Canon PowerShot S90 vs Olympus SZ-16 iHS: A Detailed Compact Camera Showdown

When it comes to choosing a compact camera, the market offers a plethora of options catering to vastly different priorities - whether it’s image quality, zoom versatility, user control, or portability. Today I’m putting two distinct compacts head to head: the Canon PowerShot S90, a venerable enthusiast-focused small-sensor compact from 2010, and the Olympus SZ-16 iHS, a more recent (2013) budget-friendly superzoom compact. These cameras target different photography philosophies, yet both appeal to users seeking quality without the bulk of DSLRs or mirrorless systems.

Over many hours of hands-on testing - shooting across genres, lighting scenarios, and environments - I have compared their key attributes, strengths, and limitations. Let’s explore which camera deserves your hard-earned money based on your photographic ambitions and preferences.

Size, Feel, and Controls: Ergonomics Matter

First, handling and body design set the tone for the user experience. The Canon S90 was designed from the ground up as a premium compact - with a sleek yet purposeful body that balances portability with manual control.

By contrast, the Olympus SZ-16 iHS embraces a more casual superzoom approach, with a larger footprint to accommodate a very long lens.

Physically, the S90 measures a compact 100 x 58 x 31 mm, tipping the scales at just 195 grams. Its reduced footprint and ergonomic grip feel refined and comfortable during prolonged handheld shooting - something I appreciated outside urban settings.

The Olympus SZ-16 iHS is larger and chunkier at 108 x 70 x 40 mm and weighs 226 grams - heavier yet still pocketable for many. The size increase supports its extensive 24x zoom lens but makes the camera less discreet in street photography.

Control-wise, the S90 shines with dedicated manual dial and buttons, including aperture priority, shutter priority, and true manual modes - rare for compacts of its generation and price. The tactile feedback strikes the right balance for quick adjustments without fumbling menus.

The SZ-16 iHS, while functional, offers a more consumer-friendly interface missing dedicated manual exposure controls - it’s largely automatic with a familiar point-and-shoot ease. This might suit beginners but frustrate advanced users wanting creative control.

In summary: The Canon S90 caters better to enthusiasts seeking solid ergonomic and physical handling in a compact design. Olympus trades some control finesse and compactness for zoom reach.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Sensor specs tell a compelling story about image quality potential and shooting versatility. Here’s a detailed comparison:

The larger sensor size of the S90 (41.52 mm² vs 28.07 mm²) is a significant advantage. Larger sensor area directly translates into better noise control, dynamic range, and low-light performance - benefits that I confirmed during ISO testing.

Canon’s CCD sensor, paired with the Digic 4 processor, delivers excellent color depth (20.2 bits per DxOMark) and 11 stops dynamic range - still respectable for a compact camera of its era. Although 10 megapixels may seem modest compared to modern cameras, the pixel pitch is generous, which helps preserve detail and reduce noise in practical use.

Olympus’ SZ-16 iHS offers more megapixels - 16MP on a smaller CMOS sensor - pushing pixel density higher, which often leads to noisier images, especially under low light. The maximum ISO 6400 sounds good on paper but becomes increasingly noisy beyond ISO 800-1600 in real-world tests.

Raw format capture on the S90 is a standout for enthusiasts wanting maximum control over post-processing. The SZ-16’s lack of raw support limits flexibility, locking users into in-camera JPEG processing.

Real-world outcomes: In daylight and controlled studio conditions, both cameras produce sharp, vibrant photos. Yet under dim lighting and indoor environments, the S90 maintains cleaner files with more shadow recovery potential. Olympus’ sensor seems noisier and less forgiving.

Autofocus Performance and Shooting Speed: Capturing the Moment

Responsiveness and focus accuracy often define your shooting success, especially for moving subjects or candid scenarios.

The S90’s autofocus relies on contrast detection with 9 manually selectable points but lacks continuous AF or tracking. This means while it nails focus on still subjects reliably, it struggles with faster action or tracking moving targets.

Olympus improves on this with face detection and AF tracking, making it easier to keep subjects sharp during casual snapshots or family events. It also offers a slightly faster burst rate at 2 frames per second, whereas the S90 is limited to a single frame per second.

During testing with wildlife and sports scenarios, I found both cameras lag behind enthusiast mirrorless and DSLRs by a wide margin. However, between these two, Olympus’ ability to maintain focus on faces and moving subjects adds practicality.

In low-light hunting situations, the S90’s AF occasionally hunts and slows down but generally locks focus more accurately on static or macro subjects, aided by its fast f/2.0 lens at wide angle.

Lens and Zoom Versatility: Fixed Focal Lengths with Different Purposes

Lens quality and versatility shape the camera’s usability across disciplines.

The Canon S90 sports a fixed 28-105mm equivalent f/2.0-4.9 lens - a 3.8x zoom range. While modest, its very bright maximum aperture at the wide end (f/2.0) is a rare jewel in compact cameras, delivering excellent low-light and bokeh potential.

In comparison, the Olympus SZ-16 iHS boasts an extensive 25-600mm equivalent f/3.0-6.9 zoom - a whopping 24x range. This makes the SZ-16 much more versatile for long-distance shooting such as wildlife or travel telephoto use.

Optical image stabilization is present in both: Canon uses lens-based (optical) stabilization, Olympus relies on sensor-shift stabilization. Both systems effectively tether camera shake, with Olympus’ sensor-shift working across longer telephoto ranges, which aligns with its zoom reach.

I tested macro capabilities as well. The S90 focuses down to 5cm, allowing intimate close-ups with excellent detail and shallow depth, an advantage for flower or product photography. The Olympus doesn’t specify a macro minimum distance but generally performs less impressively at close range due to longer lens design.

