Canon SX240 HS vs Fujifilm FinePix S4200: Expert Comparison of Small Sensor Superzooms

As someone who has spent over 15 years testing cameras across genres and use cases, the 2012-era small sensor superzoom category is an intriguing niche. Today, I’m diving into two popular options from that period - the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS and the Fujifilm FinePix S4200. Both cameras aim to offer remarkable zoom ranges and flexible shooting modes for enthusiasts on a budget or those seeking an all-in-one travel companion. But how do they hold up when you weigh their technical merits and real-world performance? Let’s dissect their strengths and limitations, drawing from hands-on testing and practical photographic scenarios.

First Impressions: Ergonomics and Build Quality

Starting with size, these cameras occupy slightly different segments despite a similar sensor footprint. The Canon SX240 HS is compact and pocketable at 106x61x33 mm and just 224 grams. Its design is that of a traditional compact camera with a fixed lens - streamlined but straightforward.

Compare that with the Fujifilm S4200, which leans into the bridge camera aesthetic and form factor (118x81x100 mm, 543 grams). It feels much heftier and more substantial in hand, sporting a pronounced grip and SLR-like body. This heft can be an advantage for stability but detracts from portability if you want something pocketable.

The Canon’s minimalist design favored simplicity: fewer physical controls and no viewfinder, while the Fuji provides an electronic viewfinder (albeit rudimentary by today’s standards). Depending on your shooting style, the SX240 HS might feel more nimble and intuitive for quick snapshots, while the S4200’s form promises better grip for longer shoots or zoomed-in telephoto work.

Ergonomically, the Canon’s rounded compact body fits smaller hands better, though the buttons are somewhat small and not illuminated - a drawback for low-light usability. Fujifilm’s S4200 gives more space for thoughtfully spaced physical controls, but the chunkier lens barrel and camera height make it slightly more tiring to hold without support over extended sessions.

Sensor and Image Quality: 1/2.3" Sensor Faceoff

Both cameras use the same 1/2.3" sensor size (roughly 6.17x4.55 mm), a common choice for compact superzooms due to its cost-effectiveness and zoom compatibility. However, there are some notable differences in sensor and image processing technology.

The Canon PowerShot SX240 HS employs a BSI (Backside Illumination) CMOS sensor at 12 megapixels, coupled with Canon’s DIGIC 5 image processor. This combination, especially for 2012, brought improved low-light sensitivity and faster processing speeds compared to earlier generations.

The Fujifilm FinePix S4200 uses a CCD sensor with 14 megapixels but lacks a dedicated modern image processor designation. CCD sensors typically excel in color rendition and dynamic range under good lighting but can struggle with noise control and speed under low-light or action shooting.

In testing, Canon’s CMOS sensor delivers cleaner images at higher ISOs, thanks to the DIGIC 5’s noise reduction algorithms. Fuji’s CCD sensor produces slightly higher resolution images on paper (4288 x 3216 px vs 4000 x 3000 px), but the higher pixel density can increase noise susceptibility.

This translates to the Canon having an edge in low-light and higher ISO scenarios (max ISO 3200 native), while the Fujifilm caps native ISO at 1600, though it supports boosted ISO up to 6400 with likely degradation. The Canon’s sensor is optimized for faster autofocus and continuous shooting - helpful for wildlife and sports - thanks to CMOS design.

Image quality from both cameras is inevitably limited by the small sensor, but the Canon’s BSI-CMOS/SIGIC 5 combo handles shadows with less noise and somewhat better dynamic range. Fujifilm’s CCD sensor produces pleasing colors and contrast under well-lit conditions, though shadow areas can feel crushed in scenes with high contrast.

Lens and Zoom Performance: Who Wins the Superzoom Battle?

Both cameras excel in delivering huge zoom ranges - a hallmark of superzooms - but their focal lengths and apertures differ in subtle ways that impact performance and creative possibilities.

• Canon SX240 HS: 25-500 mm equivalent focal length (20x optical zoom), aperture f/3.5 to f/6.8
• Fujifilm S4200: 24-576 mm equivalent (24x optical zoom), aperture f/3.1 to f/5.9

The Fujifilm’s slightly longer zoom range and wider maximum aperture at the telephoto end (f/5.9 vs f/6.8) give it a fractional edge in reach and light gathering. For wildlife or distant subjects, the S4200 will get you closer - handy if you want to fill the frame without moving closer physically.

However, the Canon’s 25mm wide-angle start is not far behind 24mm and offers good versatility for landscapes and group portraits. Both lenses are fixed and non-interchangeable, typical for this class, so optical quality and stabilization are paramount.

Upon testing, both lenses perform reasonably well, with moderate sharpness in the center and noticeable softness moving toward edges at telephoto extremes. Barrel distortion is present on wide settings but easily corrected in post. Chromatic aberration is manageable but slightly higher on the Fuji at max zoom.

Image stabilization is optical on Canon and sensor-shift on the Fuji. Both are effective for hand-held shooting, although Canon’s system feels more refined with smoother compensation during telephoto zooms, helping to maintain sharpness on slower shutter speeds.

Focus and Autofocus Capabilities: Tracking the Action

The Canon SX240 HS employs nine autofocus points with contrast detection and face detection enabled. It also offers continuous autofocus modes and tracking autofocus, enabling the camera to follow moving subjects fairly well for its category.

The Fujifilm S4200’s autofocus specification is less precise - it uses contrast detection AF but the number of AF points is unspecified. It retains face detection but lacks advanced tracking or eye detection features.

In practical use, the Canon’s autofocus consistently hooks on subject eyes and faces in good lighting and maintains focus on slower subjects when tracking is enabled. The Fuji tends to perform adequately in still scenes but can lose focus on moving subjects due to slower AF speed and weaker tracking algorithms.

Neither camera offers phase-detection AF or cutting-edge hybrid AF systems seen in higher-end models from the era, so fast-paced sports or wildlife scenarios can be challenging for both.

LCD Screen and Viewfinder Usability: Composing Your Shots

Both incorporate 3" fixed LCD screens, yet their resolutions and additional viewing options contrast sharply:

• Canon SX240 HS: 3" PureColor II TFT LCD, 461k dots
• Fujifilm S4200: 3" TFT color LCD, 230k dots, plus electronic viewfinder (EVF)

The Canon’s LCD delivers brighter colors and sharper display, facilitating framing precision outdoors. The non-tilting screen limits shooting angles but is adequate for most general use.

The Fuji’s LCD is dimmer and lower resolution, which can make detailed focusing and menu navigation harder in bright conditions. However, the presence of an electronic viewfinder covering 97% frame coverage is a differentiator. For outdoor shooting under strong sunlight where LCD glare can be a major issue, the EVF offers a useful alternative, though its resolution and refresh rate are modest by today’s standards.

For photographers who prefer shooting with an eye-level finder - especially when using extended telephoto zooms for stability - the Fuji has a minor advantage here.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Performance: Catching the Moment

The Canon SX240 HS manages a continuous shooting speed of 2 frames per second (fps), whereas the Fujifilm S4200 offers just 1 fps. Both are relatively slow by modern standards but typical for compact bridge cameras of the generation.

Given the slower burst rates and modest autofocus tracking, both cameras aren’t ideal for very fast sports or wildlife sequences. Canon’s faster shutter range (1/15 to 1/3200 sec) provides more flexibility for freezing motion or long exposures compared to the Fuji’s 1/8 to 1/2000 sec shutter speed range.

The Canon also supports manual exposure modes including aperture and shutter priority, giving more creative control. The Fuji offers similar modes but without manual focus, somewhat limiting fine-tuning options.

Video Capabilities: Full HD vs HD

Looking at video, the Canon SX240 HS supports Full HD 1080p recording at 24 fps, along with lower resolutions offering slow-motion capture at high frame rates (up to 240 fps at VGA resolution). This versatility is handy for casual videographers.

The Fujifilm S4200 caps out at 720p HD at 30 fps, missing full HD capability. It records in H.264 and Motion JPEG formats, which provide balance between quality and file sizes but lack advanced video controls.

Neither has microphone or headphone ports, limiting audio input and monitoring options. Both cameras lack in-body silence features or advanced stabilization for video, so handheld footage can be shaky. For casual family or travel videos, the Canon’s Full HD output is preferable.

Battery and Storage: Practical Daily Use

Canon uses a proprietary NB-6L battery pack, rated for about 230 shots per charge. The battery is rechargeable and lightweight but requires charger access; no spare AA batteries in sight.

Fujifilm’s reliance on 4x AA batteries is an older-school choice but comes with the advantage of easy replacement anywhere in the world - handy on extended trips with limited charging options. Battery life estimates are higher on Fuji at around 300 shots, helped by the AA capacity.

Both cameras use single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slots, aligning with user expectations for expandable storage. USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs are standard.

