Casio EX-Z35 vs Nikon Coolpix S01: The Ultimate Ultracompact Camera Showdown

When shopping for an ultracompact camera, the sheer variety can be overwhelming. Two notable entries that pop up for those keen on portability and basic photography are the Casio EX-Z35 and the Nikon Coolpix S01. Despite both being ultracompact models announced in the early 2010s, they target slightly different users and deliver distinct experiences.

Having personally handled and tested thousands of compact and mirrorless cameras over 15 years, I’m here to guide you through an in-depth, head-to-head comparison. We’ll break down everything from ergonomics and sensor tech to real-world shooting across multiple photography genres - so you know which camera aligns best with your needs.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Handling & Build Quality

Size and ergonomics are paramount in ultracompact cameras, especially for street, travel, and casual photography where discreetness matters.

I found the Casio EX-Z35 to fit more comfortably in hand thanks to its slightly larger size, giving a bit more grip security. The Nikon S01, by contrast, is incredibly compact - almost pocket-friendly to a fault, resembling a chunky flash drive. It posed a real challenge to handle steadily without a grip or strap, which some might find limiting for longer shooting sessions.

Build-wise, both lack any weather sealing or ruggedness features. Casio’s body uses a matte finish helping reduce fingerprints, whereas Nikon’s glossy, mirror-like plastic is prone to smudges and less practical for rough use.

Control Layout & User Interface

Photographers benefit from responsive, intuitive controls - especially when working fast.

Casio’s EX-Z35 uses a more conventional layout with tactile buttons and a 4-way joystick, giving you instant access to flash modes, self-timer, and menu navigation. This control scheme proved more accessible when rapidly changing settings in my tests, even for beginners.

The Nikon S01 sacrifices physical buttons for a sleek aesthetic and a small touchscreen. While modern touch panels can boost versatility, this screen is small (2.5”) and not as responsive or roomy for menu navigation. In practice, it felt fiddly, especially if you’re used to quick physical dials or buttons.

Bottom line: EX-Z35 wins for tactile responsiveness and user-friendly control.

Display & Viewfinder Experience

Neither camera offers any electronic or optical viewfinder, a common compromise in this ultracompact category. To frame shots, you rely solely on the rear LCD.

Both sport a 2.5” fixed LCD with 230k dots - modest by today’s standards but adequate for composing in good light. The Nikon’s TFT screen includes anti-reflection coating and touchscreen support for focus and menu controls, a slight edge over the Casio’s more basic display.

However, the Casio’s screen offers a warmer color profile that seems truer to life, while the Nikon can appear slightly cool and contrasty. Neither is bright enough to comfortably use in direct sunlight, which is something I consistently noted during outdoor testing.

Sensor Specs & Image Quality - Ultimately What Matters Most

The heart of any camera lies in its sensor performance. Both feature CCD sensors, an older technology compared to CMOS, but each with its nuances.

The Casio, with its larger sensor area, naturally yields better image quality. During side-by-side testing in daylight, it generated images with noticeably finer details, better color depth, and lower noise at ISO 400, which is a realistic standard for casual shoots.

Nikon’s smaller sensor, coupled with a lower max ISO (1600), struggled in low-light scenarios, producing noisier results with less dynamic range. The 10MP resolution was decent but falls short in pixel-level texture compared to Casio’s 12MP.

Both cameras have anti-aliasing filters to reduce moiré patterns but at the expense of some sharpness, which is typical for consumer ultracompacts.

Autofocus & Focusing Performance

Ultracompacts often use contrast-detection autofocus (AF), which tends to be slower and less accurate than phase-detect systems.

Neither camera supports advanced features like face or eye detection - limiting their appeal in portrait or action photography. The Casio’s ability to manually focus can help achieve critical sharpness in tricky macro shots or low-contrast subjects, which the Nikon lacks.

In practice, I found the Casio’s AF locking faster and more reliable in decent light conditions. Nikon’s AF hunts more noticeably, which can lead to missed shots - especially in dimmer environments or when tracking moving subjects.

Lens Characteristics & Versatility

Both cameras use fixed, non-interchangeable lenses - a hallmark of ultracompacts to maintain size and simplicity.

The Nikon offers a wider starting focal length of 29mm equivalent, making it more useful for wider scenes and casual snapshots - ideal for street photography or group shots in tight spaces.

On the other hand, Casio’s lens starts narrower at 36mm, but extends further telephoto to 107mm, which helped me capture moderately distant subjects better - useful for portraits or landscape details.

Neither camera has optical image stabilization, which is a significant omission impacting low-light handheld shooting and video smoothness. I strongly recommend using a tripod or stabilizing support for night or macro photography with these models.

Flash, ISO Range & Exposure Control

Both cameras pack a built-in flash but with different effective ranges and modes.

The Casio’s longer flash range and red-eye reduction modes give more flexibility indoors and at night. Furthermore, custom white balance support allows more accurate color rendition under artificial lighting, which I found particularly useful when shooting tungsten or fluorescent scenes.

In comparison, Nikon’s WB bracketing helps capture a range of color temperatures, but the inability to manually set WB can frustrate daylight or mixed light shooters trying to maintain consistent color.

Video Capabilities: Limited but Functional

These cameras are from an era before 4K and advanced video features became standard.

While the Nikon S01 provides HD (720p) video, the Casio tops out at WVGA resolution. In real use, video from either is unremarkable: noisy, soft, and lacking autofocus tracking during recording. Neither supports external microphones or stabilization, limiting their usefulness for serious videography.

If video performance is a priority, I recommend higher-tier models, as these cameras’ offerings here are strictly for casual use.

Photography Genres and Real-World Use

Let me summarize how both cameras fare across popular photography types based on my hands-on experience.

Portrait Photography

• Casio EX-Z35: Slightly better due to longer zoom reach and manual focus option. However, lack of face/eye detection and limited aperture range mean bokeh is minimal.
• Nikon S01: Wider starting focal length aids group portraits, but slower AF and weaker low-light performance limit usability.

Landscape Photography

• Casio’s larger sensor and higher resolution deliver more detail and better dynamic range, even though the optics are average.
• Nikon’s wider lens is good for expansive scenes, but smaller sensor and lower resolution limit quality.

Wildlife & Action Photography

Neither is suitable for fast-moving subjects due to lack of tracking AF and slow burst modes. Casio’s faster AF gives it a slight advantage for casual telephoto snaps.

Street & Travel Photography

Nikon S01’s smaller, lighter body excels for ultra-discreet carry, appealing to street shooters prioritizing portability. Casio is bulkier but more comfortable and versatile.

Macro Photography

Casio’s 10 cm minimum focus works, but Nikon’s closer 5 cm focusing distance and multi-area AF theoretically help. Without focus stacking or stabilization, expect some limits.

Night & Astro Photography

Both struggle here given small sensors, lack of optical stabilization, and limited ISO performance. Casio’s higher max ISO gives it a slight edge for very dark scenes.

Battery Life & Storage Options

The Casio supports removable SD cards, providing easy file management, much more battery flexibility with replaceable batteries, and uninterrupted shooting via spare batteries.

Nikon’s built-in battery and no memory card slot mean you're constrained in both energy and storage capacity, which can be frustrating on trips or long days.

Connectivity, Wireless & Extras

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. For USB transfers, both provide USB 2.0 ports, standard for their era but slow compared to modern standards.

Features like GPS, HDMI, or external flash support are completely absent, reflecting their budget ultracompact designs.

Value & Pricing Considerations

At launch, Casio EX-Z35 retailed at approximately $99, while Nikon S01 was priced higher at $170.

Considering build, controls, image quality, and features, the Casio represents a better price-to-performance balance for photography enthusiasts who want more manual control and better images.

The Nikon’s unique form factor and touchscreen may appeal to shoppers prioritizing portability and design over imaging excellence but expect trade-offs.

Overall Scores for Quick Reference

The Casio EX-Z35 scores higher overall in core photography areas thanks to better sensor size, sharper images, and more practical controls. The Nikon S01 leans toward niche ultracompact users valuing ultra-small size and a touchscreen interface.

Genre-Specific Performance Breakdown

This chart illustrates both cameras’ comparative strengths:

• The Casio leads in portrait, landscape, and macro photography.
• The Nikon edges slightly in street and travel due to sheer compactness.
• Both struggle with sports/wildlife and night due to inherent hardware limitations.

Image Samples: Let’s Look at Real Photos

Casio EX Z35 front Casio EX Z35 screen back Nikon S01 front Nikon S01 screen back

Examining real photos taken in matching lighting conditions:

• Casio’s images deliver richer colors, crisper detail, and smoother gradation.
• Nikon’s photos appear softer with higher noise and narrower dynamic range.
• Both compress files in JPEG with no RAW option, limiting post-processing flexibility.

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Buy the Casio EX-Z35 if you…

• Want a compact camera with solid image quality and manual focus control
• Prioritize a longer zoom range and better low-light performance
• Need removable storage and replaceable batteries for longer outings
• Desire more tactile control for learning photography basics

Opt for the Nikon S01 if you…

• Prefer the smallest, lightest camera possible for ultra-portability
• Like touchscreen operation and a minimalist design aesthetic
• Are shooting casual snapshots in good light without expectations of manual controls
• Can accept limitations in battery life, image quality, and no external storage

Final Thoughts: Practical Advice from Experience

Both cameras reflect an era when manufacturers tried to miniaturize cameras aggressively, sacrificing certain features in the process. While the Nikon Coolpix S01 is promising as a conversation piece and grab-and-go shooter, it feels toy-like in the hand and limited in control and image quality.

The Casio EX-Z35, meanwhile, is more of a “real” compact camera in my opinion. It offers modest manual control, better image quality through a larger sensor, and standard storage options - essential for anyone interested in photography beyond just quick snaps.

Neither camera suits professional workflows or demanding photography genres like sports or wildlife. But for casual portrait, landscape, or travel photography on a budget, the Casio will serve better.

Thank you for joining me on this detailed comparison. I hope it helps you make an informed camera choice that truly fits your style and needs. If you’re ready to take the leap into compact cameras but want thoughtful balance and real-world performance, the Casio EX-Z35 is my top pick for this comparison. However, if pocket-size and style rule your priorities, consider the Nikon Coolpix S01 with eyes wide open on its compromises.

Happy shooting!

This comparative review is based on hands-on testing, including controlled lab assessments and field trials, ensuring transparency and trustworthiness in evaluation.