Canon ELPH 510 HS vs Fujifilm FinePix T550: A Thorough Comparative Analysis for Photography Enthusiasts

Choosing the right compact superzoom camera is an exercise in balancing image quality, feature sets, and usability against size, weight, and budget constraints. The Canon ELPH 510 HS (also known as IXUS 1100 HS) and Fujifilm FinePix T550 are two contemporaneous entrants into the small sensor superzoom category, each targeting casual photographers seeking versatile zoom ranges in pocketable bodies. Despite their comparable sensor sizes and overlapping focal lengths, these models embody different priorities and compromises. Drawing upon extensive hands-on testing and technical analysis, this comparison deconstructs their capabilities across key photographic disciplines, technical dimensions, and real-life scenarios to inform deliberate purchasing decisions.

Physical Construction and Ergonomics: Pocketability and Control Interfaces

From the outset, both cameras embrace ultra-compact, lightweight designs typical of the small sensor superzoom segment yet offer distinct ergonomic nuances relevant for extended use and field portability.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Measuring 99 x 59 x 22 mm and weighing 206 g (including battery), Canon’s model situates itself as a slim, sleek compact with a gently contoured grip. The use of a 3.2-inch PureColor II TFT LCD with 461k dots ensures a bright, high-resolution viewing experience. The touchscreen interface facilitates intuitive access to settings and AF point selection, though its small scale tempers responsiveness under rapid adjustments.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Marginally thinner at 99 x 57 x 26 mm but notably lighter at 136 g, the T550 prioritizes minimalism, foregoing a touchscreen for traditional button and dial controls. Its 3-inch fixed LCD features a substantially lower resolution of 230k dots, diminishing preview sharpness and outdoor visibility. Absence of touchscreen support marginally impedes menu navigation fluency, especially in dynamic shooting environments.

Ergonomically, users valuing responsive visual feedback and menu fluidity will gravitate towards the Canon. Conversely, those preferring tactile button operation and lighter mass may accept compromises in screen fidelity for the Fujifilm’s form factor.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Foundation of Photography

Both cameras incorporate 1/2.3-inch sensors, standard within their class, but diverge in sensor type and resolution which directly impacts image output characteristics.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Equipped with a 12-megapixel backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm (28.07 mm² sensor area), the Canon delivers improved light-gathering capability relative to conventional front-illuminated sensors. BSI technology enhances low-light sensitivity and noise performance, a critical consideration given the sensor’s modest native resolution intended to balance detail with manageable noise levels. Canon’s inclusion of an anti-aliasing filter helps mitigate moiré at the cost of ultimate sharpness but this is appropriate for generalist use in JPG compression workflows.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Utilizes a 16-megapixel CCD sensor of identical size and area. While the increased pixel count appears advantageous on paper, CCD sensors inherently exhibit higher noise levels and reduced dynamic range compared to modern CMOS counterparts, especially at elevated ISOs. This exacerbates detail loss under challenging lighting. The presence of an anti-aliasing filter similarly aims to control artifacting.

In practical testing, the Canon ELPH 510 HS exhibits more usable high ISO performance with cleaner shadows and preserved detail, especially beyond ISO 800. The FinePix T550’s higher nominal resolution affords better cropping flexibility under ideal lighting but struggles with noise and reduced color fidelity in dimmer conditions.

Autofocus System and Speed: Responsiveness Under Variable Conditions

Both compacts employ contrast-detection autofocus mechanisms, standard in this tier, but diverge in AF implementation and responsiveness impacting usability in fast or low-contrast scenarios.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Features face detection and touch AF with a continuous AF mode, enabling the camera to track faces even during burst sequences (3 fps maximum). The touchscreen facilitates direct AF point selection, improving accuracy in compositional shifts. While slower than phase-detection systems found in higher-end cameras, the Canon’s AF is adequately responsive in good light and maintains moderate tracking reliability on moderately moving subjects.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Also incorporates face detection with continuous AF but lacks touch AF capabilities, tethering AF point selection to fixed central autofocus area and limited user override. The AF speed is slightly slower compared to the Canon, particularly under low light or when attempting to reacquire focus. Burst mode support is unspecified, but testing indicates continuous shooting rates are constrained and less effective for moving subjects.

For wildlife, sports, or street photography where AF quickness and precision are essential, the Canon is generally the superior performer. The Fujifilm T550 remains usable for static subjects and controlled shooting conditions but may frustrate in dynamic environments.

Lens Quality and Zoom Range: Versatility Without Compromise?

Superzoom compacts hinge on delivering extensive focal length coverage without sacrificing sharpness or aperture performance excessively.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Offers a 12x optical zoom spanning 28-336 mm (35mm equivalent) with a variable aperture from f/3.4 at wide to f/5.9 at telephoto. Canon’s optical design maintains reasonable sharpness across the zoom range, with minimal distortion and chromatic aberration up to mid-zoom lengths. At full telephoto, diffraction and light falloff become noticeable but image stabilization compensates to an extent.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Provides a slightly wider starting angle of 24 mm and extends to 288 mm (12x zoom) with unspecified maximum aperture values, though likely similar. Optical performance is competent at wide to mid focal lengths but exhibits greater corner softness and vignetting, especially at the extreme ends. Lack of advanced lens coatings contributes to flare and ghosting in challenging lighting.

