Clicky

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800

Portability
86
Imaging
39
Features
45
Overall
41
Canon PowerShot SX160 IS front
 
Casio Exilim EX-ZR800 front
Portability
91
Imaging
39
Features
55
Overall
45

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 Key Specs

Canon SX160 IS
(Full Review)
  • 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
  • 3" Fixed Display
  • ISO 100 - 1600
  • Optical Image Stabilization
  • 1280 x 720 video
  • 28-448mm (F3.5-5.9) lens
  • 291g - 111 x 73 x 44mm
  • Launched June 2013
  • Superseded the Canon SX150 IS
  • Later Model is Canon SX170 IS
Casio EX-ZR800
(Full Review)
  • 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
  • 3" Fixed Display
  • ISO 80 - 3200
  • Sensor-shift Image Stabilization
  • 1920 x 1080 video
  • 25-450mm (F3.5-5.9) lens
  • 222g - 108 x 60 x 31mm
  • Announced August 2013
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD Cards

Canon PowerShot SX160 IS vs Casio Exilim EX-ZR800: A Comprehensive Expert Comparison for Photography Enthusiasts

Selecting the optimal compact superzoom camera can be challenging, especially when choices span different brands and nuanced technical capabilities. This detailed comparison of the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS and the Casio Exilim EX-ZR800 delves into every critical facet - from sensor technology to real-world usability across varied photographic disciplines. Armed with extensive hands-on testing experience and methodical evaluation techniques from over 15 years, this article aims to equip photographers, from enthusiasts to professionals considering a backup or travel companion, with precise, actionable knowledge.

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 size comparison

First Impressions and Ergonomics: Handling in the Hand

Straight out of the box, the Canon SX160 IS and Casio EX-ZR800 both fall under the compact superzoom category with a fixed lens, but their physical dimensions and handling ergonomics offer meaningful differences relevant to portability and shooting comfort.

  • Canon SX160 IS: Measures 111 x 73 x 44 mm, weighing approximately 291g using two AA batteries. Its deeper grip and slightly larger footprint contribute to a substantial feel in hand. The AA battery system benefits those who travel to remote locations without guaranteed recharging facilities, as AA batteries are universally available, albeit with added weight.

  • Casio EX-ZR800: More compact at 108 x 60 x 31 mm, with a lighter body weight of 222g using a proprietary NP-130 battery pack. Its streamlined design suits portability and discreet shooting, especially critical in street and travel photography. The rechargeable battery offers longer longevity per charge but demands access to power for replenishing.

Both cameras prioritize compactness but diverge in weight distribution and battery strategies, which photographers should weigh depending on their shooting contexts.

Control Layout and Top Design: User Interface Insights

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 top view buttons comparison

The utility of buttons, dials, and general body layout markedly influences shooting efficiency.

  • Canon SX160 IS offers a traditional layout with dedicated mode and exposure compensation dials. Buttons are tactile but somewhat plasticky, reflecting its budget orientation. The lack of an articulated screen limits compositional flexibility.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 adopts a more minimalistic control scheme with fewer physical buttons but an interface built around the EXILIM Engine HS 3 processor that enables intelligent automation and scene recognition. The top panel hosts a more modern design with a mode dial and a zoom lever that responds quickly, although its smaller size can hamper rapid manual adjustments.

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder; composing relies solely on the rear LCD.

Sensor and Image Quality: Technical Breakdowns and Real-World Performance

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 sensor size comparison

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm with an effective resolution of 16 megapixels. This sensor class is standard for superzoom compacts, affording portability but inherently constraining dynamic range and noise performance compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors.

  • Canon SX160 IS uses a CCD sensor with a native ISO range of 100-1600. CCD sensors traditionally excel at color accuracy and noise control at base ISO but falter at higher ISO sensitivity. The maximum shutter speed extends to 1/3200 sec, granting some flexibility for bright light and action photography.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 opts for a CMOS sensor with a native ISO 80-3200 span, accommodating higher sensitivity shooting. CMOS sensors benefit from faster readout speeds, aiding burst modes and video capture, as well as contributing to better low-light performance compared to CCD. Its maximum shutter speed tops at 1/2000 sec.

In controlled testing, the Casio's CMOS sensor handles noise marginally better at ISO 800 and above, producing cleaner images suited for low-light conditions like night or indoor photography. The Canon, despite its higher shutter ceiling, exhibits more aggressive noise at elevated ISO settings, limiting its usefulness under dimmer scenarios.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Versatility

Both cameras integrate contrast-detection autofocus systems, with face detection enabled - a boon for portraiture and everyday subjects - but differ in continuous autofocus availability and frame rates.

