Nikon D5100 vs Casio Exilim EX-FH25

Winner
Nikon D5100

54

Casio Exilim EX-FH25

48

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D5100

Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
 

Reasons to buy the Casio Exilim EX-FH25

High-speed framerate
High speed movies
1,000 fps
Continuous shooting
Rapid fire
40 fps

galleries

Explore our gallery of 29 sample photos taken by the Casio Exilim EX-FH25.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D5100.

competitors

Nikon D5100 Competitors

Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$471 body only

$419 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Higher true resolution
Overall image quality Slightly better image quality
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out
Nikon D3200

Nikon D3200

Entry-level DSLR

$300 body only

$395 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Higher true resolution
Color depth Better color depth
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out
Nikon D5200

Nikon D5200

Entry-level DSLR

$420 body only

$479 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Higher true resolution
Overall image quality Better image quality
Battery life Shorter battery life

Casio Exilim EX-FH25 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix L120

Nikon Coolpix L120

Super zoom

$389

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$500 body only

$759 with 18-55mm lens

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Supports 24p Supports 24p
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-HX300

Super zoom

$491

Image stabilization Image stabilization
Zoom Much more zoom
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

discussion

Nikon D5100
D5100
Nikon

Report a correction
Casio Exilim EX-FH25
Exilim EX-FH25
Casio

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments