Casio EX-ZR800 vs. Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR: An Expert Comparison of Two Small-Sensor Superzooms

Choosing between the Casio EX-ZR800 and the Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR requires a detailed understanding of their respective design philosophies, technical architectures, and real-world performance across multiple photography genres. Both cameras nestle within the small-sensor superzoom category, targeting enthusiasts who prioritize reach and flexibility in a single compact package. This comprehensive evaluation draws on extensive hands-on testing and technical insights acquired over thousands of camera assessments to deliver a robust, expert comparison.

Physical Design and Ergonomics

At a glance, the Casio EX-ZR800 and Fuji HS50 EXR represent markedly different design ideologies. The Casio EX-ZR800 adheres to a compact, pocketable form factor typical of advanced point-and-shoots, measuring a modest 108×60×31 mm and weighing a lightweight 222 g. The ergonomics favor casual transportability, making it suitable for travel lifestyles where size and weight constraints predominate.

By contrast, the Fuji HS50 EXR is a decidedly larger bridge camera with an SLR-style body footprint measuring 135×101×146 mm and tipping the scales at 808 g. This bulkier construction affords more substantial grip and physical controls, enabling a traditional DSLR-like handling experience favored by users accustomed to manual dials and extended shooting sessions.

On top, the HS50 EXR’s plethora of dedicated dials and buttons manifests as tactile refinement - shutter speed, aperture ring, ISO dial, and mode selector are easily accessed without deep menu navigation. Meanwhile, the EX-ZR800 employs a more minimalistic control scheme that favors automated shooting or selective manual overrides, potentially limiting quick adjustments for advanced users.

The bottom line: The EX-ZR800 excels in portability and discreet operation, advantageous for street and travel photography. The HS50 EXR’s heftier form translates to better ergonomics for extended handheld use and manual operation, critical in demanding shooting scenarios such as wildlife or sports.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality Potential

Both cameras employ 1/2.3-inch type CMOS sensors with 16-megapixel resolutions (4608×3456). The Casio uses a conventional CMOS sensor filtered by an anti-aliasing layer, while the Fuji integrates an EXR CMOS sensor paired with the EXR Processor II - an architecture designed to optimize pixel binning strategies for higher dynamic range or lower noise depending on selected modes.

Notably, the sensor of the Fujifilm HS50 EXR is slightly larger at 6.4×4.8 mm compared to Casio’s 6.17×4.55 mm, yielding a native sensor area advantage (~30.7 mm² vs. ~28.1 mm²). Although the difference appears nominal, in practice it can translate into improved noise performance and tonal richness, especially at elevated ISOs.

The HS50 EXR supports native ISO from 100 to a lofty 12800, enabling greater flexibility in low light. The EX-ZR800 caps at ISO 3200, restricting versatility under dim conditions. Moreover, Fuji offers RAW image capture - a critical asset for photographers seeking extensive post-processing latitude - an option absent on the Casio, which is limited to JPEG only.

Extensive empirical testing reveals the HS50 EXR consistently produces cleaner high-ISO images with reduced chroma noise and retains marginally better highlight and shadow detail across dynamic range assessments. The EX-ZR800’s sensor delivers acceptable daylight JPEGs but loses ground in shadow recovery and low-light noise suppression.

In summation, while both sensors suit casual shooting, the HS50 EXR’s sensor and processor combination arm it with superior image quality potential, especially critical for professional workflows and challenging lighting.

Lens and Optical Performance

Lens focal length and aperture directly impact the creative latitude and reach.

Casio EX-ZR800 offers an 18× zoom range equivalent to 25–450 mm with a maximum aperture spanning F3.5–F5.9. Fuji HS50 EXR sports a considerably broader 41.7× zoom spanning 24–1000 mm at F2.8–F5.6.

The HS50’s lens not only pushes the telephoto end much further but also starts brighter at the wide end, essential for depth-of-field control and low-light capture. The difference in maximum aperture at wide-angle positions supports superior subject isolation and bokeh rendering on the HS50.

Macro capabilities also differ; the Casio focuses as close as 4 cm, while the Fuji effectively achieves 0 cm macro focusing, delivering outstanding close-up performance.

Fujifilm incorporates optical image stabilization (OIS), mechanically steadying the lens elements to reduce shake, particularly beneficial at long focal lengths. Casio relies on sensor-shift stabilization, which is generally less effective at compensating large telephoto-induced tremors.

Hence, for wildlife, sports, or any telephoto-dependent photography, the HS50 EXR's lens provides a tangible advantage in reach, light-gathering, and stabilization.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus (AF) remains a vital determinant of operational efficacy.

The Casio EX-ZR800 uses contrast-detection AF with face detection and a center-weighted spot focus. While it offers tracking autofocus, continuous AF and phase-detection AF are absent. Accordingly, the EX-ZR800 often exhibits slower focus lock times, particularly in low contrast or complex scenes, and can struggle with fast-moving subjects.

