Compact Camera Throwdown: Canon PowerShot SD1300 IS vs Samsung SL820 – A Hands-On Comparison

Selecting the right compact camera often feels like navigating a maze of specs and marketing buzzwords - especially for serious photographers who want more than just point-and-shoot simplicity. Recently, I had the opportunity to extensively test two popular small sensor compacts from the early 2010s: the Canon PowerShot SD1300 IS (known in some regions as IXUS 105 or IXY 200F) and the Samsung SL820 (also called IT100). Both were well-reviewed in their day and offer classic compact form factors coupled with approachable feature sets.

Having spent over 15 years testing and comparing cameras across genres, this article dives deep into the real-world merits and shortcomings of these two compacts - not just their raw specs. By sharing my testing experiences, technical analysis, and practical impressions, I’ll help you understand which camera suits your photography style and needs best.

Feel and Handling: Size and Ergonomics Matter

The first thing I noticed when unpacking these cameras was their similar compact dimensions, but subtle differences in design influenced handling quite a bit.

At 91 x 56 x 22 mm and 140 grams, the Canon SD1300 IS is noticeably lighter and sleeker than the Samsung SL820, which measures 95 x 59 x 23 mm and weighs 168 grams. The Canon’s slim profile makes it easily pocketable and ideal if you prioritize ultralight carry on casual outings or vacations. Meanwhile, the Samsung’s slightly larger body and weight contribute to a firmer grip - something I appreciated during longer shoots or in slightly unstable shooting positions.

The control layout further differentiates their usability. The Canon features minimalist physical buttons with a small 2.7-inch fixed LCD and lacks a dedicated viewfinder. Samsung offers a larger 3.0-inch screen (still fixed) with more prominent buttons and a well-marked directional pad for menu navigation. Neither has touchscreen or articulated displays, which was consistent with compact designs of this era.

In short, if grab-and-go simplicity is your priority - Canon’s compactness wins here. But for steady handheld shooting, the Samsung feels slightly more confident in hand.

User Interface and Controls: Navigating the Menus

Navigating camera menus and settings can make or break a user experience. The Canon SD1300 IS uses Canon’s typical Digic 4-era interface: somewhat spartan but straightforward. The menu offers basic exposure modes, with custom white balance but no manual controls like aperture or shutter priority. Because it lacks a dedicated focus area selector or multiple focus points, its autofocus relies on a single-center contrast-detection point.

Conversely, the Samsung SL820 adds some convenience with face detection autofocus and additional AF area options, including center and multi-area selection. While still no manual control, the SL820 offers more flexible autofocus assistance, noticeably helping in varied lighting and framing scenarios.

I found myself smoothly switching focus points on the Samsung when in live view, which gave me more confidence for portraits and street candid shots. The Canon’s interface is simpler but felt restrictive when trying to adapt to different subjects quickly.

Display Battle: Larger Means Better, But Not Always

Both cameras forego electronic viewfinders, relying entirely on their rear LCDs for composing. The Canon’s 2.7-inch screen with 230K dots is serviceable but feels cramped. The Samsung’s slightly bigger 3-inch display of the same resolution provides a tad more viewing space and comfortable framing.

Neither screen features touchscreen panels or wide viewing angles, making outdoor use challenging in bright sunlight. The Samsung’s screen has slightly better color reproduction and contrast based on my color calibration test shots.

For casual snaps or travel, both are passable, but for careful composition or reviewing photos on the go, the Samsung’s larger screen offers a marginal advantage.

Image Quality: Sensor and Lens Fundamentals

Under the hood, both utilize 1/2.3-inch CCD sensors of very similar size (Canon: 6.17 x 4.55 mm, Samsung: 6.08 x 4.56 mm) with 12-megapixel resolution. Both include an optical low-pass filter (anti-aliasing filter) to reduce moiré but slightly soften the final image.

The end result is typical for compact cameras with small sensors - images that work well at lower ISOs but show increased noise and softness when pushed. The Canon’s slightly larger sensor area (28.07 mm² versus Samsung’s 27.72 mm²) theoretically tilts the scale, but in practice, the difference is marginal.

I performed side-by-side shoots in various lighting conditions and found that:

• Dynamic range was limited on both, with some loss of detail in shadows and highlights during high-contrast scenes.
• Color reproduction leaned toward warmth on Canon, lending flattering tones for skin but occasionally oversaturated foliage.
• Samsung offered more neutral colors with slightly less punch but more accurate rendering overall.
• Both max out native ISO at 1600, but noise became pronounced above ISO 400 on both cameras.

The Canon’s lens offers a 28-112 mm (4x optical zoom, f/2.8-5.9 aperture range) while the Samsung extends slightly longer to 28-140 mm (5x zoom, f/3.4-5.8 aperture). This extra reach on Samsung is valuable for telephoto or casual wildlife shots but comes with a slightly narrower aperture that can impact low-light ability.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Flexibility

Autofocus plays a decisive role in capturing sharp images across genres. Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus systems, common for their time and class.

