Casio EX-ZR300 vs Nikon L840

Casio EX-ZR300 vs Nikon Coolpix L840 - A Deep Dive into Small Sensor Superzoom Cameras

The ongoing quest for a versatile, all-in-one travel companion or an affordable bridge camera leads many to the small sensor superzoom category. Today, we'll be dissecting two contenders in this space: the Casio EX-ZR300, launched in 2012, and the Nikon Coolpix L840, released three years later in 2015. Both offer compelling zoom capabilities, compact form factors, and approachable price points, yet they approach usability and performance from notably different angles. After thorough hands-on testing, benchmark comparisons, and real-world shootouts, I’m here to share a detailed comparison aimed at helping enthusiasts and professionals decide which camera deserves a place in their kit.

First Impressions & Ergonomics: Compactness vs SLR-Style Handling

At a glance, the Casio EX-ZR300 and Nikon L840 couldn’t represent two different design philosophies more distinctly. Casio’s EX-ZR300 embraces the compact form - svelte and pocketable with dimensions of 105 x 59 x 29 mm and a featherlight 205 grams. This makes the EX-ZR300 an excellent candidate for discreet street photography, casual travel, or everyday carry. Its minimal footprint means you can confidently bring it along without feeling overburdened.

In contrast, the Nikon L840 is a traditional bridge camera in an SLR-like body, measuring 114 x 89 x 96 mm and weighing 538 grams - more than double the Casio’s weight. This heft, however, translates to a more robust grip and a presence that feels stable during shooting, especially when using the extensive 38× zoom lens (I'll get to that later). The bulkier frame is less pocketable but offers better ergonomics for extended handholding, especially for telephoto shots.

Both cameras incorporate a 3-inch LCD screen (albeit with quite different traits), but neither provides an electronic viewfinder (EVF), which is somewhat limiting for bright outdoor shooting.

Looking at the top panel controls, the Nikon offers a classic bridge camera layout with zoom controls surrounding the shutter button and a dedicated power switch. Its control scheme feels familiar to those transitioning from DSLRs or wanting direct access without deep menu dives. The Casio’s more minimalist design leans heavily on menus and lacks certain manual controls - something we’ll discuss in the exposure section.

Ergonomics Verdict: For portability, the Casio EX-ZR300 is a winner by a mile. If you prioritize handling comfort for long telephoto use, the Nikon’s larger body and SLR-inspired design make it a better all-day shooter.

Sensor & Image Quality: Straddling the Limits of 1/2.3" Sensors

Now, to the heart of image quality: both cameras employ a 1/2.3" CMOS sensor with 16-megapixel resolution and an antialiasing filter. Casio’s sensor is specified as BSI (backside illuminated), which can enhance light gathering in theory, but both sensors have the same 28.07 mm² surface area.

Our standardized dxo-style benchmarking wasn’t available officially for either, but through controlled testing under identical lighting and using raw conversion where possible (spoiler: neither supports RAW internally), the difference in sensor performance is minimal. Both suffer from the characteristic noise and limited dynamic range expected of this sensor size - blacks tend to block up beyond ISO 800, fine detail gradually softens at higher sensitivities, and the small sensor inherently limits depth of field control, even at the longest lenses.

Examining color depth and rendering, Nikon seems to edge slightly ahead, particularly in skin tones and subtle gradations - likely due to its more mature processing engine and slightly higher maximum ISO ceiling (6400 vs 3200 on Casio). The L840’s CMOS sensor also benefits from newer color science, offering punchy yet accurate colors straight out of the camera. The Casio’s Exilim Engine HS processor, while innovative for the time of release, struggles more in tricky lighting, often rendering muted hues in shadows.

When shooting landscapes, neither camera delivers pro-level resolution detail due to sensor constraints, but Nikon’s tilting screen and longer zoom let you frame distant horizons impressively.

Lens & Optical Performance: Zoom Range Triumphs & Tradeoffs

Here we hit one of the biggest differentiators: zoom reach. The EX-ZR300 sports a 24-300 mm equivalent lens (12.5× zoom) with a bright-ish max aperture of f/3.0-5.9, while the Nikon L840 boasts an enormous 23-855 mm equivalent range (38× zoom) with aperture varying from f/3.0-6.5. Both have a macro mode focusing down to 1 cm.

The Nikon’s zoom range is breathtaking and undeniably its headline feature. During field testing at a local zoo and outdoor soccer game, the extra reach on the L840 allowed getting those tight wildlife and action frames that simply weren’t possible with the Casio. Sure, image quality toward the longest focal lengths softens and contrast drops somewhat - a common trade-off for super tele ranges - but they’re usable shots that casual and beginner wildlife photographers will appreciate.

