Canon SX20 IS vs Sony WX350: The Ultimate Small Sensor Superzoom Showdown

When stepping into the world of small sensor superzoom cameras, especially within the bridge and compact segments, the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS and Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX350 stand out not just for their respectable specs but for their distinct design philosophies and feature sets. As one who’s had thousands of hands-on hours testing cameras across genres, I found this pair particularly interesting because they target enthusiasts who want reach, portability, and versatility without the bulk or price tag of larger systems.

In this comprehensive comparison, we’ll break down everything from sensor tech to real-world shooting scenarios, spanning portraits, landscapes, sports, and video work. By the end, you’ll know which of these two merits a spot in your gear bag, based on expert insight and practical experience - not just spec sheets.

Size and Handling: Bridge Body Bulk vs Pocketable Compact

Let’s start with what immediately hits you - their physical presence and ergonomics. The Canon SX20 IS is a bona fide bridge camera with a pronounced SLR-like form factor, while the Sony WX350 is a snappy little compact designed for quick grab-and-go versatility.

The Canon packs 128x88x87 mm and weighs a hearty 600g, powered by four AA batteries. It feels substantial in hand, with a grip that aligns well with traditional DSLR ergonomics - something I appreciate when careful framing or prolonged shooting is involved. The 2.5-inch fully articulated screen swivels out, adding flexibility for awkward angles or video.

Meanwhile, the Sony stretches only 96x55x26 mm and tips the scales at 164g with a dedicated NP-BX1 battery. It slips into virtually any jacket or bag pocket. The tradeoff? A fixed 3-inch screen with no articulation reduces compositional freedom but boosts durability.

If size and ease of carrying are your dealbreakers, the Sony brilliantly edges out here. But if you want better handling and more user control physically, the Canon’s bridge form is more comfortable for extended shoots.

Button Layout and Usability: The Photographer’s Touchpoints

Handling continues under the hood with how these cameras let you interface with them.

Canon’s SX20 IS impresses with a more traditional DSLR-like control layout including dedicated dials for shutter/aperture priority modes, manual exposure, exposure compensation via a dial, and a clear mode wheel. The point-and-shoot tends to shy away from complexity, so these make the camera easier to take seriously in manual modes.

The Sony WX350 strips everything down to simplicity. There’s no command dial for ISO or exposure compensation, no manual focus control, and almost nothing dedicated to manual exposure. You’re choosing primarily from presets, superior auto modes, and a standard program mode. The plus side is minimal setup, but the pro enthusiast will find this restrictive.

Having tested countless models, I can say the Canon’s more tactile design will suit users who want deliberate creative control. If you want straightforward reliability and minimal fuss, Sony's smaller interface serves very well.

Sensor, Image Quality, and Shooting Performance

Now, this is where things get juicy. Both cameras have the same-sized 1/2.3-inch sensor but differ fundamentally in technology and resolution, impacting image quality across all genres.

Canon SX20 IS Sensor

• Sensor Type: CCD
• Resolution: 12 MP
• ISO Range: 80 to 1600 (native)
• Anti-alias Filter: Yes

CCD sensors, while historically valued for color depth and detail rendition, have largely given way to CMOS for speed and low light. Canon’s CCD in the SX20 IS has respectable color accuracy, especially in well-lit conditions, but struggles as ISO climbs past 400, with noise becoming rapidly apparent. The max native ISO of 1600 is quite limited by today’s standards.

Sony WX350 Sensor

• Sensor Type: BSI-CMOS
• Resolution: 18 MP
• ISO Range: 80 to 12800 (native)
• Anti-alias Filter: Yes

Sony’s BSI-CMOS sensor is inherently better at gathering light due to backside illumination, which means lower noise levels at higher ISO and improved dynamic range. The higher 18-megapixel count in a compact sensor can risk more noise, but the sensor’s modern construction and processing offset this.

In my side-by-side lab tests under mixed lighting, the WX350 consistently produced cleaner images at ISO 800 and above, with richer shadow detail and a noticeably wider dynamic range than the SX20 IS. For landscape and low-light shooters, this is a decisive advantage.

However, do note that the Sony’s sensor area remains small, limiting absolute resolution and detail compared to APS-C or full-frame, so these cameras don't compete in resolution with advanced mirrorless options.

LCD Screen and Viewfinder: Composing Your Shot

Another important usability factor lies in the compositional aids each camera offers.

The Canon’s 2.5-inch fully articulated LCD can flip out and rotate, which is a rare feature at this price point and format. This articulation is a boon for videographers and creative shooters who find themselves shooting over crowds, low to the ground, or from tricky angles.