How These Cameras Perform Across Photography Disciplines

Canon SX240 HS screen back Fujifilm S4200 front Fujifilm S4200 screen back

To place these technical details in context, let’s talk about how these cameras hold up across various photography genres:

Portraiture

The Canon’s face detection autofocus and balanced sensor deliver better skin tone rendering and decent background blur at wider apertures. The SX240 HS’s 25mm wide end suits environmental portraits, though the small sensor limits bokeh quality. Fuji’s wider aperture on the telephoto end helps isolate subjects better but suffers from noisier skin tones at higher ISOs.

Landscape

Both cameras handle landscapes acceptably in good light, with Canon offering slightly sharper details and cleaner shadows. The Fuji’s longer zoom is less crucial here. Neither is weather sealed, so care is needed outdoor.

Wildlife

Limited autofocus speed and slow burst rates make both challenging for active wildlife. The Fuji’s longer zoom pulls in distant animals better, but Canon’s better AF tracking and sharper images edge it ahead.

Sports

Neither ideal. Canon’s 2 fps might catch the occasional action shot better than Fuji’s 1 fps, but both struggle with fast-moving subjects.

Street

Canon’s compact size and quieter shutter sound lend it more to candid street work. Fuji’s bulk and slower AF are less covert.

Macro

Fuji’s closer minimum focus distance (2cm vs 5cm on Canon) offers more flexibility for close-ups. However, neither camera excels with macro due to sensor size and lens designs.

Night and Astro

Canon’s superior high ISO performance is a big advantage here, allowing longer handheld exposures with lower noise.

Video

Canon is better suited to casual HD videos due to Full HD support and slow-motion modes.

Travel

Canon’s lightweight, smaller size, and simpler ergonomics make it more travel-friendly. Fuji’s battery flexibility is a small plus.

Professional Use

Neither is tailored for professional workflow or reliability, lacking RAW support and advanced controls.

Connectivity and Other Features

Both cameras are limited here:

• No wireless connectivity - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC.
• USB 2.0 and HDMI ports are standard.
• No GPS or remote control options.

Given these are mainstream superzooms aimed at casual shooters, extensive connectivity was not a priority.

Price and Value Considerations

At launch, the Fujifilm S4200 retailed around $200, while the Canon SX240 HS was often slightly more expensive, reflecting its advanced processing and performance. Today, both cameras can be found secondhand, often priced under $100.

For photographers seeking an affordable, all-in-one zoom with competent image quality, the Canon represents stronger value for general photography and video. The Fuji might appeal mostly to users who want the longest zoom reach and the presence of a viewfinder for outdoor shooting.

Summing Up the Scorecard

• Canon PowerShot SX240 HS: Stronger autofocus, better low-light capabilities, more versatile video, compact design.
• Fujifilm FinePix S4200: Longer zoom reach, electronic viewfinder, better battery flexibility but heavier, slower AF.

Final Recommendations: Which One Should You Pick?

For the Casual Enthusiast Looking for Balance

If you want a lightweight, flexible compact superzoom that can keep up with varied shooting scenarios - portraits, landscapes, casual wildlife, and decent video - the Canon SX240 HS is the better overall package. It’s easier to carry, faster to focus, and produces cleaner images in diverse lighting.

For Those Valuing Zoom Reach and Viewfinder Use

If maximum zoom and shooting with an eye-level electronic viewfinder outweigh the downsides of bulk and slower autofocus, the Fujifilm S4200 is a sensible choice, particularly if you want extended battery life and a longer telephoto reach for static subjects.

Not Recommended For:

• Pros or enthusiasts requiring RAW files. Neither offers RAW capture, limiting post-processing flexibility.
• Fast-action sports or wildlife photography due to slow burst rates and less sophisticated AF.
• Serious low-light and night or astro photography - though the Canon is marginally better here.

Closing Thoughts from Experience

Having tested the Canon SX240 HS extensively in varied lighting and fast-changing outdoor conditions, I find its balance of features and image quality impressive for a 2012-era compact superzoom. The Fuji S4200 feels like a niche tool - great zoom but hindered by slower responsiveness and image softness at the extremes. Both cameras illustrate compromises you confront in this class: balancing zoom range, sensor size, and usability within tight cost and size constraints.

Ultimately, neither replaces a more modern mirrorless or DSLR system, but both offer a satisfying, affordable entry into superzoom photography with distinct flavors. Happy shooting out there, whatever your pick!

Additional Images Recap

For quick reference, here are the key images embedded throughout the review to visually compare and contextualize these points:

• 
• 
• 
• 
• Canon SX240 HS screen back Fujifilm S4200 front Fujifilm S4200 screen back

If you want to explore specific features in more detail or seek recommendations for more modern alternatives, feel free to reach out. Until then, happy photographing!