Casio Exilim EX-FH20 vs Casio Exilim EX-FH100

Tie
Casio Exilim EX-FH20

31

Casio Exilim EX-FH100

30

Tie

Reasons to buy the Casio Exilim EX-FH20

Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Digital
Wide angle lens
Wide angle
26 mm
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
1,000 fps
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
 

Reasons to buy the Casio Exilim EX-FH100

Wide angle
Wide angle lens
24 mm
Size
Really small
Compact (104×60×28 mm)
Thickness
Thin
1.1"
Weight
Light-weight
201 g

galleries

Explore our gallery of 3 sample photos taken by the Casio Exilim EX-FH100.
Explore our gallery of 16 sample photos taken by the Casio Exilim EX-FH20.

competitors

Casio Exilim EX-FH20 Competitors

Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$436 body only

$400 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
External mic jack Has an external mic jack
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Super zoom

$451

Zoom Much more zoom
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Casio Exilim EX-FH25

Casio Exilim EX-FH25

Super zoom

$1,699

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
True resolution Slightly higher true resolution
Image stabilization No image stabilization

Casio Exilim EX-FH100 Competitors

Casio Exilim EX-100

Casio Exilim EX-100

Pro digicam

$508

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Wide angle Significantly worse wide angle
Casio Exilim EX-ZR200

Casio Exilim ZR-200

Travel zoom

$430

Continuous shooting Shoots significantly faster
Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Longest exposure Shorter max exposures
Casio Exilim EX-FH25

Casio Exilim EX-FH25

Super zoom

$1,699

Continuous shooting Shoots significantly faster
Aperture Wider aperture
Image stabilization No image stabilization

discussion

Casio Exilim EX-FH20
Exilim EX-FH20
Casio

Report a correction
Casio Exilim EX-FH100
Exilim EX-FH100
Casio

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments