Canon PowerShot A1200 vs Olympus FE-47: Which Budget Compact Camera Still Holds Value Today?

When diving into the realm of affordable compact digital cameras, especially older models like the Canon PowerShot A1200 and the Olympus FE-47, it's easy to get overwhelmed by specs sheets filled with numbers that don’t always translate into real-world performance. With over 15 years of hands-on camera testing under my belt, I’m here to cut through the marketing fog and offer an honest, no-nonsense comparison that’ll help you decide which one (if either) deserves a spot in your bag - or if it’s time to simply invest in something newer instead.

Both cameras were launched around the same timeframe, early 2010s, targeting budget-conscious new users or casual shooters wanting a step above their smartphone snaps. While neither features the bells and whistles of today’s mirrorless marvels, each brought something to the table when they were released. So, let’s unpack their true capabilities, strengths, and limitations based on extensive testing experience and user needs.

Hands-On Design and Ergonomics: Which Compact Fits Your Grip?

First impression matters, and for photographers, that often comes down to how the camera feels in your hands during those long shooting sessions or quick snatches of street moments.

• Canon PowerShot A1200 measures 98 x 63 x 31 mm and weighs 185 grams (with batteries), sporting a compact yet chunky profile. Its fixed lens provides a modest zoom range, and the camera has a small, bright optical tunnel viewfinder - a rarity in compacts of this class and era. While not the largest or most comfortable body, its protruding grip area allows a secure hold, especially for smaller hands.

• Olympus FE-47 comes in slightly slimmer at 98 x 61 x 27 mm but is a bit heavier at 204 grams (batteries included). It completely forgoes a viewfinder, relying solely on its LCD screen for composing shots, which might be a downside if you prefer shooting in bright sunlight. The body feels smooth but less substantial in hand, making it prone to feeling a little slippery during extended use.

In terms of physical control layout - let's take a peek from above.

Both cameras are no-frills affairs. You'll find good old-fashioned minimal buttons without extras like customizable dials, touchscreens, or rear command wheels. The Canon features a modest mode dial and a dedicated zoom rocker, while the Olympus is a little more simplistic, favoring larger buttons but sacrificing nuanced control.

My take? If tactile control and a modest viewfinder matter, the Canon A1200 edges ahead. But if you prefer something lighter that slips easily in a coat pocket, the Olympus FE-47 feels less bulky in daily carry despite its slightly heavier weight.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Pixel Peeping the Classics

Now here’s where it gets interesting (or a bit underwhelming) - both cameras inhabit the same sensor size territory: tiny 1/2.3 inch CCD sensors. Notorious even back then for limited dynamic range and noise handling.

• Canon A1200’s 12-megapixel sensor produces sharp 4000x3000 pixel images. It’s paired with Canon’s DIGIC 4 processor with iSAPS tech, which was decent at balancing quality and noise reduction but still struggled at ISO levels beyond 400.

• Olympus FE-47 leans on a slightly higher 14-megapixel count at 4288x3216 resolution. Its TruePic III processor is tried-and-true but far from cutting-edge. ISO maxes out at 1600 but with images that get grainy quite early.

Despite the Olympus’s higher resolution, the Canon’s color science shines through in daylight - delivering slightly warmer skin tones and better contrast. Both cameras are hampered by heavy anti-aliasing filters lowering perceived sharpness slightly.

Low-light tells a familiar story: neither sensor deals well beyond ISO 400, with noise and loss of detail rapidly becoming evident. On the bright side, both cameras feature 9-point (Canon) or multi-area (Olympus) contrast-detect autofocus systems which are reliable under decent lighting but hunt hard in the dark.

My advice? For casual snaps in ample light, the Canon A1200’s color rendition and slightly better optics deliver more pleasing JPEGs straight out of camera. The Olympus, meanwhile, might appeal to enthusiasts looking to crop for extra detail, but be wary of noise.

LCD Screen and User Interface: Seeing the Shot and Navigating Menus

Shooting with compacts becomes tiresome with poor screens or fiddly menus.

Both the Canon and Olympus pack a 2.7-inch TFT LCD with 230k-dot resolution - not bright by today’s standards but serviceable back then.

The Canon’s screen feels slightly sharper and presents more natural colors; however, it’s fixed in place, so no tilt or swivel for awkward angles. Olympus’s display is equally fixed, but the lack of a viewfinder on the FE-47 often forces you to rely heavily on it. This combination feels limiting in bright sunlight, where glare is apparent on both.

Menus on the Canon are straightforward with clear iconography and quick access to exposure compensation (via custom white balance). Olympus menus are more basic and can feel clunky with fewer customization options and no direct control over exposure settings.

