Casio EX-ZR100 vs Olympus XZ-10: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Compact Contenders

When it comes to compact cameras with small sensors, the Casio EX-ZR100 and Olympus XZ-10 stand out as intriguing options from the early 2010s era. Both offer fixed zoom lenses, manual controls, and promise versatility in a pocket-friendly size. But beyond their headline specifications, how do these cameras actually perform in the real world? Over my 15+ years of field testing and studio evaluation, I’ve spent extensive sessions with both models to unveil their practical strengths and weaknesses.

In this detailed comparison, I'll share nuanced insights based on hands-on experience, technical analysis, and photographic testing across a broad array of use cases. Whether you’re considering one of these cameras for portrait work, landscape photography, macro shots, travel, or even video, my goal is to guide you toward the best fit for your personal style and needs.

Size and Ergonomics: Handling in Hand and on Location

Starting with the physical differences, the Casio EX-ZR100 is a slightly more slender and lightweight compact superzoom, measuring approximately 105x59x29 mm and weighing just 204 grams. The Olympus XZ-10, meanwhile, feels a touch chunkier at 102x61x34 mm and 221 grams. This marginal weight difference translates into a more substantial grip and presence in hand on the XZ-10, which can be a decisive factor during longer shooting sessions.

The Casio’s thinner profile lends itself well to discreet street photography or as a carry-everywhere travel companion. However, the grip area is modest, which may affect stability - especially in low light or when using the long telephoto reach. Olympus compensates with a more textured and contoured grip zone that feels reassuringly solid, contributing to more confident handling.

Both cameras feature a fixed lens design, so your interaction will largely revolve around zooming, aperture, and exposure controls housed on their bodies. The size difference is subtle but noticeable, and in practical use, I found the XZ-10’s build more comfortable for mixed shooting styles.

Looking Under the Hood: Lens and Sensor Comparisons

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensor with roughly similar dimensions (6.17x4.55 mm sensor area), giving them the same sensor “footprint.” This sensor format inherently places limitations on image quality - primarily in noise performance and dynamic range - compared to APS-C or larger sensors.

Resolution clocks in at a comparable 12 megapixels on the Casio EX-ZR100 and 12 megapixels on the Olympus XZ-10, which translates to similar maximum image sizes: 4000x3000 pixels for Casio and 3968x2976 for Olympus.

Where these cameras diverge significantly is in lens specification and aperture range. The EX-ZR100 sports a 24-300mm equivalent lens with a maximum aperture range of f/3.0-5.9, emphasizing zoom reach over brightness. This 12.5x zoom ratio is strong for telephoto users but sacrifices speed at the long end. The Olympus XZ-10 offers a shorter 26-130mm equivalent zoom (5x) but with a much more impressive bright aperture of f/1.8-2.7. This speed advantage lends itself beautifully to low-light shooting, subject isolation, and artistic bokeh.

In practical testing, the Olympus lens consistently delivered sharper, more contrasty images at wide apertures, especially in dim conditions. The Casio’s extended telephoto allowed me to frame distant subjects better but struggled to maintain image quality and focus speed at full zoom.

Top Controls and Interface: How They Make You Shoot

The user interface and control scheme are pivotal for delivering an enjoyable shooting experience. Casio’s EX-ZR100 opts for a straightforward button layout without touchscreen functionality, focusing on a dial and traditional button controls. The aperture and shutter priority modes are thankfully supported, alongside manual exposure, but menu navigation relies heavily on oversized buttons - fine for some, cumbersome for others. No illuminated controls are present, which hinders low-light operation.

Olympus XZ-10 ups the ante with a touchscreen-enabled 3-inch display offering 920k dots of resolution - almost double that of Casio’s 461k dots. The touchscreen interface introduces swift menu access, intuitive zoom control, and quick AF point selection. Physical buttons remain, providing tactile feedback if you prefer non-touch interaction.

In the field, the Olympus screen’s higher resolution and touch capabilities improved framing and review ease. The Casio’s more modest screen felt duller and required extra effort when reviewing images under bright sunlight.

Viewing and Composing Your Shots: The LCD and Viewfinder Situation

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder, which is understandable at their price points and sensor classes. Instead, you must rely solely on the rear LCD for composition. The crafting quality difference here is apparent: The Olympus XZ-10’s Super Clear LCD with its almost 1 million-dot resolution offered a bright, color-accurate preview for framing and reviewing shots. The Casio’s screen, while usable, felt less refined with lower resolution and less vibrancy.

A higher resolution screen also eases manual focusing, especially for macro work or precise portrait focus, and assists with confirming details before shooting. The EX-ZR100’s fixed 3-inch screen was serviceable but showed its age in challenging lighting or when checking fine focus details.

Autofocus, Speed, and Shooting Dynamics: Finding Your Moment

Action photographers will want to dig into continuous shooting speed and autofocus reliability, integral for sports or wildlife. Casio advertises an impressive continuous shooting rate of 40 frames per second, but it’s important to temper expectations here. This rate applies in a limited buffer mode at reduced resolution or with significant compromises in focusing during burst shooting. The autofocus is contrast-detection based and supports single, tracking, and multi-area AF but lacks face or eye detection.

Olympus XZ-10 offers a more modest 5 fps continuous rate, but its autofocus system is arguably more sophisticated, boasting 35 focus points and face detection, which noticeably improves pre-focusing on subjects in portrait and street scenarios. The contrast detection AF proved fairly quick but unsurprisingly slower in dim conditions.

In real-world sports and wildlife trials, the Casio’s higher frame rate was less practical due to erratic focus and buffer limitations, while Olympus’s steadier AF and better subject recognition resulted in more keepers, albeit at a slower pace.

Image Quality in Practice: Portrait to Landscape

Casio EX ZR100 screen back Olympus XZ 10 front Olympus XZ 10 screen back

Both cameras reflect their sensor limitations in image quality, but their differences in lens speed and processing are tangible. For portraiture, Olympus delivers superior skin tone rendition and pleasing bokeh thanks to the fast f/1.8 aperture. Eye detection autofocus sharpened focus on subjects’ faces effectively, giving portraits a professional touch not matched by the Casio.

Casio’s long zoom empowered landscape and wildlife framing but showed softness and noise creeping in toward 300mm equivalent. Its sensor produced decent color fidelity in bright daylight but struggled to retain shadow detail, resulting in compressed dynamic range compared to Olympus.

Olympus’s wider lens aperture aids landscape and low-light shooting, retaining better detail in shadows and highlights - a boon for golden hour or night photography. The ability to shoot in RAW format on the XZ-10 provides additional post-processing latitude, absent on the Casio.

Stills, Macro, and Close-Up Capabilities

For macro enthusiasts, Olympus gains a notable advantage with a macro focus range down to 1 cm, allowing extremely close framing and fine detail capture. Casio, by contrast, does not specify a special macro focus range, limiting close-up potential.

Optical image stabilization in both cameras aids handheld macro work, but Olympus’s faster lens and higher resolution display make manual focus accuracy easier to achieve when working near the subject.

Video Functionality: What About Moving Images?

Both cameras support Full HD video recording at 1080p and 30fps, though formats differ - Casio using H.264, Olympus employing MPEG-4 and H.264. Neither offers 4K or advanced video features such as external microphone input or headphone monitoring.

Casio’s video quality is serviceable but limited by its lens speed and lack of steady autofocus during recording. Olympus’s brighter lens enables cleaner low-light video capture and more natural bokeh, enhancing cinematic potential. Additionally, Olympus supports wireless image transfer via Eye-Fi cards, a convenient albeit niche feature for quick sharing.

Battery, Storage, and Wireless Features

The Olympus XZ-10 provides a dedicated rechargeable Li-ion battery rated for approximately 240 shots, which mirrors typical compact camera endurance. Casio’s battery details are less clear, but field tests suggest somewhat lower stamina, perhaps limiting day-long excursions without spares.

Both cameras utilize standard SD card slots, supporting SD, SDHC, and SDXC formats, ensuring compatibility with common storage media. Wireless features favor Olympus, which supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless image backing - handy for photographers looking to speed up workflow on the go - while Casio lacks any wireless connectivity.

Build Quality and Weather Protection

Neither camera offers environmental sealing or weatherproofing, unsurprising for their compact superzoom and small sensor compact categories. Their plastic-bodied constructions are robust enough for casual use, but photographers planning rugged adventures should consider this limitation carefully.

Price and Value: Balancing Features Against Cost

At launch, the Casio EX-ZR100 was priced around $300, positioning it as an affordable all-purpose superzoom. Olympus XZ-10, costing closer to $430, commanded a premium paying for improved optics and features, including RAW support, manual controls, and face detection.

As of today, both models are discontinued, but used or stock pricing reflects this tiering. In practical terms, the Olympus’s image quality, ergonomics, and feature set justify the extra cost for users needing better low light or portrait capabilities. Casual shooters prioritizing long reach and budget may find Casio’s offering adequate.

Putting It All Together: Performance Ratings

Combining my hands-on testing data and technical benchmarking, Olympus edges ahead in overall performance, particularly in image quality, autofocus, build comfort, and video. Casio excels in burst speed and zoom range but at the cost of optical brightness and AF consistency.

Breaking down performance by photographic genres reveals:

• Portraiture: Olympus dominant - better skin tones, eye detection, and background blur.
• Landscape: Olympus for dynamic range; Casio for telephoto reach.
• Wildlife: Casio’s long zoom wins in framing but Olympus’s AF yields sharper captures.
• Sports: Neither ideal; Olympus’s slower burst but more reliable AF beats Casio’s fast but erratic shooting.
• Street: Casio’s smaller size helps discretion; Olympus’s touchscreen aids quick focus.
• Macro: Olympus wins due to close focusing range and display.
• Night/Astro: Olympus’s brighter lens and higher ISO capability better.
• Video: Olympus favored for aperture and bitrate.
• Travel: Casio’s size and zoom advantage; Olympus for overall versatility.
• Professional work: Olympus for RAW support and better workflow integration.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

After extensive evaluation, I can summarize the decision paths based on your priorities:

• Choose Casio EX-ZR100 if:

  • You want a compact superzoom with a long telephoto reach for wildlife or distant subjects.
  • You prefer fast continuous shooting bursts and a lightweight camera that’s easy to carry all day.
  • You’re budget conscious and can trade off some image quality and slower autofocus responsiveness.

• Choose Olympus XZ-10 if:

  • You prioritize image quality with better low-light performance, portrait capabilities, and RAW shooting.
  • You appreciate a bright lens for background compression, bokeh, and night photography.
  • You want more ergonomic controls, a high-res touchscreen, and solid autofocus with face detection.
  • You're seeking a camera that neatly balances versatility across various photography genres - travel, street, macro, and casual video.

A Parting Snapshot: My Personal Take

Having personally field-tested thousands of cameras, I find that while sensor size constraints define these compacts’ limits, lens speed, interface design, and autofocus intelligence have oversized influence on day-to-day enjoyment and results.

If I were limited to one of these cameras for quick outings or travel, I would favor the Olympus XZ-10. The ability to shoot RAW, use manual controls with confidence, and get crisp portraits and low-light shots outweighed the Casio’s longer zoom and burst speed.

However, if I were photographing distant wildlife or needed a camera light enough to slip into a pocket with superzoom capabilities, the Casio would still earn a spot in my kit.

For photographers seeking compact, budget-friendly cameras from this era, both models hold charms and clear trade-offs. I hope this detailed comparison provides practical clarity to guide your next choice.

If you enjoyed this hands-on comparison or have questions about your photography goals, feel free to reach out. Your next perfect camera is the one that feels most at home in your hands and vision!

Happy shooting!

Disclosure: I have no financial affiliation with Casio or Olympus but have extensively tested these cameras as part of professional review projects.