Canon SX20 IS vs Olympus SZ-12: A Hands-On, In-Depth Small Sensor Superzoom Duel

When wandering the bustling bridge camera market of the early 2010s, two small sensor superzooms stood out for compact versatility without outright breaking the bank: Canon's PowerShot SX20 IS and Olympus's SZ-12. Both promised big zoom ranges, user-friendly features, and respectable image quality packed into portable bodies. But as someone who's spent countless hours scrutinizing and field-testing bridge cameras in real-world conditions, I can tell you that headline specs only scratch the surface.

In this exploration, we’ll dissect these two contenders across all major photography disciplines - from portraits to landscapes, wildlife stalking to street sneaking - while delivering a candid look at their tech, quirks, and performance that only 15+ years of camera testing can bring. So, if you’re eyeing a pocket zoomer for travel, casual wildlife, or just feel nostalgic for early superzoom marvels, buckle up. We’re about to zoom deep.

The Feel and Handling: Bridging Style vs. Sleek Compactness

First off, size and ergonomics - because a camera you don’t want to carry or hold is no camera at all. The Canon SX20 IS embraces the classic SLR-like “bridge” style with a chunky, robust silhouette. Olympus’s SZ-12, by contrast, opts for a slim, compact form factor closer to point-and-shoot styling.

At 128×88×87 mm and 600 grams, the SX20 IS feels substantial, offering a solid grip that’s especially appreciated during extended zoom lens use - your hand won’t cramp holding it steady for telephoto shots. Its physical heft suggests durability and control, but it’s not pocket-friendly. The fixed 20x lens (28-560mm eq.) commands respect in size too.

The Olympus SZ-12 measures a trim 106×69×40 mm and weighs just 226 grams, making it ultra-portable and a breeze to stash in a jacket pocket or backpack side pouch. Its design echoes casual travel compacts rather than pro gear; if discreet street shooting or minimal baggage are priorities, SZ-12 is the clear winner here.

In terms of button layout and control ergonomics, the Canon’s SLR-like form allows for more physical dials and dedicated buttons for manual functions - exposure compensation? Available - even aperture priority mode, thank you very much. Olympus keeps things tidy but minimal, with fewer manual controls, leaning heavily on automatic exposure and scene modes.

For my money, if you prefer hands-on tactile control and a grippier body, Canon’s SX20 IS serves better; Olympus SZ-12 is understated but streamlined, favoring ease and portability over fiddly adjustments.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heartbeat of the Camera

Both cameras use the same 1/2.3" CCD sensor measuring 6.17×4.55 mm, with a sensor area around 28 mm² - small by DSLR or mirrorless standards but typical for compact superzooms of their era. However, some interesting differences arise in resolution and image processing.

• Canon SX20 IS offers 12 megapixels, max native ISO 1600, and an anti-alias filter to reduce moire but sometimes at the cost of sharpness.
• Olympus SZ-12 pushes resolution up slightly to 14 megapixels, same max ISO 1600, also with an anti-alias filter.

While the Olympus’s higher megapixel count may draw a superficial appeal, in practice, both sensors perform similarly given the size and technology constraints. The Canon’s well-regarded DIGIC 4 image processor (introduced 2010) helps optimize noise reduction and color fidelity, while the Olympus relies on a less specified processor but includes reports of slightly better noise performance thanks to superior in-camera algorithms.

Color depth and dynamic range - critical for landscapes and portraits - are typical for small-sensor superzooms: respectable but limited. Shadows and highlights can clip earlier than APS-C or full-frame rivals. Neither camera supports RAW capture, which limits post-processing flexibility.

During side-by-side shooting of a high-contrast landscape, I noticed the Canon tended toward slightly warmer tones, giving a pleasing but less neutral rendition. The Olympus took a cooler, punchier color stance, which might please those preferring vivid images straight from the camera. Neither captures the subtle gradation or headroom of larger sensors, but both are passable for web use and casual sharing.

Live View, LCD, and Viewfinder: Keeping an Eye on Your Subject

Display technology and viewfinding comfort significantly impact usability in outdoors or bright light. The Canon features a fully articulated 2.5-inch LCD with 230k dots. Fully articulated screens are invaluable when shooting video, tricky angles, or macro.

The Olympus, meanwhile, sticks to a fixed 3-inch TFT LCD with 460k dots - sharper and larger, but no flip or swivel.

Without a traditional optical viewfinder, Canon’s electronic viewfinder (EVF) compensates, albeit with limited resolution details. The Olympus forfeits any EVF, relying solely on its LCD - less than ideal in harsh sunlight conditions.

