OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Cameras Methodology v3.0
Cameras Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Cameras Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Cameras Methodology v3.0

Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 review: 112 specs compared

Avg. price:~£290Sensor size:1/2.3"Weight:205 gBattery life (CIPA):515 shots

Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 Review: Compare 112 technical specifications and 3 expert reviews to see how this product ranks in the Cameras category and whether it is worth buying.

Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400
6.0/10

Overall score

Score
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, best-of lists, expert reviews and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 35%, List score 30%, Reviews score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 61% of models
Score components

35%

5.1

Technical score

30%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

5.1

Reviews score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.1, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▼Worse than 61% of cameras
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the camera's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you want to know how much overall quality you get for the price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 52% of models
Score components

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

▼Worse than 52%
5.1

Technical score

Technical score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 57% of models
Score components

28%

4.4

Sensor & Image

25%

5.6

Photo Features

18%

5.1

Video & Audio

14%

5.0

Display & Design

8%

8.5

Battery & Power

7%

2.8

Connectivity & Storage

▲Better than 57%
5.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.5 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 62% of models

5.1

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.6

Average grade

20%

6.1

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 62%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 30% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • casio-exilim-ex-zr400
  • casio-exilim-ex-zr400
  • casio-exilim-ex-zr400
casio-exilim-ex-zr400
casio-exilim-ex-zr400
casio-exilim-ex-zr400
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400

Based on 3

Reviewers agree it feels quick and responsive, with burst shooting a clear highlight and no recurring complaints.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Cameras model ranking

Ranked #260 of 975 models in Cameras (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of camera Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400

Technical score
Technical score
5.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 35% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 57% of models
Score components:

28%

4.4

Sensor & Image

25%

5.6

Photo Features

18%

5.1

Video & Audio

14%

5.0

Display & Design

8%

8.5

Battery & Power

7%

2.8

Connectivity & Storage

5.1
Reviews score
5.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the camera's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you want to know how much overall quality you get for the price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 52% of models
Score components:

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

9.0

Price

6.9
Sensor size
1/2.3"
This camera has a sensor size of 1/2.3", which is smaller than 59.1% of cameras and the same as 39.1% of cameras.
Sensor resolution
16.1 MP
This camera captures images at 16.1 MP, which is lower than 53% of cameras and equal to 7.7% of cameras.
Sensor pixel size
1.33 µm
Market range: <1.33 µm – >5.94 µm
This camera has sensor pixels measuring 1.33 µm, which are smaller than those in 86.2% of cameras and the same size as those in 3.6% of cameras.
Base ISO
80
Market range: <80 – >200
This camera has a base ISO of 80, which is lower than 80.2% of cameras and equal to 15.3% of cameras.
Max ISO
ISO 3200 ISO
This camera reaches ISO 3,200, which is lower than 61.5% of cameras and equal to 23.8% of cameras.
Show more
Lens mount
N/A
Built-in focus motor
N/A
N. of focus points
?
Phase-detection autofocus (photos)
no
This camera does not support phase-detection autofocus for photos. 36.6% of cameras support phase-detection autofocus for photos.
AF tracking
yes
This camera supports AF tracking. This feature is available on 87.4% of cameras.
Show more
What reviewers say
Max video resolution
1920 px
This camera records at 1920 px, which is higher than the resolution in 28.7% of cameras and the same as in 46.7% of cameras.
Video bitrate
?
Video bit depth
8 bit
This camera records in 8 bit, which is higher than the colour depth in 8.2% of cameras and the same as in 79.8% of cameras.
Video chroma subsampling
4:2:0
This camera records with 4:2:0, which is better than the chroma sampling in 8.2% of cameras and the same as in 70% of cameras.
Video codecs
H.264
Show more
Type
compact
Weight
205 g
Market range: <142 g – >812 g
This camera weighs 205 g, which is lighter than 77.1% of cameras and equal to 0.6% of cameras.
Width
104.8 mm
Market range: <96 mm – >142.6 mm
This camera is 104.8 mm wide, which is narrower than 75.4% of cameras and equal to 0.4% of cameras.
Height
59.1 mm
Market range: <57.6 mm – >105.8 mm
This camera is 59.1 mm tall, which is shorter than 81.3% of cameras and equal to 0.2% of cameras.
Thickness
28.6 mm
Market range: <21.9 mm – >92 mm
This camera is 28.6 mm thick, which is thinner than 78.9% of cameras and equal to 0.4% of cameras.
Show more
Battery life (CIPA)
515 shots
Market range: <210 shots – >700 shots
This camera lasts for 515 shots per charge, which is longer than 83.6% of cameras.
Battery capacity
1,800 mAh
Market range: <700 mAh – >2.2k mAh
This camera has 1,800 mAh battery capacity, which is larger than 78.2% of cameras and equal to 3.6% of cameras.
Removable battery
yes
This camera has a removable battery, and 97.8% of cameras include one.
USB Power Delivery (PD)
no
This camera does not support USB Power Delivery. 10.6% of cameras support USB Power Delivery.
Wi-Fi connectivity
no
This camera does not support Wi-Fi. 48.2% of cameras include this feature.
Wi-Fi version
N/A
Bluetooth connectivity
no
This camera does not have Bluetooth. 24.1% of cameras support Bluetooth.
Bluetooth version
N/A
USB Type-C
no
This camera does not include USB Type-C. 16.4% of cameras use USB-C.
Show more

Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 vs the average camera

246810TotalDisplay & DesignSensor & ImagePhoto FeaturesVideo & AudioBattery & PowerConnectivity & Storage
  • In-body stabilization
    This camera supports in-body stabilization, the average camera does not.
  • 24.4 fps faster mechanical burst
    This camera has a faster mechanical burst than the average camera (30 fps vs 5.6 fps). The average camera reaches 5.6 fps.
    30 fps vs 5.6 fps
  • Uses a BSI sensor
    This camera uses a BSI sensor, the average camera does not. 35.7% of cameras use a BSI sensor.
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This camera supports slow-motion video, the average camera does not.
  • 185 shots longer battery life
    This camera lasts longer per charge than the average camera (515 shots vs 330 shots). The average camera lasts for 330 shots.
    515 shots vs 330 shots
  • 680 mAh more battery capacity
    This camera has a larger battery than the average camera (1,800 mAh vs 1,120 mAh). The average camera has 1,120 mAh battery capacity.
    1,800 mAh vs 1,120 mAh
  • 184.5 g lighter
    This camera is lighter than the average camera (205 g vs 389.5 g). The average camera weighs 389.5 g.
    205 g vs 389.5 g
  • 0.05 GB more internal storage
    This camera has more internal storage than the average camera (0.1 GB vs 0 GB). The average camera has 0 GB internal storage.
    0.052 GB vs 0 GB
  • 184.5 g lighter
    This camera is lighter than the average camera (205 g vs 389.5 g). The average camera weighs 389.5 g.
    205 g vs 389.5 g
  • 14.6 mm shorter body
    This camera is shorter than the average camera (59.1 mm vs 73.7 mm). The average camera is 73.7 mm tall.
    59.1 mm vs 73.7 mm
  • 14.2 mm narrower
    This camera is narrower than the average camera (104.8 mm vs 119 mm). The average camera is 119 mm wide.
    104.8 mm vs 119 mm
  • 17.3 mm thinner
    This camera is thinner than the average camera (28.6 mm vs 45.9 mm). The average camera is 45.9 mm thick.
    28.6 mm vs 45.9 mm
  • Uses a BSI sensor
    This camera uses a BSI sensor, the average camera does not. 35.7% of cameras use a BSI sensor.
  • In-body stabilization
    This camera supports in-body stabilization, the average camera does not.
  • 24.4 fps faster mechanical burst
    This camera has a faster mechanical burst than the average camera (30 fps vs 5.6 fps). The average camera reaches 5.6 fps.
    30 fps vs 5.6 fps
  • In-camera panorama mode
    This camera includes an in-camera panorama mode, the average camera does not.
  • Supports slow-motion video
    This camera supports slow-motion video, the average camera does not.
  • 185 shots longer battery life
    This camera lasts longer per charge than the average camera (515 shots vs 330 shots). The average camera lasts for 330 shots.
    515 shots vs 330 shots
  • 680 mAh more battery capacity
    This camera has a larger battery than the average camera (1,800 mAh vs 1,120 mAh). The average camera has 1,120 mAh battery capacity.
    1,800 mAh vs 1,120 mAh
  • 0.05 GB more internal storage
    This camera has more internal storage than the average camera (0.1 GB vs 0 GB). The average camera has 0 GB internal storage.
    0.052 GB vs 0 GB
  • Smaller image sensor
    This camera has a smaller sensor than the average camera (1/2.3" vs 2/3"). The average camera's sensor size is 2/3".
    1/2.3" vs 2/3"
  • 1.71 µm smaller sensor pixels
    This camera has smaller sensor pixels than the average camera (1.3 µm vs 3.04 µm). The average sensor pixel size is 3.04 µm.
    1.33 µm vs 3.04 µm
  • 2.5 stops less stabilisation
    This camera has weaker stabilisation than the average camera (1.5 stops vs 4 stops). The average camera is rated at 4 stops.
    1.5 stops vs 4 stops
  • No hot shoe
    This camera does not have a hot shoe, the average camera does.
  • 21.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.5 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 62% of models