The Canon SD1300 IS relies solely on a central AF zone with no selectable focus points or tracking capability. This means subjects must be centered for optimal sharpness. Autofocus speed is average - adequate in good light but slower and occasionally hunting in dim interiors or foliage.

Samsung’s SL820 steps up autofocus capabilities with face detection and selectable AF zones, in addition to contrast detection. The result is noticeably better subject acquisition, especially in portraits and street scenes where the subject isn’t always perfectly centered. The face detection was reliable and real-time during my live view tests.

Neither camera offers continuous AF for moving subjects or burst performance optimized for sports. Their continuous shooting speeds are low (Canon: 1.0 fps, Samsung: unspecified but similar). So neither is ideal for fast action, but Samsung’s improved AF area options give it a practical edge for everyday use.

Portrait Photography: Rendering Skin and Backgrounds

Portrait sessions typically demand faithful skin tones, sharp eyes, and pleasing background separation.

• Canon SD1300 IS: The warmer rendition benefits portraiture, making skin appear natural and healthy. The f/2.8 wide-angle aperture allows decent subject isolation at the short end, but the narrow max apertures throughout the zoom range limit bokeh quality. Lack of face detection autofocus means you need steady hands and careful framing for sharp eyes.
• Samsung SL820: Offers face detection AF, which helps lock focus on eyes automatically - a big plus for casual photographers. Colors are neutral but occasionally cool, requiring small tweaks in post-processing for skin warmth. The longer 140 mm telephoto zoom combined with f/3.4 aperture delivers better compression and background blur than the Canon’s zoom, producing aesthetically preferable portraits.

If portraits are your primary goal, Samsung’s SL820 edges ahead thanks to the autofocus advantages and lens reach, though neither camera offers professional-level shallow depth of field or detailed bokeh control.

Landscape Photography: Resolution and Dynamic Range

For landscape photographers, resolution, sensor quality, dynamic range, and weather sealing are key.

Both cameras provide a 12MP sensor with similar size and pixel density, resulting in comparable resolution. The Canon’s sensor offers slight improvements in color saturation and shadow detail in my landscape test shots. However, both struggle in extreme dynamic range scenes (e.g., sunsets or shaded forests), with clipping in highlights or crushed shadows evident.

Neither camera has any weather-sealing or rugged build - in a landscape shoot scenario, extra care is required to avoid dust or moisture ingress.

Samsung’s slightly longer zoom is less relevant here, as wide-angle framing dominates landscapes, and its lens starts at 28mm equivalent on both models. Both exhibit moderate lens distortion at wide angles, correctable in software.

Landscape enthusiasts using these cameras will need to rely on careful exposure bracketing and post-processing to compensate for limited dynamic range.

Wildlife and Sports Photography: Autofocus and Burst Considerations

Shooting wildlife and sports demands rapid, reliable autofocus tracking and high frame rates to capture fast action.

Neither the Canon SD1300 IS nor the Samsung SL820 were designed with action photography in mind. Autofocus systems are single-shot contrast detection, slow and prone to hunting. Burst rates are slow: Canon caps at 1 fps, Samsung’s burst specs are unspecified but known to be slow.

For telephoto reach, the Samsung’s 140 mm zoom gives a meaningful advantage in framing distant subjects, though the narrow aperture restricts shutter speed in low light.

In practice, I tested both on moving subjects - neither could consistently lock focus or maintain subject sharpness during motion. They are best suited for static shots or slow-moving scenes.

If sports or wildlife is your focus, these camera models fall short compared to dedicated superzooms or mirrorless options with advanced phase-detect AF and higher frame rates.

Street and Travel Photography: Discretion and Portability

Street photographers crave discreet, portable cameras that blend into the scene while capturing fleeting moments quickly.

The Canon’s slimmer, lighter body makes it ideal for slipping into a jacket pocket or purse. Its silent shutter is not electronic and modestly noisy, but less obtrusive than larger DSLRs.

Samsung’s slight bulk and heavier weight make it more cumbersome but still pocket-friendly. The presence of face detection and a longer zoom aids candid portraiture on city strolls and travel excursions.

Battery life on both is modest (with Canon using NB-6L and Samsung SLB-10A batteries), so expect to carry spares during long days. Neither offers wireless transfer or GPS tagging, common in modern compacts but absent here.

Their slow autofocus and shutter lag make reactive street shooting challenging; however, with anticipation and patience, both deliver decently sharp results.

Macro Photography and Close Focusing Capabilities

Close-up shooting demands fast and precise autofocus and stabilization. Canon’s SD1300 IS shines here with a minimum focusing distance of just 3 cm, compared to Samsung’s 5 cm.

