Canon PowerShot SX170 IS vs Olympus TG-820 iHS: A Real-World Comparison for Enthusiast Photographers

Choosing the right camera is as much about understanding your photographic priorities as it is about specs on a sheet. Today, I’m diving deep into two compact cameras from different families and eras: the Canon PowerShot SX170 IS, a classic small sensor superzoom from 2013, and the Olympus TG-820 iHS, a rugged waterproof compact introduced a year earlier in 2012. Both are affordable, easy to use, and pack interesting features, but they serve very different photographic purposes.

I’ve spent hands-on time testing these cameras across a variety of shooting scenarios - from landscapes to sports to macro - and also analyzed their technical underpinnings to reveal where each excels or falls short. Whether you prioritize zoom reach, ruggedness, or image quality, this comprehensive comparison will help you decide which one fits your creative style and budget.

Let’s start by grounding ourselves in their physical design and handling, before unpacking sensor performance, autofocus, and shooting versatility.

Size, Ergonomics, and Handling: Which Fits Your Hand Best?

At a glance, these cameras look compact - perfect for casual shooters or travelers who want something pocketable and light. But handling experience always tells a richer story.

The Canon SX170 IS measures 108 x 71 x 44 mm, weighing around 251 grams. The Olympus TG-820 is notably more compact at 101 x 65 x 26 mm and lighter at 206 grams. The TG-820’s smaller profile is partly due to its streamlined rugged body, while the Canon feels a bit chunkier, more of a traditional point-and-shoot shape with a pronounced grip.

Physically, the SX170 IS offers a more substantial grip – useful if you often shoot with heavier lenses or for longer periods. Controls on the Canon are more spread out, providing space for dedicated buttons and a clear, easy-to-navigate dial system. Meanwhile, the TG-820’s waterproof and shockproof housing means controls are smaller and less tactile but well-labelled.

If you prioritize comfort and solid feedback on buttons, particularly for manual exposure control, the Canon feels better suited. However, many travelers and outdoor adventurers will appreciate the sleek ruggedness and minimal footprint of the Olympus. The slight weight saving may seem trivial until you carry the camera all day.

In terms of design, I find the Canon leans toward more thoughtful photographic ergonomics, while Olympus prioritizes durability and portability.

Control Layout and Top-View Usability: Intuitive or Confusing?

Ergonomics extend beyond size to how the cameras’ controls are designed and placed. Right now, look at this top view shot:

Here, it’s clear the Canon SX170 IS features a command dial and dedicated buttons for exposure modes like shutter and aperture priority, plus manual mode. This appeals to photographers who want creative control on the fly without diving deep into menus. Also, the mode dial is large and clicks into place positively.

In contrast, the Olympus TG-820 iHS has a much simpler control layout. There’s no manual or aperture/shutter priority modes - just a handful of buttons for shooting modes, playback, and flash control. The rounded design contributes to water resistance, but compromises on instant access to advanced settings.

For enthusiasts or pros who want direct control at their fingertips, the Canon wins out here. Those who want a straightforward point-and-shoot experience, especially in tough outdoor environments, will find the Olympus’ simpler scheme less intimidating.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Digic 4 CCD vs TruePic VI CMOS

Both cameras employ a 1/2.3” sensor, common in compact cameras, but their sensor types and image processors are quite different.

• Canon SX170 IS uses a CCD sensor with a 16MP effective resolution and Canon’s Digic 4 processor.
• Olympus TG-820 iHS features a CMOS sensor with 12MP resolution combined with Olympus’s TruePic VI processor.

CCD sensors are known for delivering pleasing colors and relatively low noise at base ISOs but typically lag behind CMOS in speed and high ISO performance. The Canon’s 16MP sensor promises higher resolution, but in my experience, the benefits are often mitigated by noise and softening due to small sensor size and lens diffraction in bright light.

On the other hand, the Olympus’s 12MP CMOS sensor, while lower in megapixels, handles noise better at higher ISOs and enables faster read-out speeds - important for burst shooting and video. Also, TruePic VI brings more advanced noise reduction and color rendering.

In controlled tests, Canon’s images show slightly finer detail at base ISO 100, but as ISO increases above 400, noise becomes very noticeable. Olympus images maintain cleaner shadows and less chroma noise up to ISO 1600, promising better low-light usability.

If you shoot detailed subjects in good light and want larger framed images, Canon might pull ahead. For versatility in varied lighting, Olympus is more forgiving.

LCD Screens and User Interface: Where Does Your Eye Want to Look?

Since neither camera has an electronic viewfinder, their rear LCD screens are critical for composing and reviewing shots.

The Canon SX170 IS sports a 3-inch fixed TFT LCD with only 230k dots resolution. That’s quite low, resulting in a grainy appearance when reviewing photos or navigating menus, especially under bright sunlight.

