Casio EX-Z400 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T99: A Hands-On Ultracompact Camera Showdown

As someone who's tested digital cameras across genres and price points for over fifteen years, I love diving into the subtle nuances that separate choices in the ultracompact category. Today, we’re placing two modest but intriguing contenders side-by-side: the Casio EX-Z400, a 2009 entry-level ultra-compact, and the slightly newer Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T99 from 2010. Both target casual photographers after pocket-sized convenience, but their specs and real-world handling betray notable differences.

If you’re shopping for the best bang for your buck in a compact, reliable camera - or just curious about the evolving features of early 2010s ultracompacts - I’m here to walk you through what matters beyond the marketing fluff. I’ll focus on sensor tech, ergonomics, autofocus, image quality, and key photo disciplines, always with my trusty test routines and personal experience guiding the way.

Let’s start by sizing them up - in more ways than one.

First Impressions: Pocket-Fit and Handling

The very first thing you notice when holding a camera is its physical presence (or lack thereof). Both the Casio EX-Z400 and Sony T99 proclaim the ultracompact label, but there are differences.

The Casio EX-Z400 measures 95 x 60 x 23 mm and weighs 130 grams, while the Sony T99 is smaller and lighter at 93 x 56 x 17 mm and 121 grams. That 6 mm thickness difference means the Sony slips into pockets a little easier, a trait that lovers of discrete street photography and travel snaps will appreciate.

Sony also manages a sleeker build, with a modern touchscreen (a rare feature back then) occupying its rear surface, enhancing interface interaction over Casio’s fixed, non-touch 3-inch screen.

Looking at the top view reveals clues about control ergonomics:

The Casio offers a classic shutter button and simple mode dial with little else, leaning on an intuitive, if barebones, design. The Sony adds a few more buttons - accommodating its touchscreen - and a slightly larger zoom rocker for its 4x zoom lens. Both cameras skip viewfinders entirely, forcing reliance on their LCDs under bright sunlight, which was typical for compacts of their era but a clear disadvantage for professionals used to composing through an optical or electronic finder.

Verdict

For sheer portability and handling, Sony’s T99 holds an edge with a slimmer profile and touchscreen convenience - a notable perk in usability. The Casio EX-Z400 feels more traditional, with a chunkier grip that might appeal to users wanting something a bit more substantial in hand.

Sensor Tech and Image Quality: Tiny Sensors, Big Questions

Both cameras share the same sensor size: a 1/2.3" CCD sensor measuring roughly 6.17 x 4.55 mm, yielding a sensor surface area of about 28.07 mm².

Resolution-wise, the Casio caps at 12 megapixels (max image resolution 4000x3000), while the Sony edges ahead slightly with 14 megapixels (4320x3240 max). On paper, that might suggest the Sony pumps out slightly sharper images due to the extra pixel real estate, but as many photographers know, cramming more pixels onto a tiny sensor often leads to compromised noise performance and poorer dynamic range.

My own lab testing with these cameras backs up the typical ultracompact sensor story: both struggle in low light, with noticeable noise creeping in by ISO 800 and almost unusable images at ISO 1600 (Casio’s max native) and ISO 3200 (Sony’s max native). The Sony does have that slight advantage at ISO 80-100 base, producing crisper detail in bright conditions thanks to its newer Bionz image processor.

Bright, well-lit landscapes and daylight portraits are where these cameras perform decently, though neither achieves the tonal subtlety or shadow recovery of larger sensor competitors. Both feature anti-aliasing filters to reduce moiré but at the cost of some minute detail loss.

Color reproduction tilts toward neutral in both models, with Casio’s CCD sensor leaning ever so slightly warmer in skin tones - as I found after shooting test portraits. Sony’s output is a little cooler but less prone to saturation clipping, offering colors that pop more naturally.

Verdict

For everyday photographers shooting in good light, the Sony T99 provides incrementally better detail retention and sharper images. The Casio is no slouch but shows its age when it comes to dynamic range and high-ISO noise control.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Focus Points

Anyone who’s ever chased a toddler or tried to photograph a skittish bird knows autofocus is a make-or-break feature.

The Casio EX-Z400 employs a basic contrast detection AF system, featuring single-point focus only with no continuous or tracking capabilities. In contrast, the Sony T99 sports a more advanced contrast detection AF with 9 focus points and center-weighted autofocus, albeit also lacking continuous AF and tracking.

While neither camera boasts phase-detection AF - a feature rare in ultracompacts from the time - the Sony’s multiple focus points provide a subtle but noticeable boost in framing flexibility.

I ran side-by-side tests photographing subjects at varying distances under good light. The Casio often took a second or two to lock focus, struggling when subjects moved quickly or in lower contrast scenes. The Sony generally locked quicker and with less hunting thanks to its multi-point system, though it still lagged behind modern standards.

Verdict

If autofocus speed and reliability in shifting or busy environments are must-haves, the Sony T99 leads by a clear margin. The Casio’s AF system is better suited for steady, static subjects in well-lit conditions.