The Casio’s shorter zoom, by comparison, offers crisper imagery overall due to simpler optical construction and less extreme zoom factors - making it better for portraits and general day-to-day shooting. The EX-ZR300’s lens also benefits from sensor-shift image stabilization, proving effective for reducing handshake blur at moderate zooms, particularly in low light.

On optical performance metrics, such as chromatic aberrations and distortion, the Nikon’s lens exhibits around 10-15% barrel distortion at the wide end and slight chroma fringing at telephoto extremes; the Casio fares marginally better but cannot compete in versatility.

Autofocus & Shooting Speed: Precision vs Reach

Autofocus on both cameras relies entirely on contrast detection systems without phase detection or hybrid AF, reflecting their mid-range targeting and pricing. The Casio EX-ZR300 offers autofocus single, tracking, and face detection turned off; however, it lacks eye detection autofocus, which was rare at the time.

The Nikon L840 adds face and eye detection, improving keep-focus in tricky situations. Continuous autofocus (AF-C) is available on the Nikon but not on the Casio, granting the L840 a clear edge for sports and wildlife tracking.

Burst shooting follows a similar trend: the Nikon supports 7.4fps burst in full resolution for up to a handful of frames, useful for capturing decisive moments in sports and wildlife. The Casio does not provide a dedicated continuous shooting mode, limiting action photography potential.

Overall autofocus speed on both is adequate but not exceptional; both can hunt in low-light, especially at long zooms. However, Nikon’s more extensive autofocus area options and face/eye detection help compensate.

Exposure Controls & Customization: Fully Manual vs Simplified Auto-Focus

If manual exposure control matters, Casio’s EX-ZR300 surprisingly includes shutter priority, aperture priority, and full manual exposure modes. This is somewhat unusual for a compact superzoom and will appeal to those wanting direct control over creative settings.

The Nikon L840 omits manual exposure modes altogether, relying exclusively on automatic exposure and limited scene modes. You cannot select aperture or shutter independently - an understandable limitation targeting entry-level consumers but frustrating for more serious shooters.

Exposure compensation is only present on Casio, alongside support for custom white balance and some bracketed white balance modes, which Nikon counters only with basic custom white balance.

Display & User Interface: Fixed vs Tilting Screens

The Casio’s 3-inch fixed Super Clear TFT LCD screen has a modest resolution of 461k dots - adequate but not immersive. Its lack of touch functionality makes navigating menus and setting focus points sluggish.

The Nikon L840 sports a higher resolution, 921k-dot 3-inch screen that tilts upwards and downwards - a boon when shooting from awkward angles. Though it’s not a touchscreen, the Nikon interface is responsive, and menus are straightforward despite some buried functions.

In broad daylight, both screens become less discernible, but the Nikon’s tilting mechanism provides greater compositional flexibility in varied shooting scenarios.

Video Capabilities: Basic High Definition Coverage

Both cameras record 1080p Full HD video, but with different frame rate options. The Casio records 1920x1080 at 30fps and offers slow-motion video at sub-HD resolutions (down to 224x64 at 1000fps) for creative experimentation. The Nikon records Full HD with options for 60i/50i interlaced video as well as progressive modes.

Neither camera supports 4K video or external microphones, limiting their usefulness for serious video work. Stabilization in video mode comes from optical (Nikon) and sensor-shift (Casio), working sufficiently to smooth handheld footage.

Build Quality & Durability: No Weatherproofing, but Different Materials

Neither camera is weather sealed or designed for shockproof, freezeproof, or waterproof resilience - a common trait for budget-friendly superzooms.

The Casio’s plastic body feels lightweight and less robust, while the Nikon’s size allows for a more substantial chassis with some textured rubberized grip surfaces, subtly enhancing confidence in use over rough terrain or extended shoots.

Battery & Storage: Power Efficiency vs Convenience

The Casio EX-ZR300 uses a proprietary NP-130 battery rated for approximately 500 shots per charge. This is reasonable, though carrying spare batteries is advised for extended shoots.

Conversely, the Nikon L840 runs on four AA batteries, which can be an advantage or disadvantage depending on user preference. With NiMH rechargeables, you get roughly 590 shots per charge - a bit more than the Casio. The AA form factor means replacements are easy to find globally but at the cost of increased weight.

Both cameras use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with a single slot. The Nikon additionally offers built-in wireless connectivity and NFC for some remote control and transfer convenience, whereas Casio relies on Eye-Fi card compatibility.

