Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1 vs Casio Exilim EX-FH100

Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1
Casio Exilim EX-FH100

Reasons to buy the Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1

High speed movies
High-speed framerate
1,200 fps
Rapid fire
Continuous shooting
60 fps
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Digital
External flash
External flash
Better lighting
 

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 9 sample photos taken by the Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1.

competitors

Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1 Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$325 body only

$380 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Significantly larger screen
Supports 24p Supports 24p
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II

Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II

Pro digicam

$529

Wide angle Much better wide angle
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Continuous shooting Shoots much slower
Nikon D610

Nikon D610

Pro DSLR

$1,497 body only

$1,971 - $2,447 with 28-300mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Casio Exilim EX-FH100 Competitors

Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Super zoom

$457

Zoom Much more zoom
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
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 ZR800

Casio Exilim ZR800

Travel zoom

$330

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Continuous shooting Shoots significantly faster
Aperture Narrower aperture

discussion

Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1
Exilim Pro EX-F1
Casio

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

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments