Canon PowerShot SX160 IS vs Olympus Stylus 1s: An In-Depth Comparison of Two Small Sensor Superzooms

Choosing the right camera in the compact superzoom category can be daunting, especially with models that appear similar at first glance but embody very different approaches to features, ergonomics, and image quality. Today, we take an authoritative, hands-on look at two notable small sensor superzoom cameras launched within a couple of years of each other: the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS (2013) and the Olympus Stylus 1s (2015). Our goal is to cut through marketing speak and provide photography enthusiasts and professionals a meticulously detailed assessment based on technical specifications, real-world usability, and imaging performance, contextualized across a diverse range of photography genres.

First Impressions: Design, Build, and Ergonomics

To start, the physical design and user interface heavily influence a camera’s appeal and handling, especially for photography enthusiasts who rely on quick access to controls in varying environments.

The Canon SX160 IS, true to its compact category, embodies a pocketable, lightweight footprint measuring 111 x 73 x 44 mm and weighing just 291 grams, making it extremely portable and accessible for casual travel and street photography. Its compact “point-and-shoot” style, however, comes with compromise: the absence of a viewfinder and a fixed TFT LCD screen of modest 230k-dot resolution limit framing options, especially in bright outdoor settings. Moreover, ergonomics tilt toward casual users, as manual control dials and buttons are minimal, with the primary navigation through menus and a few dedicated buttons.

In contrast, the Olympus Stylus 1s adopts a more robust, SLR-like bridge camera body measuring 116 x 87 x 57 mm and weighing 402 grams - still remarkably compact for a bridge camera. Its inclusion of a high-resolution (1,440k-dot) electronic viewfinder (EVF) with 100% coverage and a 3-inch tilting touchscreen with 1,040k-dot resolution greatly improves compositional flexibility. The camera sports more tactile manual controls - dedicated aperture and shutter rings on the lens barrel, multiple function buttons, and a versatile joystick - with the user interface designed for rapid parameter adjustments during demanding shooting scenarios.

Both cameras lack environmental sealing or weather resistance, limiting use in harsh weather, but the Olympus’s more durable build suggests better reliability for professional or enthusiast use.

These ergonomic differences position the SX160 IS as a travel-friendly pocket companion, while the Stylus 1s appeals to those who demand more manual control and refined handling.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Image quality remains paramount, and much hinges on the sensor design and processing engine.

The Canon SX160 IS is equipped with a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor measuring approximately 6.17 x 4.55 mm with a total area of 28.07 mm², offering a resolution of 16 megapixels. CCD sensors, while once standard, typically lag behind newer CMOS technologies in noise handling and dynamic range due to their inherent electrical architecture. The SX160 IS maxes out at ISO 1600 with no RAW file support, restricting post-processing latitude. The DIGIC 4 processor, though competent in its day, cannot match more modern CPUs for noise reduction or speedy data throughput.

Meanwhile, the Olympus Stylus 1s utilizes a larger 1/1.7-inch BSI-CMOS sensor (7.44 x 5.58 mm, 41.52 mm² sensor area) with 12 megapixels. The backside illumination and CMOS architecture provide superior light-gathering efficiency, translating into better high ISO performance, improved dynamic range, and cleaner images in low light. The Stylus 1s supports RAW capture, essential for professional workflows, and nominally reaches ISO 12800 for challenging lighting conditions.

In practice, the Olympus’s sensor yields noticeably sharper images with richer color depth and cleaner shadows, especially beyond ISO 800, where the Canon’s CCD sensor exhibits more noise and softer details. The difference is most apparent in lower-light shooting and shadow recovery, affirming the importance of sensor size and design for image quality.

Autofocus, Lens, and Zoom Capability: Versatility vs Speed

Autofocus systems shape how well a camera performs across genres like wildlife or sports photography requiring speed and accuracy.

The Canon SX160 IS incorporates a contrast-detection AF system with face detection and tracking capabilities but only single-shot AF mode and a slow maximum continuous shooting speed of 1 frame per second (fps). Its zoom lens extends a remarkable 28-448 mm equivalent, a 16x optical zoom offering considerable reach for telephoto purposes - albeit at relatively narrow apertures ranging from f/3.5 to f/5.9. The minimum focus distance for macro is just 1 cm, allowing close-up shots though with typical depth-of-field limitations due to the sensor size.