Screens and Interface: Viewing and Control

Both cameras feature 3-inch fixed LCDs with 230k-dot resolution - standard for budget ultracompacts in their day.

However, the Sony T99’s inclusion of touchscreen capability significantly impacts usability. The ability to tap-to-focus or navigate quick menus dramatically reduces fumbling through button presses, especially for casual users or newcomers. The Casio’s menu operated via physical buttons feels slower and less intuitive.

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder, which is a downside if you often shoot outdoors in direct sunlight.

Sony also offers more flash modes, including red-eye reduction and slow sync, giving photographers greater control of ambient and fill lighting - a nod toward more creative freedom.

Verdict

Sony wins here, hands down, thanks to touchscreen controls and richer flash options. Casio’s interface might be simpler, but that comes at a cost in speed and ease-of-use.

Video Capabilities: Recording with Convenience or Compromise?

Ultracompacts often double as grab-and-go video devices, so what can these two offer?

Both cap video at 1280x720 HD, Casio at 24 fps, Sony at 30 fps. The Casio records in Motion JPEG format, while Sony uses MPEG-4, a more compressed and efficient format that consumes less storage space.

Sony also supports continuous shooting burst up to 10 fps - a nice bonus for capturing fleeting moments in video or stills - whereas the Casio doesn’t advertise continuous shooting capabilities.

Neither camera has microphone or headphone jacks, limiting audio control for videographers. The lack of image stabilization modes tuned for video on either device means handheld footage will show some jitter, but the Casio claims sensor-shift stabilization, while Sony uses optical image stabilization - typically more effective in smoothing out shakes during video.

Verdict

For casual video, the Sony T99’s higher frame rate, efficient codec, and optical IS offer a smoother experience than the Casio, which feels more basic and dated when shooting footage.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Both cameras use proprietary batteries - Casio’s NP-40 and Sony’s NP-BN1 - with similar endurance expecting around 200 shots per charge under typical usage. These stats come from official numbers, and from experience testing older ultracompacts, expect to get less in real-life mixed use including flash and video.

For storage, Casio supports SD and Eye-Fi cards, a plus for wireless transfer if you retro-fit Eye-Fi - which is a neat option if you want to edge out aging hardware.

Sony supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards and Memory Stick Duo formats, giving more flexibility for capacity but requires carrying two types of media if you switch between brands.

Sony includes a USB 2.0 port but lacks HDMI, while Casio has an HDMI output for direct display on TVs but no USB. Connectivity is otherwise barebones - no Bluetooth or WiFi.

Verdict

Sony’s storage flexibility and USB connection make it more adaptable, especially for users with newer memory cards and compatibility needs. Casio’s HDMI offers straightforward playback but is less universally useful.

Shooting Disciplines: How Do They Perform Across Photography Genres?

We’re not just testing for specs; I’ve taken these cameras through a battery of real-world scenarios to see how their features and limitations stack up.

Portraits: Skin Tones and Bokeh

The Casio’s wider max aperture at the wide end (f/2.6 vs. Sony’s f/3.5) theoretically allows for better low-light and softer background separation. But with the tiny sensor and modest zoom range, neither camera can create significant bokeh or smooth background blur. Both fall short of the dreamy, creamy separation portrait photographers crave.

Skin tones recorded by the Casio feel warm and inviting, occasionally bordering on oversaturation, while the Sony’s output is cooler but more neutral-balanced - a variable preference depending on your style.

Eye detection autofocus is absent on both, disappointing for those wanting quick focus on faces, but Sony’s 9-point AF gives a little help in framing sharp portraits.

Landscape: Dynamic Range and Resolution

The Sony’s 14 MP sensor packs slightly more detail, which can help when cropping or printing larger landscapes. However, dynamic range is constrained by sensor limitations - both cameras lose shadow detail and struggle recovering highlights in high-contrast scenes.

Neither camera offers weather sealing, which restricts landscape photography in challenging conditions. The Sony’s slightly better noise control lets you experiment with ISO in low-light dawn or dusk settings more confidently.

Wildlife: Speed and Telephoto Reach

Ultracompacts aren’t wildlife specialists, but we still push to see how they handle action and reach.

The Casio’s focal range equates roughly to 28-112 mm (4x zoom), similar to Sony’s 25-100 mm. Both are insufficient for serious wildlife telephoto work, where 300-600 mm equivalents shine.

Autofocus speed is sluggish on both, especially Casio which lacks multi-point and tracking AF.

Sony’s ability to shoot 10 fps bursts is helpful but only for static subjects or mild movement due to slow AF.

Sports: Tracking and Low-Light Speed

Neither camera sports sport-specific autofocus modes or high shutter speeds. Sony maxes out shutter at 1/1250s and Casio at 1/1000s - not terrible but limiting for fast action shooting.

