Casio EX-ZR700 vs Fujifilm S9800

Choosing a compact superzoom camera can feel like navigating a maze, especially when contenders like the Casio EX-ZR700 and the Fujifilm S9800 come from leading brands but cater to subtly different needs and styles. Having handled both extensively across a spectrum of shooting scenarios, from portraits to high-speed wildlife, I want to share a grounded, practical comparison that will help you decide which fits your photography ambitions best.

Let’s break down these two 16-megapixel fixed-lens superzooms with 1/2.3” sensors in a way that prioritizes your shooting experience over just spec sheets. Ready? Let’s dive in.

Getting a Feel for It: Size, Build, and Ergonomics

First impressions matter, and with superzooms, portability and handling can heavily influence your willingness to carry the camera everywhere. The Casio EX-ZR700 impresses with its compact form, measuring only 108 x 60 x 31mm and weighing a featherlight 222 grams. In contrast, the Fujifilm S9800 is a much chunkier presence, with an SLR-style bridge camera body sized at 123 x 87 x 116mm and tipping the scales at 670 grams.

That’s a huge difference: the EX-ZR700 feels like it slips effortlessly into your pocket or small bag, while the S9800 is clearly built to be held with two hands, the heft giving it that confident grip that some photographers crave.

This disparity also means different user experiences: the Casio’s minimalist, ultra-portable design favors travelers prioritizing light packing, while the Fuji demands a dedicated spot in your kit but compensates with a more substantial grip and a tactile SLR-style layout.

Moving to control design, the EX-ZR700 keeps it straightforward with a compact, uncluttered top deck and easy-to-reach buttons, perfect for quick point-and-shoot sessions without fuss. The S9800, meanwhile, provides a richer physical control set that mimics DSLRs, offering more tactile dials and buttons that experienced shooters appreciate for manual adjustments on the fly.

I appreciate Fuji’s approach here: while it adds bulk, it rewards with better handling and quicker access to key settings like ISO, exposure compensation, and shooting modes without diving deep into menus. Casio’s simplicity has its charm but can feel limiting when rapid control changes are needed.

The Heart of the Matter: Sensor and Image Quality

Both cameras share a 1/2.3” CMOS sensor with 16MP resolution, a common choice for superzooms that balances detail with processing speed. They measure 6.17 x 4.55 mm, equating to around 28 mm² sensor area - small by enthusiast or professional standards.

With this sensor size, strong reliance falls on image processing engines to squeeze out the best image quality possible. Casio employs its EXILIM Engine HS 3 processor, while Fuji’s specific processor information isn’t clearly documented here, though the brand is known for its dedicated image processing expertise.

Resolution-wise, both deliver the same maximum image size: 4608 x 3456 pixels, which translates to decent prints up to 13x19 inches without quality degradation. But details like color depth, noise performance, and dynamic range often diverge in real shooting.

Practically speaking, the Fujifilm S9800 pulls ahead slightly on ISO sensitivity, with a maximum native ISO of 12800 compared to the Casio’s 3200. This suggests better low-light flexibility, though at these small sensor sizes, noise can become intrusive approaching those upper limits. In my test shots, Fuji’s noise control at ISO 800-1600 was cleaner, lending better detail retention, while the Casio started to show grain earlier.

Importantly, neither camera supports RAW image capture, limiting post-processing flexibility for serious enthusiasts. This makes in-camera JPEG processing quality crucial. Fuji’s images often exhibited slightly punchier contrast and richer colors straight out of the camera, likely tailored to appeal to enthusiasts who want vibrant, ready-to-share shots.

Viewing Your Shots: Screens and Viewfinders

Composing and reviewing images can be make-or-break for user experience. Both cameras sport fixed 3-inch screens, but they differ significantly in resolution and functionality.

Casio’s EX-ZR700 offers a 3" Super Clear TFT LCD with 922k dots, providing bright, sharp liveview for framing and playback. Fuji’s screen is the same size but has a notably lower resolution of 460k dots, making fine detail evaluation on-screen somewhat less comfortable.

However, Fuji upgrades the experience with an electronic viewfinder (EVF): a 920k-dot EVF with 97% coverage. This feature alone can be a game-changer for many shooters - especially under bright sunlight where LCD glare hampers visibility.

In practice, I found Fuji’s EVF a welcome addition. It provides a DSLR-like experience with eye-level composition, making handheld telephoto shooting more stable and precise. Casio’s lack of any viewfinder means awkward squinting at the rear screen in harsh conditions.

How Do They Focus? Autofocus Performance Analysis

Autofocus is particularly critical with long zoom lenses, where slight misfocus can ruin shots. Both cameras use contrast-detection AF without phase detection, reflecting typical small sensor designs.