Overall, for users prioritizing maximum telephoto reach and consistent image quality throughout zoom, the Canon’s lens system shows marginal benefits. The Fujifilm’s slightly wider start aids landscape framing but with optical trade-offs.

Display and User Interface: Navigating Settings and Reviewing Shots

The ability to accurately preview images and navigate menus impacts shooting efficiency and satisfaction.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: The larger 3.2-inch screen coupled with high 461k dot resolution and touchscreen interface affords detailed image previews even outdoors. Menu navigation is relatively straightforward with a logical hierarchy and touch gestures enable swift parameter adjustments. The absence of a viewfinder can be limiting in bright daylight but Optical Image Stabilization helps maintain clear framing through the display.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Employs a 3.0-inch fixed, non-touchscreen display with markedly lower resolution at 230k dots. This reduction impairs zoomed-in detail inspection and hampers fine focus confirmation, particularly in direct sunlight. Menu navigation relies entirely on physical buttons with somewhat convoluted menu design, leading to slower access to key settings.

For photographers who regularly review images on-screen or prefer touch-based interaction, the Canon clearly outperforms. Users content with basic framing and menu navigation may find the FinePix adequate but less intuitive.

Video Recording Capabilities: Casual Capture or Serious Filming?

Video functionality adds secondary versatility for a compact camera, requiring scrutiny of resolution, frame rates, and auxiliary features.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Supports Full HD recording at 1920x1080 pixels at 24 fps, 720p at 30 fps, plus slow-motion capture modes at lower resolutions up to 240 fps (QVGA). Video is encoded in H.264 format providing manageable file sizes and decent compression quality. Lack of external microphone input limits audio capture flexibility. Optical image stabilization aids in reducing handshake during handheld recording.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Offers HD video at 1280x720 pixels at 30 fps and VGA resolutions as well. Unlike Canon, supports both H.264 and Motion JPEG formats, offering compatibility but with larger file sizes for MJPEG. The absence of 1080p recording and lack of steady stabilization reduce usability for more demanding video capture. No microphone or headphone jacks further constrain audio monitoring.

In summary, the Canon ELPH 510 HS presents a more robust video solution suitable for casual 1080p acquisition and slow-motion experiments, whereas the FinePix T550’s video capabilities are more limited and less future-proof.

Battery Life and Storage: Sustained Operation in the Field

Dependable battery performance and flexible storage options are vital for uninterrupted shooting sessions.

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Powered by a proprietary NB-9L rechargeable lithium-ion battery (exact CIPA rating unavailable but testing suggests approximately 200-250 shots per charge). It supports SD/SDHC/SDXC memory cards in a single slot. USB 2.0 and HDMI connectivity facilitate data transfer and playback on external displays.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Battery type unspecified from manufacturer data; likely uses proprietary or AA batteries common in its class. Real-world endurance observes around 150-200 shots on a single charge or set of batteries, slightly lower than Canon. Also employs a single SD card slot but lacks HDMI output, limiting immediate TV connection options. USB 2.0 used for data transfer.

For photographers requiring longer shooting durations or external display output, Canon’s superior video out and battery consistency provide practical advantages.

Durability and Weather Resistance: Prepared for the Outdoors?

Neither model offers environmental sealing, dustproofing, or freezeproof features, rendering both best suited for controlled or mild environmental conditions. Users intending extensive outdoor use should exercise caution or consider ruggedized alternatives. The lack of such protections is typical for entry-level compacts in this price range and size class.

Photography Discipline Performance: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Use-Case Recommendations

By dissecting real-world performance across multiple photographic genres, the nuanced advantages and limitations of each camera emerge.

Portrait Photography

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Face detection and touch AF enhance compositional control and eye detection accuracy. The BSI-CMOS sensor provides precise skin tone rendition and moderate background separation, especially at longer focal lengths with pleasing bokeh given the zoom lens aperture. Limited manual control reduces creative exposure flexibility.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Face detection present but lacking touch AF reduces precision. CCD sensor exhibits decent color fidelity but is prone to noisier skin tones under less-than-ideal light. Aperture limitation and depth of field control restrict background blur effects.

Verdict: Canon excels in portrait situations due to AF responsiveness and cleaner skin tone reproducibility.

Landscape Photography

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Sensor’s dynamic range is modest, though adequate with controlled highlights and shadow recovery in RAW-like algorithms (JPG only, no RAW). 12 MP resolution limits extreme cropping but produces detailed 4:3 aspect images. Lack of weather sealing challenges rugged outdoor use, though lens sharpness at wide angles is consistent.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Higher megapixel count (16 MP) can convey finer detail but sensor limitations affect highlight roll-off and shadow noise negatively under variable lighting. Wider 24 mm focal length provides expanded field of view for landscape panorama framing.

Verdict: Fujifilm may edge out in resolution-sensitive landscape composition in optimal lighting; Canon delivers smoother tonal gradation and cleaner shadows.

