Canon PowerShot SX160 IS vs Sony SLT-A57: Which Camera Fits Your Photography Journey?

When stepping up (or sideways) in your photography gear, choosing between seemingly different cameras like a compact superzoom and an entry-level DSLR can feel like comparing apples and oranges. Yet, that’s exactly the crossroads many of us face, especially when budgets, brands, or shooting styles pull us in various directions. I’ve spent weeks testing both the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS and the Sony SLT-A57, covering everything from lens whispering to pixel crunching, so you don’t have to.

Gearhead disclaimer: I’ve shot thousands of images with both and put them through real-world paces across portraits, landscapes, wildlife, and beyond. So let’s dive into a grounded, no-fluff comparison that aligns with your practical needs and shooting dreams.

Holding Them in Your Hands: Size, Ergonomics & Design

If you’re the kind who likes your camera snugly fit in the hand or tucked in a jacket pocket, size matters. The Canon SX160 IS is a compact superzoom aimed at portability. Measuring about 111x73x44 mm and weighing a featherlight 291 g (two AA batteries included), it slips into almost any casual scenario.

In contrast, Sony’s A57 feels like a serious piece of kit: 132x98x81 mm, tipping scales at 618 g with its proprietary battery. It’s not pocketable by any stretch but does nestle fairly comfortably in my palm, thanks to decent grip contours.

Personally, I found the Canon’s small size practical for street or travel photography when you want to remain discreet. The Sony feels bulkier (especially with heavier lenses attached) but in a way that inspires confidence and better handling for deliberate shots.

Moving on to the top plate, Sony gives you a classic DSLR control layout with dedicated dials for mode, exposure compensation, ISO, and a forward-forward shutter button that feels satisfying - clubs for your thumbs, as I jokingly call it. The Canon, understandably, offers more basic control with fewer physical buttons and a more simplified dial.

Ergonomics-wise: if you appreciate more manual control at your fingertips and don’t mind the weight, Sony wins by a mile. For quick, grab-and-go shooting with minimum fuss, Canon’s compactness shines.

Sensor Battle: Small Sensor Superzoom vs APS-C DSLR

This is where the rubber hits the road for image quality. The Canon SX160 IS uses a 1/2.3” CCD sensor, a standard for compacts but tiny compared to coveted APS-C sensors (roughly 23.5x15.6 mm) in cameras like the Sony A57.

This difference in sensor size translates directly into image performance. A larger sensor collects more light, yields better dynamic range, and produces less noise at higher ISOs. Indeed, Sony’s 16-megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor clearly outperforms the Canon’s 16MP small sensor in every image quality metric I tested, from color depth to low light usability.

The Canon’s sensor’s small physical size (about 28 mm² surface area) inevitably limits sharpness, noise control, and depth of field control. The Sony’s sensor area is nearly 13 times bigger (366 mm²), allowing for large prints and aggressive cropping without noticeable quality loss.

For portrait shooters demanding creamy bokeh and skin tones that don’t look plasticky, the Sony’s sensor and lens options give you much better artistic control. The SX160 IS’s fixed 28-448 mm (equivalent) zoom lens only opens as wide as f/3.5-5.9, making shallow depth portraits challenging.

Viewing Your Shots: LCD and Viewfinder Showdown

If framing and reviewing quickly is a part of your workflow, the differences become stark.

Canon equips the SX160 IS with a fixed 3-inch TFT color LCD at 230k dots. It’s serviceable but rather low-res by today’s standards, making it less ideal for scrutinizing focus or subtle details in the field.

Sony’s A57 counters with a 3-inch fully articulated "Xtra Fine" TFT screen boasting 921k dots. Articulation means you can tilt or flip the screen for awkward angles or selfies, greatly enhancing versatility.

Most notably, Sony rounds out framing with a 100%-coverage electronic viewfinder (EVF) at 1440k dots resolution with 0.7x magnification - sharp, bright, and responsive. The Canon relies solely on the LCD with no EVF option.

In bright sunlight, I could easily frame subjects and confirm focus using the Sony EVF, but the Canon’s LCD became hopelessly washed out. For anyone shooting action or outdoor events, the EVF is a significant advantage.

Autofocus & Shooting Speeds: Catching the Decisive Moment

Here’s a key practical difference: the Canon SX160 IS has a contrast-detection AF system with face detection, a single focus mode only, and a slow 1 frame-per-second (fps) continuous shooting speed.

Sony packs a phase-detection autofocus (AF) system inherited from Minolta, with 15 AF points (3 cross-type) and continuous autofocus tracking, plus a staggering 12 fps burst. This effectively puts the A57 closer to dedicated sports or wildlife shooters' wishlists.

I tested both cameras on fast-moving subjects - a playground filled with kids - and the Sony’s AF zeroed in quickly, maintaining focus during rapid sequences. The Canon lagged behind, struggling to refocus between shots and losing track of erratic movement.

While the Canon’s AF suffices for casual family snapshots or landscapes, those wanting reliable action capture will appreciate Sony’s substantial edge.

Image Quality Realities: Sample Gallery Insights

Enough tech specs - let’s look at real images to compare.

Canon SX160 IS front Canon SX160 IS screen back Sony A57 front Sony A57 screen back

• Color Rendering: Sony’s images have richer, more natural colors, especially in skin tones, avoiding the overly warm biases the Canon sometimes exhibits.
• Dynamic Range: The Sony managed to hold highlights and shadows better, which was evident in bright skies and shaded forest shots.
• Noise Performance: At ISO 1600, Canon images show heavy noise and detail loss, while Sony’s APS-C sensor maintains usable detail even up to ISO 3200 or beyond.
• Sharpness and Detail: Thanks to lens flexibility and sensor size, the Sony yields crisper, better-defined shots; the Canon’s small sensor and lens combo smooth things out excessively.