The Casio offers center-weighted, face detection autofocus, and tracking AF modes, but it lacks touch or animal eye AF. Its continuous autofocus and burst shooting capabilities aren’t supported, limiting fast action capture.

The Fuji S9800 steps up with hybrid AF options including AF tracking, selective multi-area focusing, face detection, and continuous autofocus. It supports burst shooting at 10 fps, a significant advantage for capturing fast-moving subjects.

In real-world wildlife and sports shooting tests, Fuji’s autofocus consistently locked faster and held focus more accurately than Casio’s. The ability to shoot bursts at 10 fps lets Fuji capture fleeting expressions or decisive moments far better.

Exploring the Lens: Zoom Range, Aperture, and Macro

Here’s where the cameras reveal very different philosophies.

• Casio EX-ZR700 features an 18x zoom with focal length range equivalent to 25-450mm (in 35mm terms), aperture f/3.5-5.9
• Fuji S9800 boasts an incredible 50x zoom, 24-1200mm equivalent, aperture f/2.9-6.5

That’s more than doubling your telephoto reach with the Fuji, at the expense of nearly triple the lens bulk.

I’ve tested both lenses extensively; Fuji’s longer reach unlocks true super-telephoto use - birdwatching, distant wildlife, or sports fields become accessible without extra lenses. Casio’s shorter zoom range fits generalist use and casual travel well but can feel limiting for action at a distance.

Aperture performance is brighter on Fuji’s wide-angle end at f/2.9, which aids low-light flexibility and subject separation, though the lens quickly closes down to f/6.5 at full zoom. Casio caps out at f/3.5, which is respectable, but with less zoom reach.

For macro enthusiasts, Casio focuses down to 5cm, allowing for closer detail work than Fuji’s 7cm minimum. If you want to do tight close-ups of flowers, insects, or small objects, Casio provides a slight edge here.

Steady Shots: Image Stabilization and Burst Shooting

Long zooms demand effective stabilization and responsive shooting speeds.

Casio EX-ZR700 employs sensor-shift image stabilization - this system moves the sensor to counteract camera shake, reliable for photo work but generally less effective than optical solutions on long lenses.

Fuji S9800 uses optical image stabilization, moving lens elements to stabilize images, which is usually more effective over huge zoom ranges like 50x. This made a noticeable difference in my handheld super-tele shooting, reducing blur from camera shake at 1200mm equivalent.

Regarding burst rates, Casio maxes out at 3 fps continuous shooting without continuous autofocus, limiting its utility for dynamic and unpredictable subjects.

The Fuji offers 10 fps burst shooting with continuous autofocus, a standout feature in this category that caters well to wildlife and sports shooters chasing action.

Portrait and Bokeh: Handling Skin Tones and Background Separation

Portrait photographers will want pleasing, natural skin tones and good subject-background separation.

Because both have small sensors and modest maximum apertures, bokeh quality (background blur) is limited but distinguishable. Fuji has an edge with a wider f/2.9 aperture at the wide end, giving it a slight advantage over Casio’s f/3.5 in isolating subjects indoors or in lower light.

Both cameras feature face detection AF, helping keep eyes and faces sharp - critical for expressive portraits. While neither supports advanced eye AF, Fuji’s continuous AF tracking helps when subjects move.

Color reproduction tends to vary: Fuji’s default processing produces punchier, more vibrant skin tones, which some find flattering. Casio’s images are more neutral, suitable if you prefer to tweak colors in post or want softer rendition.

Landscape: Dynamic Range, Weather Sealing, Resolution

Landscape photographers often emphasize dynamic range, detail resolution, and robustness.

Both cameras share the same sensor and resolution - 16MP, 4608 x 3456 - adequate for prints up to A3 size, though not at the highest detail levels delivered by larger-sensor cameras.

Neither camera offers weather sealing or environmental protection. So, if outdoor toughness is a priority (rain, dust), you’ll need extra care or accessories with either choice.

Dynamic range in small sensors tends to be restricted; Fuji gives a slight boost here with ISO 100-12800 options and AE bracketing, which can aid HDR workflow. Casio lacks AE bracketing, placing more reliance on single-exposure captures.

Wildlife and Sports Photography: Which Excels?

Here is a decisive battleground.

Fuji’s 50x zoom and 10 fps continuous shooting make it the clear favorite for wildlife and sports photographers on a budget wanting a versatile all-in-one solution. Its continuous AF and burst mode significantly improve catch rates for fleeting moments - birds in flight, athletes mid-action.

Casio’s restrained 18x zoom and 3 fps continuous speed lack the responsiveness and reach for serious wildlife or sports capture but remain adequate for casual animal shots or slower kinetics.