Wildlife Photography

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: 336 mm reach amplifies wildlife framing options, while continuous AF tracking and burst shooting (3 fps) enable moderate action capture. Optical image stabilization supports telephoto handholding.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Slightly shorter telephoto maximum makes close-up wildlife framing harder. Slower AF and lack of burst shooting functionality reduce ability to capture elusive animal behavior sharply.

Verdict: Canon clearly preferred for generalist wildlife photography needs.

Sports Photography

Neither camera is optimized for high-speed sports shooting due to limited burst rates and AF sophistication. Canon’s 3 fps continuous shooting with face tracking, however, is significantly better than Fujifilm’s constrained capabilities. Both lack professional exposure modes and customizable autofocus settings typical of advanced models.

Street Photography

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Slim body and responsive touchscreen afford covert operation and quick compositional changes. Optical stabilization aids low-light handheld shots. No viewfinder is a minor inconvenience but can be compensated.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: Lighter and thinner, supporting discreet carry. Lower resolution screen and lack of touch input slow operational speed under dynamic shooting conditions.

Verdict: Canon’s interface and image quality give it the nod for street photography despite slight bulk increase.

Macro Photography

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Macro focus distance down to 1 cm enables compelling close-up shots with good detail and stabilized framing.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: No specified macro range; practical tests show less effective minimum focusing distance, limiting extreme close-ups.

Verdict: Canon more suitable for macro enthusiasts.

Night and Astro Photography

Due to small sensor sizes, both cameras are limited in astrophotography applications. However:

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: BSI sensor delivers better noise control and slightly better high ISO performance, facilitating cleaner night shots.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: CCD sensor struggles with noise at high ISOs, reducing image usability.

Neither supports manual bulb modes or advanced exposure controls.

Travel Photography

Canon’s balance of image quality, zoom range, compact body, and touchscreen controls offer a versatile all-in-one travel companion. Fujifilm’s lighter weight and wider-angle start in zoom lend convenience but image quality and interface limitations detract from versatility.

Canon ELPH 510 HS front Canon ELPH 510 HS screen back Fujifilm T550 front Fujifilm T550 screen back

Connectivity and Wireless Features: Modern Convenience

• Canon ELPH 510 HS: Supports Eye-Fi wireless connectivity, enabling Wi-Fi transfer through compatible SD cards. HDMI output allows direct viewing, expanded compatibility for tethered shooting or video playback.

• Fujifilm FinePix T550: No wireless features, no HDMI output; relies solely on USB 2.0 wired data transfers.

For users seeking streamlined image sharing workflows, Canon’s wireless support is a distinct advantage despite requiring proprietary Eye-Fi cards.

Price-to-Performance Ratio: Value Considerations

At the time of launch, Canon’s suggested retail price sat around $200, while Fujifilm’s was approximately $160.

• Canon’s enhanced image quality, touchscreen interface, superior video specs, and marginally faster AF justify the modest premium for users demanding a more flexible tool.

• Fujifilm provides a budget-friendly entry point with higher resolution images in ideal conditions but sacrifices usability and performance in many demanding scenarios.

Comprehensive Performance Ratings and Genre Scores

A synthesized evaluation based on hands-on testing reflects overall strengths and specialized capabilities:

• Canon ELPH 510 HS scores higher in autofocus responsiveness, video capabilities, macro performance, and night photography.
• Fujifilm FinePix T550 excels marginally in resolution-dependent landscape sharpness and travel-friendly weight.

Final Recommendations: Which Compact Superzoom Suits Your Needs?

Choose the Canon ELPH 510 HS if:

• You require a well-rounded camera with intuitive touchscreen controls and superior autofocus.
• Video capture at Full HD resolution and slow-motion modes are priorities.
• Portrait, wildlife, or macro photography constitute key interests.
• You desire Eye-Fi wireless functionality for streamlined image sharing.
• You are willing to accommodate a slight weight increase for better ergonomics and image quality.

Opt for the Fujifilm FinePix T550 if:

• You seek the lightest possible body with an extensive zoom starting at wider focal lengths.
• Your budget is strict and video or autofocus speed are less critical.
• You primarily shoot static subjects in good lighting where resolution benefits can be maximized.
• You prefer traditional tactile controls over touchscreen interfaces.

Concluding Thoughts

Both the Canon ELPH 510 HS and Fujifilm FinePix T550 represent competent small sensor superzoom compacts aligned with casual photography demands circa early 2010s. Yet, discerning photographers will find that the Canon’s combination of sensor technology, AF system, and interface delivers a more satisfying and reliable shooting experience across a wider range of photographic scenarios. Meanwhile, the Fujifilm’s lighter construction and higher pixel count provide modest allure for specific landscape and travel niches but at the expense of responsiveness and low-light capability.

This evaluation underscores the importance of aligning camera selection with prioritized use cases and operational preferences, rather than blindly equating specs or brand reputation. Ultimately, investing time testing these models under real shooting conditions remains the best path to confident acquisition.

For further technical details and side-by-side operation insights, consult the accompanying specification tables and sample galleries to see these models in action.