Canon SX240 HS vs Nikon B500

Canon SX240 HS vs Nikon Coolpix B500: An In-Depth Comparative Analysis for Serious Photography Enthusiasts

Choosing a compact superzoom camera entails balancing portability, zoom reach, image quality, and real-world usability. We examine two notable offerings in this category from different eras and design philosophies: the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS (2012) and the Nikon Coolpix B500 (2016). Both aim at delivering versatile all-in-one solutions but diverge in core specifications, ergonomics, and performance capabilities.

Based on exhaustive hands-on testing protocols - spanning controlled lab metrics, extensive field trials across multiple photography genres, and workflow integration assessments - this article breaks down their strengths and weaknesses. Our goal is to empower advanced amateurs and professional photographers seeking an affordable zoom-centric fixed-lens camera with a rigorous technical and practical comparison.

Physical Design and Handling: Ergonomics Matter in the Field

Form Factor and Build

• Canon SX240 HS: The SX240 HS defines compact convenience with a pocketable 106 x 61 x 33 mm body weighing just 224 grams. The small sensor superzoom market values low weight highly, and Canon refined this model to fit easily in shirts or coat pockets, facilitating casual and travel photography.
• Nikon B500: In contrast, the B500 adopts a bridge style model measuring 114 x 78 x 95 mm and weighing 541 grams - considerably larger and heavier. Its DSLR-like grip offers solid handholding stability, especially beneficial given the substantial telephoto reach.

Implications for Use:

Compact portability favors street and travel photography scenarios with quick grab-and-go demands. Larger ergonomics on the B500 yield better balance with long telephoto lenses and extended shooting sessions but at the expense of pocketability.

Control Layout and User Interface: Balancing Complexity and Simplicity

Canon SX240 HS:

• Minimalistic physical controls, consistent with entry-advanced compact design.
• Lacks touchscreen; relies on physical buttons and a 3-inch, 461K-dot PureColor II TFT LCD.
• Manual exposure modes (aperture and shutter priority) available, a noteworthy feature in this class.
• Illumination on buttons is absent, complicating use in dim environments.

Nikon B500:

• More extensive button grouping that emulates DSLR ergonomics.
• A tilting 3-inch LCD with 921K dots - a significant improvement over Canon's fixed screen, delivering sharper real-time composition evaluation.
• Absence of touchscreen limits intuitive navigation.
• Lacks physical illumination on buttons.
• Manual exposure is more limited, with no dedicated aperture or shutter priority modes, reducing creative exposure control.

Practical Impact:

The SX240 is arguably better suited for photographers desiring exposure flexibility, while the B500 favors users prioritizing simpler point-and-shoot operation. The superior screen resolution and articulation on Nikon also benefit shooting at challenging angles.

Sensor and Image Quality: Pixels and Their Limits

Sensor Technology:

• Both cameras employ 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensors occupying 28.07 mm² sensor area.
• Canon: 12 MP resolution (4000 x 3000 pixels).
• Nikon: 16 MP resolution (4608 x 3456 pixels).

Technical Considerations:

While Nikon’s higher pixel count theoretically promises greater detail, the small sensor format imposes physical pixel size limitations, frequently reducing signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic range capability.

Image Quality Observations:

• Canon SX240 HS produces clean images up to ISO 400 with respectable color accuracy and skin tone rendition. Its image processing is tuned for balanced contrast and natural hues, important for portraiture.
• Nikon B500 captures slightly crisper images at base ISO due to higher megapixels but introduces more visible noise at ISO 800 and beyond, typical of smaller pixel pitch densities.
• Both cameras lack RAW support, forcing reliance on JPEG outputs, limiting post-processing latitude.

Conclusion:

Canon’s imaging pipeline shows a marginal advantage in color fidelity and noise management, important in portraits and low light. Nikon edges out in resolution-dependent cropping scenarios but trades off some image cleanliness.

Autofocus Performance: Speed and Accuracy Under Varying Conditions

Canon SX240 HS:

• Utilizes 9 autofocus points with contrast-detection AF.
• Offers face detection but lacks eye detection or animal tracking.
• Live view AF is contrast-based only.
• Continuous AF enhances tracking capability, though at a modest 2 fps burst rate.

Nikon B500:

• Employs a more sophisticated contrast-detection AF over multiple zones but does not specify number of focus points.
• Includes face detection and selective AF area modes, improving compositional control.
• Live view AF integrates smoothly.
• Continuous shooting at up to 7.4 fps with AF tracking, better suited for action.

Practical Usability:

• SX240's AF is accurate but slower and less responsive to fast-moving subjects. This limits efficacy for wildlife or sports.
• B500’s faster continuous AF with higher frame rates supports more demanding scenarios like casual wildlife and sports photography, within the constraints of its focus system.

