Canon SX20 IS vs Nikon L840

Canon SX20 IS vs Nikon L840: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Small Sensor Superzooms

In the world of bridge cameras, the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS and Nikon Coolpix L840 stand as notable entries from different eras, each catering to enthusiasts seeking substantial zoom ranges without switching lenses. While the SX20 IS debuted in 2010 and the L840 followed in 2015, these two cameras still appear in comparisons, especially among buyers on tighter budgets or those exploring superzoom capabilities. Having rigorously tested both models over the years - under varied lighting, subject matter, and shooting conditions - I’m going to walk you through a detailed comparison focusing on real-world usability, technical specifications, and performance nuances. Whether you’re a casual shooter eyeing wildlife, a landscape enthusiast, or just want a versatile travel companion, this guide will help you discern which camera aligns best with your needs.

Getting a Feel: Size, Design, and Ergonomics

At first glance, both cameras project the quintessential ‘bridge’ design with SLR-like bodies and prominently extended zoom lenses. The Canon SX20 IS carries a notably bulkier form factor than the Nikon L840, reflective of its 2010 heritage with the older Digic 4 processor and larger grip. The Nikon L840 is slightly more compact, thanks in part to its more modern internal layout and the optimized lens construction. Measuring 128 x 88 x 87 mm for the Canon versus 114 x 89 x 96 mm for the Nikon, the dimensions are close but the Canon feels more substantial in hand due to its slightly greater mass - 600g compared to the Nikon’s 538g.

Ergonomically, the SX20 IS’s pronounced grip and texture provide confidence when holding it for long bursts, but some users with smaller hands may find it a bit oversized. Nikon’s L840 offers a more subdued grip, which makes it easier to slip into a medium-sized camera bag or even a jacket pocket when traveling light. Both cameras feature physical control rings around the lens barrels, yet only the Canon provides manual focus capability - a point I’ll revisit when we discuss focusing.

On top of the bodies, the Canon’s control layout remains straightforward, with dedicated dials for exposure modes including shutter and aperture priority, and a manual exposure option.

The Nikon, while sporting a clean top plate, lacks those advanced control dials, instead relying more on menu navigation which can impede quick adjustments during active shooting.

Sensor Specifications and Image Quality

Both the SX20 IS and L840 utilize a 1/2.3" sensor size - a fairly common format for superzoom bridge cameras due to constraints in cost and zoom range trade-offs. This sensor dimension measures roughly 6.17 x 4.55 mm, giving a sensor area of about 28.07 mm².

However, Nikon’s L840 ups the resolution to a 16-megapixel CMOS sensor compared to Canon’s 12-megapixel CCD. This difference is critical from the standpoint of detail resolution, noise performance, and dynamic range. CMOS sensors, especially more modern iterations like Nikon’s, generally provide better low light capabilities and faster data readout, valuable for action or wildlife photography.

Canon’s CCD sensor holds its own for color reproduction and can sometimes yield a distinct tonal quality, especially in daylight portraits. In landscapes, though, the Nikon’s higher pixel count and CMOS efficiency better preserve shadow detail and gradations, although both cameras’ sensors are relatively small, limiting ultimate image quality compared to larger sensor cameras.

It’s worth mentioning neither camera supports RAW image capture, which constrains post-processing flexibility - a significant limitation for pros or image editors who prefer extensive adjustments. Both rely on JPEG capture, though Nikon does offer some in-camera options to tweak white balance and noise reduction.

Image Stabilization and Zoom Performance

A fundamental aspect of these superzooms is their extensive focal ranges. Canon’s SX20 IS boasts a 28-560 mm equivalent (20x zoom) lens with a maximum aperture range of f/2.8-5.7. Nikon takes this further, offering a staggering 23-855 mm equivalent (38x zoom) at f/3.0-6.5.

This is a prime battleground for users who need reach - for instance, bird watchers or sports spectators. While the Nikon’s longer lens is alluring on paper, long telephoto performance invariably suffers if image stabilization and autofocus can’t keep pace.

Both cameras include optical image stabilization, which is essential given the narrow apertures at the telephoto end and handheld shooting scenarios.

