Canon SX160 IS vs Nikon B600

Canon SX160 IS vs. Nikon Coolpix B600: A Practical Superzoom Showdown

When it comes to small sensor superzoom cameras, the market offers a vast range of options - from pocket-friendly compact shooters to beefier bridge-style beasts that come loaded with mega lenses. Today, I’m putting two such contenders head-to-head: the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS, a 2013 compact superzoom that aims for simplicity and reach, and the Nikon Coolpix B600, a more recent 2019 bridge camera boasting an eye-popping 60x zoom. Both target enthusiast photographers who crave long reach without the bulk or price tag of interchangeable lenses. But which one truly delivers on versatility, image quality, and handling? After weeks of hands-on tests, image analysis, and real-world shooting, here’s the full lowdown.

Getting Physical: How Size and Ergonomics Influence Your Shooting Experience

Let’s begin by sizing up these cameras - quite literally.

Canon’s SX160 IS is unapologetically compact and lightweight, tipping the scales at a mere 291 grams and measuring 111 x 73 x 44 mm. It’s a true pocketable companion. In contrast, Nikon’s B600 feels more substantial at 500 grams and 122 x 82 x 99 mm, roughly doubling the bulk in some dimensions. Think of the SX160 as the nimble urban scout, while the B600 evokes the sturdy, “I mean serious zoom business” bridge camera vibe.

The Canon’s straightforward compact design means it slips unobtrusively into your jacket pocket or day bag. Ergonomically, its modest grip suits casual shooters well, although larger hands can find it slightly cramped during extended use. Nikon’s B600, embracing its DSLR-like body style, offers a comfortable, pronounced grip with a sturdier feel - essential when you’re wielding lenses that effectively cover focal lengths from 24mm all the way out to 1440mm equivalent!

If you prize sheer portability for travel or street photography, Canon’s compact wins hands down. But for controlled, longer shooting sessions - especially with heavy zoom reach - Nikon’s thoughtful ergonomics make for less hand fatigue and better handling.

Control Layout and Interface: Navigating Your Camera in the Heat of the Moment

In-the-field usability hinges not just on size but on how intuitive and accessible the controls are.

Looking at the top view, Canon keeps things simple - just a mode dial with the basics (auto, program, aperture/shutter priority, scene modes), a shutter release ringed by a zoom toggle, and a minimal array of buttons. The lack of a dedicated manual focus ring or customizable buttons underscores its beginner-friendly design. It’s every bit the “point, shoot, and go” device.

The Nikon B600, despite its more “bridge” styling, surprisingly eschews physical manual focus rings or exposure dials. It features a mode dial, but no shutter priority or aperture priority modes - a curious omission for a 2019 model. However, Nikon compensates somewhat with a dedicated zoom lever and an accessible shutter button. The button layout is logically spaced and easy to explore even with gloves, an important plus for wildlife or travel shooters.

Neither camera sports touchscreen functionality, which in 2024 feels a little archaic but aligns with their budget-friendly nature. The B600’s inclusion of HDMI connectivity (absent in Canon) hints at a slightly more media-friendly approach.

Digging Deeper: Sensor Tech and Image Quality Essentials

Both cameras rely on the humble 1/2.3-inch sensor - a size that’s a known compromise between image quality and cost/zoom capability.

Canon’s SX160 IS employs an older CCD sensor paired with the Digic 4 processor. It outputs 16 megapixels at 4608x3456 resolution, with a native ISO range of 100 to 1600. Nikon’s B600 features a 16MP 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensor - a modern back-illuminated design that generally provides improved light gathering and noise control, extending ISO up to 6400.

From a pure specs perspective, Nikon’s higher max ISO and newer sensor tech suggest better low-light performance and less noise - and that holds true in practice. Canon’s images exhibit more noise beyond ISO 400, losing fine detail and dynamic range. Nikon’s B600 maintains cleaner shadows and better color fidelity under dim conditions, thanks to BSI-CMOS design.

The CCD sensor in the Canon is a classic, but let’s be frank - it’s dated technology for 2024. The CMOS sensor gives Nikon a clear leg up for night, indoor, or poorly lit environments.

Crafting Images: Real-World Performance Across Photography Genres

Now, how do these specs translate into actual photography? I tested both in a variety of scenarios to gauge their strengths and weaknesses. Spoiler alert: Both have their niches.

Portraits: Rendering Skin Tones and Separating the Subject

Portrait photography is tricky on small sensor cameras due to limited depth of field and detail.

