Canon G12 vs Kodak Easyshare M5370: A Hands-On Comparison of Two 2011 Compact Cameras

In the crowded world of compact digital cameras circa 2011, the Canon PowerShot G12 and the Kodak Easyshare M5370 represented two very different approaches to small-sensor photography. Canon’s G12 targeted enthusiasts seeking manual control and respectable image quality in a pocketable body, while Kodak’s Easyshare line leaned toward casual shooters who valued simplicity and longer zoom reach. Having extensively tested both cameras in varied scenarios, I’m keen to break down where these two models shine - and where they stumble - through the lens of practical usage and technical performance.

Whether you’re a seasoned photographer considering an upgrade or someone diving deep into the compact camera segment, this in-depth comparison will illuminate which of these 2011 compacts deserves your attention.

Unpacking the Cameras: Size, Handling, and Ergonomics

Our journey begins with the first tactile encounter: how these cameras feel in the hand and respond to user input.

Surprisingly, the Canon G12, despite being the more sophisticated camera, offers a comfortably chunky, surprisingly ergonomic grip for a compact. Measuring 112 x 76 x 48mm and weighing 401g, it has a reassuring heft that fits well for photographers who appreciate solid handling, especially over longer shoots. Its manual controls - shutter speed dial, aperture rings, and dedicated exposure compensation dial - invite immediate intuitive engagement. Canon’s design legacy here is evident: controls where you want them, tactile feedback that punches above class.

Oppositely, the Kodak Easyshare M5370 is built with portability and ease-of-use as the guiding stars. Its body is noticeably thinner and lighter (101 x 58 x 19mm at 150g) - more like a modern phone than a traditional compact camera. This makes it a sneaky candidate for discreet street photography or travel where size and weight trump extensive manual input. However, this compactness comes at the cost of bulkier control layouts with fewer physical buttons, resulting in an all-digital touchscreen interface that, while accessible for beginners, may frustrate those desiring hands-on fiddling.

Looking down at the control surfaces reveals the difference in philosophy. The G12 boasts dedicated dials and buttons, optimized for swift adjustments during fast-changing conditions. The M5370’s interface is mostly touchscreen-driven without manual focus or aperture rings - a design ideal for amateurs but limiting for advanced users craving deeper exposure control.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

When it comes to photography, size and design fade into the background compared to one absolute: image quality. Both cameras sport small CCD sensors, but the technical specifications betray meaningful differences.

• Canon G12 Sensor: 1/1.7" CCD sensor measuring approximately 7.44 x 5.58mm with a 10-megapixel resolution
• Kodak M5370 Sensor: Smaller 1/2.3" CCD sensor roughly 6.17 x 4.55mm with 16 megapixels

At a glance, Kodak’s higher 16MP count might impress, boasting a max resolution of 4608x3456 pixels versus Canon’s 3648x2736. Yet, as any seasoned camera tester knows, sensor size and pixel density weigh heavily on image quality. Canon’s sensor is larger by 41.52 mm² compared to Kodak’s 28.07 mm², giving each pixel more surface area to gather photons, reducing noise and increasing dynamic range.

DxO Mark data - the gold standard for sensor evaluation - ranks the Canon G12 with an overall score of 47, color depth of 20.4 bits, and a dynamic range nearing 11.2 EV stop. Kodak’s M5370 unfortunately lacks DxO testing data, but given the sensor’s size and pixel density, it likely falls behind in low-light performance and dynamic range.

In practical shooting, this means:

• Canon G12 delivers cleaner images at higher ISO settings, exhibiting less noise and smoother gradations in shadows and highlights.
• Kodak’s M5370 can capture more detail in good light thanks to its higher resolution, but image noise increases rapidly beyond ISO 200-400, constraining its usability indoors or late afternoons.

Focusing and Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Real-World Reliability

Autofocus (AF) performance can make or break a shoot, especially for moving subjects or spontaneous moments. Here’s where these two cameras truly diverge.

Canon G12 AF System

• Offers 9 contrast-detection AF points with face detection
• Supports manual focus with external ring control
• Single-shot AF only, no continuous tracking or burst focusing
• Contrast detection is solid for the era but can be sluggish compared to modern phase detection systems

Kodak M5370 AF System

• Utilizes contrast detection autofocus without manual focus
• Has face detection but no continuous AF or tracking modes

Due to the lack of continuous AF and tracking in either, neither camera is engineered for fast action or wildlife photography. However, from testing, the Canon’s manual focus and sharper AF performance offer an edge for portrait and studio styles where deliberate framing is desired. Kodak’s touchscreen interface, while convenient, can introduce focus hunting and delays in low contrast or dim conditions.

