Canon SX200 IS vs FujiFilm S200EXR

Choosing between cameras released around a similar time but with contrasting designs and capabilities always makes for a fascinating exercise. Today, I’m diving into two intriguing small-sensor superzoom cameras from 2009 - the Canon PowerShot SX200 IS and the Fujifilm FinePix S200EXR. Both aimed to deliver versatile zoom ranges in compact packages, but their approaches to sensor technology, handling, and real-world usability diverge significantly. Having spent hours shooting side-by-side with these cameras, I’ll share my detailed technical take and practical experience to help you pinpoint which suits your style best.

First Impressions: Size, Style, and Ergonomics Matter

When you hold these two cameras, the most obvious contrast is their physicality. The Canon SX200 IS is a sleek compact, designed to slip comfortably into a jacket pocket or handbag with its modest dimensions of 103x61x38 mm and an ultralight weight of just 247 grams. This makes it superbly portable for travel, street, or casual photography.

The Fujifilm S200EXR, in contrast, marches to the beat of a different drum. With a bridge-style “SLR-like” body measuring a sizable 133x94x145 mm and weighing a hefty 865 grams, it commands a more deliberate carrying style - like a serious camera, not just a grab-and-go gadget. This extra bulk often means better handling and deeper control options, which you’ll appreciate for longer shooting sessions or when demanding precision.

In practical terms, if discretion and packing light are priorities, the Canon holds an immediate advantage. However, if you’re comfortable with something more substantial that feels like a tool in your hands, the FujiFilm’s grip and layout provide a more purposeful shooting experience.

Under the Hood: Sensor Technologies and Image Quality

Both cameras rely on CCD sensors, the Canon using a 1/2.3” (6.17 x 4.55 mm) unit with 12 MP resolution, while the FujiFilm ups the ante with a larger 1/1.6” (8 x 6 mm) 12 MP sensor. The larger sensor size on the S200EXR - about 48 mm² of active area compared to Canon’s 28 mm² - suggests better potential in capturing light, wider dynamic range, and lower noise levels, especially in challenging lighting.

Moreover, the FujiFilm leverages its proprietary EXR sensor technology, designed to optimize for either resolution, dynamic range, or low noise through different shooting modes. This innovative sensor design can dynamically cater to various shooting scenarios - a notable advantage when I tested scenes with high contrast or low light. Conversely, the Canon’s conventional CCD sensor performs adequately in good light but struggles noticeably as ISO climbs beyond 400, revealing noise and softness.

The Canon SX200 IS maxes out native ISO at 1600, while the FujiFilm S200EXR extends to ISO 3200 with boosted modes reaching up to ISO 12800. The latter, while noisier at extreme ISOs as expected, still maintains usable image quality thanks to sensor efficiency, especially given its era. So, if you frequently shoot indoors, at dusk, or in unevenly lit environments, the FujiFilm’s sensor yields tangible real-world benefits.

Handling and Interface: Designed to Shoot

Both cameras offer optical image stabilization to combat handshake, which I confirmed through handheld shooting tests - a must-have given their long tele zooms. The Canon SX200 IS includes a 3” fixed LCD panel with modest 230k-dot resolution, while the FujiFilm trades some screen real estate for a slightly smaller 2.7” screen with the same resolution.

However, the FujiFilm adds an electronic viewfinder (EVF), missing on the Canon, which I found greatly improves framing stability, particularly in bright sunlight where LCD visibility can fade. This EVF, albeit basic in resolution, delivers a more traditional shooting experience and reduces eye strain after extended use - a significant factor during workshops or wildlife outings.

Looking at their top decks, the Canon embraces simplicity with fewer physical dials but accessible control over aperture and shutter priority modes. The FujiFilm ups the complexity with dedicated dials and a layout evocative of DSLRs. For manual shooters or those wanting faster, tactile adjustments, the S200EXR’s control scheme is a clear winner.

That said, beginners may appreciate the Canon’s more guided approach - especially since it eschews raw support, instead relying on straightforward JPEG outputs, which suit casual users and those less interested in heavy post-processing.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: How Fast Can You Capture the Moment?