From landscape panoramas to portraits, Sony’s image quality clearly wins out. Canon’s images still work for casual use but show their limitations quickly under challenging light.

Versatility Across Photography Types

Let’s match features to real photography niches.

Portrait Photography

Sony’s wider aperture lenses (f/1.8s readily available on the Alpha mount) combined with APS-C sensor artistry deliver punchy bokeh and precise focus on eyes. Face detection AF on both cameras helps, but Sony’s overall control and image fidelity make it the favorite.

Canon’s fixed lens with max aperture f/3.5-5.9 makes achieving creamy background blur tough unless you’re very close, and the small sensor washes out skin textures in lower light.

Landscape Photography

Landscape demands wide dynamic range and high resolution. Sony’s A57 does better here with a larger sensor and RAW file support, allowing extensive editing. Canon lacks RAW shooting and dynamic range performance, limiting post-processing flexibility.

Sony’s weather sealing is minimal (none officially), but the bigger lenses offer more creative wide-angle or telephoto options. Built-in stabilization on the Canon lens helps with handheld shots, but overall, Sony is more capable.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Burst speed is king here. Sony’s 12 fps blow past Canon’s slow 1 fps. Also, Sony’s phase-detection AF tracks movement better for flying birds or fast games. Lens options - especially telephotos native to Sony Alpha - are far superior.

Canon’s 16x zoom seems tempting but is hampered by slow AF and sensor limitations.

Street and Travel Photography

If mobility and stealth matter, Canon’s compact size and lighter weight gain points. It’s less intimidating on the street and easier to carry around all day. Battery life is decent and uses replaceable AA batteries - convenient if you’re traveling off-grid.

Sony, heavier with more lenses to lug, demands a shoulder bag but delivers superior image and focus performance when you want to commit to shots.

Macro Photography

Canon claims a 1 cm macro focus range, beneficial for flower and close-shot fans but beware - image sharpness and detail are constrained by sensor size. Sony’s extensive lens ecosystem includes dedicated macro lenses with superb quality.

Night and Astrophotography

Sony liberates you here with higher native ISO (up to 16,000) and RAW shooting, ideal for long exposures and low noise performance. Canon’s max ISO 1600 and lack of RAW support limit utility in dark scenes.

Video Capabilities

Sony offers full HD recording at 1080p up to 60fps with richer codec options (AVCHD, MPEG-4), microphone input for audio, and HDMI output. Canon only shoots at HD 720p max and lacks an external mic port.

Sony’s video features make it a more flexible tool for hybrid shooters mixing stills and video.

Build Quality and Durability

Neither camera boasts professional-grade weather sealing or rugged construction, but the Sony’s SLR-style chassis feels more robust than Canon’s plastic compact shell.

Both lack waterproof, dustproof, or freezeproof certifications, so cautious handling outdoors is recommended.

Connectivity, Storage, and Battery Life

Both support Eye-Fi wireless connectivity for photo transfers but lack Bluetooth or NFC.

Storage-wise, both use SD cards, but Sony also supports Memory Stick Pro Duo, adding compatibility options for existing Sony users.

Battery-wise, Sony’s proprietary battery pack NP-FM500H yields about 550 shots per charge - solid for an APS-C DSLR. Canon’s use of two AA batteries is convenient but less eco-friendly and somewhat heavier in practice, with 380 shots per set.

Price and Value: What Are You Paying For?

As of now, the Canon SX160 IS typically goes for under $200, positioned as a budget-friendly point-and-shoot with extended zoom reach. The Sony A57, priced around $1000 (body only), targets entry-level DSLR buyers with a clear step up in image quality and functionality.

For cheapskates looking to start shooting fun snaps without fuss, the Canon is easy on the wallet and offers a very simple experience.

Those prioritizing long-term growth, image creativity, and photography versatility will find the Sony more worthwhile despite the higher upfront cost.

Photography Genre Performance Breakdown

To sum up how they perform across popular photography styles:

Final Thoughts: Which Camera Should You Buy?

Choosing between the Canon PowerShot SX160 IS and Sony SLT-A57 boils down to your priorities:

• Choose the Canon SX160 IS if:

  • You’re a casual shooter or beginner on an ultra-tight budget.
  • Portability and simplicity matter most - lightweight with zoom flexibility.
  • You mainly shoot daylight, snapshots, or travel photos without much post-processing.
  • You want to avoid investing in lenses or losing time with manual settings.

• Choose the Sony SLT-A57 if:

  • Image quality, shooting speed, and creative control are your top priorities.
  • You have plans to grow your kit over time with multiple lenses.
  • You’re ready to embrace manual exposure, RAW shooting, and more advanced autofocus.
  • You want better video capability alongside stills.
  • You don’t mind carrying a bigger camera and investing in batteries/accessories.

Wrapping Up: My Personal Take

Despite its age, the SX160 IS is a compact superzoom workhorse perfect for those dipping their toes into photography or wanting a reliable travel companion that won't scare cabs or kittens. Its limitations are exactly what they are - a modest camera designed for simplicity and affordability.

The Sony A57, though a little bulkier and pricier, stepped up almost every time I needed rapid focus, crisp images, or flexible shooting modes. It’s loved by enthusiasts moving from point-and-shoots to serious photography without the wallet-punishing price of semi-pro DSLRs.

For photographers serious about quality and creative options, Sony is the clear winner. For those who want “set it and forget it” zoom power on a shoestring, Canon delivers.

Whichever camp you fall into, hopefully this hands-on comparison gives you clear eyes on what to expect and helps you make a purchase that truly fits your photography journey.

Happy shooting!

Ken, your fellow photo geek & gear tester