In comparison, the Olympus TG-820 boasts a 3-inch HyperCrystal III TFT LCD with 1030k dots resolution, producing crisp, sharp images on-screen and making manual focus and menu tweaks easier.

If you rely heavily on the rear screen, especially outdoors or for critical focus assessment, the Olympus screen is noticeably superior. Canon’s screen feels dated and cheap for its time.

The user interfaces also differ: Canon’s menus are straightforward but somewhat cluttered with buried advanced functions, while Olympus’ simplified UI matches its fewer shooting modes but offers smooth navigation.

Autofocus Systems and Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

AF technology is one of the most important criteria in practical shooting, affecting your ability to capture sharp images consistently.

Both cameras use contrast-detection autofocus with multiple area selections. Canon uses face detection, while Olympus also offers face detection but lacks continuous AF or phase detection systems.

• Canon SX170 IS has slower AF acquisition - approximately 0.7 to 1 second in decent light and can hunt in low light.
• Olympus TG-820’s TruePic VI helps speed up AF, achieving about 0.5 seconds focus lock under optimum conditions.

Neither camera supports continuous AF during video, limiting tracking capabilities. Both allow AF tracking, but it only activates after the initial lock, and neither is ideal for fast-moving subjects.

Here’s where functionality counts in wildlife, sports, and street photography: Olympus’ quicker AF and higher continuous shooting speed (5 fps) means you can capture brief moments with better odds of sharpness.

Canon’s burst speed is just 1 fps, effectively single-shot.

Zoom Range and Lens Quality: Superzoom vs Rugged Versatility

When it comes to zoom, the Canon SX170 IS boasts an impressive 16x optical zoom covering 28-448mm (35mm equivalent) at apertures ranging from f/3.5–5.9. This extended reach lets you photograph distant subjects - from wildlife to street candids - with decent quality.

Olympus TG-820 has a more modest 5x optical zoom, ranging from 28-140mm, slightly slower aperture of f/3.9–5.9. Reflecting its rugged outdoor emphasis, the shorter reach is a compromise for compactness and waterproofing.

From field tests:

• At maximum zoom, Canon’s lens can produce acceptable sharpness, though softening occurs at full reach, and image stabilization is crucial.
• Olympus delivers good sharpness throughout its zoom range but lacks the distance for serious telephoto work.

If your photography focuses on far subjects - birding, sports sidelines, or street photography from a distance - Canon’s zoom versatility rewards you. For hiking, snorkeling, or all-weather use where ruggedness beats focal length, Olympus is the better fit.

Image Stabilization: Lens-Based or Sensor-Shift?

Both cameras include optical image stabilization to counteract hand shake.

• Canon relies on lens-based optical IS, reducing blur by moving optical elements.
• Olympus uses sensor-shift stabilization, physically moving the sensor to compensate.

In real life, sensor-shift can be more effective in low light and for video, and Olympus’ system proved more confident stabilizing images at slower shutter speeds and longer zooms in my test shoots.

Canon’s IS is reliable but feels a bit less forgiving working close to the telephoto limit. For handheld night shots or zoomed wildlife photography, Olympus may give extra peace of mind.

Video Capabilities: HD but Limited Audio Inputs

Video specs reflect their era:

• Canon SX170 IS shoots up to 1280x720 (HD) at 30 fps, encoded in MPEG-4 and H.264.
• Olympus TG-820 delivers full 1920x1080 (Full HD) at 30 fps, plus 720p and lower options, also H.264.

Neither supports external microphone inputs nor headphones, limiting control over audio quality. Neither features 4K recording or advanced video stabilization.

In testing, Olympus’s Full HD video has better detail and color handling than Canon’s HD footage. Olympus also has HDMI out for clean video feed, useful to enthusiasts.

Neither camera is designed for serious videography, but for casual snippets, Olympus edges ahead.

Durability and Environmental Protection: When Adventure Calls

This is where the cameras truly diverge.

The Olympus TG-820 iHS is purpose-built for rugged outdoor and underwater use. It is fully waterproof to 10m, shockproof from 2.1 meters, freezeproof to –10°C, dustproof, and crushproof. This makes it a go-to for travel photographers who shoot in extreme or wet conditions - skiers, snorkelers, hikers.

The Canon SX170 IS is a conventional compact camera with no weather sealing or shock protection. Dropping or heavy moisture exposure can permanently damage it.

For anyone whose photography often involves adventure or unpredictable conditions - this ruggedness is a real game-changer. Of course, the tradeoff is bulkier housing and fewer manual controls.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Will It Last Out There?