For real-world usability, the Canon’s inclusion of face detection AF is a bonus for portrait shoots, and the interface feels more intuitive for beginners.

Zoom Range and Optics: Flexibility for Framing Your World

Let’s dig into the fixed lenses:

• Canon: 28-112mm (35mm equivalent) with a brighter f/2.8-5.9 aperture range. The wider end is good for snapshots and moderate portraits; the telephoto end is a modest zoom.

• Olympus: 36-180mm (35mm equivalent) with a slightly narrower f/3.5-5.6 aperture. This gives the Olympus more reach but starts less wide and with a dimmer lens.

Though nominally Olympus's 5x zoom outperforms Canon’s 4x zoom in length, the Canon’s wider angle lens edges out for landscapes and street photography, where more context and environmental cues matter. Conversely, the Olympus's longer range may appeal to those dabbling into wildlife or sports at a casual level - provided you’re aware the image quality at max zoom softens and has edge distortion.

Neither camera features image stabilization, so telephoto shots can easily blur without steady hands or flash.

Autofocus Performance: Fast Enough for Casual Snapping?

Both cameras rely on contrast-detection AF, commonplace in compacts but slower than DSLR or mirrorless phase-detect systems.

• Canon A1200 uses 9 focus points with face detection. It offers both single and continuous AF modes, plus tracking and center-weighted focusing.

• Olympus FE-47 offers multi-area AF and center-weighted modes, though it lacks face detection and continuous AF options.

In practical use, Canon’s autofocus is noticeably quicker and more reliable, especially in decent lighting. The face detection helps keep portraits crisp without fiddling. Olympus struggles more in low contrast scenes and lacks continuous AF, hindering action or moving subject captures.

Neither would pose much of a challenge for fast-moving wildlife or sports; they simply aren’t designed with that use case in mind.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speeds: How Fast Can You Turn the Frame?

If you’re chasing motion or just love to capture a rapid-fire sequence of candid moments:

• Canon PowerShot A1200 manages a max continuous shooting speed of about 1 frame per second (fps). Not fast, but typical for entry compacts of its era.

• Olympus FE-47 doesn’t specify continuous shooting, suggesting no practical burst mode beyond single shots.

Shutter speed ranges differ slightly - the Canon caps at 1/1600 sec and goes as slow as 15 seconds, useful for long exposures, while Olympus covers from 4 sec up to 1/2000 sec, giving a little edge in bright light shooting but lacking the very long exposure modes critical for night or astro photography.

Neither camera allows manual exposure controls beyond basic program auto modes - a limitation for enthusiasts seeking creative control.

Video Capabilities: Enough for Casual Captures?

Video is an afterthought in both cameras:

• Canon A1200 shoots 720p HD video at 24 fps using MPEG-4/H.264 codecs. It lacks microphone or headphone jacks and has no built-in stabilization.

• Olympus FE-47 records only VGA resolution (640x480) at 30 fps in Motion JPEG format - a severely outdated and low-res option by any standard.

If shooting video matters (even casually), the Canon’s higher resolution and more modern codec make it the obvious choice. Neither supports 4K or advanced video features, reflecting their primary focus as still photographers' tools.

Battery Life and Storage: Keeping the Cameras Running

Both cameras depend on common 2x AA batteries - a convenient choice for travelers or casual users without charging worries.

• Canon A1200 quotes roughly 200 shots per battery set, which is modest.

• Olympus FE-47 does not specify battery life but likely similar.

Both sport a single SD card slot compatible with SD/SDHC/SDXC memory cards. Olympus uniquely includes some internal memory, but its minuscule size restricts usage.

From a real-world perspective, AA batteries are both a blessing and a curse: easy replacements anywhere but add bulk and weight, and performance can vary widely depending on battery quality.

Real-Life Photography Use Cases: Where Do These Cameras Shine?

Let’s break down how these two fare in various photography niches, based on hands-on testing and experience shooting with compacts in comparable conditions.

Portrait Photography

• Canon A1200 wins thanks to face detection autofocus, nicer color reproduction (especially skin tones), and a slightly faster lens at 28mm that produces modest background blur in close-ups.
• Olympus FE-47 lacks face detection, making it less intuitive for portrait novices, and the slower aperture limits bokeh potential.

Landscape Photography

• Canon’s wider 28mm equivalent angle reigns supreme for sweeping vistas versus Olympus’s more tele-centric 36mm start.
• Neither camera features weather sealing, so caution is advised in wet or dusty environments.
• Image resolution is similar, but Olympus’s slight edge in megapixels doesn’t translate into better dynamic range or highlight recovery.

