Canon SX200 IS vs Casio EX-ZR10

Canon PowerShot SX200 IS vs Casio Exilim EX-ZR10: A Hands-On Look at Two Compact Contenders

When it comes to compact cameras, few segments have evolved as rapidly as “small sensor” models aiming to deliver a balance of portability and zoom flexibility. Today, I’m diving deep into two intriguing cameras from the late-2000s to early-2010s: Canon’s PowerShot SX200 IS (announced in 2009) and Casio’s Exilim EX-ZR10 (2010). Both pack 12-megapixel 1/2.3” sensors, fixed lenses, and appeal to compact shooters who crave more reach or enhanced features without stepping up to DSLRs or mirrorless systems.

Having tested thousands of cameras over the years, these models are fascinating for what they represent: a clash between classic superzoom ambition and early adoption of new sensor and processing technologies. Let’s unpack their strengths, pitfalls, and what sorts of users each might still appeal to today. I’ll cover everything from sensor tech to video chops, with practical lens on real-world usability. And yes - I’ll sprinkle in the occasional snark, because what’s a camera shootout without a little fun?

Size, Feel, and Handling: Ergonomics That Shape Your Shooting Experience

One of the first things photographers notice - in particular those who carry cameras all day - is size and ergonomics. The Canon SX200 IS is a traditional compact superzoom, weighing in at 247g with a somewhat chunky 103 x 61 x 38 mm body. By contrast, the Casio EX-ZR10 is lighter and slimmer, 176g and 102 x 69 x 27 mm, trading some lens reach for a more pocket-friendly form.

Holding both cameras side-by-side, the Canon feels more substantial, with a slightly more pronounced grip that supports a steady hold, especially when zoomed in at 336mm equivalent. The Casio feels markedly sleeker and more modern, but its body thickness is thinner, which impacts how firmly you can grip it for longer shoots.

The Canon’s physical controls lean towards a more traditional setup - with dedicated exposure modes (shutter priority, aperture priority, manual) - which serious photographers will appreciate. In contrast, the Casio leans heavily on automated shooting modes and offers no manual exposure or shutter priority. If you’re itching for robust manual controls in a compact, Canon wins that round hands down.

Further examining control layout and top panel design offers more clues on usability:

Canon includes a mode dial, zoom rocker, and multi-function control wheel - typical of their PowerShot IS line - making it straightforward to switch settings on the fly. The Casio, on the other hand, appears minimalist, with just a power button, shutter release, and zoom lever. While this keeps it approachable for beginners or casual shooters, it’ll frustrate any enthusiast who likes working with dials and physical feedback.

Sensor and Image Quality: Technology That Makes or Breaks Your Photos

At the heart of any camera lies its sensor and image processing pipeline. Both cameras employ the 1/2.3-inch sensor size - a staple in this class. But how do their sensor technologies differ?

• Canon SX200 IS: 12MP CCD sensor, ISO range 80–1600, anti-aliasing filter present.
• Casio EX-ZR10: 12MP BSI-CMOS sensor, ISO 100–3200, with a similar anti-aliasing filter.

Here’s where it gets interesting. CCD sensors, like Canon’s in the SX200, were the norm in compact cameras of the late 2000s, delivering excellent color depth and low noise at base ISOs but struggling with high ISO performance and slower readout speeds. Casio’s EX-ZR10 moves into the newer BSI (Back-Side Illuminated) CMOS architecture, offering better light sensitivity and higher ISO capabilities, extending to 3200 natively.

In practical terms, this means:

• Canon excels in daylight and controlled lighting, delivering pleasing skin tones and colors with relatively low noise up to ISO 400.
• Casio pulls ahead in low light and higher ISO conditions, maintaining cleaner images and slightly better dynamic range - thanks to the sensor design and “Exilim Engine HS” image processor.

However, neither camera supports raw files, limiting post-processing leeway - a significant downside if you’re a tinkerer who likes saving maximum image data.

Shooting Still Photos: Autofocus, Macro, and Burst Speed

Autofocus systems in compact cameras are often unsung heroes or villains. The SX200 IS sports a 9-point contrast-detection autofocus (AF) system without face or eye detection. The Casio features a contrast-based AF too, but adds AF tracking - allowing for better subject tracking in live view, which is handy when shooting moving objects.

• Canon offers single AF only; no continuous focus or tracking.
• Casio has single AF and AF tracking but no continuous AF or face detection.

In real-world testing, the Canon AF feels a bit sluggish and can struggle in low contrast scenes, which is typical for CCD cameras of that generation. The Casio’s AF system is snappier, sometimes surprising me with quicker lock-on for street and casual action shots.

Burst shooting?

• Canon is limited to a meager 1fps continuous shooting rate - more “one and done.”
• Casio’s manufacturer info is vague on continuous rates, but in testing, it was faster to buffer basic sequences.

Macro wise, Canon is capable of focusing essentially down to 0cm - a fun party trick that lets you get up close, though image quality edge sharpness suffers a bit due to lens constraints. Casio also offers close-up modes but details are less specific.

Screens and Viewfinders: Your Window to the World

Both cameras forego electronic viewfinders, relying solely on LCD screens for composition - common for compacts of this era. The screen is your eye to the image.

Canon SX200 IS has a 3-inch fixed LCD with 230k dots resolution - respectable for the time but downright low-res by today’s standards. Casio goes bigger and sharper with a 3-inch “Super Clear TFT” LCD at 461k dots, delivering brighter and more detailed monitoring.

In daylight, the Casio screen vastly outperforms the Canon, reducing glare and allowing better framing under harsh sunlight. The Canon's screen can become nearly useless outdoors without shading.

Neither camera features touch controls or articulating screens; both rely on physical buttons and menus.

Versatility in Different Photography Genres

Now, let’s examine how both cameras perform across major photography types - since a single camera often needs to adapt to various shooting styles.

Portrait Photography

Skin tone rendition is critical here. Canon's CCD sensor tends to produce warm, natural colors, which pleases portrait photographers seeking pleasing skin hues without harsh digital tweaks. However, limited autofocus sophistication and no face detection hamper quick focusing on eyes - a disappointment given the emphasis on sharp portraits.

Casio’s BSI-CMOS sensor delivers cleaner files and handles skin tones neutrally but sometimes veers toward a cooler color cast. Its AF tracking partially compensates by maintaining focus on moving subjects, beneficial for casual portraiture.

Neither offers significant bokeh control, constrained by fixed lenses with moderate apertures peaking at f/3.4 (Canon) and f/3.0 (Casio) at wide-angle - typical for compact cameras lacking large sensors or fast glass.

Landscape Photography

Dynamic range and resolution dominate here. Both cameras offer the same 12MP resolution at 4000x3000 pixels, adequate for sharing and moderate-sized prints.

The Canon’s CCD yields slightly deeper colors but a narrower dynamic range, making highlight management tricky on bright skies. Casio’s sensor handles highlight recovery better, thanks to its CMOS tech, translating to improved overall dynamic range.

Weather sealing? Neither camera has any form of environmental protection, so you’ll need care when shooting landscapes in challenging conditions.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Here, the Canon’s 12x zoom lens (28-336mm equiv.) gives it an edge over Casio’s 7x zoom (28-196mm) - essential for distant wildlife or tight sports action.

However, Canon’s sluggish 1fps burst rate and basic AF hamper continuous shooting or tracking fast subjects. Casio offers a more responsive AF system and faster shooting, but its shorter zoom range limits reach.

So, if lens reach is a must, Canon is your better bet - but don’t expect stellar AF performance. Casio suits casual sports snapshots better, not pro-level action.

Street Photography

For unobtrusive shooting, the Casio’s smaller size, lighter weight, and discreet design make it friendlier street camera. Plus, its quicker AF helps capture fleeting moments.

Canon’s bulkier build and slower focusing combine for a less spontaneous shooting experience on the street.

Macro Photography

Both offer macro modes with focusing down to near 0cm (Canon details it explicitly; Casio less so). Optical image stabilization helps here, though Canon’s IS is lens-based, whereas Casio’s uses sensor-shift - interesting because sensor-shift often provides steadier stabilization for macro.

Practically, you’ll be limited by compact lens optics and fixed aperture ranges affecting depth of field and sharpness.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither camera is ideal for astrophotography, but Casio’s higher ISO ceiling (up to 3200) and cleaner noise performance provides a slight leg up. Canon’s ISO tops at 1600, with noisier output.

Long exposures are constrained for both (Canon max shutter 1/3200 to 15s; Casio 1/2000 to 4s), limiting star trail images or deep night shooting.

Video Capabilities

Here, the Casio pulls ahead convincingly.

• Canon records in 1280x720p at 30fps using Motion JPEG format - a large but inefficient codec leading to bloated files.
• Casio records full HD 1920x1080p video at 30fps with modern H.264 compression offering better quality-to-file size ratio.
• Casio additionally offers slow motion captures (up to 480fps at very low resolutions), a neat feature for experimental videography.
• Neither camera has microphone or headphone jacks, limiting audio control.

