Casio EX-Z400 vs Sony WX9: A Deep Dive into Ultracompact Camera Performance

Choosing the right ultracompact camera can be surprisingly nuanced. Unlike their DSLR or mirrorless cousins, these pocket-sized marvels promise convenience and simplicity, yet they come with compromises that may or may not matter depending on your style and expectations. Today, I’m putting two such cameras head-to-head: the Casio EX-Z400 from 2009 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX9 from early 2011.

These models sit in the same ultracompact category but are separated by a couple of years - a period in which sensor and video tech evolved noticeably. I brought these cameras to my usual mix of controlled lab tests and real-world shooting scenarios, covering everything from portraits to night photography, to uncover their true strengths and weaknesses.

By the end of this comparison, you’ll have a clear sense of which camera suits your particular photographic needs - and why.

First Impressions: Size, Handling, and Build

Let’s start with the physicalities, the feel-good factor that can make or break your enthusiasm for any camera.

At first glance, both cameras embrace the ultracompact ethos wholeheartedly, but subtle differences emerge once you hold them. The Casio EX-Z400 is slightly thicker (23mm) with dimensions of 95x60x23mm, while the Sony WX9 is a bit slimmer at 95x56x20mm. Both fit nicely in the palm, but the Sony’s marginally reduced thickness and weight give it a slight edge for discreet, everyday carry - ideal for street photographers or travelers wanting minimal bulk.

However, Casio’s body provides a bit more grip with rounded edges, lending a reassuring feel despite its compact size. The Sony favors a more angular design which - while sleeker - feels less secure if your hands are on the smaller side. Personally, I found myself more comfortable with the EX-Z400 during extended handheld shooting, though the WX9 is easier to slip in and out of pockets.

Overall, both pass the pocketability test without fuss, but your tactile preference could sway you one way or the other.

Command and Control: Layout and Usability

User interface is often overlooked in ultracompacts, where manufacturers tend to simplify controls to keep sizes down.

Here, the differences are more pronounced. Looking at the top plates, the Sony WX9 offers a more polished layout with dedicated zoom rocker, exposure compensation (though limited), and an assortment of shooting modes accessible via a mode dial and soft keys. The camera also has nine autofocus points, granting slightly more flexibility in focusing than the Casio’s more rudimentary system.

The EX-Z400 keeps things barebones, with fewer buttons and no manual exposure modes - no shutter or aperture priority either. If you prefer fiddling with settings and want some level of creative control, the Sony edges ahead, albeit still limited compared to larger cameras.

That said, the Casio’s simplicity might appeal to photo purists who just want a reliable point-and-shoot without distractions. Both lack touchscreens, which is a shame given the era, meaning all navigation relies on physical buttons navigating menus. The lack of customizable buttons on either is noticeable to enthusiasts.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Camera

Now, down to the meat of image making: sensor performance.

Both cameras sport the industry-standard 1/2.3-inch sensor size, common in compact cameras of their generation. This size allows for small bodies while still capturing reasonable detail, but naturally, it hits a ceiling on dynamic range and noise performance compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors.

The Casio EX-Z400 uses a 12-megapixel CCD sensor, whereas the Sony WX9 employs a more modern 16-megapixel back-illuminated CMOS (BSI-CMOS) sensor. The switch to CMOS technology generally means better noise handling and faster readout speeds, which directly benefits image quality, burst shooting, and video recording.

From raw lab files and real-world shots, the WX9’s sensor delivers noticeably sharper images with more vibrant color rendition and finer detail retention - particularly in well-lit scenes. At base ISO 100, the WX9 provides clean images with decent dynamic range, whereas the EX-Z400’s CCD sensor tends to produce softer images with slight color shifts, a common CCD trait after years of use.

At higher ISOs, the difference broadens; the Sony’s CMOS excels at reducing noise up to ISO 800 and maintains usable quality at ISO 1600 and even 3200 (its maximum), while the Casio’s images rapidly degrade beyond ISO 400, showing chroma noise and loss of fine details.

For casual landscapes or everyday snapshots in good light, either can suffice, but if you’re serious about image quality and want a bit of low-light versatility, the WX9’s sensor is the clear winner.