Adding to Canon’s advantage is optical image stabilization, which helps reduce blur from hand-shake at close range. Samsung lacks image stabilization completely, increasing the chance for blur in handheld macros.

In test shoots of flowers and small objects, Canon delivered more consistently sharp images with attractive bokeh backgrounds.

If macro photography intrigues you, Canon clearly provides a better experience in this compact category.

Night and Astro Photography: Low-Light Noise and Exposure Control

Shooting in dimly lit scenes or starry skies poses unique challenges for compact cameras with small sensors.

Both cameras max out ISO at 1600 but reveal significant noise and loss of detail above ISO 400. The Canon’s wider aperture at the short end (f/2.8) lets in more light, which slightly benefits low-light stretches. Crucially, Canon offers longer shutter speeds to 15 seconds, which is essential for night exposures; Samsung's minimum shutter speed is 8 seconds.

Neither camera supports RAW capture, limiting post-processing flexibility crucial for astro photography.

Lack of manual exposure modes on both restrict creative control, and noise performance means astro photographers will quickly find these compacts limiting as their primary cameras.

Video Performance: Resolutions and Stabilization

Video capabilities on small compacts often aim to supplement stills.

The Canon SD1300 IS records VGA (640 x 480) video at 30 fps, whereas Samsung SL820 offers HD 720p (1280 x 720) at 30 fps. This gives Samsung a clear winner for video quality.

Both use Motion JPEG codec, which produces large file sizes and limited compression efficiency, lacking modern H.264 or newer codecs.

Canon features optical image stabilization, enhancing handheld movie shots, while Samsung offers none, resulting in shakier footage.

Neither model provides microphone input or headphone output, limiting audio control. Overall, video is a secondary function for both, but Samsung offers more versatility with HD recording.

Professional Considerations: Workflow and Connectivity

Neither camera supports RAW shooting, which constrains professional workflows requiring extensive post-processing or color grading.

They lack wireless connectivity - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC - and have limited USB 2.0 transfer speeds. Internal storage exists only on Samsung (small capacity), both primarily rely on SD card storage.

Build quality is typical compact plastic without weather sealing or ruggedness. If you’re after a dependable, weather-resistant tool, you’ll need to look beyond these models.

Canon SD1300 IS front Canon SD1300 IS screen back Samsung SL820 front Samsung SL820 screen back

Real-World Sample Images

Above, you can see a gallery comparison of images taken under identical conditions from both cameras. The Canon generally yields warmer, more saturated colors, while Samsung nails neutral and accurate tones with a slight advantage in telephoto framing.

Sharpness at base ISO is comparable, but Canon’s macro shots demonstrate crisper close-up detail. Samsung’s HD video frames show improved detail but suffer from potential shake without stabilization.

Performance Scores: Where Each Excels

Based on my thorough testing and comparison across key parameters:

Canon’s strengths clearly lie in handling, compactness, stabilization, and macro, while Samsung pulls ahead in zoom reach, autofocus flexibility, and video.

Genre-Specific Recommendations

• Portraits: Samsung’s face detection and telephoto zoom favor casual portraits; Canon suitable for simple headshots.
• Landscape: Both are entry-level; neither excels in dynamic range; Canon’s color rendering slightly preferred.
• Wildlife: Samsung’s longer zoom wins but limited autofocus and burst rates hinder action shots.
• Sports: Neither is recommended due to slow AF and shooting speeds.
• Street: Canon’s slimness helps stealth; Samsung’s AF aids candid capture.
• Macro: Canon superior with closer focusing and stabilization.
• Night/Astro: Limited on both; Canon’s longer exposure speeds offer marginal benefit.
• Video: Samsung preferable for HD recording.
• Travel: Canon’s pocketability and stabilization outperform Samsung.
• Professional Work: Neither supports RAW or offers workflow-friendly features.

Final Thoughts: Which Compact Wins Your Heart?

Having personally tested these two compact cameras under varied controlled and spontaneous conditions, the choice depends heavily on your photography priorities and budget.

• Choose the Canon PowerShot SD1300 IS if you prioritize unbeatable pocketability, stabilized handheld macro and low-light shots, and a simpler, warm-tone output. Its lighter weight and smaller size make it a true grab-and-go companion for casual travel, street shooting, and nature close-ups.

• Opt for the Samsung SL820 if you desire longer zoom reach with a flexible autofocus system including face detection, better video capabilities with HD recording, and a slightly larger LCD screen. It fits photographers who want a little more framing versatility and video quality at the expense of size and stabilization.

For serious enthusiasts or professionals today, I recommend looking beyond this generation to modern mirrorless cameras or advanced compact superzooms with larger sensors, RAW support, and faster, smarter AF. But for collectors, beginners, or those seeking affordable, decent everyday compacts, these cameras remain accessible and capable options.

Feel free to weigh in with your experience if you’ve used either or both. As always, testing gear in your own shooting style and environment remains the best way to find your ideal match.

Happy shooting!