Street and Travel Photography: Discreetness and Battery Life

For discretion and bulk, Casio’s compact and lightweight profile makes it exceptionally travel- and street-friendly. It easily tucks into jackets or purses without alarming subjects or tiring your shoulders.

Fuji’s size and SLR styling draw more attention and impose heavier carrying demands, but its extensive zoom range and EVF utility appeal to prepared travelers wanting to capture everything from wide scenes to distant details without changing lenses.

Battery life further divides: Casio’s battery pack delivers approximately 470 shots per charge, better than Fuji’s 300 shots using AA batteries. The difference here could matter for prolonged outings without charging opportunities.

Macro and Night Photography: Close Focus and Low Light Performance

In macro, Casio’s 5cm focus limit helps capture finer details, but expect limited bokeh separation due to sensor size.

Night shooting is challenging on both, given tiny sensor sizes. Fuji’s higher ISO ceiling (12800) and slightly brighter aperture extend low-light options. However, image quality degrades substantially above ISO 1600 on both.

Neither camera includes advanced long-exposure modes for astro or night sky photography, so their utility here is casual at best.

Video Capabilities: What Can They Do?

Both cameras can record Full HD video at 1080p:

• Casio EX-ZR700 supports 1920x1080 @30fps plus multiple slow-motion options down to 1000 fps at lower resolutions.

• Fuji S9800 offers 1080p at 60fps and 720p at 60fps.

Neither has microphone or headphone ports, limiting audio control. Neither offers 4K or advanced video codecs like LOG profiles.

Fuji’s 60fps video brings smoother motion capture, appealing for action scenes or slow-motion playback editing. Casio’s ultra-high frame rates let you create dramatic slow-mo effects but at diminished resolution.

Stabilization assists video handheld shooting: Fuji’s optical IS tends to yield steadier footage than Casio’s sensor-shift.

Professional Use and Workflow Integration

Both cameras fall short of professional workflow demands: no RAW support, limited manual controls, and smaller sensors mean these are not primary tools for pro photographers requiring top image quality or extensive post-processing.

Connectivity is minimal - no WiFi, Bluetooth, or GPS in either model. USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs facilitate tethering or file transfer but lack modern wireless convenience.

Price and Value: Which One Gives More Bang for Your Buck?

At their retail prices - about $370 for Casio EX-ZR700 and $299 for Fujifilm S9800 - the Fuji offers excellent value, especially considering its versatile 50x zoom, superior autofocus, EVF, and burst shooting.

If you prize a lightweight travel companion that fits pocket DNA, Casio is attractive despite its narrower zoom and less sophisticated AF.

Putting It All Together: Performance Scores and Genre Ratings

To sum up, let’s lean on performance metrics and genre suitability I assessed using standard photo tests and in-field use:

You’ll notice Fuji leads in overall responsiveness, telephoto reach, and autofocus. Casio scores well for portability and battery life.

Breaking down by photographic genres:

Fujifilm dominates wildlife and sports thanks to burst rates and zoom, plus edges in video. Casio’s strength lies in travel, street, and macro photography due to compactness and close-focus capability.

Sample Images: Real-World Image Comparisons

See for yourself some sample image galleries showcasing daylight, indoor portraits, telephoto wildlife, and low-light cityscapes from both cameras.

Casio EX ZR700 front Casio EX ZR700 screen back Fujifilm S9800 front Fujifilm S9800 screen back

While both deliver respectable detail for their class, Fuji’s images pop with vibrancy and reach further into distance shots. Casio excels in tight macro and lightweight everyday shooting.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

If you’re a traveler, street photographer, or macro enthusiast who values portability, longer battery life, and easy handling, the Casio EX-ZR700 is a solid choice. It’s small, quick to deploy, and delivers pleasing images for casual and travel use. However, keep your expectations tempered - its zoom range and autofocus won’t satisfy fast-action or extreme telephoto needs.

If you need superzoom reach, faster autofocus, better burst shooting, and prefer an SLR-style handling experience with a viewfinder, the Fujifilm S9800 offers more versatility and responsiveness for wildlife, sports, and generalist photography. The trade-off is a bigger, heavier body and shorter battery endurance.

Neither camera is a professional workhorse, given sensor size and lack of RAW support. But within their niche, each offers distinct strengths that can serve enthusiasts well.

I hope this detailed side-by-side helps you narrow down your superzoom search grounded in practical, hands-on experience rather than just specs. Have you tried one of these cameras? How do their ergonomics or autofocus behave for your style? Feel free to reach out - I’m always eager to discuss gear and share insights drawn from thousands of hours behind the lens. Happy shooting!