Casio EX-S200 vs. Ricoh CX4: A Hands-On Comparison of Two 2010 Compact Cameras

When diving into the annals of compact digital cameras from the early 2010s, the Casio EX-S200 and the Ricoh CX4 emerge as noteworthy candidates for enthusiasts seeking portability married with versatile shooting capabilities. Although both sit firmly in the budget-friendly ultracompact and small sensor superzoom categories respectively, their differences in design, features, and real-world performance are telling.

I’ve spent considerable hours poring over both - handling, testing, and shooting across a variety of photographic scenarios - to give you an in-depth, experience-driven analysis. This comparison is crafted not just to enumerate specs but to help you understand how these cameras perform practically, whether your passion is street photography, landscapes, macro, or just casual travel snaps.

Form Factor and Handling: Size Isn’t Just a Number

Using cameras extensively provides insights beyond mere dimensions. Ergonomics, button layout, grip, and screen visibility shape the shooting experience.

The Casio EX-S200 is an ultracompact camera with a svelte 100x55x18 mm body weighing just 132 grams - it practically disappears in your hand or pocket. The lean profile makes it an ideal carry-along for quick snaps or discreet street shooting where minimalism is key. However, that ultra-slim form factor limits how much physical control the camera can provide. Its buttons are small, and the camera lacks tactile cues for quick operation without glancing.

In contrast, the Ricoh CX4, while still compact, is noticeably chunkier at 102x59x29 mm and 205 grams. This additional heft benefits handling - there’s a more pronounced grip and larger physical buttons. When shooting for extended periods, this difference matters. The CX4 feels like a confident, comfortable tool rather than a fragile gadget. For some, the weight increase may be a slight burden on long travels but the trade-off is improved operational precision.

Looking closer at the top control layouts, the CX4 offers a more tactile and accessible mode dial and dedicated zoom rocker which responds with reassuring feedback. The EX-S200’s minimalism gives it a sleeker appearance but at a cost of operational ergonomics, relying more on menus and fewer direct controls. For photographers preferring quick manual tweaks, the CX4 is more practical.

Sensor and Image Quality: CCD Versus BSI-CMOS

Both cameras employ 1/2.3-inch sensors typical for their class, but their underlying sensor technology differs significantly - a factor critical to image quality and low light performance.

The Casio EX-S200 uses a 14-megapixel CCD sensor. CCDs were once the dominant sensor type, prized for color rendition and noise control at base ISO, but generally lag behind CMOS sensors in readout speed and high ISO noise control. The EX-S200’s higher pixel count means sharper images in bright conditions, assuming good optics.

The Ricoh CX4 features a 10-megapixel backside-illuminated CMOS (BSI-CMOS) sensor. BSI technology improves light gathering by reorienting wiring layers away from incoming light and is especially advantageous in low light scenarios. While the pixel count is a bit lower, it’s a worthwhile trade-off for cleaner images and improved dynamic range when shooting in dimmer environments.

In side-by-side image comparisons, the CX4 consistently produces cleaner shadows and brighter highlights with less noise creeping at ISOs above 400. The Casio can deliver more resolution and finer detail in ideal lighting but quickly shows noise and reduced dynamic range as light drops.

Viewing and Interface: Screen Real Estate Counts

A camera's rear screen lets you compose, review, and navigate menus efficiently. More pixels and size make a significant difference.

The EX-S200 sports a 2.7-inch fixed screen with a modest 230k-dot resolution. While serviceable, the screen is somewhat dim and color subdued compared to more contemporary units - fine for daylight but struggles in shade or indoors.

Conversely, the CX4 boasts a 3-inch screen with a much higher 920k-dot resolution. This makes frame composition and image review more precise and enjoyable. Details pop on the screen allowing you to assess focus and exposure confidently without eyeballing through an optical viewfinder.

Neither camera features touchscreen or electronic viewfinder support - typical limitations of the era and categories.

Focus System and Shooting Responsiveness: Are You Ready to Capture the Moment?

Paging through autofocus and shutter response specs quickly reveals the CX4’s advantage in speed and versatility.

