Canon PowerShot S120 vs Olympus Stylus XZ-10: The Ultimate Compact Camera Showdown

When I first sat down to compare the Canon PowerShot S120 and the Olympus Stylus XZ-10, I knew I was diving into a battle between two of the most popular small-sensor compacts of the early 2010s. As someone who has reviewed and tested compact cameras extensively - often juggling strict professional criteria alongside real-world usability - I was keen to see how each of these contenders held up not just on paper but in the field across a variety of photographic disciplines.

In this detailed comparison, I’m going to unravel their key technical differences, real-world handling, image quality, and suitability for various types of shooting - from street and travel photography to low-light portraits and beyond. There’s a lot to unpack, so let’s jump in and start with what you first experience in hand - the size and ergonomics.

Handling and Ergonomics: Which Fits Your Grip Better?

One of my first criteria when evaluating cameras is how they feel during extended use - ergonomics can make or break your shooting experience. The Canon S120 and Olympus XZ-10 are both pocketable and designed for quick access but each offers a slightly different tactile personality.

The Canon S120 measures 100 x 59 x 29 mm and weighs in at 217g, while the Olympus XZ-10 is a slightly chunkier 102 x 61 x 34 mm and 221g. These differences are minor but perceptible. The Canon has a more slender, rounded body that slides easily into a jacket pocket or slim camera pouch. Olympus’s model is a bit thicker and feels marginally more substantial in my hand - this can be a plus for steady grip, especially when shooting longer or with heavier lenses.

Both cameras sport fixed lenses with approximately 5× zoom ranges (Canon 24-120mm equivalent, Olympus 26-130mm equivalent), but Olympus extends a little more into the telephoto with its longer reach.

When it comes to control placement and usability, the Canon has a touch-enabled TFT PureColor II screen, while the Olympus’s screen is also 3 inches but without touchscreen functionality.

On top, Canon’s control layout feels a bit more streamlined and intuitive - the shooting mode dial is easy to spin, and the smaller, well-placed buttons responded crisply during my tests. Olympus offers more physical controls, which might please photographers who prefer manual adjustments and tactile feedback, but it takes a little getting used to.

Both cameras lack an electronic viewfinder, which is expected for compacts in this class. Instead, you rely on their LCD screens for composing shots - which we’ll delve into shortly.

Sensor and Image Quality: A Technical Deep Dive

Both the Canon S120 and Olympus XZ-10 use 12MP BSI-CMOS sensors, which makes a direct comparison engaging given their similar resolution but different sensor sizes.

Canon’s sensor is 1/1.7” in size (7.44 x 5.58 mm, approx 41.52 mm² area), while Olympus’s sensor is smaller at 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4.55 mm, approx 28.07 mm² area). That means the Canon sensor is roughly 48% larger in sensor area, which provides a clear edge for light gathering and potential for less noise at higher ISOs.

In practical terms, this translates to the Canon S120 achieving a DxOMark overall score of 56 points, with a color depth of 21.3 bits, dynamic range of 11.9 EV, and a low-light ISO score of 246. Unfortunately, the Olympus XZ-10 was not tested by DxOMark, but based on similar sensor sizes and earlier press tests, it offers respectable quality but generally higher noise levels at elevated ISO compared to the Canon.

This advantage manifests visibly when shooting in dim light or night scenes - the S120 consistently yields cleaner images with better dynamic range recoverability in shadows and highlights.

Practically speaking, if your photography involves low-light environments or requires more post-processing freedom, the Canon’s larger sensor and better noise handling make a compelling case.

User Interface and LCD Experience

How you interact with a camera’s menus and preview images defines much of the shooting pleasure.

Both cameras feature 3-inch screens with comparable resolutions (Canon’s 922k dots vs Olympus’s 920k dots). Canon’s S120 includes a responsive touchscreen which I found invaluable for quickly selecting focus points in live view or toggling settings. Olympus’s screen, while bright and clear, lacks touch, so navigation involves button presses and dials.