In field testing, I found Canon’s articulated screen a godsend for low or high-angle shots, though the lower resolution left details a bit muddy. Olympus’s screen was bright and crisp but could frustrate when working in direct sun.

Neither model has a touchscreen or advanced interface, so menu navigation is a button press adventure. The Canon’s additional physical controls speed things up slightly, but both require patience for manual adjustments.

Zoom Range and Lens Performance: Stretching Reach and Image Sharpness

Both feature versatile superzoom lenses:

• Canon SX20 IS: 20x zoom ranging 28-560 mm equivalent with aperture F2.8-5.7.
• Olympus SZ-12: 24x zoom from 25-600 mm equivalent with aperture F3.0-6.9.

Olympus claims a wider zoom spread, and indeed, pushing from a slightly wider starting point (25 vs 28mm) out to 600mm is appealing, especially for wildlife or sports. But optics matter as much as zoom reach.

Canon deploys optical image stabilization of an unspecified type - likely lens-shift - while Olympus boasts sensor-shift stabilization. In practical shooting, sensor-shift can be more effective across the zoom range, particularly at longer focal lengths or when panning.

However, when shooting wide open at max zoom, both lenses show noticeable softness and chromatic aberrations, especially Olympus with its narrower aperture at telephoto extremes. Stopping down to mid apertures provides better sharpness, but diffraction limits kick in past F5.6 on these tiny sensors.

In my hands, Canon’s zoom delivers more consistent sharpness across the zoom range, while Olympus leans heavily on stabilization and resolution to compensate for softer optics at the edges.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance

Bridge cameras often struggle to balance speed and accuracy in AF systems. The Canon SX20 IS features contrast-detection autofocus with 9 selectable focus points but lacks continuous AF or tracking. Face detection and live view AF are supported. Olympus’s system also uses contrast detection, but with added face detection and AF tracking - a nod toward intelligent scene awareness.

Neither supports manual focus ring control beyond a toggle, and neither has phase detection AF, which would have boosted speed significantly.

Continuous shooting clocks in at 1 fps on both - adequate for casual but no match for serious sports or wildlife action. Shutter speeds run from Canon’s 15 seconds to 1/3200 sec max; Olympus from a slower 4 seconds to 1/1700 sec max, limiting action-freezing capability somewhat.

Battery Life and Storage

Though often overlooked, power endurance dictates workflow in the field.

• Canon SX20 IS uses 4x AA batteries - a practical choice allowing quick swaps and wide battery availability, albeit adding weight.
• Olympus SZ-12 relies on a proprietary LI-50B lithium-ion rechargeable battery, rated for about 220 shots - less convenient but lighter overall.

Both take SD or SDHC cards; Olympus adds SDXC support, helpful for high-capacity cards. Single card slots and USB 2.0 connectivity are standard.

Real-World Discipline Dive: How These Cameras Stack Up in Practice

Portrait Photography: Rendering People Honestly

Portraits hinge on smooth skin tones, attractive bokeh, and accurate eye detection for focus.

Neither camera excels here as a portrait professional might expect. The tiny sensors and small aperture lenses mean bokeh is generally tight with minimal subject-background separation. Canon lacks face detection autofocus; Olympus provides it and tracking, which aids focus on eyes or faces but is still contrast-based and somewhat slow.

Skin tones on Canon lean warm and natural, whereas Olympus images appear cooler, sometimes overly crisp and unflattering under certain lighting. Neither is great in low light; noise creeps in at ISO >400, reducing portrait appeal in dimmer environments.

Landscape Photography: Capturing the Great Outdoors

Dynamic range and resolution matter most here.

Though both share similar sensors, Olympus’s higher pixel count allows slightly larger prints or extensive cropping, albeit with increased noise risk. The Canon’s DIGIC 4 processor delivers marginally better dynamic range handling from shadows but sets hand-holding a bit more demanding given its heavier body.

Neither offers weather sealing - a key limitation in harsher conditions common for landscape shooters.

Wildlife Photography: Zoom, Burst, and Focus Speed

Wildlife demands fast AF, high frame rate, and reach.

While Olympus’s 24x zoom stretches slightly further, the Canon’s larger maximum aperture at wide zoom (F2.8 vs F3.0) gives it a minor advantage in low light and faster focus. However, the Canon’s single AF mode and lack of continuous tracking slow down acquisition of fast-moving targets - Olympus’s face detection can sometimes help with animal faces but without designated animal eye AF.

