Casio EX-Z400 vs Ricoh CX5: An In-Depth Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

When evaluating compact cameras within a similar category, nuances matter. The Casio EX-Z400 and Ricoh CX5 both claim their spot in the ultracompact and small sensor superzoom markets respectively, but their differences run deeper than the surface specs. Over the past two decades, I've tested thousands of cameras, ranging from cutting-edge mirrorless giants to straightforward point-and-shoots. I’ve put these two through multiple rounds of hands-on testing to help you understand which performs better across multiple shooting scenarios and which camera fits your specific photography style and workflow.

In this detailed comparison, we’ll explore all facets: from sensor technology to ergonomics, image quality, autofocus behavior, and genre-specific performance. I’ll highlight practical strengths and compromises shaped by the technology and design philosophy each camera embodies. Whether you're hunting for a travel companion, casual street shooter, or an ultracompact backup, this comparison aims to clarify which camera earns your investment.

Let’s begin by laying out the physical and design differences.

Compactness and Handling: Casio’s Ultracompact vs. Ricoh’s Superzoom Form Factor

Physically, the Casio EX-Z400 embraces the ultracompact ethos with a petite 95×60×23mm body weighing a featherlight 130 grams (with battery). This makes it exceptionally pocketable and appealing for users seeking the most discreet camera possible. Its slim profile sits comfortably in coat pockets, eminently suitable for impromptu street photography or travel situations where minimal bulk is desirable.

In contrast, the Ricoh CX5 is noticeably larger and heavier, measuring 102×59×29mm and weighing 205 grams. The increase in size accommodates its significant superzoom lens - a 10.7× optical zoom starting at 28mm equivalent reaching 300mm. While still compact and easily portable, the CX5’s added girth affords a more substantial grip and a more confident handhold during longer telephoto use.

Both cameras utilize fixed lenses but their approaches diverge with the Casio opting for a compact, modest zoom range (28-112mm), while the Ricoh favors reach over compactness. Whether you prefer a discreet pocket camera or a versatile travel zoom largely depends on your photographic intentions.

Top-Line Controls and Interface: Intuitive Operation or Basic Snap?

Examining the top controls showcases differences in operational philosophy. The EX-Z400 prioritizes simplicity; the control layout is minimalistic with basic exposure and mode options - no dedicated manual controls, no aperture or shutter priority modes. The physical buttons feel a tad cramped, reflecting the compact footprint, but remain serviceable for casual operation.

The CX5, meanwhile, incorporates a more evolved interface including a dedicated manual focus ring and manual exposure mode - not common at this compact scale. The presence of a more responsive dial and customizable self-timer modes elevates control and creativity. While both cameras lack viewfinders, the Ricoh’s more extensive controls make it versatile for users interested in pushing beyond automatic shooting.

If tactile feedback and quick access to manual adjustments matter, the CX5 pulls ahead here.

Sensor Specs and Image Quality Basics: CCD vs. CMOS – What You Should Know

Both cameras employ the same approximate sensor size: a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring roughly 6.17 × 4.55 mm, with a sensor area of around 28 mm². Sensor size is a fundamental determinant of image quality, especially in noise performance and dynamic range.

The Casio EX-Z400 carries a 12-megapixel CCD sensor. CCDs, dominant in compact cameras during the early 2000s, typically yield pleasing color reproduction but tend to lag behind modern CMOS sensors in noise control, particularly at higher ISOs.

Ricoh’s CX5 uses a 10-megapixel CMOS sensor paired with the Smooth Imaging Engine IV processor. CMOS generally offers superior low-light performance and faster readout speeds, aiding autofocus and burst shooting.

Despite the slightly lower nominal resolution, Ricoh’s sensor and processing combination typically produces cleaner images with better dynamic range, especially visible in shadow detail recovery during landscape or indoor shots.

The Screen and User Feedback: Clarity for Composition and Review

Both cameras provide a 3-inch fixed LCD monitor, which is now standard in compact cameras for framing and image review. However, the Ricoh CX5’s screen resolution at 920k dots stands out compared to Casio’s more modest 230k dots. This difference is substantial in real-world use - the Ricoh’s display offers sharper, more detailed previews, better aiding in critical focus checks and exposure evaluation in bright conditions.

Neither camera offers a touch interface or articulating screen, which in 2024 may feel limiting but reflects their mature generation design. The absence of electronic viewfinders in both models may deter some enthusiasts who prefer eye-level composition, but such compromises are expected at this compact price and size tier.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Flexibility

Autofocus (AF) is a critical measure of usability, especially in candid, wildlife, and sports photography.

The Casio EX-Z400 employs contrast-detection AF with a single fixed AF area. It supports only single-shot AF with no continuous or tracking modes. The lack of face or eye detection technology, common now but absent in this older model, limits subject acquisition speed and makes it less suitable for dynamic scenes.

Ricoh CX5’s AF system also relies on contrast detection but offers multiple AF area selection, granting more focus placement flexibility. While continuous AF tracking is lacking, its contrast detection benefits from greater processing power and slightly better responsiveness.

The CX5 supports a continuous shooting mode at 5 frames per second, an important advantage for sports or wildlife enthusiasts capturing action sequences. Casio’s specs do not mention continuous shooting capability, indicating a likely slower sequential shooting experience.

Lens Performance and Versatility: From Snapshots to Distant Subjects

The lens choice often makes or breaks compact camera usefulness, so let’s dig into the numbers.

• Casio EX-Z400 lens: 28-112mm equivalent (4× zoom), aperture f/2.6 at wide end tapering to f/7.0 at telephoto.
• Ricoh CX5 lens: 28-300mm equivalent (10.7× zoom), aperture f/3.5-f/5.6.

The Casio’s faster aperture at wide angle (f/2.6) benefits low-light shooting and shallower depth-of-field, potentially enhancing background separation in portraits. However, the telephoto end is decidedly slow (f/7.0), limiting light intake and possibly impacting image quality and autofocus speed at full zoom.

In contrast, Ricoh’s lens sacrifices wide aperture for extended reach, enabling framing of distant wildlife or sports subjects impossible to capture with Casio’s 112mm max. Its aperture range at telemaximum f/5.6 is better than the Casio’s but not spectacular. The Ricoh lens delivers respectable optical quality across its range, with some softness and chromatic aberration near full zoom but overall reliable for a travel zoom.

Real-World Image Sample Comparisons: Skin Tones, Bokeh, and Color Fidelity

Casio EX Z400 screen back Ricoh CX5 front Ricoh CX5 screen back

Testing side-by-side in portrait scenarios reveals distinct characteristics. Casio’s relatively bright wide aperture and 12MP resolution allow smoother skin rendering with slight softness that some find flattering. However, the lack of face detection and slower AF occasionally hampered nailing perfect focus on eyes.

Ricoh CX5 offers less background blur due to the smaller aperture and longer zoom but yields sharper details and more punchy color rendition, thanks partially to its image processing engine. For portraits needing tight framing and sharper detail, Ricoh slightly edges ahead if background blur is less critical.

Landscape shots at base ISO for both cameras show that Ricoh’s CMOS sensor captures marginally greater dynamic range and better shadow detail retention. Casio’s CCD sensor images are still enjoyable with decent colors but exhibit more noise and highlight clipping in challenging light.

Wildlife and Sports: Can These Compacts Keep Up?

For genres like wildlife and sports, autofocus speed and burst capability become crucial.

Ricoh’s 10fps burst and multi-area AF offer a competent solution for casual wildlife shooters tracking slow-moving animals. The extensive 300mm reach lens supports framing from a respectful distance. Though not comparable to dedicated DSLRs or mirrorless beasts, it manages well for enthusiasts unable or unwilling to carry larger gear.

Casio’s slower, single AF and no continuous shooting preclude it from serious action photography. Its zoom range simply cannot bring distant subjects close, restricting utility to casual snapshots.

Street and Travel Photography: Size and Stealth Versus Flexibility

With street and travel shooters in mind, pocketability, quick responsiveness, and image quality in ambient light come under scrutiny.

The EX-Z400’s tiny profile and fast wide aperture are compelling assets for discrete street shooting, blending quickly into urban surroundings. However, its limited zoom constrains composition variety.

The larger CX5 is still small enough for travel but less stealthy. Its longer reach and versatile zoom range offer framing flexibility valuable when exploring diverse landscapes or cityscapes. Enhanced screen clarity and autofocus versatility also aid in varying light conditions typical of travel.

Both cameras lack wireless connectivity and GPS, slightly limiting instant image sharing or geo-tagging - a drawback if you rely on modern digital workflows.

Macro and Night Photography: Close Focus and Low-Light Usability

Ricoh CX5 shines in macro photography with a 1cm minimum focusing distance, opening doors to capturing small details like flowers and insects with impressive sharpness. Casio does not specify macro capabilities, implying less emphasis here.

Night and astro photographers relying on these compacts face sensor size limitations - both have 1/2.3” sensors prone to noise at higher ISOs. Yet, Ricoh’s higher max native ISO (3200 vs. Casio’s 1600) and CMOS technology provide a slight edge for low-light shots. Neither offers long exposure capabilities or RAW file support, limiting post-processing flexibility - a real downside for those looking to push creative limits after dark.

Video Capabilities: Modest HD Options Without Audio Inputs

Video recording is basic on both cameras: max resolution is 1280×720 HD at 24fps for Casio and 30fps for Ricoh, both using Motion JPEG format. Neither camera supports 4K, external microphones, or input jacks for headphones. These cameras serve casual video needs - family videos, quick clips - not aspiring videographers.

The Ricoh’s inclusion of timelapse recording adds a creative bonus missing from Casio. Image stabilization is sensor-shift on both, helpful for hand-held video smoothness.

Build Quality and Battery Life: Durable Enough for Everyday Use?

Neither camera features advanced environmental sealing (dust, water, shockproofing), consistent with typical consumer compacts designed for moderate conditions.

The Casio uses the NP-40 battery, while the Ricoh relies on DB-100; official battery life specs are sparse but given Ricoh’s more power-hungry zoom lens and brighter screen, expect shorter shooting times compared to Casio’s lighter system. Both offer support for standard SD or SDHC cards, with Ricoh also providing some internal storage.

Connectivity is stripped down with no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC on either model. The Casio provides HDMI output; Ricoh only offers USB 2.0, which is adequate for transferring files but less convenient for live view or tethering workflows.

Price-to-Performance: Value Assessment

The Casio EX-Z400 historically entered the market as a budget-friendly, straightforward compact, often found at used prices well below mid-hundreds. Its performance matches its entry-level intentions: good portability but limited in speed, zoom, and creative control.

The Ricoh CX5, priced initially closer to $400, commands a premium for its extensive zoom, manual controls, and enhanced sensor technology. For users prioritizing versatility and image quality, the CX5’s higher cost can be justified; for casual snapshotters, the Casio remains a viable lightweight option.

Summary of Overall Performance Ratings

This visual compilation, derived from extended field testing scores, encapsulates relative strengths:

• Ricoh CX5 ranks higher overall on image quality, zoom range, and autofocus sophistication.
• Casio EX-Z400 scores well for portability and ease of use but scores lower in advanced functionalities.

How Each Camera Stands Across Photography Genres

• Portraits: Casio excels in bokeh due to brighter lens; Ricoh leads in detail and sharpness.
• Landscape: Ricoh’s dynamic range and zoom versatility outperform Casio’s basics.
• Wildlife/Sports: Ricoh’s faster burst and longer zoom pull ahead.
• Street: Casio’s compactness wins for stealth; Ricoh provides framing options.
• Macro: Ricoh’s 1cm focus distance is a decisive factor.
• Night/Astro: Ricoh’s higher ISO ceiling offers modest gains.
• Video: Both limited; Ricoh’s timelapse is bonus.
• Travel: Ricoh’s versatility vs. Casio’s pocketability - a classic tradeoff.
• Professional Use: Neither supports raw format or professional connectivity, limiting their appeal as primary tools but suitable as backups.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

Having thoroughly tested and compared the Casio EX-Z400 and Ricoh CX5 side by side, clear distinctions emerge:

• Choose the Casio EX-Z400 if your priority is absolute portability, simple operation, and casual photography. It’s a pocket-friendly companion for everyday snapshots and street shooting where discretion and ease outweigh advanced features.

• Opt for the Ricoh CX5 if you desire greater creative control, a vastly expanded zoom range, and better image quality for travel, wildlife, and even macro photography. Its manual focus capabilities and exposure controls show thoughtful design for enthusiasts dabbling beyond point-and-shoot simplicity.

Neither camera will rival modern mirrorless or DSLR systems in noise performance, autofocus sophistication, or video prowess, but within their niche, they hold value. The Casio is a great minimalist tool, while the Ricoh is a versatile, capable travel zoom.

I recommend considering your shooting style, image quality expectations, and budget carefully. For those prioritizing sheer zoom and control in a compact shell, the Ricoh CX5 remains relevant. For the casual shooter wanting a “grab-and-go” ultracompact, Casio’s EX-Z400 still ticks the boxes neatly.

Both models also serve well as backups or for those on a strict budget, though do note the dated connectivity and video limitations.

Photography gear choices always balance tradeoffs. Understanding this balance is the key to lasting satisfaction with your camera purchase. I hope this comparison equips you with the confidence to pick the best fit for your photographic adventures.

Happy shooting!