  • Canon SX160 IS supports single autofocus (AF-S) with face detection and center-weighted metering. It lacks continuous AF during burst shooting, restricting tracking capabilities for moving subjects.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 enhances autofocus with face detection plus AF tracking during burst shoots, albeit still contrast-based and not phase-detection. The 3 fps burst shooting paired with continuous tracking aids wildlife and sports photography, though not competing with dedicated DSLRs.

Despite neither model being optimized for aggressive focusing scenarios, the EX-ZR800's autofocus is noticeably faster and more responsive in live view, translating to better subject acquisition amid moderate motion.

Mechanical and Exposure Parameters: Shutter and Aperture Control

  • Canon SX160 IS features a maximum shutter speed of 1/3200 sec with manual, aperture priority, and shutter priority exposure modes - all uncommon for compact cameras of its generation. Aperture ranges from f/3.5 at wide angle to f/5.9 at telephoto.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 offers comparable apertures (f/3.5–5.9) but a maximum shutter speed limited to 1/2000 sec. Exposure modes include manual controls alongside program auto and aperture/shutter priority.

Users seeking creative manual control benefit more from the Canon’s wider shutter speed range, especially for freezing extremely fast motion or employing wide apertures in bright conditions without ND filters.

LCD Screens and Viewfinding: Composition and Playback

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 Screen and Viewfinder comparison

Both cameras forego an electronic viewfinder, relying on LCD screens:

  • Canon SX160 IS has a 3-inch TFT LCD with 230k-dot resolution. This lower-resolution display hampers clarity during outdoor use, making manual focus and exposure verification less accurate.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 utilizes a 3-inch Super Clear TFT LCD with 922k-dot resolution, offering significantly sharper, more vibrant playback and framing in varied lighting environments.

The Casio's superior LCD markedly improves user experience during composition and review, particularly essential given the absence of a viewfinder.

Zoom Range and Lens Performance: Versatility in Field Use

  • Canon SX160 IS sports a 16x optical zoom covering 28-448mm equivalent, suitable for general photography with substantial reach.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 extends slightly further with an 18x zoom from 25-450mm equivalent, offering marginally wider wide-angle framing and comparable telephoto length.

Both lenses max out at f/3.5-5.9 aperture, which can limit low-light shooting at full zoom. During tests, both lenses produced acceptable sharpness in the central frame, with noticeable softness and chromatic aberrations at extreme telephoto in both cameras. Close focusing for macro work is superior on the Canon, reaching down to 1 cm versus the Casio’s 4 cm minimum, enabling more detailed close-ups.

Image Stabilization: Correction Methods and Efficacy

  • Canon SX160 IS employs optical image stabilization (OIS), mechanically counteracting hand shake at the lens level.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 uses sensor-shift stabilization, moving the image sensor to counteract motion.

While both methods effectively reduce blur in general hand-held shooting, sensor-shift stabilization can have slight advantages in correcting smaller, more rapid hand tremors. Real-world trials found the Casio’s stabilization marginally more consistent, particularly at longer focal lengths.

Video Capabilities: Resolution, Frame Rates, and Formats

  • Canon SX160 IS records video at a maximum resolution of 1280x720 (720p) at 30 fps in H.264 format. There is no microphone or headphone jack, and no 4K or high frame rate options.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 supports Full HD 1920x1080 video at 30 fps, 720p at varied frame rates, and multiple slow-motion modes (up to 1000 fps in low-res modes), using MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs. It also lacks external audio I/O.

The EX-ZR800’s richer feature set caters better to enthusiasts requiring advanced video capabilities, including slow-motion capture, though audio quality remains basic.

Battery Life and Storage: Endurance and Convenience

  • Canon SX160 IS relies on two AA batteries, offering about 380 shots per charge with alkaline AAs or better performance with rechargeables. AA batteries assure utility when traveling to remote areas but increase weight and bulk.

  • Casio EX-ZR800 uses a proprietary lithium-ion NP-130 battery, rated for approximately 470 shots per charge, favoring longer uninterrupted use.

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, facilitating wide storage choices. The Casio features HDMI out for direct playback, a bonus missing from the Canon.

Durability and Weather Sealing: Outdoor Suitability

Neither camera offers weather sealing or ruggedization. The lack of resistance to dust, moisture, or shock restricts their application in harsher environments. Users intending landscape or wildlife photography in uncontrolled conditions should consider protective casings or alternative models.

Image Quality Gallery and Sample Comparisons

Observations from Captured Images

  • Both cameras render balanced color rendition with natural skin tones, though the Canon’s CCD sensor produces slightly warmer hues.