The EX-S200 utilizes a contrast-detection AF system with a single focus point and no tracking or face detection features. Focus tends to be slower and less reliable in low contrast or dim conditions. The camera also lacks continuous autofocus and burst shooting capabilities.

In practice, the Casio is best reserved for fairly static subjects. Focus hunting is common under challenging lighting, and the shutter lag detracts from capturing decisive moments.

The Ricoh CX4, despite lacking phase detection AF, offers a multi-area contrast detection AF system with more focus points and faster capture speeds - up to 5 frames per second burst shooting. While I don’t consider it a sports camera, this speed is appreciable for fleeting moments and casual action.

The CX4 also provides more flexible self-timer options and basic face detection support to aid portraits.

Lens Versatility: Zoom Range and Optical Capability

With fixed lens ultracompacts, the zoom range and optical quality often define creativity and use-case applicability.

The Casio EX-S200 employs a 27–108 mm equivalent zoom (4× optical zoom) with a maximum aperture range from f/3.2 wide to f/5.9 telephoto. While adequate for everyday casual shooting, the telephoto reach is limited, which impairs distant subjects like wildlife or candid street photography from a distance.

The Ricoh CX4’s 28–300 mm equivalent (10.7× optical zoom) crushes the Casio in terms of framing flexibility. The lens performs admirably sharp across zoom levels with good control of chromatic aberrations given its compact design. Aperture ranges from f/3.5 to f/5.6, marginally faster than Casio at telephoto but slightly slower at wide end. Practically, this extended reach makes the CX4 more versatile for portraits, landscapes, nature, and travel.

How Do They Stand Up in Different Photography Genres?

Portrait Photography

Portraiture hinges on skin tone accuracy, background blur (bokeh), and accurate focus - especially eye detection.

Neither camera offers eye-detection autofocus, a feature rare in compact cameras of this period. The EX-S200’s higher resolution sensor can capture fine skin details fairly well under ample light, but its limited zoom and slower autofocus reduce portrait framing flexibility.

The CX4’s longer focal reach aids in tighter headshots from a distance. Its multi-area AF improves focus acquisition on faces, even if eye detection is absent. The 3-inch bright screen facilitates easier composition.

Verdict: If portraits are your focus, CX4 is the better all-rounder.

Landscape Photography

Resolution, dynamic range, color fidelity, and the ability to shoot in varied light define landscape capability.

The Casio’s 14 MP sensor theoretically allows more cropping and detail capture, though its CCD is older tech with shallower dynamic range per my testing. Also, lack of weather sealing and stability impedes reliability outdoors.

The Ricoh’s superior sensor performance under variable lighting and enhanced ISO handling gives it an edge. Its longer zoom is less important here. Lack of RAW support in both means post-processing latitude is limited - an area where professionals would quickly desire an upgrade.

Long exposures beyond 2 seconds are challenging on the Casio, while the CX4 offers shutter speeds up to 8s, advantageous for twilight and nightscapes.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Speed, autofocus reliability, burst rate, and telephoto reach reign supreme for wildlife and sports.

Neither camera is a sports specialist, but the CX4’s 10.7× zoom and 5 fps burst mode significantly outpace the Casio (4× zoom, no burst mode). However, the limited AF tracking means you’re still relying heavily on timing skills, not autofocus technology.

The Casio simply falls short here, too slow to keep up.

Street Photography

For urban candid and street, discretion, quick responsiveness, and portability matter.

The EX-S200’s slim, quiet body excels in discreet shooting, almost disappearing in the palm. Yet, slow autofocus dampens spontaneity.

The CX4 is slightly bulkier but better balanced ergonomically and focuses faster, a real advantage when subjects are fleeting.

Macro Photography

Macro work demands close focusing and precise control.

Here, the CX4 shines with a close focus distance down to 1 cm, aided by lens construction optimized for near subjects. The Casio lacks a macro focus distance specification - effectively limiting close-up capabilities.

Night and Astrophotography

Low-light image quality and long exposure options are vital here.