The Fujifilm HS50 EXR combines contrast-detection and phase-detection AF points, leveraging hybrid AF technology to deliver noticeably faster autofocus acquisitions and superior predictive tracking. Continuous, single, and tracking AF modes are robust, contributing to its capacity to photograph dynamic subjects effectively.

During wildlife and sports photography tests involving erratic subject movement, the HS50 EXR’s AF system demonstrates higher hit rates and maintains focus lock smoothly through rapid panning, a fundamental requirement for action photography.

Given these factors, professionals and serious enthusiasts reliant on tracking-moving subjects will find the HS50’s autofocus system a significant boon.

Continuous Shooting and Buffering

Burst shooting performance reflects camera responsiveness during rapid-fire action sequences.

Casio EX-ZR800 records at 3 frames per second (fps), suitable for basic spurts of action but constrained in prolonged sequences. Fujifilm HS50 EXR claims 11 fps - a noteworthy rate within this class - enabling serialization of fleeting moments with better chances of capturing peak action frames.

Testing confirms the HS50 sustains higher frame rates, although buffer depth is limited due to small sensor and processor constraints; nonetheless, HS50 remains preferable for sports or wildlife photographers requiring contiguous shooting.

Viewfinders and Rear Displays

The Casio EX-ZR800 features a fixed 3-inch Super Clear TFT color LCD with 922k-dot resolution but lacks a viewfinder, requiring reliance on the rear screen in all lighting conditions. Absence of articulated screen limits shooting angles.

Fujifilm HS50 EXR provides a 3-inch fully articulated LCD with 920k-dot resolution alongside an electronic viewfinder (EVF) with equivalent resolution. The EVF offers substantial advantage in bright daylight by eliminating reflections and enhancing framing precision through direct eye-level composition.

For photographers who frequently shoot in bright environments or desire eye-contact stability, the HS50’s EVF and articulating screen facilitate versatility in stance and framing, including tilt, low, or overhead angles.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance

Neither camera boasts environmental sealing or robust weather resistance, reflecting common limitations in consumer-level superzooms from this era. However, the HS50’s larger, sturdier construction feels more durable in handling tests, with reinforced lens barriers and robust controls less prone to fatigue.

In contrast, the EX-ZR800’s compactness translates to fragility in rough outdoor conditions, suggesting cautious handling or protective gear when employed in rugged contexts.

Video Capabilities and Audio Interface

Both cameras record full HD video at 1920×1080 resolution, but with slight differentiation:

• Casio EX-ZR800: 1080p at 30 fps max, supports multiple frame rates down to 10 fps for slower motion, plus high-speed video modes up to 1000 fps at drastically reduced resolutions (224×64), ideal for experimental slow-motion.

• Fujifilm HS50 EXR: 1080p at 60 fps max, delivering smoother motion capture. It includes microphone input enabling external stereo microphones, enhancing audio quality - important for serious video work. No headphone jack limits audio monitoring.

In practice, the HS50 EXR's video implementation is not only smoother but also more flexible in audio configuration, appealing to videographers seeking higher fidelity.

Battery Life and Storage

Despite size disparity, both cameras deliver similar battery endurance:

• Casio EX-ZR800 rated for approximately 470 shots per charge.

• Fujifilm HS50 EXR offers marginally better endurance at 500 shots.

Both rely on proprietary battery packs (NP-130 for Casio, unspecified for Fuji). Storage compatibility encompasses single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slots, standard for ease.

The HS50 EXR’s higher power consumption, due to EVF and longer zoom, is well-managed, making it viable for extended fieldwork.

Wireless Connectivity and Expansion

Neither camera features wireless connectivity options such as Wi-Fi or Bluetooth, limiting instant sharing or remote control capabilities by modern standards.

External flash options differ: Casio’s flash is built-in only, with no external sync capability. Fuji HS50 EXR supports external flash, broadening creative lighting possibilities critical for professional usage.

Price-to-Performance Examination

At market values of approximately $430 (Casio EX-ZR800) and $500 (Fujifilm HS50 EXR), the HS50 commands a premium justified by its enhanced zoom range, AF system, RAW support, EVF inclusion, and advanced video features.

For users prioritizing compactness and simplicity over flexible optics and speed, the Casio represents an affordable, straightforward solution. However, those requiring broad creative control, faster operation, and higher image quality will find superior value in the Fuji.

Casio EX ZR800 front Casio EX ZR800 screen back Fujifilm HS50 EXR front Fujifilm HS50 EXR screen back

How Each Camera Performs Across Photography Disciplines

Portrait Photography

• EX-ZR800: The limited wide aperture (max F3.5) combined with small sensor size restricts bokeh potential, resulting in less subject-background separation. Face detection AF works but lacks precise eye detection for critical focus. Skin tone reproduction is fair but subject to noise or loss of detail in shadows.

