Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70
96 Imaging
36 Features
25 Overall
31
91 Imaging
42 Features
39 Overall
40
Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 14MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Screen
- ISO 50 - 3200
- Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
- 640 x 480 video
- 27-108mm (F3.2-5.9) lens
- 124g - 91 x 52 x 20mm
- Introduced August 2010
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.7" Fixed Display
- ISO 125 - 6400
- Digital Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-140mm (F3.5-5.5) lens
- 193g - 123 x 62 x 30mm
- Introduced February 2020
- Newer Model is Ricoh WG-80
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firms Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Overview
In this article, we are reviewing the Casio EX-Z800 versus Ricoh WG-70, one is a Ultracompact and the other is a Waterproof by brands Casio and Ricoh. The image resolution of the EX-Z800 (14MP) and the WG-70 (16MP) is very close and they use the same exact sensor measurements (1/2.3").
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or banThe EX-Z800 was unveiled 10 years earlier than the WG-70 which is a fairly large gap as far as camera technology is concerned. Each of the cameras offer different body type with the Casio EX-Z800 being a Ultracompact camera and the Ricoh WG-70 being a Compact camera.
Before delving straight into a complete comparison, below is a brief highlight of how the EX-Z800 grades vs the WG-70 in terms of portability, imaging, features and an overall mark.
Photography Glossary Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Gallery
Here is a sample of the gallery pics for Casio Exilim EX-Z800 and Ricoh WG-70. The full galleries are viewable at Casio EX-Z800 Gallery and Ricoh WG-70 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Casio EX-Z800 over the Ricoh WG-70
| EX-Z800 | WG-70 |
|---|
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-70 over the Casio EX-Z800
| WG-70 | EX-Z800 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduced | February 2020 |  | August 2010 | Newer by 115 months |
Common features in the Casio EX-Z800 and Ricoh WG-70
| EX-Z800 | WG-70 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focus manually |  | Dial exact focus | ||
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Display sizing | 2.7" |  | 2.7" | Equivalent display measurements |
| Display resolution | 230k |  | 230k | Exact same display resolution |
| Selfie screen |  | Absent selfie screen | ||
| Touch friendly display |  | Absent Touch friendly display |
Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Physical Comparison
For anyone who is planning to travel with your camera often, you will need to consider its weight and measurements. The Casio EX-Z800 provides outer dimensions of 91mm x 52mm x 20mm (3.6" x 2.0" x 0.8") and a weight of 124 grams (0.27 lbs) and the Ricoh WG-70 has proportions of 123mm x 62mm x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") and a weight of 193 grams (0.43 lbs).
Compare the Casio EX-Z800 versus Ricoh WG-70 in the new Camera with Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Keep in mind, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will differ dependant on the lens you are using at that time. Below is the front view size comparison of the EX-Z800 against the WG-70.
Considering dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the EX-Z800 and WG-70 is 96 and 91 respectively.
Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Sensor Comparison
More often than not, it is hard to imagine the difference in sensor dimensions merely by looking through a spec sheet. The picture underneath may give you a stronger sense of the sensor dimensions in the EX-Z800 and WG-70.
Clearly, both of those cameras enjoy the same exact sensor sizing but different resolution. You should expect to see the Ricoh WG-70 to provide you with greater detail having an extra 2 Megapixels. Greater resolution will enable you to crop pics far more aggressively. The more aged EX-Z800 will be behind with regard to sensor innovation.
Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Screen and ViewFinder
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesStreet Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthSports Comparison
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a LandslideTravel Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsLandscape Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneVlogging Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music video
Casio EX-Z800 vs Ricoh WG-70 Specifications
| Casio Exilim EX-Z800 | Ricoh WG-70 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Company | Casio | Ricoh |
| Model type | Casio Exilim EX-Z800 | Ricoh WG-70 |
| Class | Ultracompact | Waterproof |
| Introduced | 2010-08-03 | 2020-02-04 |
| Physical type | Ultracompact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Powered by | Exilim Engine 5.0 | - |
| Sensor type | CCD | BSI-CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor surface area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 14 megapixels | 16 megapixels |
| Anti alias filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | 1:1, 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Highest resolution | 4320 x 3240 | 4608 x 3456 |
| Highest native ISO | 3200 | 6400 |
| Lowest native ISO | 50 | 125 |
| RAW format | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Manual focusing | ||
| Autofocus touch | ||
| Continuous autofocus | ||
| Single autofocus | ||
| Tracking autofocus | ||
| Selective autofocus | ||
| Center weighted autofocus | ||
| Autofocus multi area | ||
| Autofocus live view | ||
| Face detection autofocus | ||
| Contract detection autofocus | ||
| Phase detection autofocus | ||
| Total focus points | - | 9 |
| Cross type focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mount type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens zoom range | 27-108mm (4.0x) | 28-140mm (5.0x) |
| Largest aperture | f/3.2-5.9 | f/3.5-5.5 |
| Macro focusing distance | - | 1cm |
| Focal length multiplier | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Type of screen | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Screen size | 2.7 inches | 2.7 inches |
| Resolution of screen | 230 thousand dots | 230 thousand dots |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch screen | ||
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Lowest shutter speed | 4s | 4s |
| Highest shutter speed | 1/2000s | 1/4000s |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Expose Manually | ||
| Set white balance | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Built-in flash | ||
| Flash distance | - | 5.50 m (at Auto ISO) |
| Flash options | Auto, flash off, flash on, red eye reduction | On, off |
| Hot shoe | ||
| AEB | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment exposure | ||
| Average exposure | ||
| Spot exposure | ||
| Partial exposure | ||
| AF area exposure | ||
| Center weighted exposure | ||
| Video features | ||
| Supported video resolutions | 1280 × 720 (20 fps), 640 x 480 (30 f ps) | 1920 x 1080 @ 30p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 120p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 60p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 30p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM |
| Highest video resolution | 640x480 | 1920x1080 |
| Video data format | Motion JPEG | MPEG-4, H.264 |
| Mic port | ||
| Headphone port | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | Yes (Wireless) |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environmental sealing | ||
| Water proofing | ||
| Dust proofing | ||
| Shock proofing | ||
| Crush proofing | ||
| Freeze proofing | ||
| Weight | 124g (0.27 lbs) | 193g (0.43 lbs) |
| Dimensions | 91 x 52 x 20mm (3.6" x 2.0" x 0.8") | 123 x 62 x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range rating | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light rating | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | - | 300 photographs |
| Battery type | - | Battery Pack |
| Battery ID | NP-120 | - |
| Self timer | Yes (10 seconds, 2 seconds, Triple Self-timer) | Yes (2 or 10 secs, remote) |
| Time lapse feature | ||
| Storage type | SD/SDHC, Internal | Internal + SD/SDHC/SDXC card |
| Card slots | 1 | 1 |
| Launch cost | $150 | $280 |