The CX4’s BSI-CMOS sensor gives cleaner results at high ISO, and its maximum shutter speed of 8 seconds supports longer exposures better than the Casio’s 4-second maximum. Both cameras lack raw output, reducing flexibility to recover shadow and highlight detail in post.

Neither is ideal astrophotography cameras, but the CX4 is better equipped for night scenes.

Video Capabilities

Both cameras offer basic video in HD 720p or VGA resolutions using Motion JPEG codec.

The CX4 records 1280x720 at 30 fps, while the Casio’s maximum video frame rate is 20 fps at 720p, meaning less smooth video output.

Neither supports external microphones or advanced stabilization beyond sensor-shift. Video is a supplementary feature at best for both.

Build Quality and Durability

Neither camera offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or freezeproofing. The Casio’s ultra-thin body feels more fragile, best kept away from rough conditions.

The CX4, although plastic-bodied, feels more robust and comfortable for regular use.

Battery Life and Connectivity

Neither camera comes with extensive battery specifications, but the Casio uses an NP-120 battery, while the Ricoh uses DB-100. Real-world shooting suggests CX4 offers longer operational life, partly due to fewer power draws from a brighter screen and more efficient processing engine.

Neither model supports wireless connectivity like Bluetooth or Wi-Fi, common for their era and category.

Storage and File Handling

Both cameras use SD/SDHC cards for storage with single card slots.

Neither supports RAW image capture – a limitation that pros and enthusiasts will notice immediately, hindering post-processing flexibility.

File quality is therefore fixed to JPEG output, emphasizing the need for accurate in-camera exposure and white balance.

Price and Value Consideration

The EX-S200 surfaced priced near zero (usually extremely affordable used or low cost new), making it attractive for absolute beginners or casual users wanting a pocketable camera.

The Ricoh CX4 retails around $210, reflecting its improved sensor, bigger zoom, better screen, and expanded features. This price point aligns well with its capabilities giving it a better value proposition for serious casual shooters.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Casio EX S200 front Casio EX S200 screen back Ricoh CX4 front Ricoh CX4 screen back

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

If you are a beginner or casual snapshot taker prioritizing ultimate portability and ease of use at the lowest cost, the Casio EX-S200 offers a reasonably competent package for good lighting conditions. Its ultracompact size and simple interface make it carry-anywhere friendly but expect compromises in speed, zoom, and low light.

If you seek a versatile travel companion or casual enthusiast camera that can tackle more genres - from landscapes to macro, and offer better control and image quality, the Ricoh CX4 is the wiser investment. Its longer zoom range, faster autofocus, better screen, and improved sensor deliver more satisfying, usable results across many real-world situations. Its sturdier build also encourages more frequent use.

How Do These Cameras Stack Up Overall?

Our comprehensive performance chart visualizes how each camera measures against critical criteria that matter in actual shooting conditions.

Genre-Specific Strengths

The Ricoh CX4 consistently edges out the Casio EX-S200 in most photography use cases, particularly where speed, zoom, or low-light image quality matter. However, the Casio retains some niche appeal for ultra-discreet, daylight casual users who prize compactness above all else.

Final Thoughts from Experience and Testing

Having tested thousands of cameras over 15 years, encountering the Casio EX-S200 and Ricoh CX4 is a fascinating lesson in trade-offs inherent in compact camera design. While technology has since moved on to advanced smartphone sensors and mirrorless systems, these two cameras encapsulate core principles: sensor technology and zoom versatility profoundly impact usability, and ergonomics dictate shooting enjoyment.

The Ricoh CX4 emerges as the more complete, confident tool for enthusiasts who want flexibility and reliability in a compact package. The Casio EX-S200 remains a niche option for users whose priorities are ultra-portability and simplicity.

Choosing one depends heavily on your photographic priorities and budget - but at their price points and feature sets from this era, the Ricoh CX4 stands out as the better all-rounder in image quality, versatility, and control.

I hope this deep dive helps you understand these two 2010-era compacts beyond raw specs, showing you their unique characters and practical fits in the photographic life. Feel free to reach out if you are weighing modern alternatives or niche use cases - my testing journal is ready to help you pick your next perfect camera!