Burst mode at 10 fps on Sony potentially captures sequences better than Casio’s lack of continuous mode, but autofocus still isn’t up to the race car following.

Street Photography: Stealth and Low Light

Here Sony’s smaller size and touchscreen offer discreet shooting, while the wider aperture on Casio’s wide end helps in dim streetscapes.

Both cameras lack a viewfinder, which is a significant minus in bright daylight.

Sony’s flash modes allow more flexibility when supplementing street light or neon, a plus where the Casio’s basic flash struggles.

Macro: Close Focus and Stabilization

Sony gets a jump on macro with its 1 cm minimum focus range, enabling closer detailed shots - a handy feature for flower or food photography. Casio doesn’t advertise macro specifics and tends to miss focusing very close.

Casio’s sensor-shift image stabilization benefits handheld shots, but Sony’s optical IS generally delivers sharper results when zoomed in or shooting macro, in my testing.

Night and Astro: High ISO and Exposure Support

Both cameras disappoint for astrophotographers, limited to max ISOs of 1600 and 3200, but with noisy and grainy output at those settings. Neither offers manual exposure modes or bulb shooting that serious night photographers crave.

Video: Versatility and Quality

Sony’s HD video at 30 fps with optical IS trumps Casio’s 24 fps digital IS setup. Lack of mic inputs on either slams professional use, but casual video capture favors Sony.

Travel and Professional Use

Sony’s lighter build, touchscreen, superior AF, and flexible storage make it better suited for travel photography on the go. Battery life is similar and modest on both.

For professionals or enthusiasts wanting solid workflow compatibility, both fall short - no RAW support here, no extensive manual controls, no tethering, no weather sealing. These are mainly point-and-shoots for casual everyday use.

Casio EX Z400 screen back Sony T99 front Sony T99 screen back

Seeing actual image samples side-by-side helps ground these conclusions. Note the subtle resolution and color differences, as well as the handling of light and sharpness.

Build Quality and Durability: More Than Just Looks

Neither camera offers weather sealing, dustproofing, or shockproofing.

Casio’s body feels slightly more robust with added heft, while Sony’s is slender and stylish, reflecting its fashion-oriented design philosophy.

No freezeproof ratings here, which matters if shooting in harsher climates.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Both cameras come with fixed lenses - no interchangeable options.

Sony’s lens specs (25-100 mm, F3.5-4.6) are a bit shorter in reach but with better macro focus, while Casio offers 28-112 mm (F2.6-7.0), slightly faster at the wide end but slower telephoto aperture.

Given these are self-contained systems, lens ecosystem is a non-starter but consider whether zoom range and aperture meet your priorities.

Connectivity and Extras

Eye-Fi wireless card support on Casio is unusual and could be useful if invested in the Eye-Fi ecosystem, but lacks Bluetooth or modern WiFi.

Sony offers USB 2.0 and broad memory card options, with no HDMI output despite having a nice screen.

Neither camera supports GPS or NFC found on more recent models.

An expert rating overview reminds us that neither camera breaks new ground but both deliver decent performance for the simplest photographic needs.

Breaking down their scores by genre highlights clear winners in autofocus and video (Sony), and some parity in landscape and macro.

Who Should Buy the Casio EX-Z400?

• Cheapskate photographers wanting a basic, dependable, budget-friendly ultracompact with a brighter wide aperture
• Users prioritizing simple manual white balance in a traditional button-based interface
• Photographers shooting primarily in good daylight and casual snapshots with little need for video or speed

It won’t wow anyone looking for speed, versatility, or advanced features.

Who Should Opt for the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T99?

• Buyers who want better autofocus, smoother video, and more modern touchscreen controls
• Street photographers favoring a slim, stylish, discreet camera
• Casual travelers wanting a versatile fixed-lens camera with expandable storage and eye-friendly LCD interaction
• Those curious about early 2010s portability trends with some interest in video recording

The Sony represents a more rounded, user-friendly camera for most casual uses compared to the Casio.

Final Thoughts: Which Ultracompact Reigns?

While both cameras occupy the ultracompact niche, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T99 emerges as the more capable generalist, with superior autofocus, video features, and interface ergonomics. The Casio EX-Z400 is a nostalgic relic bearing slight advantages in wide aperture and HDMI output but increasingly shows its age in an era favoring touchscreen ease and video fluency.

Neither model will satisfy serious photographers in 2024 looking for RAW support, robust image quality, or advanced manual control - nor are they intended for that audience. But if your use case is casual everyday shooting, quick travel snaps, or keeping a pocketable ‘always ready’ around, the Sony T99 provides a slightly more polished experience.

So, unless you find a Casio EX-Z400 for zero bucks at a clearance sale and want to tinker for fun, invest your hard-earned cash in the Sony for a better all-around ultracompact companion.

If you’ve any questions on how these pockets perform under specific lighting or situations, hit me up - I’m always happy to share insights from hundreds of hours of testing these little but mighty machines!