Wildlife and Sports

• Neither camera is designed for fast action but Canon’s better autofocus tracking and continuous AF offer marginal benefits.
• Slow burst rates on both severely limit capturing peak moments.
• Olympus’s longer zoom range looks promising but image softness and no image stabilization diminish practical usefulness.

Street Photography

• The Canon’s optical viewfinder provides an advantage when shooting in bright conditions or when trying to be inconspicuous.
• Olympus’s lack of a viewfinder makes you rely on the LCD, which can be tough in sunlit city streets.
• Both are compact enough to be pocket-friendly but not stealthy.

Macro Photography

• Both feature 3cm minimum focusing distances, standard for their size, allowing decent close-ups of flowers or small objects.
• Canon’s slightly wider lens helps contextualize macro shots better.

Night and Astro Photography

• Neither camera excels here. The Canon’s max 15-second shutter and ISO ceiling provide very limited long exposure potential for stars.
• Olympus offers longer max shutter of 4 seconds only - too short for serious astro work.
• Noise levels at higher ISOs preclude clean night images.

Video Usage

• Canon A1200’s 720p output is passable for casual family or travel videos; Olympus’s low-res VGA makes it unappealing for anything but basic clips.

Travel Photography

• Both are light and pocketable but suffer from limited control, slow startup times, and low battery lives. AA batteries mitigate the latter for remote trips.
• Canon’s more versatile zoom and viewfinder make it a slightly better all-around travel companion.

Professional Work

• Neither camera suits professional workflows due to lack of RAW support, limited controls, and modest sensor capabilities.

Value Assessment and Price Considerations

Both cameras are firmly in the “budget compact” category, with the Canon A1200 priced around $109 new at launch and the Olympus FE-47 now often found only used or at negligible street prices.

Considering age and specs, their value today is primarily for collectors, casual users desiring an ultra-simple point-and-shoot, or those budgeting under $100 looking for physical zoom not offered on smartphones.

Using modern entry-level mirrorless or even mid-tier smartphone cameras will dramatically outperform both, especially in image quality, autofocus, and video.

Canon A1200 front Canon A1200 screen back Olympus FE 47 front Olympus FE 47 screen back

Quick Pros and Cons Rundown

Canon PowerShot A1200

Pros:

• Optical viewfinder for better framing in bright light
• Face detection autofocus improves portrait shots
• Wider-angle lens better suited to landscapes and street photography
• 720p HD video recording at 24 fps
• Intuitive menus and controls

Cons:

• No image stabilization
• Slow continuous shooting rate (1 fps)
• Limited low-light and high ISO performance
• No RAW file support
• Small fixed LCD screen without touch or tilt

Olympus FE-47

Pros:

• Longer 5x optical zoom (36-180mm equivalent)
• Slightly higher megapixel count (14 MP)
• Simple, clean design with larger buttons
• Internal storage for quick snaps in a pinch

Cons:

• No viewfinder - reliance on LCD outdoors is problematic
• No face detection AF or continuous AF modes
• Limited/shallow menus with fewer options
• VGA video only (low resolution)
• No image stabilization or RAW support

Who Should Pick Which?

If you’re a beginner or casual shooter looking for a simple, affordable zoom compact for daylight travel, family events, or general snapshots, the Canon PowerShot A1200 is the better pick of the two - even nearly a decade after release. Its ergonomic touches like an optical finder and face detection AF matter in real-world shooting.

If you’re a cheapskate zoom enthusiast who prioritizes telephoto reach over image quality and can tolerate a clunky, less flexible experience, possibly for casual wildlife or sports photograph forays without the ambition to crop or edit, then the Olympus FE-47 might have a niche appeal.

For both, understand their limitations: neither camera truly compares to modern compact cameras or phones, especially in low light, video, or dynamic range.

Final Thoughts: Are These Cameras Still Worth It Today?

The Canon PowerShot A1200 and Olympus FE-47 are relics from a time when compact cameras ruled the budget scene. Tested side by side, the A1200 justifies a small place in the casual shooter’s arsenal with better autofocus, wider optics, and a viewfinder that remains useful even today. The Olympus FE-47’s longer zoom is tempting but hamstrung by poor focusing and outdated video.

If your photographic aspirations extend beyond nostalgic point-and-shoot simplicity, consider investing a bit more for newer entry-level mirrorless models or premium smartphones with multi-lens setups and modern autofocus systems.

But if your priority is simple, functional, and cheap, and you don’t mind the limitations, either camera can still capture memories - just with the understanding that you will be trading advanced features and quality for old-school charm.

Thanks for reading. If you want to dive deeper into modern cameras or lenses suited for your photography interests, let me know - I’m happy to share tested recommendations tailored to your needs. Until then, happy shooting with whatever gear you pick up!