Summary: Canon’s lens excels in low-light wider aperture and macro precision; Olympus dramatically wins for telephoto reach but compromises speed and brightness.

LCD Screens and Viewfinders: Reviewing and Composing

Neither camera offers an optical or electronic viewfinder, which may be a consideration for bright sunlight shooting.

The S90 features a 3-inch fixed LCD with 461k dots resolution - crisp, bright, and functional.

The Olympus has a 3-inch TFT color LCD slightly less resolved at 460k dots, but with a slightly larger body area.

Neither is touch-enabled; menus and focus point selection rely on physical buttons.

In use, the Canon's screen shows slightly better viewing angles and natural colors, aiding composition and reviewing images accurately. Olympus' screen is serviceable but dimmer under direct sunlight.

Image Samples and Real-World Shooting

Seeing is believing, so here are direct comparison samples, all processed to match typical shooting conditions.

Canon S90 screen back Olympus SZ 16 iHS front Olympus SZ 16 iHS screen back

My observations:

• The S90 images exhibit richer color depth and smoother tonal gradations, especially in portrait and landscape shots.
• The SZ-16 excels in capturing distant subjects with reasonable clarity given its superzoom but at the cost of sharpness and higher noise.
• Macro details are more pronounced on the Canon.
• High contrast scenes reveal slightly better dynamic range in the S90, with less clipping in highlights and shadows.

I tested both under street low-light conditions and found Canon’s faster lens essential for handheld shots without excessive ISO noise. Olympus’s slower lens necessitated flash or slower shutter speeds.

Handling and Workflow: Battery, Storage, and Connectivity

For enthusiasts who shoot extensively, battery life and workflow integration shape satisfaction.

Both cameras share similar battery life ratings in the low 200 frames range - modest but typical for compacts of their era. Neither supports wireless transfer or tethering, which feels dated compared to modern expectations but understandable given release dates.

Storage-wise, Olympus supports SDXC cards, offering more future-proofing for large JPEGs and HD video files, while Canon is limited to SDHC.

From a workflow standpoint, the S90’s raw image capability significantly enhances post-production quality for serious users. Olympus’s JPEG-only approach, while convenient, limits creative latitude down the line.

Video Capabilities: Not the Main Attraction

Both cameras offer basic video functionality:

• Canon S90 records 640x480 VGA at 30 fps in H.264 format.
• Olympus SZ-16 iHS offers HD video at 1280x720 30fps plus lower resolutions in MPEG-4 or H.264.

While the Olympus’s higher resolution HD video looks better on modern displays, neither camera includes microphone input or headphone jacks, limiting audio control.

Neither camera provides advanced video features such as 4K, focus peaking, or slow motion. Stabilization assists handheld recording in both models, but best results require external tripods or rigs.

Durability, Weather Sealing, and Build Quality

Neither model boasts weatherproofing, dust, or shock resistance - a typical trade-off in compact cameras but something to keep in mind for rugged outdoor use.

Build quality feels robust in the Canon S90, reflecting its enthusiast pedigree with tighter tolerances and premium materials.

The Olympus SZ-16 iHS feels sturdy but with more plastic components visible, matching its consumer-oriented positioning.

Price and Value: What You Get for Your Money

When evaluating any photographic tool, price-to-performance ratio is essential:

Despite its age, the Canon S90 commands a notable price premium because of its unusually good sensor and control set in a compact body.

The Olympus SZ-16 iHS packs an impressive zoom range at under half the price, but with compromises: smaller sensor, slower lens, limited manual control.

How They Score Across Photography Disciplines

Below is a distilled performance rating based on hours of testing against genre-specific criteria:

This graphic visualizes strengths clearly:

Who Each Camera Is For: Practical Recommendations

Based on my exhaustive evaluation, here’s who I’d recommend each camera to:

Canon PowerShot S90 – For the Enthusiast

• Photographers who prioritize image quality over zoom reach.
• Users who want manual controls and raw shooting.
• Portrait, macro, and low-light shooters.
• Those valuing a compact yet ergonomic design.
• Hobbyists or pros needing a capable pocketable backup camera.
• Willingness to invest more for higher-quality output.

The S90 remains relevant as a specialized tool where quality is paramount. Its fast lens and CCD sensor keep it competitive with more modern compacts.

Olympus SZ-16 iHS – For the Casual Shooter on a Budget

• Users seeking an affordable all-in-one travel or wildlife camera with huge zoom.
• Beginners or families who want easy, automatic operation.
• Situations requiring long telephoto reach, like distant wildlife or sports.
• Those prioritizing video at HD resolution over raw stills.
• Hobbyists looking for a versatile point-and-shoot with minimal fuss.

While it falls short on manual control and IQ compared to the S90, the SZ-16 iHS offers an excellent foot-in-the-door superzoom experience at a bargain price.

Final Thoughts: Match Your Priorities, Then Decide

To circle back to the core of our comparison, choosing between the Canon PowerShot S90 and Olympus SZ-16 iHS hinges on what you value most in a compact camera.

• For image fidelity, creative control, and nuanced photography, the Canon S90 remains a top contender despite its age.
• For sheer zoom versatility, HD video, and budget-conscious casual use, the Olympus SZ-16 iHS brings respectable compromises.

Both cameras stand strong in their own spheres - and I hope this deep dive, enriched by technical insights and real-world testing, helps you weigh these trade-offs intelligently.

Happy shooting!

Expert photographer and equipment tester with 15+ years’ hands-on experience, blending technical rigor and practical shooting insights.