CameraLore
Side-by-side comparison

Casio QV-R51
vs Casio QV-R52

Archive illustration for Casio QV-R51

Casio / 2004

QV-R51

Full specifications
VS
Archive illustration for Casio QV-R52

Casio / 2005

QV-R52

Full specifications

Sensor area

Calibrate screen size

Enter your display diagonal so sensor rectangles are shown closer to their physical size.

38 mm²
QV-R51
38 mm²
QV-R52
Area ratio
1:1
Absolute difference
0 mm²
Relative difference
0%

The QV-R51 and QV-R52 have the same sensor area. Compare pixel density, sensor architecture, and release generation to understand likely image-quality differences.

These cameras were released 1 years apart. Consider sensor generation when comparing pixel metrics.

Key specification differences

QV-R51MetricQV-R52
4.9 MPEffective pixels5.25 MP
7.11 × 5.33Sensor7.11 × 5.33
2.78 µmPixel pitch2.69 µm
7.73 µm²Pixel area7.22 µm²
12.93 MP/cm²Pixel density13.85 MP/cm²
4.87Crop factor4.87
—Maximum video—
168 gWeight168 g
MultiMedia, Secure DigitalStorageMultiMedia, Secure Digital
AA (2) batteries (NiMH included)Battery2x AA

Amber marks the value that is generally preferable in this comparison context. It is not an overall camera score.

How to choose between these cameras

The QV-R51 and QV-R52 have the same sensor area. The QV-R51 and QV-R52 have the same body weight. The QV-R52 has the higher effective resolution. The QV-R52 is the newer release. Also consider the lens system and subjects you shoot.

Reasons to choose QV-R51

Released in 2004, QV-R51 has about 38 mm² of sensor area, 4.9 MP effective resolution, and a 168 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.

Reasons to choose QV-R52

Released in 2005, QV-R52 has about 38 mm² of sensor area, 5.25 MP effective resolution, and a 168 g body. Use these values to narrow the field, not as an overall image-quality score.

Choose different cameras