Casio EX-ZR1000 vs Casio EX-ZR800

Casio EX-ZR1000 vs EX-ZR800: An Expert Comparison of Two Small Sensor Superzoom Compacts

In an era where mirrorless systems and smartphones dominate discussions, compact superzoom cameras with small sensors still hold niche appeal for users valuing extreme zoom reach combined with modest size and straightforward operation. Among these, Casio’s EX-ZR1000 and EX-ZR800 models stand out from the early 2010s compact zoom category. Both introduced compact bodies with long focal ranges and sophisticated point-and-shoot features, but they target subtly different user priorities.

This detailed comparative review draws on extensive hands-on testing, image quality measurements, and ergonomic analysis to clarify which of these two Casio compact superzooms suits particular photographic applications. We will explore their sensor and lens designs, autofocus, ergonomics, shooting modes across genres, and more - providing actionable insights for both enthusiasts and semi-pro users seeking a compact bridge camera.

Physical Dimensions and Handling: Compactness versus Control

Both the EX-ZR1000 and EX-ZR800 are compact bridge cameras with fixed superzoom lenses typical of the small sensor category. A precise evaluation of their physical dimensions and ergonomics reveals key differences impacting portability and operational comfort.

• EX-ZR1000 Dimensions: 108 x 62 x 37 mm, Weight: 255 g
• EX-ZR800 Dimensions: 108 x 60 x 31 mm, Weight: 222 g

The EX-ZR800 is noticeably slimmer and lighter, favoring travel and street photography where discretion and prolonged handheld use matter. Meanwhile, the EX-ZR1000’s slightly chunkier build accommodates a tilt-enabled 3-inch LCD providing more flexible composition. The control layouts of both cameras reflect Casio’s clean design language but differ in button arrangements and surface area.

Compared to the EX-ZR800’s fixed screen and minimalist button placement, the EX-ZR1000 includes a tilting screen facilitating low or high-angle shooting ergonomics critical for macro or street perspectives. The tactile feedback and button size on the EX-ZR1000 feel more refined, which benefits users who adjust settings frequently in manual and semi-automatic modes. Conversely, the EX-ZR800’s interface favors quicker point-and-shoot operation but lacks some ergonomic flexibility.

Sensor and Image Quality: Small CMOS Foundations with 16 Megapixels

Both models share a small 1/2.3” CMOS sensor with a resolution of 16MP (4608 x 3456). Since sensor size and pixel pitch are identical, intrinsic image quality characteristics are broadly similar; however, subtle variances in the image processing pipeline and lens aperture ranges influence results.

The 28.07 mm² sensor area places these cameras firmly in the small sensor compact class, limiting dynamic range and noise performance compared to larger APS-C or full-frame alternatives. Both utilize Casio’s EXILIM Engine HS 3 processor which executes noise reduction, detail enhancement, and color rendering algorithms.

• EX-ZR1000: Max aperture F3.0 (wide) to F5.9 (tele) with 24-300mm equivalent zoom range
• EX-ZR800: Max aperture F3.5 (wide) to F5.9 (tele) with longer 25-450mm equivalent zoom range

The wider maximum aperture at the wide end on the EX-ZR1000 slightly improves light gathering, benefiting low light portraits and indoor shooting. Conversely, the EX-ZR800’s extended telephoto up to 450mm offers more reach but suffers from the narrower aperture and increased sensitivity to camera shake, despite sensor-shift stabilization.

In practical testing, both cameras produce reasonably clean images at ISO 80-400, but noise becomes intrusive beyond ISO 800. The EX-ZR1000’s marginally brighter lens at the wide end aids in achieving better signal-to-noise ratios in the critical low ISO range. Because neither camera supports RAW output, post-processing flexibility is constrained, making in-camera image quality optimization paramount.

Display and User Interface: Flexibility Versus Resolution

Screen presentation and feedback are vital, especially in compact cameras lacking electronic viewfinders.

• EX-ZR1000: 3” Tilting Super Clear TFT LCD, 461,000 dots
• EX-ZR800: 3” Fixed Super Clear TFT LCD, 922,000 dots

The EX-ZR800’s screen boasts roughly double the resolution, rendering clearer preview images, menus, and playback details. This higher resolution facilitates critical focus checking in daylight, a common challenge with small LCDs.

However, the EX-ZR1000’s tilting mechanism introduces compositional versatility that many photographers value - from waist-level shots to high-angle framing - which compensates for its lower pixel density in many scenarios. For macro or street photography, the tilting screen can be indispensable.

Both cameras lack touchscreen capability, a drawback in today’s context but understandable given the release period. The absence of an electronic viewfinder may deter photographers accustomed to eye-level framing, especially in bright outdoor conditions.

Lens and Zoom Performance: Reach, Aperture, and Macro Capabilities

The lenses reflect the design tradeoffs between reach and aperture:

The EX-ZR800 significantly extends the telephoto reach, beneficial for wildlife and sports photography where subject distance is critical. However, this comes at the expense of aperture, increasing reliance on image stabilization and stable shooting conditions.

The lenses’ optical quality is typical for their class: center sharpness is acceptable when stopped down slightly, but edge softness and chromatic aberrations become apparent at telephoto extremes. The EX-ZR1000’s slightly wider aperture and shorter zoom range permit better control over depth of field and marginally improved sharpness at wide angles.

Macro capabilities are comparable, with the EX-ZR800 allowing slightly closer focusing (4 cm vs 5 cm), although neither camera offers dedicated focus bracketing or stacking features, limiting true macro enthusiasts.