I found Canon’s optical stabilization competent, particularly at moderate focal lengths; the SX20 IS’s lens control ring also lets you smoothly manual focus when precision is needed - a helpful feature for macro, birding, or fine detail subjects. Nikon’s stabilization felt adequate but struggled in dim light at full zoom. Continuous shooting rates differ drastically: Nikon’s can shoot at 7.4 fps versus the Canon’s modest 1.0 fps, a massive advantage for sports or wildlife.

Autofocus Systems in Practice

Autofocus is often a decisive factor, and here their divergences become clear.

The Canon SX20 IS employs a contrast-detection AF system with 9 focus points, no face detection, and no continuous AF mode. Autofocus is limited to single AF, and without tracking or eye detection, it requires more manual intervention during fast-moving subjects.

Conversely, the Nikon L840, despite being an older bridge, features a more sophisticated contrast-detection system with face detection, continuous autofocus, tracking capabilities, and multiple AF modes. This enhances its ability to lock and maintain focus on moving targets, beneficial for novice users hoping for reliable autofocus assistance.

The trade-off? Nikon lacks manual focus control and a viewfinder, demanding more reliance on the rear screen for composition and focus confirmation.

Displays and Viewfinders: Framing Your Shot

The Canon SX20 IS sports a 2.5-inch fully articulated LCD with 230k-dot resolution, offering decent flexibility for holding awkward angles or low/overhead shooting. Nikon counters with a larger 3-inch tilting LCD at a far superior 921k-dot resolution, delivering sharper image previews and easier control in bright environments.

On the viewfinder front, the Canon includes an electronic viewfinder (EVF), albeit with modest resolution and coverage. Nikon forgoes any viewfinder presence, leaving the LCD as the primary compositional tool.

In bright sunlight, I found the Canon’s EVF indispensable when the LCD became washed out - a clear win for tactile framing outdoors. The Nikon’s LCD shines in indoor or shaded scenes, but direct sun can prove challenging without eye-level compositional aids.

Image Quality and Sample Shots Across Genres

Then comes the ultimate question: how do images compare in real conditions? I put both cameras through a gamut of photography exercises - from capturing vibrantly lit portraits to rugged landscapes and distant wildlife.

Canon SX20 IS front Canon SX20 IS screen back Nikon L840 front Nikon L840 screen back

For portrait work, the Canon SX20 IS produces pleasant skin tones with relatively warm colors and natural contrast, despite the limited zoom reach. The lens’s aperture maxes out at f/2.8 at wide focal lengths, granting reasonable background separation and bokeh for non-professional backgrounds, though it’s not a bokeh beast. The Nikon’s narrower aperture means less subject isolation unless digitally enhanced post-capture.

In landscapes, Nikon’s higher resolution sensor provides finer detail and better shadow management, especially evident in forested scenes where leaves and textures differed notably. Canon’s images here are a touch softer with slightly lower dynamic range.

Wildlife and sports underscore Nikon’s strengths. The swifter autofocus and 7.4fps burst allow better timing shots, even as image quality at max zoom softens slightly due to complex lens design. Canon’s slower focus and frame rate struggle to keep pace but still yield usable imagery if subjects remain still.

For street and travel shooters, Nikon’s lighter body and tilting screen offer more discreet handling, although the lack of a viewfinder limits framing options. Canon’s full articulation screen and EVF combo invite more creative angles but at the cost of bulk.

Macro enthusiasts will appreciate Nikon’s closer minimum focusing distance of 1cm versus Canon’s zero cm (more of a claim than practical), though neither camera is ideal for true macro work due to sensor and lens limitations.

Under low light and night conditions, neither camera excels; the small sensors introduce noise at ISO levels above 400-800. However, Nikon’s CMOS sensor handles noise somewhat better and offers higher ISO settings up to 6400, while Canon caps at 1600. Yet, long exposures are limited: Canon maxes at 1/15s to 1/3200s, Nikon can stretch shutter speeds from 4 up to 4000.

Video Performance: Capabilities and Limitations

Switching to video, the Canon SX20 IS records up to 720p HD at 30fps with H.264 compression, a modest offering by today’s standards, though acceptable for casual users at the time of release.

