Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370
86 Imaging
40 Features
45 Overall
42
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/af213/af21359bdfa4f28ab8b439e5e28d6933f307906a" alt="Canon PowerShot SX160 IS front Canon PowerShot SX160 IS front"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5ea1a/5ea1a2dcd0db3a5f518a33b0c5b509e82763f6fa" alt="Kodak Easyshare M5370 front Kodak Easyshare M5370 front"
95 Imaging
39 Features
35 Overall
37
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Screen
- 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
- Previous Model is Canon SX150 IS
- Renewed by Canon SX170 IS
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 64 - 1600
- 1280 x 720 video
- 28-140mm (F) lens
- 150g - 101 x 58 x 19mm
- Announced September 2011
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4fad8/4fad8be6e5d8cb84d21f21424f73546c57bfca20" alt=""
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Overview
Let's look much closer at the Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370, one is a Small Sensor Superzoom and the other is a Small Sensor Compact by companies Canon and Kodak. The image resolution of the SX160 IS (16MP) and the Easyshare M5370 (16MP) is very similar and both cameras offer the identical sensor sizing (1/2.3").
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/09f89/09f89c6b5dc0c8e793ce323afb658e7f43d45612" alt=""
The SX160 IS was revealed 22 months after the Easyshare M5370 making them a generation away from one another. Both cameras feature the same body design (Compact).
Before diving straight to a in depth comparison, here is a concise synopsis of how the SX160 IS matches up versus the Easyshare M5370 in the way of portability, imaging, features and an overall score.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c3338/c3338e925c8d47c26e739e490d039a1411046530" alt=""
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Gallery
Here is a sample of the gallery pics for Canon PowerShot SX160 IS and Kodak Easyshare M5370. The full galleries are available at Canon SX160 IS Gallery and Kodak Easyshare M5370 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Canon SX160 IS over the Kodak Easyshare M5370
SX160 IS | Easyshare M5370 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Announced | June 2013 | ![]() | September 2011 | More modern by 22 months |
Focus manually | ![]() | Very exact focus |
Reasons to pick Kodak Easyshare M5370 over the Canon SX160 IS
Easyshare M5370 | SX160 IS | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Touch display | ![]() | Easily navigate |
Common features in the Canon SX160 IS and Kodak Easyshare M5370
SX160 IS | Easyshare M5370 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Display type | Fixed | ![]() | Fixed | Fixed display |
Display size | 3" | ![]() | 3" | Same display measurement |
Display resolution | 230k | ![]() | 230k | Identical display resolution |
Selfie screen | ![]() | Neither provides selfie screen |
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Physical Comparison
For anyone who is intending to carry around your camera frequently, you are going to need to consider its weight and measurements. The Canon SX160 IS provides exterior dimensions of 111mm x 73mm x 44mm (4.4" x 2.9" x 1.7") and a weight of 291 grams (0.64 lbs) whilst the Kodak Easyshare M5370 has proportions of 101mm x 58mm x 19mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 0.7") accompanied by a weight of 150 grams (0.33 lbs).
Check the Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 in the latest Camera and Lens Size Comparison Tool.data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a6ef8/a6ef8f16e8deba30cb986caafd44d83681e96a75" alt="Camera Size Comparison with Lenses Camera Size Comparison with Lenses"
Don't forget, the weight of an Interchangeable Lens Camera will vary based on the lens you are using at the time. Here is a front view measurements comparison of the SX160 IS vs the Easyshare M5370.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3caf7/3caf7d1a1d96544256e28cbfa460c0fef51d3f43" alt="Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 size comparison Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 size comparison"
Using dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the SX160 IS and Easyshare M5370 is 86 and 95 respectively.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b0c5b/b0c5ba968a37d9f60267070409a64c1f3ae2d604" alt="Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 top view buttons comparison Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 top view buttons comparison"
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Sensor Comparison
More often than not, it's difficult to imagine the contrast between sensor sizes purely by reviewing specifications. The picture here may give you a far better sense of the sensor dimensions in the SX160 IS and Easyshare M5370.
