Casio EX-Z550 vs Casio EX-Z800

Casio EX-Z550 vs EX-Z800: A Detailed Comparison of Two Ultracompact Companions for the Decade

When evaluating compact digital cameras suited for casual to intermediate users, the Casio EX-Z550 and EX-Z800 models stand out as contemporaries launched within the same brand ecosystem in 2010. Both represent Casio’s push into the ultracompact segment, targeting photographers seeking portable, easy-to-use solutions delivering respectable image quality without the bulk of DSLRs or mirrorless systems. Despite their outward similarities, these two cameras subtly diverge in build, ergonomics, imaging features, and operational nuances that impact overall usability and performance. This comprehensive comparison draws on hands-on imaging tests, technical analysis, and practical experience to dissect these differences, providing photographers with a clear understanding of how each model fares across a range of photographic disciplines and user scenarios.

Physical Design and Ergonomics: Form Dictating Function

At first glance, the EX-Z550 and EX-Z800 are archetypal ultraportables, crafted for pocketability and on-the-go convenience. However, nuances in their physical dimensions and weight influence handling comfort and discreet usage.

• Dimensions and Weight: The EX-Z550 measures 99x53x20mm and weighs 143g, whereas the EX-Z800 is slightly smaller at 91x52x20mm and lighter at 124g. The weight difference, while marginal, contributes to a perceptible sense of nimbleness for extended handheld shooting, particularly advantageous during travel or street photography.

• Body Design and Materials: Both feature minimalist plastic chassis common for the era and category, with no environmental sealing or weatherproofing, marking them unsuitable for harsh conditions or demanding outdoor applications such as landscape photography in inclement weather.

• Control Layout: The EX-Z800 incorporates the Exilim Engine 5.0 processor, facilitating more responsive UI interactions. Meanwhile, control placement between both models remains similar, lacking dedicated physical dials or customizable buttons which can frustrate advanced users seeking granular exposure control.

Despite their diminutive size, neither camera compensates with enhanced grip ergonomics, potentially challenging photographers with larger hands or those requiring steadier hold for macro or telephoto shots.

Sensor and Image Quality: CCD Technology Meets Modest Specifications

Image quality remains paramount in camera evaluation; here both models employ similar sensor architectures but with subtle operational differences influencing output.

• Sensor Type and Size: Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3" CCD sensor measuring 6.17x4.55mm (28.07mm² sensor area). Given the diminutive sensor size, limitations in dynamic range and noise handling are expected when compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors.

• Resolution: Each features a 14MP effective resolution, yielding native image sizes up to 4320x3240 pixels. This strikes a balance between detail rendering and reasonable noise levels at base ISOs.

• ISO Sensitivity: Both support ISO 64 (EX-Z800’s minimum is 50) up to ISO 3200, though usable quality notably degrades above ISO 400 due to CCD sensor noise performance constraints.

• Anti-Aliasing Filter: Presence of an anti-aliasing filter reduces moiré risk but slightly softens perceived sharpness.

• Output Formats & RAW Support: Neither camera supports RAW image capture, limiting post-processing latitude, a critical shortcoming for professional workflows or enthusiasts demanding custom development.

• Image Stabilization: Both offer sensor-shift image stabilization, effective primarily for modest shutter speed compensations but less so for action or low-light handheld exposures.

In real-world testing, daylight sharpness across both cameras is acceptable for web or small prints but lacks the finesse for large format or critical portraiture. The EX-Z800's inclusion of the Exilim Engine 5.0 processor marginally enhances noise reduction and color fidelity, though differences are subtle without raw support.

Autofocus System: Limited but Functional for Casual Use

Autofocus (AF) performance on compact cameras can vary widely; Casio’s EX-Z series deploy a contrast-detection AF system, standard for fixed-lens ultracompacts of this time.

• Focus Modes: Both cameras offer single AF with manual focus override, contrast-detection only, and no continuous or tracking AF modes. This significantly limits utility in dynamic portrait, wildlife, or sports settings.

• Detection Areas and Speed: Neither designates the number of focus points, reflecting a basic center-weighted system prone to hunting under low contrast scenarios or challenging lighting. The EX-Z800 arguably benefits from faster processing through its upgraded engine, yielding slightly quicker AF lock times.

• Face or Eye Detection: Absent in both models, which impacts portrait photography where eye-detection autofocus improves sharpness on critical elements.

• Macro Autofocus: No dedicated macro focus range is specified; closer focusing distances are constrained due to lens design, affecting macro and close-up photography potential.

For casual use - vacation snaps, street scenes - autofocus performance is sufficient, provided lighting is good and subjects remain still. Action or fast-moving subjects will challenge both models, reducing keeper rates.

Lens and Optical Performance: Fixed Focal Range Limiting Versatility

Each camera employs a fixed 4x optical zoom lens:

• Focal Length Range: EX-Z550 uses a 26–104mm equivalent lens, while EX-Z800 nudges the telephoto end slightly to 27–108mm.

• Maximum Aperture: EX-Z550 starts brighter at f/2.6 on the wide end compared to EX-Z800’s f/3.2, granting better low-light gathering capability and depth-of-field control advantage out of the gate. However, both tighten to f/5.9 at telephoto extremes, limiting subject isolation and light intake.

• Lens Quality and Distortion: Both lenses exhibit moderate barrel distortion at wide-angle and slight pincushion at telephoto, typical of budget ultracompact zoom optics.

• Macro Capability: Neither lists dedicated macro specifications, and minimum focusing distances hover around 10cm to 20cm depending on zoom position, restricting close-up framing options.

The greater maximum aperture on the EX-Z550’s wide end offers an edge for indoor or low-light shooting, as well as early attempts at shallow depth of field for simple portraits.

LCD Screen and User Interface: Identical Visual Feedback with Simplified Controls

Both cameras sport non-touch 2.7-inch fixed LCDs with 230k-dot resolution, reflecting typical 2010 standard:

• Screen Quality: Adequate for framing and basic exposure preview with moderate outdoor visibility challenges.

• Viewfinder: None present on either model, emphasizing reliance on LCD framing which hampers composition stability in bright environments.

• User Interface and Menus: EX-Z800’s newer Exilim Engine offers incrementally improved menu responsiveness and graphical polish compared to EX-Z550’s interface, beneficial when cycling through scenes or settings albeit still basic with no exposure modes beyond auto.

Video Capabilities: Modest Resolution and Frame Rates Limit Creative Options

Video functionality remains secondary to still capture for these models:

• Maximum Resolution and Frame Rate: Both support HD at 1280x720. The EX-Z550 does not clearly specify max video resolution (defaulting to 640x480), while the EX-Z800 supports 720p at 20fps and 480p at 30fps.

• Video Format: Both record in Motion JPEG, inflating file sizes and limiting editing flexibility.

• Electronic Stabilization: Image stabilization benefits video by smoothing hand jitters but with limited efficacy.

• Audio: Neither model features external microphone inputs; onboard stereo microphones suffice for casual recording but fall short of professional applications.

Neither camera supports advanced video features such as 4K capture, slow-motion, or high frame rates, marking them as utilitarian options for brief clips rather than filmmaker tools.

Battery Performance and Storage: Practical but Unremarkable

Battery life metrics for these cameras are modest and typical for compacts fitted with proprietary lithium-ion batteries rather than AA cells:

• Battery Models: EX-Z800 employs the NP-120 battery model, while EX-Z550's battery info is unspecified but similar in capacity.

• Practical Endurance: Expect approximately 200-300 shots per charge under mixed usage, decreasing with frequent LCD use or video recording.

• Storage: Both support SD/SDHC cards and feature small internal memory buffers. Single card slot design is standard but limits simultaneous backup options favored by professionals.

Connectivity and Wireless Features: Minimalist Implementations

Connectivity options reflect the age and target market:

• EX-Z550 incorporates Eye-Fi card compatibility for wireless image transfer when paired with compatible SD cards, an early attempt at wireless workflow integration.

• EX-Z800 lacks any wireless features, relying solely on USB 2.0 for tethered data transfer.

Neither camera offers Bluetooth, NFC, or HDMI out, truncating multimedia sharing or direct display capabilities which modern users might expect.

Durability and Environmental Considerations: Basic Construction for Casual Use

No weather sealing, splash proofing, dustproofing, or shock resistance is present in either camera, situating them firmly as casual day-to-day devices rather than rugged field tools. Consequently, these units are ill-advised for outdoor landscape photographers or professionals demanding high reliability under adverse conditions.

Performance in Different Photographic Disciplines

Casio EX Z550 front Casio EX Z550 screen back Casio EX Z800 screen back

• Portrait Photography: Without face/eye detection autofocus and with limited aperture flexibility, neither camera excels here. The EX-Z550’s slightly faster wide aperture aids low depth-of-field attempts, but strong background bokeh remains out of reach due to sensor size constraints.

• Landscape Photography: Both provide sufficient resolution for prints and displays; however, small sensors limit dynamic range critically, hindering detail retention in shadows and highlights. The lack of weather resistance curtails outdoor persistence.

• Wildlife and Sports Photography: AF speed is average at best; the inability to track subjects or use burst shooting restricts both models to static or slow subjects.

• Street Photography: The compact size and quiet operation suit street work, with the EX-Z800’s lighter weight favoring discretion.

• Macro Photography: Limited minimum focus distance and absence of macro mode impede close-up options, although the built-in sensor-shift stabilization may marginally assist handheld shots.

• Night and Astro Photography: High ISO performance is poor above ISO 400; long exposure capabilities are minimal, and no bulb mode exists, limiting night sky imaging applications.

• Video Recording: Both afford simple video capture; however, low frame rates and limited codec options restrict creative video use.

• Travel Photography: Portability and lens versatility suffice for casual travelers, though limited battery life and absence of wireless transfers on the EX-Z800 may impede workflow.

• Professional Use: Lack of RAW format, slow AF, and minimal exposure control negate professional applicability.

Overall Ratings and Value Assessment

Scoring these models in comprehensive performance metrics including ergonomics, image quality, speed, video, and connectivity places the EX-Z800 marginally ahead due to processor improvements and portability. Pricing for both remains close to USD $149, reflecting their entry-level positioning.

Who Should Consider Each Model?

Choose the Casio EX-Z550 if:

• You desire marginally better low-light wide-angle performance courtesy of the f/2.6 aperture.
• Built-in wireless transfer via Eye-Fi is an important convenience.
• You value a slightly larger grip area facilitating steadier hold.

Opt for the Casio EX-Z800 if:

• Ultimate compactness and lightweight body weigh more heavily in your decision.
• Faster UI responsiveness and marginally improved AF speed are desirable.
• Video recording at 720p with slightly better frame rates is part of your workflow.

Final Thoughts

Both the Casio EX-Z550 and EX-Z800 reflect the compromises typical of early 2010s ultracompact cameras that prioritize ease of use and portability over advanced photographic controls or cutting-edge sensor technology. Their CCD sensors, limited dynamic range, and lack of RAW format significantly constrain image quality potential. Autofocus and exposure systems favor still, well-lit subjects, rendering them most appropriate for casual trip documentation, street snapshots, and general everyday photography.

For photography enthusiasts or professionals requiring versatile autofocus, higher image quality, and more comprehensive controls, exploring modern compact cameras or entry-level mirrorless systems offers substantial benefits. However, as affordable, pocket-friendly point-and-shoot cameras, they maintain utility for those prioritizing simplicity and size over technical prowess.

Casio EX Z550 front Casio EX Z550 screen back Casio EX Z800 screen back

By balancing specifications against everyday shooting scenarios and understanding the operational limitations inherent in each model, photographers can select the Casio EX-Z550 or EX-Z800 with realistic expectations on performance, value, and creative potential.