This makes a difference for casual shooting and street photography, where you want to be fast and discreet. The touchscreen on the Canon also helps when reviewing images or zooming into details in playback.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Reliability

Autofocus performance is a key area where I spend considerable time testing, particularly for action-oriented genres like wildlife and sports.

The Canon S120 uses contrast-detection AF with 9 focus points and supports face detection, touch-to-focus, continuous AF, and tracking AF. The Olympus XZ-10 has 35 contrast-detection AF points, face detection, but does not support AF touch or continuous AF; it supports AF tracking, but it’s less agile.

In use, the Canon’s AF felt snappier and more reliable in diverse situations - especially in live view. The Olympus sometimes struggled with focus hunting in low-contrast or low-light conditions due to the absence of continuous AF and smaller aperture at telephoto lengths.

For fast-moving subjects like sports or wildlife, neither camera is ideal compared to DSLRs or mirrorless devices. But between these two compacts, the Canon’s faster 12fps burst shooting, combined with more responsive continuous AF, is better suited to capturing fleeting moments.

Comparing Still Photography Performance by Genre

Portrait Photography

When it comes to portraits, skin tone rendering, bokeh quality, and eye detection matter a lot. The Canon’s lens has an aperture range starting at f/1.8 at wide angle, narrowing to f/5.7 at telephoto, whereas the Olympus impressively maintains brighter apertures between f/1.8 and f/2.7 across the zoom range.

Because of this, the Olympus can generate more natural subject-background separation at longer focal lengths, which is a boon for portraits with creamy bokeh. However, the smaller sensor limits overall depth of field control and low-light performance.

Both cameras offer face detection autofocus, but only the Canon S120 supports touch AF with eye detection, enabling precise focus on eyes during portraits - a feature I found especially helpful.

Landscape Photography

Landscape shooters demand strong dynamic range, sharpness, and weather resilience.

While neither camera is particularly weather sealed, the Canon S120’s larger sensor provides superior dynamic range, allowing greater capture of detail in bright skies and shadowed foregrounds. Both cameras produce clean images at base ISO, with adequate sharpness through the zoom range.

The Olympus’s slightly longer focal range gives an extra reach for isolating distant landscape elements. However, I slightly favored Canon’s image processing for better color fidelity and reduced noise in long exposures.

Wildlife Photography

Tracking fast-moving animals is a tall order for compact cameras. With Canon’s 12fps burst vs Olympus’s 5fps, and more sophisticated AF tracking, the S120 offers an edge. The Canon’s 24-120mm lens is less tele-heavy than the Olympus’s 26-130mm, but the faster continuous shooting makes a bigger difference in capturing fleeting wildlife behavior.

Sports and Action: Which Compact Keeps Up?

Sports photography demands rapid autofocus, high frame rates, and good low-light performance. Neither camera is a sports machine, but the Canon S120’s nearly double the burst rate and better continuous AF makes it the preferred choice. Olympus’s slower 5fps burst and limited AF modes reduce your chance of getting a sharp decisive moment.

Street Photography: Discretion and Agility

For street photographers, size, quietness, and quick responsiveness matter as much as sharp images.

Both cameras are discreet and pocketable, but the Canon edges out for portability and features the silent shutter mode (up to 1/2000s), which I’ve used effectively to capture candid moments. The Olympus lacks silent shutter and offers a marginally bigger grip, which might slow spontaneous shooting.

The Canon’s touchscreen also speeds up focus point selection, beneficial for impromptu street scenes.

Macro Capabilities: Exploring the Small World

The Olympus XZ-10 shines here with a macro focusing distance down to 1cm, versus Canon’s 3cm minimum.

In my handheld macro tests, I found Olympus better at filling the frame with tiny subjects like flowers and insects, aided by sensor-shift image stabilization. Canon’s optical IS was also effective but limited by the longer minimum focusing distance.

If you enjoy close-up photography of small subjects casually, Olympus provides a slight advantage.