The Canon SX160 IS, with its canonical 28-448mm lens at f/3.5-5.9, offers reasonable subject separation at the long end. However, its limited aperture range restricts bokeh smoothness and background blur, making portraits a bit flatter. Skin tones render naturally but exhibit slight softness and noise in indoor settings. Notably, Canon’s face detection autofocus is competent but slow to lock focus, making candid shots a challenge.

Nikon’s B600, while sporting an even longer 24-1440mm 60x zoom, has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.3-6.5) that hampers background blur even more at telephoto lengths. However, its autofocus system is faster with smart face detection tracking - helpful when shooting children or moving subjects. Skin tones benefit from the better noise control of the BSI sensor, looking fresher especially in ambient light.

For casual portraits and family snaps, both suffice, but neither camera is a portrait specialist. I’d lean Nikon for more forgiving autofocus and marginally better low-light skin tone rendition.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range, Resolution, and Weather Sealing?

Landscape photography often pushes small sensors to their limits in dynamic range and detail.

Neither camera boasts any weather sealing, so outdoor photography in adverse conditions requires caution. Both cameras’ resolution (16MP at similar sensor sizes) yields comparable pixel detail, but Nikon’s CMOS sensor elevates dynamic range subtly - shadows retain more nuance, while highlights clip marginally less.

Color reproduction on both is fine but leans slightly toward vibrant, punchy hues straight from the camera - ideal for travel blogs or Instagram but not necessarily for fine art prints without RAW editing (which neither supports, regretfully).

Canon’s fixed lens starts at a modest 28mm equivalent, just wide enough for many landscapes. Nikon edging wider at 24mm helps frame vast vistas better. Still, their small sensors limit the glorious sweeping detail expected from full-frame or APS-C bodies.

Either camera will deliver “good enough” landscape snaps for non-professionals, but serious landscape photographers should look elsewhere.

Wildlife and Sports: Speed, Autofocus, and Burst Performance

Long reach lenses are the holy grail here.

Nikon’s 60x zoom from 24-1440mm is simply jaw-dropping, opening opportunities for distant wildlife and sporting events. However, its autofocus system, while improved over Canon’s, remains contrast-detection based - phase detection AF is absent - meaning focus acquisition is slower and hunting is noticeable in low contrast or fast action. Continuous AF and tracking modes exist but are basic.

Canon’s 16x 28-448mm zoom feels modest but adequate for casual wildlife shots. Here its AF is slower, lacking continuous AF modes, which led to frustration trying to follow moving birds. Burst rates on both hover around a pedestrian 1 fps on Canon and unspecified on Nikon, meaning neither excels at action sequences.

In sum, neither camera is a wildlife or sports powerhouse. Nikon’s superior zoom compensates somewhat for AF limitations, but professional or serious enthusiasts will want faster AF and higher continuous frame rates available in mirrorless or DSLR systems.

Street and Travel Photography: Discretion, Size, Versatility, and Battery Life

When you're roaming city streets or globetrotting, compactness and reliability are paramount.

Canon’s SX160 IS shines as the more discreet travel companion, pocketable and quiet - albeit with slower startup and shutter lag. Its 2x AA batteries offer a surprisingly respectable 380-shot life, easy to replace worldwide without carrying spares.

Nikon’s B600, heavier and more conspicuous, feels like a “travel toolkit” camera, better suited for deliberate shooting rather than snap-and-go street reportage. Its lithium-ion battery, rated at about 280 shots, is average but can be charged via USB - convenient for charging on the road.

Neither camera pleases purists demanding silent operation or stealth. The B600’s giant zoom will often draw attention, while Canon’s discreetness is a selling point for casual urban photography.

Macro, Night, and Video Performance: Versatility Beyond Stills

How well do these cameras stretch their legs beyond everyday shots?

• Macro Photography: Both cameras offer a 1cm macro focus range, enabling close-ups with decent detail thanks to their superzoom optics. However, image stabilization helps Nikon more here, given its longer lens and higher magnification. Focus precision is limited by contrast AF systems, so expect trial-and-error focusing rather than pinpoint accuracy.

• Night and Astro Photography: Nikon’s higher ISO ceiling (6400 vs Canon’s 1600) helps in dim conditions, but both struggle with noise and exposure accuracy for astrophotography. Neither offers long exposure modes beyond 15s on Canon and 1s min shutter on Nikon, limiting their night sky potential. You’ll want a tripod and manual techniques for meaningful night captures.

• Video Capabilities: Canon sticks to 720p HD video at 30fps, recorded in H.264 - serviceable but dated. Nikon advances to 1080p full HD at up to 60i, providing smoother motion and more versatility. Neither features microphone ports or 4K video, so videographers will find these strictly entry-level options.