    5.1

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    6.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.1 vs 6.5
  • No RAW photo capture
    This camera does not support RAW photo capture, the average camera does. 61% of cameras support RAW formats.
  • 3,200 ISO lower maximum sensitivity
    This camera reaches a lower maximum ISO than the average camera (3,200 ISO vs 6,400 ISO). The average camera's maximum ISO is 6,400 ISO.
    3,200 ISO vs 6,400 ISO
  • Older HDMI version
    This camera has older HDMI than the average camera (1.3 vs 1.4). The average camera has HDMI 1.4.
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • 21.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.5 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 62% of models

    5.1

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    6.1

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.1 vs 6.5
  • No hot shoe
    This camera does not have a hot shoe, the average camera does.
  • Smaller image sensor
    This camera has a smaller sensor than the average camera (1/2.3" vs 2/3"). The average camera's sensor size is 2/3".
    1/2.3" vs 2/3"
  • 1.71 µm smaller sensor pixels
    This camera has smaller sensor pixels than the average camera (1.3 µm vs 3.04 µm). The average sensor pixel size is 3.04 µm.
    1.33 µm vs 3.04 µm
  • 3,200 ISO lower maximum sensitivity
    This camera reaches a lower maximum ISO than the average camera (3,200 ISO vs 6,400 ISO). The average camera's maximum ISO is 6,400 ISO.
    3,200 ISO vs 6,400 ISO
  • Fewer megapixels
    This camera has fewer megapixels than the average camera (16.1 MP vs 16.2 MP). The average camera's sensor resolution is 16.2 MP.
    16.1 MP vs 16.2 MP
  • 1 years older
    This camera was released earlier than the average camera (2013 vs 2014). The average camera was released in 2014.
    2,013 vs 2,014
  • 2.5 stops less stabilisation
    This camera has weaker stabilisation than the average camera (1.5 stops vs 4 stops). The average camera is rated at 4 stops.
    1.5 stops vs 4 stops
  • No RAW photo capture
    This camera does not support RAW photo capture, the average camera does. 61% of cameras support RAW formats.
  • 15 s shorter exposure
    This camera allows shorter exposures than the average camera (15 s vs 30 s). The average camera allows exposures up to 30 s.
    15 s vs 30 s
  • 1 min shorter recording time
    This camera has a shorter recording time than the average camera (29 min vs 30 min). The average camera records for 30 min.
    29 min vs 30 min
  • Older HDMI version
    This camera has older HDMI than the average camera (1.3 vs 1.4). The average camera has HDMI 1.4.
    1.3 vs 1.4

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Hands-on video, no verdict
Overview video
Overview video
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
shutterbug.com
≈ estimated
08/04/2013
Lab test · Fast compact
Verdict
The Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 is a very fast compact for action and bursts, with good color, but it has no viewfinder and no RAW mode.
5.0
chip.de
≈ estimated
17/09/2018
Lab test · Travel zoom
Verdict
The Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 is the weakest travel zoom in this line, with fast shooting and long battery life, but its photos lack sharpness and show strong color fringes.
9.0
gadgetgear.nl
✓ explicit
19/03/2013
Hands-on review · Compact camera
Verdict
The Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 is a neat, very quick compact with buttons that suit larger hands, but it adds few new features over earlier Casio models.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400

  • 30 fps bursts catch the peak of fast action.
  • 515 shots per charge covers a long day of pictures.
  • The compact body, 59.1 mm tall, slips into a jacket pocket.
  • Slow-motion video adds playful clips.
  • HDR mode evens out bright and dark areas in one shot.
  • A base ISO of 80 keeps bright scenes clean.

What customers don't like about Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400

  • Stabilization of 1.5 stops is modest for shaky hands.
  • Video stops at 29 min per clip.
  • No Wi-Fi makes sending photos to a phone harder.
  • Small 1.33 µm pixels struggle in dim light.
  • No touchscreen, so every change needs buttons.

Verdict

With 30 fps bursts and 515 shots per charge, the Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 suits someone who shoots fast moments on the go. At 205 g and 59.1 mm tall, it is a compact pocket camera that slips into a jacket. The burst rate catches a jump or a splash, and the battery lasts through a long day of pictures. Slow-motion video and HDR mode add playful options, and the base ISO of 80 keeps bright scenes clean. The trade-off is stabilization and video. Stabilization is rated at 1.5 stops, so shaky hands may blur dim shots. Video also stops at 29 min per clip, and there is no Wi-Fi to send pictures to a phone. It fits a casual sports or kids photographer who values speed and battery life over detailed settings.

Compare Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 with other products in the Cameras category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Casio EXILIM EX-ZR400 and other products in the Cameras category

No results found