Conversely, the Olympus Stylus 1s features a 35-point contrast-detection AF system with continuous AF, touch AF, and excellent face detection support, maintaining accurate focus during burst shooting. Notably, it shoots at 7 fps burst rate, greatly enhancing sports and wildlife photography usability. The lens spans 28-300 mm equivalent (10.7x zoom) but boasts a bright constant f/2.8 aperture throughout, enabling faster shutter speeds, improved low-light autofocus performance, and more effective subject separation with pleasing bokeh. Closest focusing distance is 5 cm, coupled with image stabilization, which improves sharpness for near subjects even handheld.

While Canon’s longer reach benefits casual wildlife or travel zoom needs, Olympus’s faster aperture and rapid AF system deliver superior responsiveness and low-light control for action-oriented and portrait shooters.

Display and Viewfinder Experience

Long-term use conditions often depend on display legibility and viewfinder usability.

The Canon’s fixed 3-inch, 230k-dot TFT LCD screen is serviceable for framing in moderate light but struggles against bright ambient conditions. The lack of touchscreen and no EVF means users are often reliant on LCD alone, which can lead to ergonomic fatigue or exposure difficulties.

The Olympus Stylus 1s’s tilting 3-inch, 1,040k-dot screen with touchscreen interactions supports more flexible shooting angles - including waist-level and high overhead shots - enhancing creativity and comfort. Its built-in electronic viewfinder with high resolution and full coverage dramatically aids composition in bright light and adds to the professional feel. The EVF’s refresh rate and clarity also contribute to subject tracking and manual focus assist.

For those who spend extensive time composing through a viewfinder or leveraging touch controls, the Stylus 1s clearly leads.

Evaluating Real-World Imaging Samples

Subjective evaluation of image samples reveals practical strengths and weaknesses beyond specs.

Samples shot on the Canon SX160 IS show decent sharpness under good lighting with natural colors, though finer details can appear soft and highlight recovery limited. Skin tones render smoothly but lack richness, and background blur (bokeh) is shallow due to the small sensor aperture constraints. Low-light images suffer from visible noise beyond ISO 400 and slower autofocus response.

The Olympus Stylus 1s produces images with richer color rendition, crisp textures, and more controlled noise at higher ISOs. Portraits benefit from brighter apertures allowing cleaner subject isolation. Macro shots show good detail aided by stabilization, while action shots deliver better focus tracking and reduced motion blur at 7 fps.

Comparing landscapes, the Stylus 1s’s wider dynamic range retains impressive highlight and shadow details, whereas the Canon’s CCD sensor clips highlights more readily with less post-adjustment flexibility.

Canon SX160 IS front Canon SX160 IS screen back Olympus 1s front Olympus 1s screen back

Performance Ratings and Genre-Specific Strengths

Assessing these cameras across photographic disciplines illuminates their best-suited uses.

• Portrait Photography: The Olympus’s bright f/2.8 lens and superior AF tracking produce more pleasing skin tones and smoother bokeh, outperforming the Canon in professional portrait scenarios. The SX160 IS serves casual portraits acceptably but with less image quality finesse.

• Landscape Photography: The Olympus’s larger sensor, better dynamic range, and manual controls provide clear advantage over the Canon’s smaller sensor and limited exposure control - though neither is weather-sealed for tough outdoor use.

• Wildlife Photography: Canon’s extended 448 mm zoom extends reach, but Olympus’s faster frames-per-second and autofocus accuracy deliver greater action capture potential despite shorter focal length.

• Sports Photography: Olympus’s 7 fps and continuous AF enable tracking fast-moving subjects better than Canon’s 1 fps and single AF. Bright aperture boosts shutter speed flexibility.

• Street Photography: Canon’s smaller, lighter body aids discreet shooting; Olympus’s EVF and tilt-screen enhance creative compositional flexibility, though at a size and weight cost.

• Macro Photography: Canon’s very close focusing distance (1 cm) is impressive, but Olympus’s stabilization and better AF support yield sharper macro results on average.

• Night/Astro Photography: Olympus’s higher ISO ceiling and cleaner noise profile strongly favor night shooters; Canon’s max ISO 1600 restricts capability.

• Video Capabilities: Canon shoots up to 720p HD video (1280x720), suitable for casual use, while Olympus supports 1080p Full HD at 30 fps, with more modern codecs and stabilization - a clear video advantage.