Furthermore, the Canon G12’s shutter speed options range from 15 seconds to a relatively fast 1/4000s, giving control for both night exposures and quick sports captures. Kodak caps out at 1/1600s shutter speed, limiting action freezing ability.

In continuous shooting, initial specifications reveal Canon’s 1 fps only - not a sports camera by any stretch, but enough for casual usage. Kodak does not specify continuous rates, generally indicating minimal burst capability.

Screen, Viewfinder, and User Interface: How You See the World

Having a certain level of visual feedback and interface fluidity is paramount in composition and review.

• Canon G12: 2.8” fully articulated screen, 461k dots resolution, optical tunnel viewfinder (no EVF)
• Kodak M5370: 3” fixed touchscreen TFT LCD, 230k dots, no viewfinder

The Canon’s articulated LCD is excellent for low or high-angle shooting - useful in macro or street environments - and the slightly higher resolution screen makes framing and manual focusing easier. The tunnel optical viewfinder, while basic, can assist in bright sunlight where LCDs fall short.

Kodak’s touchscreen is larger and intuitive for casual users but suffers in bright conditions due to lower brightness and reflections. Also, absence of any viewfinder renders holding the camera up to eye-level impossible, which can be disorienting or tiring over long sessions.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: Versatility in the Field

Both cameras share a 28-140mm equivalent zoom, a versatile range covering wide-angle landscapes to moderate telephoto portraits.

• Canon G12 Lens: F2.8-4.5 maximum aperture, 5x zoom, macro focusing down to 1cm
• Kodak M5370 Lens: Similar zoom extent (5.8x multiplier), macro focusing down to 5cm

Here, Canon’s brighter aperture at the wide end offers tangible benefits for low-light shooting and smoother background blur when shooting portraits. The tighter macro focus range (down to 1cm) enables much more detailed close-ups versus Kodak’s more limited 5cm distance.

Optical image stabilization is built into the Canon G12’s lens system, helping reduce blur from handshake during slower shutter speeds. The Kodak M5370 has no stabilization, which severely limits handheld usability in dim conditions or at full zoom.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations

No camera test is complete without understanding how the hardware performs day-to-day in terms of power and memory.

• Canon G12: Uses rechargeable NB-7L battery, rated for roughly 370 shots per charge
• Kodak M5370: Employs KLIC-7006 battery, with no manufacturer-quoted battery life (generally less than Canon based on test shoots)

The G12’s superior battery life can sustain longer shooting sessions or travel shoots without constant recharge anxiety. Kodak’s smaller body and battery likely necessitate more frequent swaps.

In storage:

• Canon uses standard SD/SDHC/SDXC cards
• Kodak relies on MicroSD/MicroSDHC and includes internal memory

From a workflow perspective, the Canon’s common SD card support eases integration with existing setups. Kodak’s internal memory is convenient but quickly filled, requiring reliance on smaller cards - sometimes an annoyance for extended shoots.

Video Capabilities: Moving Images in 2011 Compact Cameras

Considering video capture’s growing importance even in compact photography, both cameras offer 720p HD recording.

Canon’s inclusion of optical image stabilization during video shooting noticeably smooths handheld footage, a definite plus for casual videographers. Kodak’s lack of stabilization demands more cautious shooting or tripod use.

Neither camera supports external microphones or advanced video controls, fortifying their role as secondary video tools rather than dedicated camcorders.

Field Performance Across Photography Genres

Let's move beyond specs to real-world applications, scoring both cameras in various genres most relevant to users.

Canon G12 screen back Kodak Easyshare M5370 screen back

Portrait Photography

The Canon G12, with its brighter aperture, accurate face detection autofocus, and ability to manually adjust aperture for depth of field control, provides stronger results. Skin tones render naturally with good color depth, while achieving smoother background separation is easier due to the lens speed and sensor size.

Kodak struggles to isolate subjects crisply due to its slower lens and limited manual controls. Images often appear flatter in terms of dynamic range and have less favorable bokeh characteristics.