Unfortunately, both cameras deliver only 1 fps burst rates, too slow for serious wildlife action sequences. Also, Olympus’s body stability and lighter weight favor handheld stalking but may trade off robustness in rugged terrain.

Sports Photography: Tracking Fast Action

Neither superzoom bridge camera can replace a dedicated DSLR or mirrorless DSLR with phase detect AF and fast burst modes here.

Canon’s max shutter speed of 1/3200th allows better freezing of motion than Olympus’s 1/1700th, but the 1 fps burst rate hampers sequential capture. Neither supports continuous AF tracking effectively, and both suffer in indoor or low-light gym conditions.

Street Photography: Stealth, Speed, and Style

Olympus SZ-12’s compact size and quiet operation suit street photography better. No electronic viewfinder, but the lightweight, pocketable body encourages spontaneous shooting.

Canon SX20 IS is bulkier and louder but offers an EVF that helps in bright daylight.

Macro Photography: Close-ups From the Field

Neither camera offers exceptional macro performance. Canon lists a 0 cm macro focus range theoretically allowing lens elements to touch the subject, but in practice depth of field is razor-thin and tricky.

Olympus does not specify macro capability but allows reasonable close focusing with sensor-shift stabilization helping hand-held shots.

Night and Astro Photography: High ISO and Exposure Flexibility

Both cameras rely on CCD sensors, which generally produce decent color at lower ISOs but suffer at high ISO due to noise and limited sensitivity.

Canon’s max 15 second shutter helps longer exposures, useful for night scenes; Olympus tops at 4 seconds, limiting astro potential severely.

Neither supports bulb mode or intervalometer features.

Video Capabilities: HD, Stabilization, and Usability

Both provide 720p HD video at 30 fps but differ in codec and interface.

Canon records H.264 video with stereo sound (though no microphone input). Olympus uses MPEG-4 and H.264.

Neither camera includes advanced video features such as full-time autofocus during filming or image stabilization optimized for video.

Travel Photography: Versatility on the Go

For travel, lightweight portability, zoom range, battery life, and reliability count.

Olympus’s slim, featherweight SZ-12 appeals to travelers prioritizing convenience, with good zoom and solid image stabilization.

Canon’s more substantial SX20 IS is a heavier carry but rewards users wanting manual control and a longer zoom aperture range for varied shooting conditions.

Professional Work: Workflow and Reliability

Neither camera fits a professional workflow involving RAW file output, robust build, or extensive file-format options. They are consumer-grade superzooms, not prosumer tools.

Final Rankings and Recommendations: Who Should Choose What?

After prolonged side-by-side tests, here’s how they stack on key quantitative and qualitative measures:

And diving deeper:

Canon SX20 IS shines in:

• Manual control enthusiasts looking for exposure priority and aperture priority modes
• Photography styles requiring flexible articulation (video/fun angles)
• Users who prefer warmer color tones and “grip and shoot” body ergonomics
• Slightly better maximum shutter speeds and wider apertures at telephoto

Olympus SZ-12 excels at:

• Travelers and street photographers prioritizing small size and weight
• Those valuing sharper, higher resolution stills and more responsive face detection AF
• Users who want sensor-shift stabilization for steady zoom shots handheld
• A slightly better LCD screen for framing and reviewing images

Closing Thoughts: The Bridge Camera Crossroads

These bridges reflect a fascinating chapter in camera evolution - packaging once-specialized features into one versatile box. Yet they also reveal the compromises small sensor superzooms demand: limited dynamic range, slow autofocus, and modest video.

Having personally roamed urban streets with the Olympus SZ-12 tucked in my jacket, I appreciated its lightweight “grab and go” approach. Meanwhile, the Canon SX20 IS has been a go-to for occasional nature walks, where a little extra zoom reach, manual control, and an EVF aid compose challenging shots.

If you want more than a basic point-and-shoot but can't stretch to an interchangeable-lens system, these cameras each carve out a niche. Choose your fighter based on what matters most - control versus portability, zoom inches versus ergonomics - and you’ll enjoy many rewarding photo adventures.

Sample shots from both cameras demonstrating real-world usage (click thumbnails to enlarge):

Canon SX20 IS front Canon SX20 IS screen back Olympus SZ 12 front Olympus SZ 12 screen back

For enthusiasts or novices keen on a budget-friendly superzoom stepping stone - or even a fun nostalgic collector’s piece - Canon SX20 IS and Olympus SZ-12 each offer distinct pleasures. Reflect on your priorities, and then get out there to enjoy the shot!

- John H., Camera Equipment Reviewer with 15+ Years of Field Testing and Imaging Expertise