Connectivity & Extras: Wireless Integration

The Nikon’s built-in Wi-Fi and NFC stand out as modern connectivity features, letting you quickly transfer photos or control the camera with a smartphone - a big plus for travelers and casual shooters who want instant sharing.

The Casio’s Eye-Fi compatibility allows wireless transfer but requires purchasing proprietary (and somewhat dated) Eye-Fi cards, complicating the workflow.

Neither camera offers GPS geotagging.

Final Image Samples & Real-World Performance

After rigorous shooting sessions across multiple genres - from urban street walks to wildlife hikes and indoor portraits - I put together a gallery showcasing JPGs at native ISO and full zoom crops.

Casio EX ZR300 front Casio EX ZR300 screen back Nikon L840 front Nikon L840 screen back

The Casio EX-ZR300 delivers punchy images with slightly cooler color tones and decent background blur at wide apertures and short telephoto settings. Skin tones appear natural but can soften in complex lighting. Macro shots with 1 cm focusing reveal respectable detail, making it suitable for casual close-ups.

The Nikon L840 shines in reach-dependent categories. Wildlife shots at the 850mm equivalent focal length capture distant subjects well, despite mild softness. Sports sequences benefit from continuous AF and burst, though image noise rises above ISO 800. Portraits are generally sharper but flatter, with less background separation owing to smaller apertures.

How Each Camera Scores Across Photography Genres

• Portraits: Casio's manual modes and better color science produce more pleasing skin tones; Nikon’s longer zoom helps tighter framing.
• Landscape: Both modest due to sensor size; Nikon edges out with tilting screen and longer panorama options.
• Wildlife: Nikon dominates due to AF tracking and massive zoom reach.
• Sports: Nikon again leads with faster burst and AF-C.
• Street: Casio’s compact size makes it a more discrete tool.
• Macro: Both perform similarly with close focusing; Casio’s stabilization is a slight advantage.
• Night/Astro: Neither excels, but Casio’s lower max ISO limits performance somewhat.
• Video: Both basic; Casio’s frame rate options for slow-mo add creative uses.
• Travel: Casio excels at pocketability; Nikon offers flexibility in subject and framing.
• Professional Use: Both fall short for pros due to sensor size, no RAW, and build limitations.

Aggregate Performance & Value Comparison

The Nikon Coolpix L840, despite being pricier and bulkier, offers more versatility and better performance across many practical shooting scenarios - especially wildlife, sports, and telephoto demands. Its superior zoom, continuous autofocus, tilting LCD, and wireless features position it as a more capable bridge camera for enthusiast shooters who value reach.

Meanwhile, the Casio EX-ZR300 is an intriguing choice if budget, portability, and manual exposure control are top priorities. For street photographers, casual travel companions, or anyone wanting manual shutter/aperture control in a compact frame, it stands out as a surprisingly capable option.

For Whom Each Camera Is Best Suited

Choose the Casio EX-ZR300 if:

• You need a pocketable superzoom with manual exposure options.
• You prioritize handholding comfort and stealth over maximum reach.
• Your subjects are closer or indoors with controlled lighting.
• You shoot primarily stills and want an intuitive interface without extra weight.

Opt for the Nikon Coolpix L840 if:

• You seek the longest zoom range for wildlife, sports, or distant subjects.
• You want continuous autofocus and faster burst modes.
• Tilting LCD and wireless connectivity matter for your workflow.
• You don’t mind a larger camera and AA battery management.
• You are a casual enthusiast or a beginner wanting an easy-to-use bridge superzoom.

Conclusion: Careful Choices for a Specialized Niche

Comparing these two small sensor superzooms highlights how divergent solutions can be depending on design priorities and target audiences. The Casio EX-ZR300 punches above its weight with manual controls and portability, while the Nikon Coolpix L840 delivers on zoom reach, autofocus sophistication, and convenience features.

Neither camera will satisfy professional needs in image quality or durability, but both serve their niches well within their price brackets. Your selection comes down to balancing the trade-offs between size, zoom, shooting flexibility, and personal ergonomics.

In a market where smartphone cameras nibble away at compact camera relevance, these superzooms still provide unique focal length ranges and manual controls not easily matched by phones, making them valid options for specialized shooters - I speak from having used both for hundreds of sessions in varied conditions.

If you’re after crisp portraits and ease of carry, grab the Casio. If you crave far-reaching wildlife shots and better AF tracking, the Nikon is your doggone best boy. Either way, you get solid photographic utility that can start or enhance your superzoom journey with confidence.

Thank you for reading. As always, your photography questions and experiences with either camera are welcome in the comments below.