Casio EX-FH20 (Review)

Written by D. Eric Franks

Wednesday, 15 October 2008 20:00

Hybrid consumer camcorders that also shoot megapixel stills have been around for a while now. More recently, hybrid megapixel still cameras that can shoot quality video have been making a splash, notably the Canon EOS 5D ($3,000), the Nikon D90 ($1,300) and the Casio Exilim EX-FH20, which is focused squarely on the consumer market at $600.

Here's the hype: this camera is by far and away the most affordable high-speed consumer camera around, shooting in a number of reduced-resolution modes at anywhere from 210 to 1000fps. Granted, it's not a scientific instrument and it's not going to shoot cinematic images, but for $600, the Casio FH20 is also quite literally tens of thousands of dollars less expensive and a good magnitude easier to use. For hobbyists and sk8bored punx, this camera rocks, as long as you are ready to realistically work within its limitations.

For most of us, however, $600 is a good chunk of change to drop on what is, essentially, a special effect, so the question remains: How does the camera perform otherwise?

The Casio EX-FH20 is sort of a little brother to the FX1, released in early 2008. Similar specs, but the new camera is a bit smaller and, more importantly, $400 cheaper.

Let's start by looking at the technology, which for a camera means the image sensor and lens. Despite the body design, the Casio EX-FH20 camera is not in the same class as the Nikon D90 or Canon EOS 5D, because the image sensor in back is not as large and the glass up front is not as good. These two characteristics define professional level cameras, with 35mm film-sized imaging chips and ultra-fast lenses combining to give you that gorgeously limited Depth of Field artistic control everyone is obsessed with.

The heart of the Casio EX-FH20 is an 8mm diagonal Sony CMOS chip, which is unquestionably smaller than the imaging plane of a piece of 35mm film. Furthermore, the lens up front is not going to match the performance of a typical SLR lens, which, to be fair, often costs as much as the entire Casio camera all by itself. What this means in the real world is that you should not expect the Casio EX-FH20 to have 35mm-class control of the depth of field, nor would you expect it to have remarkable low-light performance.

Still Image Performance

Keeping in mind both the fact that the Casio EX-FH20 is not a full-blown DSLR kit and the fact that it's $600, which is relatively expensive for a digital point-and-shoot camera, and you come to the conclusion that the still image performance is merely adequate. The 20x optical zoom is very handy for hobbyist shooters and the 9 megapixel stills are unquestionably better than the stills from my Sony HDR-SR7 camcorder, for example, which only produces mediocre stills. The larger LCD and efficient menu design result in manual control that is very straightforward and fast.

Low-light performance was about what you might expect: poor and noisy by default. This isn't a complaint, it's just that this class of camera needs light. It is, however, possible to turn the electronic gain down, set the camera to ISO100 equivalent and open the shutter for up to 30 seconds and get some pretty nice pictures.

The camera does have a 40fps still mode that is supposed to really allow you to capture the perfect moment in a series, but 40fps is overkill. Seriously: How "perfect" a moment do you need!? Two quirks: The zoom seems to toggle features in seemingly random ways and the autofocus can be squirrely and uncertain.

Comparing apples to apples, $600 is an awful lot to pay for this level of quality in a digital still camera. If you are simply looking for a good still camera with a mega-zoom and are not really interested in video or highspeed video, I'd set your budget to $300-400 and get a different 20x zoom camera, maybe from Canon or Panasonic.

Conclusion: Although the 20x zoom is great, the Casio FH20 is on the expensive side for a dedicated still camera in terms of image quality.

Video Performance

The video performance is surprisingly strong for a still camera, but nothing special if you compare this with a dedicated $600 camcorder. The 720p resolution is ideal for Web distribution and the quality is quite good, but not exceptional. The camera itself is not nearly as convenient as a dedicated video camera, however. For example, you can't really zoom while shooting (not a big deal, in my opinion, since I don't like zooming while recording anyhow). The camera has a teeny tiny on-board mic and no mic jack, so this should probably be considered as a "video-only" camcorder for coverage and B-roll. Oh, and if the Zoom is On, you can't record audio and vice versa. (I'm sure there's an engineering reason for this, but from the user's standpoint, it seems arbitrary and bizarre.) I found the electronic focus control to be easy to use, but manual focus on the fly was cumbersome. Video performance outside is quite good, but low-light performance inside is worse than what I'd expect from a $600 camcorder and the image sensor is very noisy.

In still mode, you have a lot of image control: aperture, shutter, electronic gain and ISO settings. In video mode, you basically have no control and everything is in Auto. As mentioned, the quality of the video in auto mode is rather good, but it'd be nice to have a few more options: It can be tough to get the exposure right, especially indoors.

I updated the Firmware on this camera to 1.01, which theoretically resolves video capture issues with some memory cards. I used standard Transcend 16GB SDHC Class-6 cards that I got for $30 each at supermediastore.com and didn't have any problems before or after the firmware update.

The video is saved to a Sony Motion JPEG format at a staggering 30Mbps, which is really high when compared with the H.264 video coming off of most modern tapeless camcorders. This is not necessarily better, since H.264 compression can be much more efficient than the older MJPEG format. The video quality was decent, but complex moving backgrounds (e.g., vegitation out doors) revealed some artifacting.

