Canon SX230 HS vs Sony H300: The Definitive Small Sensor Superzoom Shootout

Choosing the right camera can be a maddening affair, especially if you’re navigating the small sensor superzoom territory. With so many options promising the elusive “all-in-one” experience, I rolled up my sleeves and took two contenders - Canon PowerShot SX230 HS and Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300 - through their paces. Having tested hundreds of cameras with varying sensor sizes and zoom capabilities, I’ll here break down their performance in a straightforward, no-nonsense way, sharing the quirks and perks that no spec sheet alone can expose.

In this 2500-word guide, I’ll expose the essential differences, focusing on real-world usability, ergonomics, image quality, and, critically, which camera suits your specific photography needs - from portrait and landscape to wildlife and video. Let’s jump in.

Hands-On Ergonomics and Physical Presence: Size, Weight & Feel

First up: handling. You don’t just carry a camera - you live with it. How it feels in your hands, how easy it is to operate in various shooting scenarios matter as much as megapixels or burst speed.

The Canon SX230 HS is a compact, pocketable delight. Measuring a svelte 106x62x33 mm and weighing only 223 grams, it fits comfortably in one hand - perfect for travel and street photography when subtlety counts. The plastic build is light but reasonably solid, giving you the feeling of something well-engineered for its class.

By contrast, the Sony H300 is a behemoth by small sensor standards. At 130x95x122 mm and tipping the scales at 590 grams, it’s something closer to a lightweight bridge DSLR than a pocket companion. The “SLR-like” body offers a chunky grip, which will please those with larger hands but alienate cheapskate photographers looking for a purse-friendly option. While it feels plasticky, the bulk is conducive to steadier shooting, especially when wielding its monstrous 35× zoom range.

If you prize portability above all, Canon’s SX230 HS is your weapon of choice. But if you want that DSLR “clubs-for-thumbs” feel (and don’t mind the weight), Sony’s H300 offers heft and presence that lends to stability, particularly when tracking distant subjects.

On the topic of controls, the Canon has a clear layout with easy-to-reach buttons and dials, minimizing fumbling when you need quick adjustments. Sony’s more spacious top deck offers larger, distinct buttons, but in my experience, the H300’s layout feels less intuitive the first time you pick it up.

Sensor Tech and Image Quality: What Small Sensors Can Deliver

Both cameras design around the same 1/2.3-inch sensor size (measuring 6.17x4.55 mm). This is a common format for consumer superzooms but inherently limited in dynamic range and high ISO noise performance compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors.

Canon SX230 HS Sensor & Processor

The Canon employs a 12-megapixel backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor paired with the venerable DIGIC 4 with iSAPS image processor. The BSI design is a minor but important upgrade over traditional CMOS sensors, allowing better light gathering and cleaner images in dim conditions. It’s modestly improved over earlier Canon small sensor models.

In practice, this results in reasonably detailed images up to ISO 800, with noise becoming intrusive past ISO 1600. Colors, especially skin tones, are rendered warmly but sometimes slightly oversaturated, which suits portraiture well.

Sony H300 Sensor & Processor

Sony uses a 20-megapixel CCD sensor, feeding through their Bionz engine. While the pixel count is higher, CCD sensors typically lag behind BSI CMOS sensors in noise control and dynamic range at higher ISOs.

The H300 delivers sharp output at base ISO 80 and 100. Yet, noise rises sharply beyond ISO 400, with grain and smudging compromising low-light shots. Moreover, CCD sensors soak longer exposures, increasing motion blur risk.

Interestingly, the Canon’s BSI sensor edges out the Sony in noise management and color reproduction, despite lower resolution. For pixel peepers comparing 12MP to 20MP, remember that more megapixels on a tiny small sensor rarely equates to usable detail - optical quality and processing matter far more.

LCD Screens and Viewfinders: Framing Your Shots

Both cameras sport 3.0-inch fixed LCD screens at roughly 460–461k dot resolutions. The Canon’s PureColor II TFT LCD delivers slightly better brightness and wider viewing angles, which I found clearer under outdoor daylight.

The Sony’s Clear Photo LCD holds up well indoors but struggles under direct sunlight, necessitating more careful angle adjustment.

Critically, the Sony H300 does provide a low-res electronic viewfinder (201k dots), giving you an eye-level framing option absent on the Canon. While the EVF is grainy and small, it’s a benefit in bright lighting or when you want added stability. The Canon SX230 HS, however, lacks any viewfinder - a dealbreaker if you rely heavily on eye-level composition.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Capturing the Decisive Moment

Nothing tests autofocus more than wildlife and sports, where speed and reliability can make or break your shot.

• Canon SX230 HS autofocus: contrast-detection with 9 focus points, including face detection, continuous AF, and tracking.
• Sony H300 autofocus: contrast-detection, unknown number of focus points, with face detection but no continuous AF for tracking moving subjects.

The Canon offers a faster 3 frames per second (fps) burst mode vs. Sony’s leisurely 1 fps. That alone gives the Canon a distinct advantage for fast action and wildlife where consecutive frames matter.

In real-world use, the Canon’s autofocus locks focus quickly under good light and tracks moving subjects with reasonable accuracy, although in low contrast or dim lighting its hunting becomes noticeable. The Sony’s AF is slower and not designed for continuous subject tracking (despite specification claims), making it ill-suited for fast-paced photography.

Lens Reach and Aperture: Zoom Power vs. Brightness

The main draw of both cameras is their superzoom capability, so let’s scrutinize the numbers:

The Sony H300’s whopping 35× zoom outclasses the Canon’s 14×, enabling you to shoot from impressively far away - ideal for wildlife, distant landscapes, or surveillance-like uses.

However, with zoom length comes a key tradeoff: image stabilization struggles more at extreme telephoto, and such long zooms tend to amplify camera shake. Both cameras feature optical image stabilization, but in testing, the Canon’s system handles moderate zoom ranges with more consistent steadiness.

Additionally, the Canon’s wider 28mm equivalent at the short end is better for landscapes and street scenes compared to Sony’s 25mm - slightly wider, yes, but close enough in practice.

Zoom aperture is roughly equivalent, starting bright at f/3 or f/3.1 wide open and narrowing to f/5.9 at full telephoto. Neither camera is “fast lens” territory, so low-light performance at longer focal lengths will be compromised.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Will It Last?

When hitting the trails or covering a wedding, you want to know the camera will keep up.

• Canon SX230 HS: Rated for approx. 210 shots per battery charge using the NB-5L lithium-ion pack.
• Sony H300: Rated for approx. 350 shots on its proprietary battery (model unspecified).

Sony’s battery offers roughly 67% longer shooting endurance, a real perk if you don’t want to haul spares. However, battery life ratings from manufacturers often underestimate consumption during zooming and video.

Storage-wise, both cameras use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards, with Sony additionally supporting Memory Stick formats - a slight software/ecosystem edge but of limited practical benefit.

Video Capabilities: Shooting Motion with Confidence

Video specs are increasingly important - even compact superzooms now double as casual camcorders.

Canon is the clear winner here, offering Full HD at 24fps with a handy 120fps slow-motion option (albeit at low res). For videographers dabbling in casual recording, the SX230 HS is more versatile with better image quality and smoother video capture.

Sony sticks to 720p HD, which feels dated now, with no built-in mic input, limiting sound quality enhancement potential.

Weather Sealing and Build Durability

Neither camera is weather sealed or ruggedized, so rain or dusty environments require care. The Sony’s larger body may provide a marginal sense of durability but is no substitute for true weather resistance.

Macro Performance and Stabilization: Getting Close and Keeping Steady

The Canon SX230 HS offers macro focusing down to 5cm, which is tight enough for casual flower or insect shots. With its optical IS and smaller form factor, handheld macro is manageable with care.

The Sony H300 lists no macro distance but supports “macro mode” - in practice, it struggles focusing very close due to the small sensor lens system. The heavier body and longer lens complicate steady handheld macro shots.

Connectivity and Extras: Wireless, GPS, and More

• Canon SX230 HS excels here, offering built-in GPS tagging and Wi-Fi connectivity via Eye-Fi cards. These features appeal to travelers who want automatic geotagging and easy file sharing without cables.

• Sony H300 lacks any wireless or GPS capabilities, meaning manual location logging and wired transfers only.

Price Considerations: Who Offers the Best Bang for the Buck?

At the time of review, the Canon SX230 HS retails around $399 while the Sony H300 comes in at $249 - a notably lower price.

The Sony is clearly targeted at budget buyers wanting maximal zoom reach and a DSLR-like experience for less money, sacrificing features and image performance.

Canon commands a premium justified by better image processing, Full HD video, GPS, and more responsive controls.

Putting It All Together: Which Camera Excels Where?

Portrait Photography

• Canon SX230 HS: Better color rendering and face detection autofocus give warmer skin tones and reliable focus on eyes; wide aperture at short zoom aids background separation.
• Sony H300: Higher megapixels don’t translate to better skin tones. Coarser image quality and slower AF hurt candid portraits.

Landscape Photography

• Canon: Limited zoom with decent resolution and more accurate colors; better dynamic range.
• Sony: More zoom for distant landmarks but noisier files and weaker screen hamper composing.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

• Canon: Superior AF tracking and 3 fps burst help snap quick subjects.
• Sony: Longer zoom tempting, but slow AF and 1 fps burst not made for action.

Street Photography

• Canon: Compact and discreet, easier to carry.
• Sony: Bulky and less subtle.

Macro Photography

• Canon: 5cm macro focus with IS makes shooting close-ups more feasible.
• Sony: Macro impractical.

Night and Astro Photography

• Neither camera is ideal, but Canon’s BSI sensor fares better in noise handling at modest ISO levels.

Video

• Canon supports Full HD 1080p with stabilized footage.
• Sony limited to HD 720p.

Travel Photography

• Canon’s portability, GPS tagging, and wireless features give it an edge for on-the-go shooting.
• Sony’s long zoom useful for distant views but heavy and less connected.

Professional Use

• Neither cameras are professional tools.
• Canon’s RAW absence limits post-processing flexibility.
• Sony also lacks RAW; both shoot only JPEGs.

Final Performance Ratings

How They Compare Across Photography Disciplines

This graphic highlights the Canon’s strength in portraits, video, and street photography versus the Sony’s advantage in telephoto reach for wildlife and landscape.

Sample Gallery: Real Photos from Both Cameras

Canon SX230 HS front Canon SX230 HS screen back Sony H300 front Sony H300 screen back

Here you can see side-by-side crops and full-frame shots comparing color, detail, and noise at various ISOs and focal lengths.

Summary: Picking Your Small Sensor Superzoom Champion

Canon SX230 HS is my recommendation for:

• Budget-conscious travelers wanting compactness, GPS, and versatile video.
• Portrait shooters looking for warm colors, good face detection, and decent low-light performance.
• Street photographers seeking a discreet grab-and-go camera.
• Anyone valuing better autofocus speed and smoother user controls.

Sony H300 is better suited for:

• Shooters who prioritize extreme telephoto reach without breaking the bank.
• Wildlife or distant landscape enthusiasts who can live with slower AF and heavier gear.
• Those who want a DSLR-ish body feel on a budget.
• Situations where battery life and zoom extremes beat image quality concerns.

A Personal Anecdote

While testing these cameras, I took both on a weekend hike. The Canon’s lightweight, nimble design let me snap candid shots of friends and shifting light without arm strain. The Sony’s 35× zoom tempted me to stalk distant birds, but the camera’s slow response and heavier feel caused me to miss some critical moments. If you want a practical all-rounder, the Canon’s easier handling and richer feature set won the day.

My Takeaway: No Perfect Camera, Just Best Fit

No camera is flawless here - these are budget superzooms, after all. But understanding your shooting priorities clarifies all.

If portability, video, and overall smoother operation are paramount, Canon SX230 HS wins hands down.

If ultimate zoom reach and battery life on a shoestring budget is your game, Sony H300 is a potent offer that just asks for patience.

Choosing between these cameras ultimately boils down to your photography style and tolerance for tradeoffs, but with the insights here, you now know exactly what you’re signing up for.

Happy shooting, and remember - gear is just a tool. Master your craft, and the photos will follow!