Canon PowerShot SX130 IS vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300: An Expert Superzoom Shootout

Choosing the right superzoom camera can feel daunting with so many competing models, specs, and trade-offs. Having spent well over 15 years putting cameras through their paces - evaluating everything from image quality to ergonomics and real-world usability - I’m excited to unpack two budget-friendly superzooms: the Canon PowerShot SX130 IS, a compact 2010 offering, and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300, a bridge-style camera released in 2014. Both target casual enthusiasts seeking versatile focal ranges without breaking the bank.

In this detailed, 2500-word comparative review, I’ll share insights from extensive hands-on testing, focusing on what photographers - whether casual or experienced - really need to know when deciding between these two models. Along the way, we’ll cover sensor tech, lens performance, autofocus, build quality, handling, and how each fares across multiple photography genres, from landscape and wildlife to video and travel. You’ll also find my verdict and buying recommendations tailored to differently minded shooters.

Let’s dive in!

First Impressions and Design Philosophy: Compact Simplicity vs. Bridge-Style Ambitions

At a glance, these cameras couldn’t look more different - a fact that influences everything from handling to shooting style.

The Canon SX130 IS is a true compact superzoom with a tidy footprint measuring just 113 × 73 × 46 mm and weighing a featherlight 308 grams (including batteries). Its plastic body emphasizes portability and pocket-friendliness - perfect for casual shoots and travel without much bulk. Conversely, the Sony H300 takes the “bridge camera” approach, sporting a larger, SLR-style silhouette (130 × 95 × 122 mm) and weighing in at 590 grams. This heftier presence grants it a chunkier grip and more overt physical controls, appealing to users who appreciate a DSLR-like shooting stance without the interchangeable lens system.

Resting both side-by-side, it’s clear the H300’s size better accommodates extended telephoto shooting - with its telezoom extending to 875 mm equivalent, it demands more stable handling. The compact Canon, while easier to tote and slip into pockets, feels less balanced at full zoom due to its smaller grip.

In terms of control layout, the Canon SX130 IS features a simplified button cluster and mode dial, emphasizing ease for beginners, while the Sony H300 offers a more traditional DSLR-inspired top control placement with a larger mode dial and dedicated exposure compensation button.

This design difference is not trivial - as I tested, the Canon’s controls cater to casual users prioritizing point-and-shoot simplicity, whereas the Sony invites a more deliberate, manual-exposure-minded approach. Neither model offers touchscreen functionality - a sign of their entry-level positioning.

Sensor and Image Quality: Megapixels vs. Sensor Constraints

Both cameras rely on the same sensor technology type - 1/2.3" CCD sensors measuring approximately 6.17 × 4.55 mm (28.07 mm²) - standard fare for compact superzooms in the budget segment. However, there are crucial differences:

While the higher resolution on Sony’s 20 MP sensor sounds appealing, keep in mind that cramming more pixels into the same small sensor area often leads to increased noise and lower sensitivity in low light. Indeed, during rigorous low-light shooting tests, the Canon’s more modest 12 MP sensor showed slightly better noise control and color fidelity up to ISO 800. Beyond that, both struggled - typical of small-sensor compacts.

With complex lighting or high dynamic range scenes, the narrow sensor size also limits shadow detail retention and highlight roll-off; neither camera can match the latitude of larger sensors or newer CMOS technology.

Color rendering is interesting: Canon’s Digic 4 processor tends to emphasize natural skin tones with slightly warmer output, while Sony’s Bionz processor leans toward crisper contrast but occasionally cooler hues. The difference is subtle but noticeable when shooting portraits (more on that shortly).

LCD & Viewfinder: Your Window to the World

Neither camera boasts an electronic viewfinder, which is an important factor for some photographers who prefer composing via eyepiece over the LCD screen.

The Canon’s 230k-dot fixed LCD produces adequate but somewhat grainy previews, which can hamper precise focusing judgment - especially given the lack of touch focus and magnification assistance. The Sony’s sharper 460k-dot Clear Photo LCD offers a brighter, more detailed preview, improving framing, even in bright conditions.

The Sony does have a basic electronic viewfinder, albeit low resolution and no eye sensor; it’s not a substitute for DSLR EVFs but provides an alternative composition option on sunny days. The Canon has none, so it requires more reliance on the LCD.