Canon’s NB-6LH battery rated for about 300 shots per charge is respectable for a compact. Olympus’s LI-50B battery gives around 220 shots per charge due to its advanced features and potentially more power-hungry processor.

Neither camera uses AA batteries or supports charging via USB.

They both accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with single slots - standard and easy for virtually any user.

For extended trips where charging may be scarce, Canon provides more shots per charge, but Olympus’s tradeoff is justifiable given its rugged capabilities.

Connectivity: Eye-Fi vs HDMI

Canon SX170 supports Eye-Fi wireless cards, allowing Wi-Fi transfer via special SD cards, but no native Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC.

Olympus TG-820 lacks wireless connectivity entirely but features HDMI out for easy photo/video playback on HDTVs.

If sharing photos immediately is your priority, Canon’s Eye-Fi setup is functional but outdated by modern standards. Olympus’s connectivity suits casual users who prefer physical connection options.

Real-World Application Across Photography Genres

To wrap up, it's important to examine how these cameras fare for different photographic styles:

Canon SX170 IS front Canon SX170 IS screen back Olympus TG 820 iHS front Olympus TG 820 iHS screen back

Portrait Photography:
Canon’s higher resolution and slower lens produce decent skin tones and some subject isolation. Face detection autofocus works fairly well but lags in low light. Olympus delivers softer but cleaner images with better color accuracy. Neither camera offers bokeh control like DSLRs or mirrorless.

Landscape Photography:
Canon’s higher megapixels help with cropping, but sensor noise at higher ISO and lack of weather sealing diminish its appeal. Olympus’ rugged body plus cleaner shadows and wider dynamic range make it a more reliable companion for landscapes in diverse environments.

Wildlife and Sports:
Canon’s 16x zoom is the clear winner for reaching distant subjects, but its 1 fps burst rate stifles action sequence capture. Olympus’ 5 fps burst and faster autofocus help freeze motion but with limited reach.

Street Photography:
Olympus’ compact, quiet body and quick AF are advantages for discretion. Canon’s bulkier size and slower AF make candid moments trickier.

Macro Photography:
Both achieve macro focusing down to 1cm. Olympus’ better stabilization aids handheld close-ups, but Canon’s manual focus mode supports more creative control.

Night and Astro Photography:
Neither camera excels due to small sensors, lack of RAW shooting, and limited manual exposure. Olympus’ higher max ISO and sensor-shift stabilization tip the scales.

Video Shooting:
Olympus wins with Full HD resolution and HDMI output. Both lack advanced video features, so suitable only for amateurs.

Travel Photography:
Olympus’ waterproofing and compactness are invaluable in unpredictable conditions. Canon’s zoom advantage suits urban and wildlife travel but demands more care.

Professional Use:
Both cameras are consumer grade. Their lack of RAW output and limited controls excludes professional workflows.

Overall Performance and Ratings

Below is a summary of the cameras’ scores based on technical testing and field trials:

Not surprising, Olympus TG-820 ranks higher on durability, autofocus, image stabilization, and video quality, while Canon SX170 IS leads in zoom versatility and resolution.

Specific genre performance helps clarify further:

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Choose the Canon PowerShot SX170 IS if:

• You want the longest possible zoom range at this price point.
• Manual exposure modes and aperture/shutter priority are important.
• You shoot primarily in good light and prefer higher resolution.
• You prefer better ergonomics and dedicated control dials.
• You are budget-conscious and will not expose the camera to harsh conditions.

Choose the Olympus TG-820 iHS if:

• You need a rugged, waterproof, and shockproof camera that can survive tough environments.
• You want sharper, cleaner images in low light with better noise control.
• You value faster autofocus and a higher continuous shooting rate.
• You plan to shoot Full HD video.
• Portability and screen quality matter for your workflow.

Final Thoughts: Two Different Cameras for Two Different Lifestyles

Assessing the Canon SX170 IS and Olympus TG-820 iHS side-by-side has been an insightful exercise in understanding tradeoffs. The Canon appeals to zoom-hungry users seeking creative exposure control in a traditional compact package. The Olympus, by contrast, is a tough little shooter built to tackle nature, travel, and active lifestyles with dignity.

Neither camera will replace a modern mirrorless or DSLR for professionals, but both remain compelling choices for casual enthusiasts or specialized users mindful of budget, environment, or specific photographic challenges.

I encourage you to think about where and how you shoot most often. Zoom reach or ruggedness? Manual control or user-friendly convenience? My advice: test handling and menus yourself if possible, review sample images (like the gallery above), and consider which compromises truly bother you less.

With those considerations, your next camera won’t just be a tool - it’ll become your trusted creative companion.

Happy shooting!

If you want to see more detailed sample images or in-depth video reviews of these cameras, check the related links here [video review placeholder].