The Casio Exilim EX-Z250 is mostly gets compared to travel zooms and super zooms. The Casio Exilim EX-Z250's top rivals come from Casio (such as the Exilim EX-H30) and Kodak (such as the EasyShare Z650)

Competitor classes

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Casio EX-Z250 compared to travel zoom competitors include: it is much smaller (compact (97×58×23 mm) vs compact (104×58×28 mm)) and is thinner (0.9" vs 1.1").

However, on average it has a significantly narrower wide angle lens (28 mm vs 24 mm), is older (august 2008 vs january 2011) and slightly shorter exposures (1/2 of a second vs 8 seconds).

Casio Exilim EX-H30

Casio Exilim EX-H30
2 years newer
$320

Significant advantages of the EX-H30 (vs the EX-Z250)

  • Significantly better wide angle: 24 mm vs 28 mm

Significant disadvantages of the EX-H30 (vs the EX-Z250)

  • Much larger: Compact (104×58×28 mm) vs Compact (97×58×23 mm)

common strengths of the EX-H30 and EX-Z250

  • Very small: Compact (104×58×28 mm) vs Compact (97×58×23 mm)
  • Very thin: 1.1" vs 0.9"

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Casio EX-Z250 compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a much wider wide angle lens (28 mm vs 38 mm), has a much larger screen (3" vs 2"), is slightly smaller (compact (97×58×23 mm) vs standard size (98×78×73 mm)), has image stabilization (sensor shift vs none) and takes slightly higher resolution photos (9 MP vs 6.1 MP).

However, on average it doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital).

Kodak EasyShare Z650

Kodak EasyShare Z650
2 years older
$100

Significant advantages of the Z650 (vs the EX-Z250)

  • Has a viewfinder: Digital vs None

Significant disadvantages of the Z650 (vs the EX-Z250)

  • Much smaller screen: 2" vs 3"
  • Much worse wide angle: 38 mm vs 28 mm
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Sensor shift

common strengths of the Z650 and EX-Z250

  • Very small: Standard size (98×78×73 mm) vs Compact (97×58×23 mm)
  • Very light: 320 g vs 139 g
  • Thin: 2.9" vs 0.9"