Zoom and Lens Quality: Extending Reach with Stabilization

Canon SX240 HS:

• 25-500mm (20x optical zoom) equivalent focal length.
• Variable maximum aperture of f/3.5 at wide angle to f/6.8 at telephoto.
• Macro capability down to 5 cm.
• Optical image stabilization employing Canon’s lens-shift system.

Nikon B500:

• Significantly more extensive 23-900 mm (40x optical zoom) equivalent lens.
• Aperture ranges from f/3.0 to f/6.5, marginally faster wide-open.
• Macro focusing starting at 1 cm, facilitating extreme close-ups.
• Optical VR stabilization to counteract handshake at long zoom lengths.

Assessment:

The Nikon’s reach advantage is substantial for wildlife, sports, and travel photography requiring distant subject capture without lens swaps. However, extreme telephoto focal lengths on a compact sensor require exceptional stabilization and steady handling to avoid image degradation.

The Canon’s shorter zoom is less versatile in sheer range but benefits from a more compact lens design and slightly wider maximum aperture at the telephoto end.

Display and Viewfinder: Visual Composition and Feedback

Neither camera provides an EVF or optical viewfinder, relying solely on rear LCD screens.

• The Nikon B500’s 3-inch 921K-dot tilting screen provides clearer and more flexible framing options in bright light or awkward angles, such as low or overhead shots.
• The Canon SX240 HS features a fixed 3-inch screen at 461K dots which can be more challenging under difficult lighting.

For photographers who depend heavily on viewfinder stability, neither device excels, though the Nikon’s improved display attributes offer a noticeable tactical advantage.

Burst Mode and Shutter Speeds: Capturing Action

• Canon SX240 HS: Maximum shutter speed 1/3200 sec, with 2 fps continuous shooting.
• Nikon B500: Offers a longer shutter speed range starting from 1 sec to 1/4000 sec, with 7.4 fps burst shooting.

The Nikon supports faster shutter speeds and higher frame rates, critical attributes when capturing fast-paced sports or wildlife sequences. The Canon’s slower burst rate constrains its utility in continuous action scenarios.

Flash and Low Light Shooting: Illumination Assistance

• Canon’s built-in flash effective up to 3.5 m, with standard flash modes including red-eye correction and slow sync.
• Nikon’s flash reaches approximately 6.9 m with auto ISO enhancement; flash mode control is somewhat limited.
• Neither supports external flash units, limiting expandability.
• Both incorporate optical image stabilization but limited low-light sensitivity by sensor and processing capabilities.

In practice, Canon’s flash performance is adequate indoors or moderate environments, with more flexible shooting modes. Nikon’s stronger range benefits larger rooms or outdoor dusk conditions but with less manual control.

Battery Management and Storage

• Canon SX240 HS utilizes a rechargeable Battery Pack (NB-6L) rated for 230 shots per charge.
• Nikon B500 relies on four standard AA batteries, providing an outstanding 600 shot capacity per set.

While proprietary batteries offer consistent voltage output, AA usage in Nikon allows field replacement and less dependency on charging infrastructure - a plus for travel and prolonged outdoor use.

Storage on both is limited to a single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slot with no dual-slot redundancy.

Connectivity and Multimedia Features

• Canon SX240 HS offers HDMI output and USB 2.0 connectivity. Wireless connectivity is absent.
• Nikon B500 adds Bluetooth wireless transfer, supporting the SnapBridge app for remote control, basic wireless sharing, and geotagging.

Video recording modes:

• Canon records Full HD 1080p at 24 fps and HD 720p at 30 fps, alongside slow-motion capture at up to 240 fps (in low resolutions).
• Nikon offers 1080p at selectable interlaced frame rates (60i, 50i), progressive up to 30 fps, and 720p at 60 fps.
• Both cameras lack microphone and headphone ports, limiting serious audiovisual production capabilities.

Real-World Photography Genre Performance

To contextualize specifications into usable insights, we break down camera suitability by shooting scenarios.

Canon SX240 HS screen back Nikon B500 front Nikon B500 screen back

Portrait Photography:

• Canon’s color science offers better skin tone rendering.
• Both lack RAW, limiting post-production flexibility.
• Bokeh quality is moderate due to small sensor and variable apertures; Canon’s faster wide aperture helps slightly.

Landscape Photography:

• Nikon’s higher megapixel sensor favors detailed landscapes.
• Both sensors have limited dynamic range - exposure bracketing unsupported.
• Weather sealing is absent in both, restricting rugged outdoor use.

Wildlife Photography:

• Nikon’s longer zoom and faster burst rates provide practical advantages.
• AF lacks phase detection or animal eye detection features; tracking moving subjects remain modest.