  • The Casio handles shadows and highlights better due to the CMOS sensor’s dynamic range advantages, revealing richer detail in complex lighting.

  • Noise is more visible in Canon images beyond ISO 400, while Casio images maintain cleaner results at ISO 800.

  • Bokeh and background blur are shallow and affected by the fixed aperture range; neither camera excels in producing smooth out-of-focus separation, particularly at telephoto settings.

Specialized Use Case Performance Scores


Both cameras have been evaluated across common photography genres to highlight practical strengths and caveats:

  • Portraits: The Canon’s center-weighted metering paired with decent skin tone reproduction makes it serviceable but limited by sluggish AF and shallow focus fall-off. The Casio’s faster AF improves capture responsiveness but struggles with finer background blur.

  • Landscape: Casio wins on dynamic range and resolution impression, giving finer detail retrieval. Canon’s bulkier build feels less agile outdoors.

  • Wildlife & Sports: Both cameras are hampered by modest continuous shooting speeds (1 fps Canon, 3 fps Casio) and lack phase-detect AF, hindering tracking fast action.

  • Street: Casio EX-ZR800’s smaller size and better AF responsiveness suit candid shooting better than the Canon.

  • Macro: Canon’s 1 cm macro capability outperforms Casio’s 4 cm minimum. Both lack focus stacking.

  • Night & Astro: Casio’s higher ISO ceiling and improved noise handling offer better usability, though neither is ideal for extended night exposures due to sensor size and noise.

  • Video: Casio’s 1080p and slow-motion modes make it more versatile for hybrid shooters; Canon’s 720p limits video ambition.

  • Travel: Casio’s lighter weight and longer battery life favor travelers, albeit at increased price point.

  • Professional: Neither camera caters fully to professional needs due to lack of RAW support, limited AF sophistication, and sensor size. However, both can serve casual secondary shooters or backup roles.

Value Analysis: Price vs. Performance

At retail, the Canon SX160 IS is budget-friendly, priced near $200, geared for entry-level consumers or those prioritizing simplicity and an extended zoom with AA battery convenience.

The Casio EX-ZR800 carries a premium (~$430), justified by superior sensor tech, display quality, video functionality, and more robust autofocus/tracking features.

Prospective buyers must reconcile price with need: casual shooters or budget-constrained photographers may find Canon a sensible choice, while those desiring richer controls and video options will gravitate to Casio despite the cost.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Feature Category Canon SX160 IS Casio EX-ZR800
Sensor Type CCD sensor; good color accuracy but limited ISO range CMOS sensor; better in low light, wider ISO range
Zoom Range 28-448mm (16x) 25-450mm (18x)
Battery Uses AA batteries; convenient but heavier Proprietary Li-ion; lighter and longer lasting
Autofocus Single AF with face detection 3 fps burst with AF tracking
LCD Screen 3" 230k-dot TFT LCD; less sharp 3" 922k-dot Super Clear TFT; sharp and bright
Video Capability 720p max, H.264 Full HD 1080p + high frame rate modes
Manual Exposure Modes Available with extended shutter speed Available but limited shutter speed
Macro Focus 1 cm minimum distance 4 cm
Weight & Size Heavier, bulkier More compact and lighter
Price Affordable (~$200) Mid-range (~$430)

Recommendations for Different Photographer Profiles

  • Budget-Conscious Beginners or Travel Casuals
    The Canon SX160 IS offers dependable image quality and manual controls within a modest budget. Its AA battery compatibility proves advantageous in extended trips lacking power access, albeit at the cost of heavier handling and lower overall sensor responsiveness.

  • Enthusiasts Seeking Versatility and Video Features
    The Casio EX-ZR800 excels with better low-light performance, enhanced video modes including slow-motion, a higher resolution and more vivid rear screen, and more responsive autofocus. Its price reflects these improvements. Ideal for photographers wanting a pocket-friendly hybrid capable of casual action and travel shooting.

  • Specialized Use (Macro, Night, Street)
    For close-up work, Canon’s closer macro focusing distance yields subtle advantages. For night or astro enthusiasts, Casio’s higher ISO ceiling and sensor noise profile provide more workable image quality. Street shooters will appreciate Casio’s smaller size and faster AF.

  • Professional Backup or Secondary Camera
    Neither model replaces dedicated professional gear, but the Casio offers better fidelity and control for casual secondary use. Lack of RAW support in both impairs post-processing flexibility.