In fast-paced scenarios such as sports or wildlife, autofocus performance and shooting speed are critical. Here the FujiFilm S200EXR takes another dominant stance. It offers continuous autofocus capabilities and a burst rate of approximately 2 frames per second, doubling the Canon’s single frame per second in continuous shooting.

The SX200 IS uses contrast-detection AF with 9 focus points but only single-shot AF; there’s no tracking or continuous AF, limiting its usefulness for unpredictable motion. Meanwhile, the S200EXR boasts face detection and even allows multi-area AF, which helps maintain focus on faces or moving subjects - a feature I found invaluable during candid street photography sessions.

For wildlife photographers relying on reach (the FujiFilm max tele is 436 mm vs. Canon’s 336 mm) combined with tracking autofocus, the S200EXR stands out as the more competent tool. Sports shooters will also appreciate its longer shutter speeds up to 1/4000 sec for freezing high-speed action, compared to Canon’s 1/3200 sec maximum.

Image Stabilization and Macro: Getting Close and Steady

Both cameras incorporate optical image stabilization to counteract handshake. In my tests, both effectively reduced blur from hand movement up to 300mm focal length equivalents, however the FujiFilm’s system seemed slightly superior at longer focal lengths, lending confidence to those wanting sharp tele shots handheld.

Macro capabilities also differ. The Fujifilm’s minimum close-focusing distance reaches an impressive 1 cm, allowing for vivid close-ups with fine detail. The Canon cannot focus closer than zero centimeters per official specs, which in real terms translates to a few centimeters minimum focusing distance - less suited for true macro photography.

If you enjoy shooting flowers, insects, or textures up-close, the FujiFilm delivers a better head start. Its wider aperture at the wide end (f/2.8 vs. f/3.4) also helps isolate subjects with shallower depth of field, contributing to appealing bokeh.

Video Features: Modest by Today’s Standards

Video shooting on both cameras is limited to 640x480 or 1280x720 at 30fps maximum. The Canon boasts HD 720p capture, while the FujiFilm maxes out at VGA resolution.

Neither camera supports stereo microphones or external inputs, limiting audio quality and professional use. Both record in Motion JPEG format, resulting in large file sizes - not ideal for extensive video projects but workable for casual clip capture.

Neither offers 4K or advanced movie features, situating them firmly as stills-first cameras with video as a secondary capability. For casual family videos or short clips, the Canon’s larger HD footage feels preferable. But for any serious videography, you’d need to look elsewhere.

Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity: Powering Your Shooting Days

Battery specifics are a bit vague but we know Canon uses NB-5L batteries while FujiFilm employs the NP-140. The larger FujiFilm body theoretically allows for a bigger battery and longer life; however, its heavier internal electronics and EVF usage likely balance that out.

In my experience, both cameras adequately cover a typical day’s shooting, but stock up on spares if you’re on a longer outing, especially if video or continuous AF is used extensively.

Both cameras accept SD, SDHC, and MMC cards but remember FujiFilm includes internal storage, a handy option if you run out of card space momentarily.

Connectivity options are sparse on both - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GPS, or tethering capabilities. USB 2.0 is the sole data transfer method, with only Canon offering HDMI output for direct playback, though the FujiFilm lacks HDMI entirely.

Durability and Build: What to Expect Outdoors

Neither camera boasts environmental sealing or ruggedized construction. Neither is waterproof, dustproof, shockproof, crushproof, or freezeproof. That’s understandable for consumer models but worth considering if your adventures take you into challenging conditions frequently.

The FujiFilm’s robust bridge-style construction feels reassuringly solid but won’t save you from unexpected weather. The Canon’s lighter plastic body is more vulnerable to impact damage, so I’d recommend careful handling or a protective case.

Detailed Real-World Photographic Performance Across Genres

Let’s now zoom into how each holds up across key photographic disciplines. See below for direct side-by-side shots showcasing their image rendering styles.

Canon SX200 IS screen back FujiFilm S200EXR front FujiFilm S200EXR screen back

Portraits and People Photography

The FujiFilm’s face detection AF and larger lens aperture help produce images with pleasing skin tones and subject isolation. Eye detection is missing on both, a limitation at this price point, but Fuji’s faster AF lock and continuous modes let you catch fleeting expressions more reliably.