To sum up, each of the cameras feature the identical sensor size and the identical resolution therefore you should expect similar quality of files although you have to consider the production date of the products into consideration. The more modern SX160 IS should have an advantage in sensor tech.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/46659/46659a2ad142549be4876ac0951f4ff04fd44327" alt="Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 sensor size comparison Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 sensor size comparison"
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Screen and ViewFinder
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a23f3/a23f3b9d58b1f1aba5af4815a24422b49947cb59" alt="Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Screen and Viewfinder comparison Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Screen and Viewfinder comparison"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8876b/8876ba1234536f7f948b3ad54614ecbba59fd0b6" alt=""
Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/427ef/427ef51d855b8f8d8523699aa2b0465afb765511" alt=""
Street Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6d588/6d5886e45f6ed46a44c58516180e79dc4c09297f" alt=""
Sports Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/40b17/40b178b2c2a7887c950c5d80f9aa0bc017ad9376" alt=""
Travel Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9df93/9df93b830615ba08ba0f7e31492fca23710a884c" alt=""
Landscape Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/85299/85299aa0d77ee8b6a2d3435fdb68ab0ccaabf584" alt=""
Vlogging Comparison
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bfda9/bfda97b4ea42610c4d033bdc3102b7af07982c04" alt=""
Canon SX160 IS vs Kodak Easyshare M5370 Specifications
Canon PowerShot SX160 IS | Kodak Easyshare M5370 | |
---|---|---|
General Information | ||
Brand | Canon | Kodak |
Model | Canon PowerShot SX160 IS | Kodak Easyshare M5370 |
Type | Small Sensor Superzoom | Small Sensor Compact |
Launched | 2013-06-21 | 2011-09-14 |
Physical type | Compact | Compact |
Sensor Information | ||
Processor Chip | Digic 4 | - |
Sensor type | CCD | CCD |
Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
Sensor dimensions | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
Sensor resolution | 16 megapixels | 16 megapixels |
Anti aliasing filter | ||
Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 |
Highest Possible resolution | 4608 x 3456 | 4608 x 3456 |
Maximum native ISO | 1600 | 1600 |
Min native ISO | 100 | 64 |
RAW files | ||
Autofocusing | ||
Manual focus | ||
Touch to focus | ||
Continuous autofocus | ||
Autofocus single | ||
Tracking autofocus | ||
Autofocus selectice | ||
Center weighted autofocus | ||
Autofocus multi area | ||
Live view autofocus | ||
Face detection focus | ||
Contract detection focus | ||
Phase detection focus | ||
Cross focus points | - | - |
Lens | ||
Lens mount | fixed lens | fixed lens |
Lens focal range | 28-448mm (16.0x) | 28-140mm (5.0x) |
Maximal aperture | f/3.5-5.9 | - |
Macro focus distance | 1cm | 5cm |
Focal length multiplier | 5.8 | 5.8 |
Screen | ||
Screen type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
Screen diagonal | 3 inch | 3 inch |
Resolution of screen | 230k dots | 230k dots |
Selfie friendly | ||
Liveview | ||
Touch screen | ||
Screen technology | TFT Color LCD | TFT color LCD |
Viewfinder Information | ||
Viewfinder type | None | None |
Features | ||
Minimum shutter speed | 15 seconds | 8 seconds |
Fastest shutter speed | 1/3200 seconds | 1/1600 seconds |
Continuous shutter rate | 1.0 frames/s | - |
Shutter priority | ||
Aperture priority | ||
Manual mode | ||
Exposure compensation | Yes | - |
Change white balance | ||
Image stabilization | ||
Integrated flash | ||
Flash range | 3.00 m | 3.20 m |
Flash modes | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Slow Sync | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Fill-in |
External flash | ||
AEB | ||
WB bracketing | ||
Fastest flash synchronize | 1/2000 seconds | - |
Exposure | ||
Multisegment exposure | ||
Average exposure | ||
Spot exposure | ||
Partial exposure | ||
AF area exposure | ||
Center weighted exposure | ||
Video features | ||
Video resolutions | 1280 x 720 (30, 25 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps) | 1280 x 720 (30 fps), 640 x 480 (30 fps), 320 x 240 (30 fps) |
Maximum video resolution | 1280x720 | 1280x720 |
Video format | H.264 | MPEG-1, H.264 |
Mic port | ||
Headphone port | ||
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 | ||
Environmental sealing | ||
Water proof | ||
Dust proof | ||
Shock proof | ||
Crush proof | ||
Freeze proof | ||
Weight | 291 gr (0.64 lbs) | 150 gr (0.33 lbs) |
Physical dimensions | 111 x 73 x 44mm (4.4" x 2.9" x 1.7") | 101 x 58 x 19mm (4.0" x 2.3" x 0.7") |
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 images | - |
Style of battery | AA | - |
Battery model | 2 x AA | KLIC-7006 |
Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Custom) | Yes (2 or 10 sec) |
Time lapse shooting | ||
Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | MicroSD/MicroSDHC card, Internal |
Card slots | 1 | 1 |
Launch cost | $199 | $160 |