Final Thoughts: A Decision Grounded in Practicality

While the Canon SX160 IS and Casio EX-ZR800 share a category and resolution, their divergent sensor technology, focusing systems, and feature sets place them in distinct markets. My extensive testing underscores that the Canon prioritizes affordability and simplicity, while Casio aims to deliver richer functional performance suited to more demanding users.

Prospective owners should carefully consider shooting priorities, balancing factors such as battery sourcing, video requirements, autofocus agility, and budget constraints to arrive at the camera best aligned with their operational demands.

In an era where smartphone cameras dominate the casual segment, these superzoom compacts continue to carve niches where optical zoom reach and manual controls remain paramount.

This comparison incorporates detailed testing data, real-world usability assessments, and cross-disciplinary performance benchmarks to provide an expert-level analysis supporting informed, rational camera purchases.

Appendix: Image Credits

Canon SX160 IS vs Casio EX-ZR800 Specifications

Detailed spec comparison table for Canon SX160 IS and Casio EX-ZR800
 Canon PowerShot SX160 ISCasio Exilim EX-ZR800
General Information
Brand Canon Casio
Model Canon PowerShot SX160 IS Casio Exilim EX-ZR800
Class Small Sensor Superzoom Small Sensor Superzoom
Launched 2013-06-21 2013-08-07
Physical type Compact Compact
Sensor Information
Processor Digic 4 EXILIM Engine HS 3
Sensor type CCD CMOS
Sensor size 1/2.3" 1/2.3"
Sensor measurements 6.17 x 4.55mm 6.17 x 4.55mm
Sensor surface area 28.1mm² 28.1mm²
Sensor resolution 16 megapixel 16 megapixel
Anti aliasing filter
Aspect ratio 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9
Peak resolution 4608 x 3456 4608 x 3456
Highest native ISO 1600 3200
Min native ISO 100 80
RAW format
Autofocusing
Focus manually
Touch focus
Continuous AF
Single AF
Tracking AF
AF selectice
Center weighted AF
AF multi area
Live view AF
Face detect focusing
Contract detect focusing
Phase detect focusing
Cross focus points - -
Lens
Lens mounting type fixed lens fixed lens
Lens focal range 28-448mm (16.0x) 25-450mm (18.0x)
Maximum aperture f/3.5-5.9 f/3.5-5.9
Macro focus distance 1cm 4cm
Crop factor 5.8 5.8
Screen
Type of display Fixed Type Fixed Type
Display diagonal 3 inches 3 inches
Display resolution 230 thousand dots 922 thousand dots
Selfie friendly
Liveview
Touch display
Display tech TFT Color LCD Super Clear TFT color LCD
Viewfinder Information
Viewfinder None None
Features
Minimum shutter speed 15s 4s
Fastest shutter speed 1/3200s 1/2000s
Continuous shutter rate 1.0fps 3.0fps
Shutter priority
Aperture priority
Manually set exposure
Exposure compensation Yes Yes
Change WB
Image stabilization
Integrated flash
Flash range 3.00 m 4.70 m
Flash modes Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Slow Sync Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye
External flash
Auto exposure bracketing
White balance bracketing
Fastest flash synchronize 1/2000s -
Exposure
Multisegment exposure
Average exposure
Spot exposure
Partial exposure
AF area exposure
Center weighted exposure
Video features
Supported video resolutions 1280 x 720 (30, 25 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps) 1920 x 1080 (30 fps), 1280 x 720 (30,20,15 fps), 640 x 480 (30, 120 fps), 512 x 384 (30, 240 fps), 224 x 160 (480 fps), 224 x 64 (1000 fps),
Highest video resolution 1280x720 1920x1080
Video data format H.264 MPEG-4, H.264
Microphone support
Headphone support
Connectivity
Wireless Eye-Fi Connected None
Bluetooth
NFC
HDMI
USB USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec)
GPS None None
Physical
Environment sealing
Water proof
Dust proof
Shock proof
Crush proof
Freeze proof
Weight 291g (0.64 pounds) 222g (0.49 pounds)
Dimensions 111 x 73 x 44mm (4.4" x 2.9" x 1.7") 108 x 60 x 31mm (4.3" x 2.4" x 1.2")
DXO scores
DXO Overall score not tested not tested
DXO Color Depth score not tested not tested
DXO Dynamic range score not tested not tested
DXO Low light score not tested not tested
Other
Battery life 380 photographs 470 photographs
Battery style AA Battery Pack
Battery model 2 x AA NP-130
Self timer Yes (2 or 10 sec, Custom) Yes (2 or 10 seconds, custom)
Time lapse recording
Storage type SD/SDHC/SDXC SD/SDHC/SDXC
Card slots One One
Price at release $199 $429