Canon’s images tend to look softer, and without raw support, subtle tonal corrections in post-processing are more challenging, limiting creative flexibility for professional portrait work.

Landscapes and Nature

Landscape photographers need resolution and dynamic range. The FujiFilm’s EXR sensor handling gives it slight edge in shadow detail retention and highlights, ideal for sunrise or sunset scenes with broad contrast.

Canon’s limited dynamic range mandates careful exposure and sometimes HDR mode, which is inconvenient for fieldwork.

Weather sealing is absent on both - keep that in mind when shooting outdoors in damp conditions.

Wildlife and Sports

FujiFilm’s longer zoom and faster burst speed make it friendlier for tracking animals or sports action. Continuous AF and multi-area focus shoot more effectively in these scenarios.

Canon’s slower AF and 12x zoom curtail chances for sharp, well-framed wildlife shots but suffices for casual encounters.

Macro Photography

FujiFilm’s close focusing distance of 1 cm and f/2.8 aperture lend it a clear advantage for macro or detail work. Canon struggles to get as close and produce creamy backgrounds.

Street Photography

Here, Canon’s compact size and lighter weight enhance discretion and agility. Few subjects notice when you whip out the Canon, while FujiFilm’s bridge size can feel intrusive or clunky in crowded urban environments.

Canon’s quieter operation and the absence of a noisy zoom drive also suit street shooting better.

Night and Astro Photography

Boosted ISO 12800 on the FujiFilm makes it more capable in low-light scenes, although noise is still significant at high values. The Canon maxes out ISO 1600, meaning earlier noise onset.

Longer shutter speed capability on the Fuji (up to 30 seconds) helps in astro scenarios, coupled with manual modes.

Video Usage

As noted, neither camera excels in video. Canon’s 720p option is preferable, but both lack microphone input and stabilization modes tailored for movie recording.

Travel and Everyday Use

Canon's compact, lightweight architecture is the better travel companion. Easier to handle on hikes, fits in smaller pockets, and ready for spur-of-the-moment shots.

Fujifilm’s versatility suits planned photo ops where carrying the extra weight for better zoom and image quality pays dividends.

Professional and Workflow Considerations

Only the Fujifilm supports raw image capture, a decisive factor for professionals and serious enthusiasts seeking extensive editing latitude, color grading, or high-quality exports.

Canon’s JPEG-only workflow is quicker for casual shooters but limits post-processing opportunities.

Both cameras lack modern connectivity for rapid tethered workflows or cloud storage integration.

Comparative Ratings Across Key Camera Performance Metrics

Taking a step back, here’s a visual summary of their overall and genre-specific ratings based on my hands-on testing:

The Fujifilm FinePix S200EXR scores consistently higher in image quality, flexibility, and responsiveness, making it a better all-rounder for enthusiasts requiring quality and control. The Canon PowerShot SX200 IS shines in portability and simplicity, making it a great starter or travel snapper.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations: Which Camera Should You Choose?

If you want my expert take distilled:

• Go for the FujiFilm S200EXR if you prioritize image quality, manual control, and more advanced features like raw support, longer zoom, continuous autofocus, and EVF. Its robust handling and sensor technology shine in varied conditions, from portraits to wildlife. It suits enthusiasts and semi-pros willing to carry more weight for better results. Plus, its macro close-ups and low-light capability open creative doors.
• Opt for the Canon SX200 IS if you seek a pocketable, easy-to-use companion for everyday snapshots, travel, and street photography where discretion and convenience matter. It’s budget-friendlier and lighter with decent zoom reach for casual photographers who aren’t demanding raw files or professional-grade results.

Dear Canon, if you ever read this - adding raw support and improved continuous AF would lift this class significantly!

Both cameras have their place - understanding how their strengths map to your shooting style is key. I recommend visiting a camera store if possible to get a hands-on feel and comparing their image outputs firsthand, given how sensor choices and ergonomics influence user satisfaction so directly.

Happy shooting! And remember - no matter the gear, the best camera is the one in your hands when the moment strikes.

If you found this detailed comparison helpful, check out my full video review where I explore handling and image samples in real-time.