Lens and Zoom Capabilities: Superzoom Showdown

Both cameras feature fixed superzoom lenses with optical image stabilization - but their zoom ranges and apertures reflect different design philosophies.

The Sony H300’s 35× zoom is the clear winner in reach, which is a blessing for wildlife, sports, or surveillance-style shots without swapping lenses. That said, jumping up to 875 mm equivalent means even small hand shakes will be magnified; the bigger zoom demands a steady tripod or good IS performance to yield sharp images.

The Canon’s 12× optical zoom is shorter but still versatile for everyday travel and landscapes. Its macro capability - allowing focusing as close as 1 cm - is a nice bonus for flower and small-object photography, which the Sony lacks.

In practice, I found the Canon’s lens delivers slightly sharper edge-to-edge detail at the wide and mid focal lengths due to less aggressive zoom range. The Sony, while offering impressive reach, displayed more chromatic aberration and softness at its telephoto extreme.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Who Locks It Faster?

Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus (typical for superzooms), but their AF implementations differ.

Notably, the Sony H300 includes face detection and the rare inclusion of AF tracking among models in this budget segment. In real-world field tests - such as street and wildlife photography - the Sony’s AF reliably acquires faces and subjects faster and more confidently, thanks to this tech and more focus area options.

The Canon’s autofocus, while accurate for static subjects under good light, suffers from slower lock times, making it frustrating in quickly changing scenes. Neither camera excels in continuous autofocus or burst shooting (both capped at 1 fps), so neither is ideal for demanding sports photography.

Build Quality and Handling: Durability Meets Ergonomics

Both cameras are constructed mainly from polycarbonate and do not offer dust, water, or freeze resistance - unsurprising at this price point.

However, the Sony’s heftier construction and SLR-style grip provide a more reassuring feel, minimizing fatigue during extended handheld shooting at high zoom. The Canon’s compactness prioritizes portability, but its smaller grip can feel cramped, especially with heavier hands or when zoomed in.

Neither camera features illuminated buttons, and both lack customizable controls, which restricts workflow efficiency for more advanced shooters.

Battery-wise, the Sony H300 uses a dedicated rechargeable battery pack delivering approximately 350 shots per charge - a respectable endurance for casual use that beats most AAs in convenience and power management. The Canon depends on 2 × AA batteries, which means easy replacement anywhere but less predictable performance and shorter life per set.

Connectivity and Storage: Sharing in the Digital Age

A key weakness in both models is the absence of wireless or Bluetooth connectivity. For users wanting quick image transfer or remote control, this means reliance on cables or removing SD cards.

The Canon offers USB 2.0 port only, without HDMI output; meanwhile, the Sony adds HDMI support, useful for direct playback on televisions or monitors.

Regarding storage, the Canon supports SD/SDHC/SDXC and MMC cards, while the Sony expands compatibility to also include Memory Stick Pro Duo and Pro-HG Duo - a point of interest for users with Sony legacy cards.

Practical Performance Across Photography Genres

How do these cameras stack up in real shooting? Let’s evaluate by use case.

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones and Bokeh

Portrait shooting demands pleasing skin tone reproduction, accurate exposure on faces, and soft background rendering. Unfortunately, neither camera shines here due to small sensors limiting shallow depth of field.

The Canon’s slightly warmer, more natural color processing yields better skin tones in most lighting, without the overt contrast boost of Sony. However, the Sony’s face detection autofocus facilitates subject emphasis, reducing frustration.

Bokeh at these apertures and sensor sizes is always tight, but the Canon’s macro mode allows crisper close-ups with potential for creative shallow depth of field.

Landscape: Dynamic Range and Detail

For landscapes where dynamic range and resolution matter, the Sony’s higher 20 MP count shows benefits in resolution for detailed crops and large prints.

That said, both cameras’ small sensors restrict dynamic range, meaning highlight clipping in bright skies and blocked shadows in deep contrast scenes. The Canon’s capability to shoot at ISO 80 yields cleaner base images for HDR stacking - useful for landscape pros.

Lens sharpness at wide-angle favors Canon (28 mm vs. 25 mm), but the Sony’s wider aspect ratio options (4:3 and 16:9) enable some creative framing.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus Speed and Burst

Neither camera is tailored for fast action. Both offer just 1 fps continuous shooting, slow for wildlife or sports. The Sony’s longer zoom and AF tracking give it an edge for distant wildlife shots provided you have steady support.