Landscape Photography

Canon’s larger sensor delivers improved dynamic range and better shadow detail - key for landscapes with challenging light gradations. The G12’s 10MP resolution is adequate for prints up to A3 size without obvious softness, and the articulated screen assists framing on uneven terrain.

Kodak’s higher megapixel count provides more resolution but limited dynamic range and higher noise in low-contrast shadows diminishes image quality. Canon’s lens sharpness and color reproduction are superior overall.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Neither camera is designed with rapid action in mind. Canon’s 1 fps continuous shooting and slow autofocus make capturing fast subjects challenging. Kodak fares worse with no continuous AF and slower focusing, meaning many decisive moments will be lost.

For sports or wildlife enthusiasts, neither is recommended except for casual snapshooting.

Street Photography

Kodak’s smaller size and light weight offer an advantage for discrete shooting, but the lack of an optical or electronic viewfinder makes precise composition tricky in bright sunlight.

Canon’s more substantial form factor is less inconspicuous but offers superior manual control for challenging lighting or candid shots.

Macro Photography

Canon’s macro focusing down to 1cm combined with manual focus rings enable stunning detailed close-ups, an area where the M5370’s 5cm closest focus and no manual focus limit creative possibilities.

Night and Astro Photography

Canon’s longer shutter speeds (down to 15 seconds) and better noise control at ISO up to 3200 open doors for star trails and nocturnal landscapes, though its small sensor still imposes limits.

Kodak’s 8-second maximum shutter and noisier sensor make it less suited for prolonged exposures and night scenes.

Travel Photography

For travel, where balance between image quality, weight, and battery life matters, the Canon G12 emerges as a versatile all-arounder, capable of landscapes, portraits, and casual video. Kodak’s lightweight charm and touchscreen ease make it an appealing secondary camera or for snapshot-focused tourists on a budget.

Build Quality and Durability

Neither camera offers environmental sealing or ruggedness. Canon’s sturdier build is evident in the weight and thickness, inspiring confidence in durability over years of daily use. Kodak’s slim body feels less robust, suitable for gentle everyday usage.

Connectivity and Workflow

Canon includes Eye-Fi connectivity for wireless image transfer - a boon for photographers wanting instant sharing without cables. Kodak offers none, which could slow mobile workflows.

Both provide HDMI and USB 2.0 connections, but only Canon supports raw format shooting, a critical feature for pros and enthusiasts demanding post-processing freedom.

Price and Value: Budget vs. Feature Set

• Canon G12 MSRP approx. $600 (2011)
• Kodak M5370 MSRP approx. $160 (2011)

The stark price difference tracks their capabilities. Canon’s G12 brings advanced features, manual control, and superior image quality at a premium. Kodak’s M5370 answers the low-budget compact segment, targeting casual users needing a simple point-and-shoot with moderate zoom and resolution.

Summarizing Performance Insights

Canon PowerShot G12:

• Pros: Robust build, manual controls, articulated screen, superior image quality, optical IS, raw support, better low-light handling
• Cons: Larger and heavier, slower continuous shooting, dated AF system, no EVF

Kodak Easyshare M5370:

• Pros: Lightweight, simple touchscreen interface, higher megapixel count, affordable price
• Cons: Limited manual control, smaller sensor limits image quality and low light performance, no image stabilization, subpar burst and AF speed

Final Recommendations: Which Camera Fits Your Needs?

For serious photography enthusiasts or semi-professionals wanting a controllable compact with competent image quality and some manual freedom, the Canon PowerShot G12 remains the better choice. Its sensor size and lens quality have aged well, delivering reliable images and a satisfying shooting experience even today, especially in portraits, macro, landscape, and travel.

Beginners or budget-conscious buyers who want a portable camera for casual use, simple snapshots, and moderate zoom might find the Kodak Easyshare M5370 adequate. It’s easy to use, light, and less intimidating for those uninterested in manual exposure or focus.

However, anyone intending to push creative boundaries will likely find Kodak’s M5370 limiting due to its lack of manual controls and diminished image quality in challenging conditions.

Parting Thought: Test the Cameras Yourself

Having personally handled thousands of cameras from budget compacts to professional DSLRs, I recommend aspiring buyers to, whenever possible, physically test these models under their typical shooting scenarios. Specs and scores guide us, but feel, ergonomics, and subjective satisfaction in use often cement a camera as a trusted creative tool.

Happy shooting!