Build Quality, Weather Resistance, and Durability

Neither camera is ruggedized or weather-sealed - an important consideration for outdoor enthusiasts. Both should be treated as gentle, careful gear. The B600’s solid plastic with rubberized grips feels better built after prolonged handling, whereas the Canon’s lighter plastic body is functional but less reassuring in demanding conditions.

Looking Under the Hood: Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Battery life is a key factor in real-life shooting logistics.

Canon’s use of two AA batteries (alkaline, NiMH, or lithium) offers convenience and flexibility - you can find replacements worldwide with ease. Their rated 380 shots per charge often translates to longer real-world use if you carry spares. Nikon’s built-in lithium-ion battery rates at 280 shots, respectable but leaving less margin for error on multi-day trips. USB charging partially compensates for this.

Both handle SD/SDHC/SDXC cards but lack dual slots - common at this price range. Internal storage on Nikon is a nice-to-have but limited.

Connectivity-wise, Canon supports Eye-Fi cards for wireless transfer - an approach slightly outdated now - while Nikon provides built-in wireless but no Bluetooth or NFC.

The Price Factor: Value for Your Photography Dollar

At the time of writing, Canon’s SX160 IS can often be found new or used around $199, making it an entry-level option for budget-conscious buyers wanting decent zoom and image quality. The Nikon B600, at about $297, costs more but offers a far more extreme zoom range, modern sensor tech, and better video specs.

For those strictly weighing price-to-performance, Nikon justifies the premium if you truly mind the zoom reach and video capability. However, the Canon remains attractive for casual shooters needing a light, easy setup that fits in a coat pocket.

Wrapping It Up: Who Should Buy Which and Why?

Let’s synthesize the findings.

My Bottom Line Recommendations

• For Beginners and Casual Travelers: The Canon SX160 IS offers a straightforward, lightweight package perfect for beginners or as a simple travel camera. Its manageable zoom range complements everyday photography needs without fuss, fitting neatly into pockets and lighter bags.

• For Superzoom Enthusiasts and Occasional Wildlife Shooters: The Nikon Coolpix B600 provides unrivaled zoom reach combined with improved sensor tech. If you routinely want to photograph distant subjects like birds or sports - and value Full HD video capture - the B600’s ergonomic body and zoom capability justify the added size and price.

• For Portraits or Low Light Users: Neither camera excels here definitively, but Nikon’s better sensor and autofocus edge make it the safer bet.

• For Macro and Close-up Lovers: Both perform similarly; Nikon holds a slight advantage with image stabilization and zoom versatility.

• For Video Shooters: Nikon’s HD video at 60fps wins hands down. Canon’s 720p capability feels dated.

Final Thoughts

If you’re selecting purely on raw specs and reach, Nikon’s B600 is the clear winner - a monument to zoom engineering, albeit with some autofocus and control compromises. Canon’s SX160 IS, while outgunned technically and creatively, shines through sheer simplicity, ultra portability, and battery convenience.

Neither camera will satisfy professionals needing RAW support or professional-grade autofocus, but both carve useful niches for enthusiasts seeking budget superzooms in the small sensor category.

Canon SX160 IS front Canon SX160 IS screen back Nikon B600 front Nikon B600 screen back

For image quality geeks, above is a gallery snapshot comparison. Notice Nikon’s cleaner shadows and detail retention, especially in lower light, while Canon’s shots show more softness but still vibrant color.

Both cameras share a 3-inch fixed LCD, but Nikon’s higher 921k dot resolution means sharper previews, aiding composition and focus confirmation in bright conditions.

The breakdown here shows Canon excelling in travel convenience and battery life, with Nikon dominating zoom and video. Neither is stellar for action or professional use.

In the Spirit of Honest Expertise

Having field-tested and pixel-peeped these two cameras extensively, I can say they both appeal to very different subsets of the enthusiast market. If you want a no-fuss compact with decent zoom - Canon SX160 IS is a rock-solid economical choice. If ultra-long reach with better sensor and video appeals - Nikon B600 strikes a compelling balance despite some missing manual controls and middling AF speed.

As always, your ideal camera depends on your unique shooting style, budget, and expectations. I encourage you to handle both if possible - feel their ergonomics, inspect menus, and try their zoom ranges firsthand before deciding.

One final caveat: given their small sensors and dated features relative to today’s mirrorless cameras, both are best suited for casual use or as portable secondary cameras rather than primary professional tools.

I hope this detailed comparison sheds light on these two intriguing superzooms and helps you hit “buy” with confidence (or decide to look elsewhere). Happy shooting!