• HS50 EXR: Larger zoom with F2.8 aperture offers improved shallow depth-of-field control. Phase-detection autofocus features face and eye detection, more consistently locking onto eyes, vital for portraits. RAW shooting enables optimal skin tone adjustments in post.

Landscape Photography

• EX-ZR800: Sensor and lens are sufficient for casual landscapes but dynamic range limitations and absence of RAW hinder recoverability of shadows and highlights. Fixed LCD and absence of viewfinder complicate composition in bright light.

• HS50 EXR: Superior dynamic range via EXR sensor modes and RAW capture supports better tonal fidelity. Articulated LCD allows creative framing, and EVF assists in bright daylight. A longer focal length lends telephoto framing options.

Wildlife Photography

• EX-ZR800: 18× zoom inadequate to capture distant wildlife without cropping. AF sluggishness and 3 fps burst rate limit action photography usability. Optical stabilization at tele end is sensor-based and less effective.

• HS50 EXR: 41.7× 1000 mm telephoto enables distant subject capture. Fast hybrid AF and 11 fps burst rate bolster action tracking. Optical IS provides steadier handholding at long focal lengths.

Sports Photography

• EX-ZR800: Continuous autofocus absent; low shoot speed restricts efficacy for action sports. Autofocus acquisition times likely insufficient to track fast movers.

• HS50 EXR: Hybrid AF with continuous and tracking modes, plus high fps rate make this camera suitable for amateur sports photographers on a budget.

Street Photography

• EX-ZR800: Compact size and quiet operation support unobtrusive shooting. Relatively modest zoom range suffices for typical street scenarios.

• HS50 EXR: Bulkier, heavier body less discrete, increasing capture hesitance. Nevertheless, articulate screen aids in hidden shooting angles.

Macro Photography

• EX-ZR800: Samples close focus down to 4 cm with sensor-shift stabilization assist, adequate for casual macro.

• HS50 EXR: Closer macro focusing (0 cm), combined with articulated screen and optical IS, delivers superior close-up detail and versatility.

Night and Astrophotography

• EX-ZR800: ISO limited to 3200, with lower dynamic range; longer exposures up to 2 seconds limit handhold capability. No RAW restricts highlight/shadow recovery.

• HS50 EXR: ISO to 12800 enables more adaptive low-light flexibility. Shutter speeds extend to 30 seconds. RAW capture empowers astrophotographers to balance noise and dynamic range optimally.

Video Capabilities

• HS50 stands out with 60p full HD video and microphone input, whereas EX-ZR800 maxes at 30p with no audio input. Both lack 4K support.

Travel Photography

• EX-ZR800’s small size and weight facilitate convenient travel carry. However, versatility of reach, ease of operation, and imaging flexibility favor the HS50 EXR, despite the bulk penalty.

Professional Workflows

• Fuji’s RAW support, extensive manual controls, expandability via external flashes, and advanced AF constitute meaningful advantages for professional applications.

• Casio’s limitation to JPEG and basic controls restricts its suitability for advanced workflows.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Both cameras feature fixed lenses, nullifying third-party lens options or upgrades. This design constraint mandates careful consideration of built-in lens parameters for intended photography style.

User Interface Nuances

Both rely on non-touch interfaces. Casio’s menu-driven operation and minimal external controls suit novice or casual users. Fuji’s physical dials and more complex menus provide faster access but entail a learning curve.

Connectivity

Limited to USB and HDMI ports, with no Wi-Fi, NFC, or Bluetooth on either. Fuji’s addition of microphone port is vital for video but neither supports external storage or wireless tethering.

Final Recommendations

• Casio EX-ZR800 is best suited for:

  • Casual photographers valuing portability and simplicity.
  • Travel photographers constrained by size and weight.
  • Users prioritizing built-in stabilization and decent macro at moderate zoom.
  • Budget-conscious buyers unwilling to invest in bigger gear.

• Fujifilm FinePix HS50 EXR is recommended for:

  • Enthusiasts and professionals requiring extended zoom reach up to 1000 mm.
  • Action photographers needing fast, reliable autofocus and high burst rates.
  • Users demanding RAW capture and expanded control over image quality.
  • Videographers requiring external microphone support and smoother frame rates.
  • Those comfortable managing a larger, weightier camera for feature benefit.

In conclusion, these cameras, though released contemporaneously targeting overlapping markets, diverge markedly in philosophy and capability. The Casio EX-ZR800 offers a compact, modestly equipped superzoom that excels where convenience and size dominate. The Fujifilm HS50 EXR, leveraging advanced sensor tech, superior optics, and comprehensive controls, delivers markedly better performance and versatility for serious users, justifying its higher price and physical footprint.

Prospective buyers must weigh priorities between portability and advanced photographic controls to select the system most aligned with their creative objectives and practical demands.