However, quick-firing and dynamic scene capture remain beyond these models’ scope.

Street Photography: Discretion and Portability

The Canon’s compact dimensions and lighter weight make it far more street-friendly. The Sony’s large size and bulky zoom draw attention, reducing candid shooting ease.

Low light performance is limited on both but improved by the Canon’s slightly better noise control at base ISOs.

Macro Photography

The Canon’s 1 cm macro focusing capability delivers genuine macro shooting versatility; the Sony lacks close focusing range advantage. For budget macro, the Canon is the pick.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither camera supports long exposures beyond 15 seconds (Canon) or 30 seconds (Sony) manually, and sensor noise limits high ISO usability. Both struggle with fine star detail.

Video Capabilities

Both max out at 720p HD video at 30 fps, with the Sony offering slightly better codec options (MPEG-4 and H.264) and HDMI output. Neither have microphone ports or in-camera stabilization for video, so handheld clips will benefit from good lighting.

Sample Images: Side-by-Side Comparison

Examining real captures from natural shooting scenarios - landscape, portrait, macro, telephoto wildlife - highlights these findings in practice.

Canon SX130 IS front Canon SX130 IS screen back Sony H300 front Sony H300 screen back

Notice sharper detail and color variance on Sony’s higher-res shots, balanced by Canon’s more lifelike skin tones and macro clarity.

Overall Performance and Ratings

To quantify the overall user experience against performance metrics we've tested extensively, here are the expert scores based on image quality, usability, features, and value.

Here, the Sony H300 narrowly edges out the Canon SX130 IS, thanks to better resolution, zoom reach, and autofocus options. The Canon wins on portability and macro shooting benefits.

Comparing Strengths by Photography Type

Breaking down performance by genre helps potential buyers focus on their top priorities:

• Portraits: Canon preferred for tone
• Landscape: Sony favored for resolution
• Wildlife: Sony for zoom and AF
• Sports: Neither ideal, but Sony better zoom
• Street: Canon excels due to size
• Macro: Canon clear winner
• Night/Astro: Rough for both
• Video: Sony slightly better
• Travel: Canon’s size and weight
• Professional Use: Neither is professional-grade due to sensor and build limitations

Final Verdict: Which Camera Should You Buy?

Canon PowerShot SX130 IS
Best for:

• Photography enthusiasts valuing portability and ease of use
• Macro and close-up enthusiasts on a budget
• Travelers looking for a pocket-friendly superzoom
• Casual users with modest shooting needs in good light

Pros:

• Compact and lightweight
• Good macro focusing
• Natural color reproduction
• Uses easy-to-find AA batteries

Cons:

• Modest zoom range (12×)
• No face detection AF
• Grainier LCD
• Lacks viewfinder and HDMI

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300
Best for:

• Users needing extended zoom reach (35×)
• Those who prefer DSLR-like handling without interchangeable lenses
• Photographers who want DSLR-style controls and more manual options
• Slightly better low light imaging and face detection AF for casual portraits

Pros:

• Longer zoom range (35×)
• Face detection and AF tracking included
• Crisp Clear Photo LCD and basic EVF
• HDMI output and rechargeable battery pack
• Good resolution (20 MP)

Cons:

• Bulkier and heavier
• No macro mode
• Slower max shutter speed (1/1500 sec) vs Canon’s 1/2500
• No wireless connectivity

Wrapping Up: Who Is Each Camera For?

Despite their comparable price tags (~$250), these two cameras cater to somewhat different users. The Canon SX130 IS fits the casual snappers and travelers who prize portability and instant macro fun, while the Sony H300 appeals to those who prioritize optical reach and manual control features in a bridge form factor.

While neither will satisfy advanced or professional photographers looking for larger sensors, fast burst rates, or 4K video, both represent sensible entry points into superzoom photography - each with distinct strengths.

Personally, for everyday shooting, holidays, and close-ups, I lean toward the Canon’s ease and handling. For those intrigued by long-distance wildlife, sports snapshots in bright light, and extra resolution for cropping, the Sony offers clear advantages.

I hope this thorough comparison demystifies your choice between the Canon SX130 IS and Sony H300. Whichever route you take, you’re getting an accessible superzoom camera designed to unlock versatile shooting opportunities on a budget. Happy shooting!