Display and Framing: How You See Your Shot

A good display can dramatically influence how efficiently you compose and review your images - not to mention framing when there’s no viewfinder.

Both models carry a fixed 3-inch LCD screen, but the similarities end there. Casio’s 230k-dot LCD feels outdated and dim even under ideal indoor lighting. Contrast and sharpness are subpar, making precise manual focusing or evaluating image sharpness on the spot tricky.

Sony’s WX9 improves with a sharp 921k-dot XtraFine LCD, using technology aimed at richer colors and wider viewing angles. This makes reviewing photos a much more pleasant and reliable experience, especially outdoors where reflections and glare challenge screen visibility.

Neither model has a viewfinder, as expected in this class, but Sony’s better screen compensates somewhat for this omission.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Catching the Moment

Speed and accuracy in focusing can be make-or-break for subjects that don’t hold still - think wildlife, sports events, or candid street shots.

Casio’s EX-Z400 offers a simple single autofocus mode (contrast detection) with no continuous AF or tracking. It’s decent for static subjects but struggles with moving ones, often hunting to lock focus.

Sony’s WX9 brings a step up with nine autofocus points and multi-area focusing, plus continuous AF available in some modes. It’s no professional-level AF by any means, but in daylight and decent contrast conditions, it’s faster and more reliable than the Casio.

Continuous shooting rates reveal another gap: Casio doesn’t advertise burst speeds, which aligns with my tests showing sluggish sequence rates unsuited for action photography. Meanwhile, Sony lists a respectable 10 fps burst shooting, a real advantage for capturing fast moments, even if buffer depth and duration are constrained by the limited internal processing power.

Versatility Across Photography Genres

Let’s examine how these cameras fare across practical photography scenarios I test in my workflow.

Portrait Photography

• Casio EX-Z400: Its CCD sensor produces warmer skin tones often appreciated in portraits, but the lower resolution and limited focusing control hinder image crispness. The lens range (28-112mm equivalent) can give modest telephoto distance but has a slow aperture (F2.6-7.0), limiting depth of field control and natural bokeh. No face or eye tracking autofocus, meaning eyes might not be tack sharp unless you nail focus yourself.

• Sony WX9: Slightly wider zoom range (25-125mm) and a marginally brighter aperture at the tele end (F6.3 vs F7.0) help. The higher resolution sensor captures more detail on skin, and multi-area AF aids focus acquisition, although no eye detection is available. Low-light portraits benefit from better high ISO performance.

Winner: Sony WX9 delivers sharper portraits with more flexibility, though neither camera replaces dedicated portrait lenses or cameras with larger sensors.

Landscape Photography

• Casio EX-Z400: 12MP resolution and maximum image size of 4000x3000 provide decent prints for casual use. But image softness and modest dynamic range limit dramatic landscape shots. No weather sealing; treat with care outdoors.

• Sony WX9: The 16MP sensor and superior color reproduction help capture vibrant landscapes. Maximum resolution of 4608x3456 enables larger prints or cropping. No weather sealing here either, but the WX9’s improved optics deliver edge-to-edge sharpness better than Casio.

Dynamic range still lacks when compared with modern cameras, but for an ultracompact in 2011, this is decent.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Here’s where ultracompacts traditionally struggle.

• Casio EX-Z400: Autofocus is too slow for tracking animals or fast sports action. The slow shutter speed range (max 1/1000s) alongside poor burst rates mean you’ll likely miss many decisive moments.

• Sony WX9: Faster shutter speeds up to 1/1600s and 10fps burst help in capturing fleeting moments. The optical image stabilization combined with the better focusing system also improves hit rates, though the small sensor limits subject isolation and background separation.

Neither camera is optimal here, but for casual snapping of wildlife or kids running around, the WX9 performs satisfactorily.

Macro and Close-Up Focus

• Casio EX-Z400 doesn’t officially list macro focus distance, but you’re restricted by the fixed lens and slow aperture.

• Sony WX9 offers a close focusing distance of just 5cm, allowing much more convincing macro shots with fine detail.

If close-up nature or product photography is your thing, the WX9 is the hands-down choice.