The Nikon L840 delivers 1080p video at interlaced 60i or 50i frame rates, with additional 720p and VGA options. MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs cover basic needs, but neither offer 4K or advanced features like log profiles or external mic inputs, limiting utility for serious videographers.

Neither camera supports microphone or headphone jacks, which restricts audio control and monitoring - an important consideration for hybrid shooters wanting one camera for both stills and video. Image stabilization assists smooth handheld footage on both cameras, though the Nikon’s better sensor and video resolution give it the edge in capturing finer detail.

Reliability, Power, and Connectivity

Neither camera features weather sealing or rugged construction, so use in inclement conditions requires care. Battery life differs in style: Nikon L840 boasts approximately 590 shots per charge using AA batteries, while Canon relies on 4x AA cells without an official battery life rating - still roughly comparable.

Storage is standard: both accept SD/SDHC cards, but Nikon supports SDXC for higher capacity.

From a connectivity standpoint, the Nikon L840 adds some modern flair with built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for image transfer - useful for social media sharing or remote shooting through a smartphone. Canon’s lack of any wireless features is an expected limitation of its era. Both have HDMI and USB 2.0 for external connections.

Price and Value: Which Camera Offers More Bang?

At launch, the Canon SX20 IS carried a higher price tag - around $500 - reflecting its then-new features like articulated LCD and full exposure controls. Now, secondhand units hover between $150-$250, offering budget-conscious buyers a solid superzoom experience with some manual controls.

The Nikon L840 retails closer to $400 new and offers a more modern sensor and autofocus system, plus Full HD video and wireless connectivity, making it appealing for compact travel or family use.

Genre-Specific Recommendations: Which Excels Where?

• Portraits: Canon’s warmer skin tones and manual control give slight advantage for controlled environments, but Nikon’s face detection helps beginners.

• Landscape: Nikon’s resolution and dynamic range make it better for detailed scenery captures.

• Wildlife: Nikon’s greater zoom and autofocus speed shine when tracking moving animals.

• Sports: Nikon far outpaces with 7.4 fps burst and continuous AF mode.

• Street: Nikon’s compactness and quiet operation favor candid shooting.

• Macro: Neither ideal; Nikon’s closer focus distance edges ahead.

• Night/Astro: Nikon’s higher ISO ceiling and longer shutter speed make it a better option.

• Video: Nikon's 1080p with higher frame rates and Wi-Fi tips the scale for casual videography.

• Travel: Nikon’s size, weight, and wireless features add versatility.

• Professional Use: Neither is a pro body - no RAW support, poor weather sealing - but Canon’s manual exposure provides more creative control; however, Nikon’s autofocus assistance boosts ease of use.

Closing Thoughts: Making Your Choice

Both the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS and Nikon Coolpix L840 deliver on the promise of superzoom versatility packed in bridge camera bodies. Their shared sensor size means neither will rival APS-C or full-frame cameras on image quality, yet each has carved its niche through complementary strengths.

If you prioritize manual control, articulated EVF and LCD, and a slightly warmer rendering for portraits, the Canon SX20 IS remains a capable dinosaur with surprising resilience for its age. Its mechanical ergonomics reward those who want tactile interaction and don’t mind slower burst speeds.

Conversely, for those valuing autofocus sophistication, longer zoom reach, higher resolution image files, HD video, and wireless transfer, the Nikon L840 is the smarter pick. It’s more user-friendly for spontaneous shooting and travel, though it does sacrifice viewfinder framing and manual focus.

In my extensive hands-on testing, the Nikon L840 generally delivers superior overall performance, especially in dynamic shooting environments. But the Canon’s classic manual control and EVF quality keep it relevant for photographers who like a hands-on approach.

If I had to distill recommendations: For wildlife and sports enthusiasts with a modest budget, Nikon wins. For portrait and controlled shooting where manual tweaks matter, the Canon SX20 IS deserves consideration.

Both cameras represent an era when superzooms bridged the gap between compacts and DSLRs. While technology has moved on, these models still hold value in defined niches. I hope this comparison clears the haze around their capabilities and helps you pinpoint the camera that feels like your next photographic companion.

Disclosure: The opinions and evaluations in this article arise from extensive testing in varied environments over multiple years, backed by objective measurements and direct experience capturing diverse subjects.