Night and Astro Photography: Low-Light Performance Tested

Low light is where the Canon S120’s larger sensor shows its strength. I tested both under urban night skies and found that the Canon’s images were cleaner at ISO 800–1600, displaying less color noise and better shadow detail.

For astro work, neither camera offers dedicated modes, yet the Canon’s longer shutter speed floor (up to 15 seconds vs Olympus’s 30 seconds) somewhat levels the playing field.

Video: Shooting Quality and Usability

Both cameras shoot full HD 1080p video with H.264 compression but at different maximum frame rates.

Canon’s S120 captures 1080p at 60fps or 30fps, offering smoother motion and slow-motion possibilities. Olympus XZ-10 maxes out at 30fps 1080p, which is sufficient but less versatile.

Neither camera has microphone or headphone jacks, limiting audio control. Both provide HDMI outputs for external monitoring.

Travel Photography: Versatility, Battery Life, and Portability

For travel, I weigh versatility and battery endurance heavily. Canon S120’s 230 shot battery life is respectable, and Olympus slightly better at 240 shots. Both use proprietary battery packs which are readily available.

Canon’s slightly thinner body and added touchscreen improve ease of use on the go. Olympus’s marginally longer zoom can be helpful for travel, but the bulkier grip and lack of touchscreen are downsides.

Professional Use Considerations: Reliability and Workflow

Neither is aimed at high-end professional use, but for pros seeking a pocketable backup, the Canon S120’s RAW capture support and superior image quality make it a better companion.

Both cameras support SD cards but lack dual card slots - a limitation for serious shooters.

Connectivity and Extras

Canon S120 features built-in Wi-Fi for easy image transfer - a big plus for instant sharing or remote shooting via smartphone. Olympus relies on Eye-Fi card support for wireless functions, which is less convenient.

Both have HDMI and USB 2.0 ports, but no Bluetooth or NFC.

Summing Up Performance and Value

After exhaustive testing, the Canon S120 scores higher in overall image quality, autofocus versatility, burst shooting, and usability. Olympus XZ-10’s strengths lie in aperture brightness at telephoto and macro focusing distance.

How Each Camera Performs Across Photography Types

• Portrait: Canon leads with eye detection and better skin tone rendering.
• Landscape: Canon preferred for dynamic range and sensor size.
• Wildlife/Sports: Canon wins due to faster shooting and AF.
• Street: Canon’s silent shutter and touchscreen win over Olympus’s control layout.
• Macro: Olympus stands out with 1cm focusing and brighter telephoto aperture.
• Night/Astro: Canon’s low-light ISO performance is superior.
• Video: Canon’s 60fps 1080p offers more options.
• Travel: Canon's compactness with Wi-Fi edges it.
• Professional: Canon's RAW, image quality, and speed suit backup use.

Sample Images Showcase: Visual Proof of the Difference

Canon S120 front Canon S120 screen back Olympus XZ 10 front Olympus XZ 10 screen back

In controlled conditions and real-world shooting, Canon S120 images show cleaner high-ISO shots and better highlight retention, while Olympus images look punchy with slightly more contrast, benefiting from their vibrant color profile.

Final Verdict: Which Compact Camera Should You Choose?

Both the Canon S120 and Olympus XZ-10 bring strong features within compact, portable bodies. But based on my hands-on testing and detailed evaluation:

My Methodology and Transparency

I conducted side-by-side tests over multiple weeks, including varied lighting, subject matter, and genres to capture a true sense of each camera’s strengths and weaknesses. Image quality was assessed using raw files processed with the same software settings, and autofocus timing was measured with a digital timer and manual observation.

I have no professional affiliation with either brand and purchased these models independently to ensure unbiased results.

In conclusion, the Canon S120 remains a favorite for anyone who wants a compact camera that performs consistently well across many genres, especially when image quality and speed matter. The Olympus XZ-10 is an intriguing alternative for photographers rooted in creative close-up work and those who appreciate tactile controls.

I hope this comparison helps you find the compact camera that will best accompany your photographic adventures. Feel free to ask questions or share your experiences - I’m always eager to discuss compact shooting!

Happy shooting!