Night and Astrophotography

Neither camera is tailored for astrophotography, but the Sony’s CMOS sensor and higher maximum ISO provide better low-light results. Slow shutter speeds down to 2 seconds on the WX9 versus only 1/2 second on the Casio can be helpful for nighttime handheld shots, though star trails need longer exposures than either can provide conveniently.

Neither features manual exposure modes, which hampers control in dark environments. Both lack raw shooting support, so noise reduction is baked into JPEGs - sacrificing detail.

Video Recording Capabilities

The Casio EX-Z400 records modest 1280x720 (HD) video at 24fps using Motion JPEG format, which is inefficient in compression and results in large files - acceptable for casual clips but unsophisticated by modern standards.

The Sony WX9 steps up with Full HD 1920x1080 recording at 60fps in AVCHD and MPEG-4 formats, smoother and more efficient. It features optical image stabilization in video mode, and besides, it supports manual white balance which amateur videographers appreciate.

Neither camera offers microphone or headphone ports, limiting audio quality control.

Battery Life and Storage

Both use proprietary lithium-ion batteries with moderate stamina; actual shot counts vary but expect typical point-and-shoot day use (around 200-300 shots). Battery life will feel constrained by videographers or power users.

Storage-wise, the Casio supports SD/SDHC and Eye-Fi cards but no USB connection, making transfers potentially cumbersome. The Sony supports a wider array including SD, SDHC, SDXC, and Memory Stick variants with USB 2.0 connectivity - far more flexible for workflow integration.

Connectivity and Extras

Wireless features are sparse.

• Casio has none.
• Sony offers Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless image transfer - handy if you use Eye-Fi cards, though proprietary.

Neither have Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS, so geotagging and smartphone remote control are off the table.

Summing Up with Performance Scores and Genre Ratings

I compiled key performance metrics based on my testing and established photographic criteria.

The Sony WX9 scores uniformly higher across technical and practical tests: image quality, autofocus, shooting speed, and video capabilities.

Breaking down by genre:

Notice how the WX9 excels especially in video, macro, travel, and low-light utility, while the EX-Z400 only slightly lags behind in portrait and casual snapshot scenarios.

Sample Shots: A Tale of Two Cameras

Let’s visually corroborate these verdicts with a gallery of sample images captured under similar conditions:

Casio EX Z400 screen back Sony WX9 screen back

You’ll observe sharper edges, better dynamic range, and color depth in the Sony’s JPEGs. The Casio images carry a softer look, which might appeal if you prefer less clinical realism, but often it translates to reduced clarity.

Which One Should You Choose?

At the end of the day, neither camera will replace a serious enthusiast’s mirrorless or DSLR system, but they both serve the pocket-snapping crowd who want a capable camera without fuss.

Pick the Casio EX-Z400 if…

• You prioritize simplicity over features.
• You want a warmer color palette for portraits.
• Your budget is zero or you are after a nostalgic collector’s piece (the EX-Z400 is often found used very cheaply).
• Runtime from years ago still allows - but be aware it’s an aging model with no connectivity or advanced modes.

Pick the Sony WX9 if…

• You want better image quality, larger resolution, and improved dynamic range.
• You need a faster, more flexible autofocus system.
• Video recording at Full HD and higher frame rates matters to you.
• You appreciate macro capabilities and finer display quality.
• You require modern USB and Eye-Fi wireless transfer options.
• Your budget allows about $180-200 for this out-of-production model (used market).

Final Thoughts from My Experience

Having tested thousands of cameras over 15 years, it’s clear that even within ultracompacts, technological leaps can greatly affect user experience and output quality. The Sony WX9, despite being almost a decade old now, still holds up admirably due to its superior sensor, autofocus, display, and video faculties.

Casio’s EX-Z400 is a reminder of the CCD era’s smooth color rendering but is hampered by outdated controls and sensor technology that can frustrate users seeking quality and speed.

If you want an ultraportable “grab and go” camera that won’t feel painfully limited two decades on, the Sony WX9 is the judicious choice. For those dabbling casually or on a tight budget, the EX-Z400 still captures memories passably well.

Selecting the right ultracompact camera boils down to your priorities. Do you value speed, sharpness, and video, or just a simple, nostalgic snapshot maker? Hopefully, this detailed comparison helps you shoot confidently whichever path you choose.

Happy photographing!