Sony’s 3-inch LCD on the WX350 is larger and higher resolution (460k vs Canon’s 230k), making the image preview crisper and easier to review outside. But it is fixed, which can limit comfort for certain angles. Also, the WX350 has no electronic viewfinder at all - the Canon, by contrast, includes a modest electronic viewfinder (although with no specified resolution, it's quite basic). This might also matter for bright outdoor shooting where LCD visibility suffers.

I personally find an EVF indispensable outdoors, so on that note, the Canon holds an edge, despite being less sharp.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus is critical for nearly every photographic genre - especially wildlife, sports, and street shooting.

• Canon SX20 IS: Contrast-detection AF only, with 9 focus points. It has single autofocus only; no continuous AF for tracking moving subjects.
• Sony WX350: Also contrast-detection, but with face detection and AF tracking capabilities. Single shot AF primarily, no continuous AF video mode.

In practice, the Canon’s AF feels slow and occasionally hunts - an artifact of the older CCD sensor and processing speed. The nine focus points cover center-weighted areas mostly, with no cross-type detail to enhance precision. The lack of continuous AF or tracking hampers moving subject capture.

Sony’s WX350, benefiting from a more modern processor and sensor, delivers snappier autofocus with face detection and decent subject tracking for its class. While lacking the phase-detection systems of higher-end cameras, it’s more dependable on moving targets.

For wildlife or sports enthusiasts, the Sony offers better AF responsiveness. The Canon is better suited for static subjects where AF speed is less crucial.

Zoom and Lens Performance: 20x Reach in Two Styles

Both cameras boast impressive zooms that range roughly 25-560mm equivalent for Canon and 25-500mm for Sony - classic superzoom territory.

• Canon: 28-560 mm, f/2.8-5.7 aperture, optical image stabilization
• Sony: 25-500 mm, f/3.5-6.5 aperture, optical stabilization

The Canon’s lens opens slightly wider at the wide end (f/2.8 vs f/3.5), which provides an advantage in low light and depth of field control. The focal length range extends a touch further to 560 mm, beneficial for distant wildlife or sports shots. Optically, the Canon’s lens is good but shows typical superzoom softness at the long end.

The Sony compacts its zoom range a bit but compensates with a sharper lens on average, especially in the mid-range focal lengths. Also, because it’s a smaller camera with no manual focus ring, rapid zooming is controlled via a toggle - less precise than Canon’s physical zoom ring.

For telephoto reach and aperture, the Canon edges out. For optical performance and compact ease, the Sony wins.

Shooting Speed and Burst Rates: Catching the Decisive Moment

Burst shooting influences your success in high-action scenarios.

• Canon SX20 IS: 1 frame per second (fps) continuous shooting
• Sony WX350: 10 fps continuous shooting

No contest here. The Sony’s 10 fps burst is a huge advantage for capturing fleeting expressions, street action, or wildlife behavior. Canon’s slow 1 fps rate limits it to deliberate, single shots - better for posed portraits or landscapes than rapid sequences.

Video: HD Capabilities and Stabilization

Let’s see how they hold up when capturing moving images.

• Canon SX20 IS: 720p HD at 30fps, H.264 format, with optical image stabilization
• Sony WX350: Full HD 1080p at 60fps (progressive and interlaced options), AVCHD and MP4 formats, optical image stabilization

The Sony’s video capabilities leapfrog the Canon’s with full HD recording at 60fps, meaning much smoother motion capture. This is critical for event Videographers or those wanting higher-quality clips. Canon’s HD video, while serviceable, is stuck at 720p and 30fps, making it look dated especially on large screens.

Neither camera offers external microphone input or headphone monitoring, unfortunately, limiting sound control. The Canon’s articulated screen helps video framing; Sony’s fixed screen less so.

In real-world testing, Sony’s videos are more fluid and detailed. If video is a priority, WX350 is the natural choice.

Battery Life and Storage

Canon uses 4 AA batteries, which is convenient if you carry spares, but adds bulk and weight. Battery life varies with brand, but AA can drain quickly under heavy use.

Sony’s proprietary NP-BX1 battery offers about 470 shots per charge manufacturer-claimed, which I found realistic for casual shooting. Recharging is straightforward with an external charger.

Both accept SD and SDHC cards; Sony additionally supports Memory Stick formats, which is a minor ecosystem quirk.

Connectivity: Sharing and Workflow

Connectivity is a growing factor in digital workflows and social sharing.

• Canon SX20 IS: No wireless connectivity, USB 2.0, HDMI output
• Sony WX350: Built-in Wi-Fi for wireless image transfer, USB 2.0, HDMI output

Sony wins hands down for wirelessly transferring pics to smartphones or computers, an essential convenience for many of today’s photographers. Canon’s lack of wireless feels frustratingly outdated.

Durability and Weather-Sealing

Neither offers official weather or shock/sealing. Both require careful handling in adverse conditions.

Price and Value Proposition

At launch, Canon SX20 IS was around $500, Sony WX350 about $270. This significant price gap reflects the older vs. newer tech divide.

For budget-conscious buyers prioritizing portability, decent zoom, HD video, and wireless, Sony represents excellent value.

If you want bigger grip, manual controls, longer telephoto reach, and are okay with heavier gear, the Canon might justify the price premium secondhand.

Real-World Photography Discipline Performance

To wrap up, I put their strengths and weaknesses into context across different genres. Refer to this gallery showing sample images side by side.

Canon SX20 IS front Canon SX20 IS screen back Sony WX350 front Sony WX350 screen back

Portraits

• Canon: Wider lens aperture helps with background blur, manual settings allow fine exposure control. But AF is slow and basic - no face detection. LCD articulation aids awkward angle shots.
• Sony: Face detection AF and tracking is superior, producing accurate focus on eyes and faces. Smaller aperture limits background bokeh but higher sensor resolution helps skin detail. Fixed screen limits framing flexibility.

Landscapes

• Canon: Moderate resolution and limited ISO range restrict dynamic range capture but optical zoom covers wide to telephoto. Articulated LCD is a plus in the field.
• Sony: Higher resolution sensor, improved dynamic range, and lower noise at high ISO enable richer landscape captures. Fixed screen and no EVF reduce outdoor compositional freedom.

Wildlife

• Canon: Longer zoom gives extra reach in the field; slow AF and 1 fps burst means you’ll miss many moments.
• Sony: Faster AF, stronger burst rate, and face tracking work better with moving animals; zoom range slightly shorter.

Sports

• Canon: Manual controls important here, but slow AF and frame rate are serious drawbacks.
• Sony: Better burst and tracking, but no manual exposure modes make it less flexible for challenging lighting.

Street Photography

• Canon: Size and weight make it less discreet; articulation helps low-angle shots.
• Sony: Compactness is ideal for street candid shots; face detection helps lock focus quickly; silent shutter unavailable though.

Macro

• Canon: Claims 0cm macro focus; optical image stabilization helps.
• Sony: Macro performance average, no specific macro focusing aids.

Night / Astro

• Canon: Limited ISO and noise issues hamper low-light/night shooting.
• Sony: Higher ISO ceiling and cleaner noise profile make low-light work more feasible.

Video

• Canon: Maximum 720p, 30fps; useful but outdated by modern standards.
• Sony: Full HD 1080p at 60fps, multiple codec options, superior for video enthusiasts.

Travel

• Canon: Heavier, larger, but versatile lens and controls. Battery less convenient.
• Sony: Compact, lightweight, Wi-Fi for instant sharing, decent zoom, good battery life - great travel companion.

Professional Work

• Neither camera truly targets professional or demanding workflow. No RAW support, limited exposure control (Sony especially), and no weather sealing limit their professional credentials.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

So, which one should you choose?

• Choose the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS if you:

  • Prioritize manual controls and want the tactile experience of a bridge body
  • Want slightly longer zoom reach and wider aperture at the wide end
  • Need an articulated screen and an EVF
  • Shoot mostly static subjects, landscapes, portraits in daylight
  • Don’t care for wireless sharing or HD video beyond 720p

• Choose the Sony Cyber-shot WX350 if you:

  • Value portability, weight savings, and pocketability
  • Want the best image quality, especially in low light and higher ISO use
  • Want faster autofocus, burst shooting, and face detection for dynamic subjects
  • Need full HD 1080p video at up to 60fps
  • Want built-in Wi-Fi for easy sharing
  • Are budget-conscious and want feature-packed versatility

Dear Canon, if you’re listening - please rethink your approach to autofocus updating and sensor tech for bridge cameras. Sony’s WX350 confirms that compact superzooms can combine small size, decent image quality, and fast performance at a keen price.

For enthusiasts craving lightweight travel and moderate zoom range, the WX350 remains a strong contender years after its launch. The SX20 IS still serves those who want more control with their creative vision and don’t mind the extra heft.

Summary Table

In conclusion, both cameras have their niche - the Canon SX20 IS for the more deliberate, control-oriented photographer, and the Sony WX350 for the agile, travel-minded enthusiast wanting cutting-edge AF and video in a pocketable design.

Hope this deep dive helps you pick wisely, based on your shooting style, budget, and priorities. For me, if I’m packing light on a weekend street or travel shoot, it’s the Sony every time. But if I want to dial in my settings on a dedicated wildlife or portrait shoot close to home, my hands prefer the Canon’s heft and control.

Happy shooting!

End of review.