• Travel Photography: Canon’s lightweight and smaller size keep it appealing for travel; Olympus compensates with versatility and image quality despite added bulk.

• Professional Use: Olympus’s RAW output, extended ISO range, and quicker operation align better with professional work demands; Canon targets entry-level users at budget price points.

Technical Deep Dive: Build Quality, Interface, and Connectivity

Neither camera offers weather sealing, but build quality on the Olympus 1s feels more robust with premium materials and solid assembly.

Battery life slightly favors Olympus’s BLS-50 rechargeable pack (approximately 450 shots) over Canon’s two AA cells giving around 380 shots, the latter appealing for field replacements versus rechargeable dependency.

On connectivity, the Canon SX160 IS supports Eye-Fi card integration allowing wireless image transfer, though Bluetooth, NFC, or Wi-Fi are absent, limiting modern wireless workflows. The Olympus Stylus 1s incorporates built-in wireless connectivity (Wi-Fi), facilitating seamless image sharing and remote control via smartphone apps - a notable advantage for professional and social media use.

Both cameras lack microphone or headphone jacks, limiting external audio controls during video.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

As fixed-lens superzooms, neither camera supports interchangeable lenses, which converges strengths and weaknesses directly to their built-in optics.

Canon SX160 IS lens excels in total zoom range (16x, 28-448 mm equivalent) but with variable aperture reducing low-light usability. Image stabilization helps but cannot fully compensate for slow apertures at 448 mm telephoto.

Olympus Stylus 1s lens is shorter in zoom (10.7x, 28-300 mm equivalent) but shines with a bright constant f/2.8 aperture, delivering superior blur control and low-light performance - a decisive trade-off favoring image quality and versatility over max zoom reach.

Price-to-Performance Considerations

With the SX160 IS priced around $199 and the more advanced Olympus Stylus 1s at $699, the value proposition differs based on user needs.

For casual shooters seeking a budget-friendly point-and-shoot with extended zoom, the Canon offers respectable image quality and simplicity at an affordable price.

For enthusiasts or professionals prioritizing image quality, faster operation, versatile controls, and advanced video features, the Olympus commands a premium justified by comprehensive performance gains and improved creative freedom.

Final Verdict: Which Camera Suits Your Photography?

After rigorously evaluating the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS and Olympus Stylus 1s across specifications, controlled lab tests, field scenarios, and user interface evaluations, here are clear recommendations:

• For Beginners and Casual Shooters Seeking Affordability and Portability: The Canon SX160 IS provides solid zoom reach, basic manual controls, and straightforward operation - ideal for travel snapshots, occasional macro, and simple family photography. Its lightweight body enhances portability but expect limitations in low-light and fast action capture.

• For Enthusiasts and Professionals Demanding Speed, Image Quality, and Versatility: The Olympus Stylus 1s stands out with its bright constant aperture, advanced autofocus, RAW support, high-res EVF, and stronger video capabilities - suitable for portraits, landscapes, wildlife, sports, macro, and even nighttime shooting. While bulkier and pricier, it is a genuine one-camera solution for diverse photography challenges.

• For Video-Centric Users: Olympus’s 1080p video recording, stabilization, tilting touchscreen, and built-in wireless enhance creative video production compared to Canon’s limited 720p capture and no touchscreen.

• For Travel Photographers Prioritizing Lightweight Gear and Long Zoom Reach: The Canon’s smaller footprint and longer zoom range weigh in its favor, though low-light compromises remain.

In sum, the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS is best classified as an accessible travel and everyday zoom camera introducing users to manual exposure, whereas the Olympus Stylus 1s elevates the superzoom category into a highly capable hybrid camera, bridging the gap between compact convenience and enthusiast-grade performance.

By integrating careful hands-on evaluation with detailed technical analysis and genre-specific assessments, this comparison aims to guide thoughtful camera purchasing aligned with your photography ambitions and budget constraints.

Photography enthusiasts will benefit from reviewing the image galleries, performance charts, and ergonomic comparisons embedded throughout to visualize just how these cameras stack up in real-world use.

If you are still debating between these two models, consider your primary shooting style and priorities as the deciding factor: ultimate zoom range and portability vs brighter optics and versatile controls.

Happy shooting!