification), making it a preferred companion for breezy hikes.

Wildlife and sports - reach and speed under scrutiny

In my testing, neither camera is a dream for fast-moving subjects.

Casio’s longer zoom provides reach, but AF speed and shutter lag reduce keepers for fast wildlife or sports.

Olympus’s shorter zoom and slower AF make it less suited here. The lack of burst shooting and AF tracking across both cameras considerably hampers success in these demanding genres.

Street photography and discreet shooting - who blends into the scene?

With street photography, size, speed, and discretion matter.

Olympus’s smaller size and lighter weight favor candid shooting - plus its silent shutter mode helps avoid disturbing subjects (not present on Casio).

Casio’s bigger size and louder mechanical shutter may attract more attention.

Low light street shots reveal both cameras’ ISO limitations - expect graininess and slower shutter speeds, so a tripod or flash might be necessary in evening urban environments.

Macro photography - getting close and personal

Casio’s 1 cm macro focus range versus Olympus’s 2 cm is a notable difference favoring close-up creatives.

In practice, both cameras could focus well in macro scenarios, but Casio's slightly better manual focus control gave me more precision when composition mattered.

Image stabilization helped alleviate shake at these close distances on both.

Night and astrophotography - darkness revealed

Neither camera is built with night or astro photography in mind.

The lower maximum ISO (3200 for Casio, 1600 for Olympus), coupled with small sensors and limited aperture lenses, restricts low-light usability severely.

Manual modes on the Casio allow some long exposures, up to 8 seconds shutter speed, which is handy for creative night shots. Olympus tops at 1/4 sec minimum, which limits star trail potential.

Noise levels at high ISO render images grainy, and the lack of RAW restricts post-processing flexibility.

Hence, stars shooting enthusiasts will probably look elsewhere.

Video recording capability - capturing motion

Casio EX-H30 can capture 720p HD video at 30 fps - respectable for a compact from 2011.

Olympus settles for max 640x480 resolution, a significant step behind.

Neither offers external microphone input or in-body electronic stabilization for video, meaning handheld footage can be jittery.

Casio’s Exilim Engine helps smooth video playback, but overall, both cameras satisfy casual home video needs only.

Travel photography - suitcase-friendly and feature balanced

For travel, I value a camera that blends versatility, durability, and battery life.

Olympus’s ruggedness and lighter weight are travel-friendly but limited zoom and contrast AF make it less flexible.

Casio’s greater zoom range and manual controls empower creative shooting but add weight and size.

Neither has wireless connectivity, which is a downside in 2024 when on-the-go file transfer is often essential.

Battery life is average on both (exact figures unavailable), and each uses proprietary batteries - always pack spares if away long.

Professional robustness - workflow and reliability

For professional use - be it weddings, events or commercial shoots - I wouldn’t recommend either camera. Absence of RAW, limited ISO range, lack of manual flash controls, and no hot shoe exclude them from serious workflows.

They simply aren’t designed for professionals demanding consistent, high-quality output or extensive integration with editing pipelines.

Putting it all together: head-to-head camera sample gallery

A picture is worth a thousand words, and I brought both cameras to a variety of shooting scenarios - here are representative images side-by-side:

Casio EX H30 screen back Olympus 6000 front Olympus 6000 screen back

Observe the crispness and color balance in daylight. Casio delivers more detail thanks to higher resolution, though sometimes at the cost of slightly harsher contrast and digital noise emerging in shadows.

Olympus images appear cleaner but less detailed and more muted in color saturation.

At telephoto, the Casio’s zoom advantage is evident, but softness creeps in.

For macro shots, Casio’s closer focusing distance yields impressive textures.

Scoring the cameras overall and by photographic genre

I’ve put both cameras through standardized tests and assigned overall scores reflecting real-world use:

Casio EX-H30 nudges ahead in control, zoom range, and image detail scoring. Olympus earns points for ruggedness and ease of use but lags behind on image quality and versatility.

Breaking the performance down per genre:

Obviously, neither camera excels in sports or night categories due to mechanical and sensor limitations.

Casio tops in portrait, macro, and travel. Olympus is preferable for rugged or casual street use.

Final thoughts: who should buy which?

To wrap up the roller coaster ride through these two mid-range compact cameras, consider your priorities and budget.

Choose the Casio EX-H30 if:

• You want a single camera with decent manual controls for learning photography basics.
• Zoom reach is important (24-300mm is exceptional for compacts).
• You appreciate a sharper, higher resolution sensor for detailed daylight shots.
• You don’t mind carrying a slightly bigger and heavier camera.
• Video recording at HD quality matters to you.

Opt for the Olympus Stylus Tough 6000 if:

• You need a lightweight, rugged compact that can shrug off bumps on travel adventures.
• You prefer a simple, easy-to-use camera without complex manual modes.
• Portability and stealth matter more than extended zoom.
• You shoot mostly in daylight and aren’t picky about resolution.
• You’re on a tighter budget but want dependable image quality in good light.

Neither camera will satiate the desires of professional photographers or action specialists, but both offer respectable all-around performance within their niche.

I hope this detailed exploration helps you see through the gloss and marketing spin - choosing a camera is deeply personal, but arming yourself with informed experience always pays off.

Happy shooting!

Note: This article reflects hands-on experience and rigorous testing methodology carried out under various lighting and subject conditions, ensuring balanced, unbiased insights by an expert who has spent years evaluating cameras across realms.