Getting the video off of the camera is a breeze,either by simply connecting the camera to your computer via the included USB cable or by popping the memory card out and plugging it into a card reader. Copy the files to your hard disk and you are ready to edit. The movies are standardized, compatible and editor-friendly AVI files and were much less taxing to the computer than H.264 video files typically are. In other words, the footage is a joy to edit!

Conclusion: Strong automatic 720p video quality, but almost no manual controls and mediocre low-light performance mean that video should be considered a secondary feature of the camera.

Jack of All Trades...

The Casio EX-FH20 is a true, convenient hybrid, shooting better video than any still camera in its class and shooting better stills than any video camcorder in its class, but it is not as good as either specialist. "Jack of all trades and master of none" is a fitting cliche. If you are looking primarily for a digital still camera, I'd recommend saving yourself some money and going with a less expensive still camera with similar specs. Or, you could spend a little more money and grab a true digital SLR package from Canon or Nikon. Likewise, if you are looking primarily for a video camera, I think you will find the features in a dedicated camcorder with higher 1920x1080 HD resolution to be a better value.

At $600, the Casio EX-FH20 is, however, considerable less expensive than if you bought both a dedicated camcorder and a dedicated still camera with similar specs. And, of course, at 17 ounces, it's also more convenient to carry around. I would definitely expect to see more hybrid competitors in the near future in the form of still cameras that shoot quality HD video, so this is a category to watch.

Of course, you really can't ignore the FH20's astonishing high-speed reduced-resolution video modes, shooting at 210, 400 and 1000fps, soberly realizing you need a ton of light to do this and the video is going to be quite noisy. I did find the 210fps video at 480x360 to be quite usable and interesting and I can see some hobbyist getting the camera for this reason alone. The only camera that I can think of that might do something similar is the Sanyo HD1010, which has a 300fps, 448x336 mode, which, for $800, is in the same class in terms of video.

Recommendations

Recommended For:
- photographers that also want to shoot a little video
- vacation shooters primarily into stills, but a little video too
- sk8bored punx, effects hobbyists, urban ninjas and gear sluts

NOT Recommended For:
- digital still enthusiast with a $600 budget
- videographers that want a new HD camcorder

Score: 75%

Still Quality	75%
Video Quality	50%
Convenience	85%
Geek Gear Factor	95%
Value	70%

Other Products to Consider:
+ Videographers: Sony Handycam HDR-SR10 camcorder ($700)
+ Hobbyist Snaps: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ28 ($320)
+ SLR Enthusiasts: Canon EOS Rebel XSi DSLR w/ 18-55mm lens ($600)
+ HighSpeed Shooters: Phantom v12.1 (~$100,000)

Tech Specs and Comments

You can go to Casio's main site to read the reported specs for the Casio EX-FH20, but here are a few comments.

Memory
The camera has 32MB of internal memory built in, but you will definitely want to get another memory card or two, especially if you are going to shoot RAW or video. I use a 16GB Class-6 SDHC cards from Transcend that I got from supermediastore.com for$30.

I updated the Firmware on this camera to 1.01, which theoretically resolves video capture issues with some memory cards.

Still Image Format
The camera shoots at resolutions as high as 3,456 x 2,592 pixels in a few different JPG compressed formats and one RAW format, Adobe's versitile Digital NeGative (DNG). A typical JPG will take up 3-4MB, while a losslessly compressed DNG occupies about 4x that. DNG is an Adobe RAW format that is probably not supported by most apps other than Photoshop, although a free converter is available. A $30 16GB SDHC card will hold at least a few thousand images, as long as you aren't shooting DNG. The larger DNG files also take a little time to save to the card, even though I'm using pretty fast cards. My opinion: DNG files are too large and slow and inconvenient for this level of camera and the highest quality JPGs are your best bet.

Battery
The camera takes 4 standard AA batteries, which I have always felt is an important feature. Well, not always, but for at least a decade after the proprietary lithium ion battery on my first Canon S10 went dead and it cost me $60 to replace it. I spent about four hours shooting with the Casio FH20 on rechargeable NI-MH batteries (2100mAh) with the LCD on the entire time - stills, video, high-speed, the works - before the batteries flagged and failed. Always bring extras!

Image Stabilization
The camera has an image stabilization system, but I didn't really test it. I shot some stills handheld, but I have to say, I rarely shoot anything serious handheld. Since everything I did with this camera during testing was intended for publication, I did my best to let the camera put its best foot forward and used a tripod on every shot! In other words: It's got image stabilization, but I didn't test it. Sorry!

CMOS video chips are sometimes accused of having serious rolling shutter wobble skew issues. While I CAN verify that this is an issue and CAN intentionally demonstrate the "rolling shutter" effect in a CMOS video camera (including this one), I have NEVER seen it during normal usage. I'll make sure I watch out for it the next time I strap my camcorder to my lawnmower, however.

Sample Images and Video

Click on the image thumbnails to see larger versions. All photos have been compressed for the Web. With the exception of the macro detail shots, all images are smaller than the original and do not represent the full resolution of the camera.