Autofocus: Contrast Detection Within Limits

Both cameras employ contrast-detection autofocus systems without phase-detection points. The focusing systems incorporate centerweighted and multiarea modes, with face detection enabled. Neither model features continuous autofocus tracking during video or burst shooting.

In practice, autofocus speed is modest, generally adequate for still subjects but challenged by fast-moving wildlife or sports. The reliance on contrast detection results in slight hunting under low light or low contrast scenes. Face detection helps in portraits but is limited; no eye or animal eye autofocus is available.

The EX-ZR1000 and EX-ZR800 both support manual focus with focus peaking to aid precision, suitable for controlled shooting scenarios like macro or landscape.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speed Range

Both cameras share a maximum continuous shooting rate of 3 frames per second and shutter speed range from 4 seconds to 1/2000 second. The relatively slow burst rate and limited shutter speeds constrain their efficacy for fast action or very low-light exposures.

Neither camera supports electronic shutter modes or silent shutter operation, so capturing fast-moving subjects without potential distortion remains a challenge.

Image Stabilization and Low Light Use

Sensor-shift (in-body) image stabilization is implemented in both models, essential given their small sensors and extensive zoom ranges. The stabilization effectiveness is moderate, allowing sharp handheld shots up to roughly 1/60 second at telephoto but not replacing tripod support in challenging conditions.

Low light performance is typical for 1/2.3” sensor cameras: ISO beyond 800 produces visible noise and reduced detail. The EX-ZR1000’s wider aperture at the wide end aids in low-light scenarios marginally.

Video Capabilities: Full HD with High Frame Rate Options

Both cameras offer Full HD video recording at 1920 x 1080 resolution, capped at 30 fps. Additionally, they provide standard HD and SD resolutions at various frame rates up to 1000 fps in the lowest resolution for super slow-motion, although this is of limited practical use beyond experimental shooting.

Video formats include MPEG-4 and H.264 encoding, with no options for advanced codecs or variable frame rates beyond presets.

Neither model includes microphone or headphone ports, reducing audio recording flexibility for serious videographers. Also, no optical zoom during video with continuous autofocus is supported.

The EX-ZR800 uniquely adds timelapse recording, absent from the EX-ZR1000, a notable plus for creative videographers interested in motion timelapses without external intervalometers.

Connectivity and Storage

Both cameras are limited in connectivity, lacking wireless features such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or NFC. File transfer relies on USB 2.0 interfaces and HDMI output for monitoring.

Storage accepts single SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, standard in compact cameras, with no dual slot redundancy.

Battery life is identical at approximately 470 shots per charge (CIPA standard), which is decent for travel use but will require spares for extended outings.

Use Case Evaluations: What Each Camera Brings to Different Genres

To provide targeted advice, we assess their real-world suitability across photography disciplines:

Casio EX ZR1000 front Casio EX ZR1000 screen back Casio EX ZR800 front Casio EX ZR800 screen back

Build Quality and Weather Sealing

Neither camera features weather sealing, dustproofing, or shockproofing construction. Their compact plastic builds are typical of consumer bridge cameras from their generation. While adequate for general handling, neither is suitable for harsh environments without additional protection.

Price-to-Performance Ratio and Market Position

At launch and in resale markets, the EX-ZR800 generally trades at a lower price point (~$430) versus the released price of the EX-ZR1000 (~$570). The lower cost corresponds with compromises in aperture and ergonomics but includes advantages like extended zoom and higher resolution LCD.

In evaluating value, photographers must prioritize zoom reach and screen clarity against ergonomics and aperture. The EX-ZR1000 commands a premium for the latter, whereas the EX-ZR800’s appeal lies in travel-friendly dimensions and extended telephoto capability.

Summary of Core Strengths and Limitations

Final Recommendations

For Enthusiasts Prioritizing Handling and Versatility:
The Casio EX-ZR1000 excels for users who need flexible composition options via the tilting screen and prefer a marginal aperture edge at the wide end for portraits and indoor shooting. Its ergonomic control layout supports manual exposure adjustments and is more comfortable for extended use, making it better suited for portraits, casual landscapes, and macro photography, where framing flexibility and image quality matter.

For Travelers and Occasional Wildlife Photographers:
The EX-ZR800’s ultra-telephoto zoom and reduced bulk are compelling for wildlife and sports amateurs relying on extreme reach and desire a highly portable system. Its high-resolution fixed screen improves reviewing images, while timelapse video adds creative options. However, users must accept the narrower aperture and less ergonomic handling.

Neither camera fits professional demands due to the small sensor, lack of RAW support, slow autofocus, and build constraints. They serve best as lightweight secondary cameras or enthusiast travel companions when extreme zoom is needed without the bulk of DSLRs or mirrorless systems.

Closing Thoughts: Legacy Models in Today’s Photography Landscape

The Casio EX-ZR1000 and EX-ZR800 represent a snapshot of early 2010s compact superzoom evolution, emphasizing extreme zoom and user-friendly operation over ultimate sensor performance. While superseded by modern mirrorless and smartphone hybrids, they provide a case study in design tradeoffs between aperture, zoom range, ergonomics, and image quality on small sensors.

Photographers considering either model today should weigh their specific priorities carefully and accept the inherent limitations. Thorough practical testing remains essential to discern subtle differences, given how similarly these cameras perform in controlled conditions. For those seeking compact convenience with significant zoom in a budget package, the EX-ZR800 offers excellent value. Users willing to pay more for ergonomic flexibility and slightly better optical brightness will find the EX-ZR1000 a more satisfying tool.

This comprehensive evaluation thus empowers buyers to align Casio’s EX-ZR1000 and EX-ZR800 strengths with their photographic ambitions and constraints, enabling informed, experience-backed decision making.