Sports Photography:

• Nikon’s 7.4 fps burst supports better action capture.
• Autofocus responsiveness insufficient for high-end sports but serviceable for casual shooting.

Street Photography:

• Canon’s smaller footprint promotes discreet shooting.
• Neither supports silent shutter modes or an EVF for eye-level shooting.

Macro Photography:

• Nikon’s 1 cm closest focus provides superior macro capability.
• Stabilization effectiveness is challenged at extreme magnifications on both models.

Night and Astro Photography:

• Both cameras suffer from high noise at upper ISO settings.
• Limited manual control over exposure times reduces astrophotography viability.

Video Capabilities:

• Canon’s video code is H.264; Nikon adds MPEG-4 support.
• Absence of mic inputs constrains audio quality; stabilization benefits handheld shooting in both.

Travel Photography:

• Canon’s compactness and lighter weight facilitate day-long carry.
• Nikon’s zoom versatility and extended battery life appeal to long excursions with diverse scenes.

Professional Workflows:

• Neither supports RAW or tethered shooting.
• Limited manual exposure controls (particularly Nikon) restrict professional creative workflow integration.

Performance Ratings Summary

Performance Across Photography Disciplines

• Portraits: Canon better color accuracy; Nikon offers marginal detail advantage.
• Landscapes: Nikon’s resolution wins; both limited by sensor noise/dynamic range.
• Wildlife/Sports: Nikon superior considering zoom and shooting speed.
• Street: Canon’s discreetness preferred.
• Macro: Nikon excels with closer focus distance.
• Night/Astro: Neither ideal; high noise limits usability.
• Video: Comparable; no standout.
• Travel: Canon favored for compactness; Nikon for battery longevity.
• Professional Use: Neither fully satisfies pro requirements but Canon’s exposure modes offer more control.

Technical Takeaways for Prospective Buyers

1. Sensor and Image Quality: Both cameras are bound by small 1/2.3-inch sensors - a limiting factor for noise and dynamic range. Nikon trades noise performance for higher megapixels, producing slightly sharper images in good light but noisier results in shadows and high ISO.

2. Autofocus and Mechanical Operation: Nikon’s faster frame rates and superior autofocus tracking better accommodate casual action photography. Canon’s slower and simpler AF system suits static or slower-moving subjects.

3. Lens and Zoom Capability: Nikon’s 40x optical zoom dominates for reach-centric shooting, favorable in wildlife and travel situations. Canon trades range for more compact handling and modest zoom.

4. Body Design and Interface: Canon’s compact, lightweight design is ideal for street or travel photographers prioritizing portability. Nikon’s bulkier body delivers stability and usability for extended zoom operation.

5. Battery and Connectivity: Nikon’s AA battery system provides extensive shooting endurance and field-swappable convenience, while Canon’s proprietary battery necessitates pre-planned charging. Nikon also benefits from Bluetooth wireless transfer - enhancing remote operation and image sharing.

6. Video Recording: Both cameras fall short in professional video capabilities, limited to Full HD without audio input and absent advanced stabilization modes.

Final Recommendations: Who Should Choose Which?

• Choose the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS if:

  • You prioritize a compact, lightweight camera for street, travel, or casual portraiture.
  • Manual exposure modes (aperture/shutter priority) are essential to your creative control.
  • You prefer better color accuracy and moderate telephoto reach.
  • Battery rechargeability without reliance on AA cells suits your workflow.
  • Your budget is constrained, and you value size over absolute zoom range.

• Choose the Nikon Coolpix B500 if:

  • Long telephoto reach (up to 900mm) is critical, e.g., for wildlife, sports, or distant landscapes.
  • You require faster continuous shooting and AF tracking to capture action.
  • High battery life and field-replaceable power sources are a priority, such as on extended trips.
  • You are comfortable with a larger, less pocketable body.
  • Wireless image transfer or remote smartphone control aligns with your usage scenario.

Closing Thoughts

Between these two small sensor superzooms, the Nikon Coolpix B500 represents the evolution toward greater zoom versatility, faster capture speeds, and enhanced battery endurance. The Canon SX240 HS continues to appeal to users wanting a smaller footprint with more classic manual exposure controls and consistent color reproduction.

Neither camera will satisfy advanced professionals due to sensor limitations, lack of RAW support, and modest AF capabilities. However, they both hold value as affordable superzoom solutions tailored to distinct priorities - portability versus reach and speed.

The ultimate choice rests on your photography focus areas, willingness to carry bulk, and feature compromises you are prepared to accept.

This comprehensive evaluation draws on over fifteen years of hands-on testing experiences, leveraging standardized lab assessments and diverse real-world shooting conditions to deliver nuanced, actionable intelligence on Canon’s and Nikon’s compact superzoom offerings.