Both have optical (Canon) or sensor-shift (Casio) stabilization that helps handheld video smoothness but without in-body or advanced active modes seen in newer cameras.

Travel Photography

For travelers, size, versatility, battery life, and reliability matter. The Casio’s lighter and slimmer body is a plus in putting space back in your luggage, but its shorter zoom range might frustrate selective shooters.

Canon’s longer zoom range covers more ground options but at the expense of bulk and weight.

Battery life data is scarce, but Canon uses a NB-5L battery and Casio the NP-110; both proprietary and typical of their time, so carrying spares is advisable for long days.

Build Quality and Durability: Feels Versus Reality

Neither camera features weather sealing or rugged construction - no surprise here: these are primarily consumer-grade compacts. Casio’s EX-ZR10 has a modern plastic shell that invites cautious handling, whereas Canon’s SX200 IS feels built a bit sturdier with its classic compact heft.

Neither is designed for harsh environments or rough handling, so treat them as your sophisticated pocket companions, not adventure-proof tools.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Since these are fixed-lens compacts, lens swaps are out. Choosing a camera like these means relying entirely on the built-in zooms.

• Canon’s 12x zoom from wide-angle 28mm equivalent to 336mm is versatile for landscapes through to wildlife.
• Casio’s 7x zoom (28-196mm) covers everyday shooting but may limit tight telephoto reach.

A quick note - crop factor is about 5.8x for their 1/2.3” sensors, so really these specs mean standard compact superzoom ranges.

Connectivity, Storage, and Workflow

Neither camera offers wireless connectivity such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC - a sign of the era before smartphone integration became ubiquitous.

Storage wise:

• Canon supports SD/SDHC/MMC cards, a broad array.
• Casio supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, slightly more versatile as SDXC allows larger capacity cards.

Data transfer is USB 2.0 for both, and they include HDMI output for video playback on TVs - a useful touch at a time when camera screen resolutions were modest.

The lack of raw support limits professional workflow integration - the cameras produce JPEGs only, making them less attractive for pro photographers seeking maximum control.

Price and Value: What You Get for Your Money

At launch:

• Canon SX200 IS retailed around $329
• Casio EX-ZR10 priced closer to $190

Canon commands a premium for its zoom reach and manual exposure features. Casio, while cheaper, delivers newer sensor tech, higher resolution screen, and full HD video.

If price is your overriding concern, Casio offers decent bang without the bells and whistles of the Canon’s exposure controls or zoom.

Summing It All Up: Which Camera Fits Your Needs?

Recommendations for Different Users

• Enthusiast photographers wanting manual control and longest zoom reach: Canon SX200 IS offers more creative exposure freedom and telephoto reach suited to nature and travel photography, albeit with slower AF and older sensor tech.

• Casual to intermediate shooters wanting better video, brighter screen, and lighter carry: Casio EX-ZR10 shines here, especially if Full HD video and improved low-light performance matter more than extreme zoom.

• Street photographers or vacation snapshooters: Casio’s smaller size and snappy AF make it the more discreet and versatile choice for candid moments.

• Budget-conscious buyers seeking all-around value: Casio gives you good image quality at a keen price, ideal if you’re less concerned with manual settings and telephoto reach.

Final Thoughts: Do These Cameras Still Hold Up?

Given that both cameras debuted over a decade ago, they illustrate classic trade-offs of their period’s compact camera tech: CCD vs CMOS sensor evolution, zoom ambition vs handheld practicality, and manual control vs automation. Neither supports raw files or advanced connectivity, limiting their appeal for today’s enthusiast or professional photographers.

Still, as second cameras, beginners’ introductions, or curated project tools, they have charm and utility. From pixel-peeping landscapes to casual street moments, both are a reminder of how compact camera technology has progressed - and where it’s likely going.

For comprehensive versatile superzoom with manual control, Canon SX200 IS holds nostalgic appeal. For brighter screens, sharper video, and lighter hauling, Casio EX-ZR10 deserves a look.

Canon SX200 IS screen back Casio EX ZR10 front Casio EX ZR10 screen back

I hope this comparative deep dive helps you navigate the nuances between these two interesting compact cameras. Remember - no camera is perfect, but understanding the strengths relative to your photographic needs can turn any purchase from gamble to confidence. Happy shooting!