Canon SX240 HS vs Pentax WG-3: A Deep Dive into Two Compact Cameras for Distinct Needs

Choosing the right compact camera often feels like walking a tightrope between capability and convenience. Today, I’m comparing two intriguing models from a decade ago that still find loyal audiences: the Canon PowerShot SX240 HS and the Pentax WG-3. Although they share the small sensor compact category, these cameras serve very different purposes. The Canon SX240 HS is a superzoom compact focused on versatility, while the Pentax WG-3 is a rugged, waterproof tough camera designed for adventure shooters.

Having put both cameras through hours of real-world testing and detailed lab analysis, I will walk you through their sensor tech, autofocus, build quality, handling, image/output qualities, and suitability for various photographic disciplines. Along the way, I’ll share insights you won’t find on spec sheets alone - because, at the end of the day, it’s practical performance that counts.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions and Handling: Size, Ergonomics, and Controls

Handling is often overlooked until you’re mid-shoot in challenging conditions. So, how do these cameras feel in hand?

The Canon SX240 HS embraces a compact body designed for portability and zoom-centric handling. It measures roughly 106 x 61 x 33 mm and weighs in at a lightweight 224g, which makes it easy to slip into a jacket pocket or small bag. Its fixed lens extends substantially at the telephoto end, but the body maintains a pleasingly compact footprint for general travel.

By contrast, the Pentax WG-3 tips the scales slightly heavier at 230g and is bulkier - 124 x 64 x 33 mm - with a more rugged aesthetic. This isn’t a camera to hide in a pocket but rather one to bring along for rugged adventures where durability matters. It feels solid in hand thanks to a grippy, rubberized coating with well-sized, recessed buttons designed to resist accidental activation. Despite its robustness, it handles comfortably enough for extended shoots with gloves on.

Both cameras have fixed lenses and lack electronic viewfinders, relying solely on rear LCDs. Canon places key controls such as the zoom toggle and mode dial ergonomically near the right hand’s natural resting zone. Its button layout is straightforward but not massaged for speedy one-handed operation. The WG-3 sacrifices some control complexity for simplicity and robustness - no exposure compensation dial, no manual exposure modes - but its buttons have reassuring feedback indispensable in wet or cold conditions.

Ergonomically, Canon favors photography enthusiasts craving flexibility in a pocket-size form factor, while Pentax WG-3 aims squarely at rugged lifestyle photographers needing a dependable, waterproof companion.

Sensor and Image Quality: A Tale of Resolution and Sensitivity

Sensor technology is the beating heart of any digital camera and an area rife with trade-offs, especially in compact cameras with tiny sensors.

Both the SX240 HS and WG-3 sport a 1/2.3” backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor - a common compact sensor size - but with important differences:

• Canon SX240 HS: 12 MP resolution, ISO 100-3200 native range.
• Pentax WG-3: 16 MP resolution, ISO 125-6400 native range.

Resolution favors the WG-3 by a considerable margin, offering images at 4608 x 3456 pixels versus Canon’s 4000 x 3000. But as you well know, more pixels can mean smaller photodiodes, often translating into increased noise, especially in low light. I ran both cameras through low-light laboratory tests and real-world shootings at night and indoors to gauge noise performance and dynamic range.

In my experience, the Canon’s Digic 5 processor paired with its 12 MP sensor produces slightly cleaner images up to ISO 800, with more consistent colors and less visible noise in shadows. The Pentax, while sharper at base ISO given higher resolution, demonstrates more visible noise and luminance degradation past ISO 800. This difference matters if you anticipate shooting in low-light or night conditions frequently.

Neither camera supports RAW format, which limits post-processing flexibility - a downside for professionals, though casual users may prefer jpegs’ convenience.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Responsiveness

Autofocus (AF) can be a deal-breaker when photographing wildlife, sports, or candid street moments. Let’s assess how these cameras handle AF.

Both cameras employ contrast-detection AF systems with nine focus points:

• SX240 HS supports continuous AF, face detection, and center-weighted metering.
• WG-3 supports continuous AF and face detection but lacks manual exposure modes.

Canon’s SX240 HS autofocus system is reasonably fast for a compact, delivering consistent focus lock across varied lighting from bright daylight to indoor scenarios. It also supports continuous AF tracking, a plus for shooting moving subjects, albeit at just 2 frames per second (fps) continuous shooting speed - slow by today’s standards but typical for its class and era.

Pentax WG-3 emphasizes burst speed, offering an impressive 10 fps continuous shooting mode. However, its autofocus is relatively slower to lock initially due to more conservative contrast AF implementation. The WG-3 is better suited for pictures of active outdoor subjects under bright conditions than demanding fast-action sports stripes.

Neither camera excels for professional-level sports or wildlife photography requiring blazing fast, precise AF and frame rates exceeding 10 fps. However, the WG-3’s rugged design and fast burst rate might appeal to casual wildlife photographers or action travelers who prioritize durability over rapid AF finesse.

Build Quality and Environmental Durability: Everyday Use vs Rugged Adventures

One of the starkest contrasts between these two cameras lies in their construction and suitability for challenging conditions.

The Canon SX240 HS lacks any sort of weather sealing or rugged protection; it’s a lightweight compact meant primarily for indoor, casual, or travel photography in good weather. It’s not splash-resistant and should be treated gently to avoid damage.

In contrast, Pentax’s WG-3 is a bona fide tough camera engineered for adventure. It’s waterproof down to 14 meters (46 feet), dustproof, crushproof to 100 kgf, shockproof from 1.5 m drops, and freezeproof to -10°C (14°F). It meets MIL-STD-810G standards. This kind of durability uniquely positions the WG-3 for underwater explorations, hiking, snowboarding, and rugged outdoor sports, where typical compacts, such as the Canon, would be vulnerable.

Screen and User Interface: LCD Quality and Usability

Both cameras feature 3-inch fixed LCD screens around 460–461k dots resolution, with no viewfinder option.

The SX240 HS uses Canon’s PureColor II TFT LCD technology, delivering sharp and bright images with a balanced color representation. The screen’s anti-reflective coating is average, necessitating shading in direct sunlight.

Pentax’s WG-3 claims an anti-reflective coating, which improves outdoor visibility slightly, but the overall sharpness and color haven’t changed significantly from typical compacts of that generation. The screen is nonetheless usable with gloves and wet hands - an advantage for cold or underwater settings.

User interfaces reveal the cameras’ philosophy: Canon offers manual exposure modes, exposure compensation, and white balance customization - ideal for enthusiasts seeking control. The Pentax WG-3 is more simplified, lacking manual exposure and aperture/shutter priority modes, focusing instead on ease of use in extreme conditions.

Lens and Focal Length Versatility

Let’s talk optics, often the deciding factor for many buyers.

• Canon SX240 HS sports a 25-500 mm (20x) zoom lens at f/3.5–6.8 aperture range.
• Pentax WG-3 comes with a shorter 25-100 mm (4x) zoom, but brighter aperture of f/2.0–4.9.

Canon’s extensive telephoto reach is phenomenal, particularly for capturing distant subjects such as wildlife or sports events, where flexibility in framing is key. The downside is a relatively slow aperture at the telephoto end, which usually means lower light-gathering capability and potentially slower autofocus in limited lighting.

The Pentax’s lens is physically shorter but faster at the wide end with f/2.0, aiding low-light shooting and shallow depth-of-field effects somewhat. Its macro capability shines, with a focusing distance down to 1 cm, beating Canon’s 5 cm minimum. This macro prowess, combined with the rugged design, makes the WG-3 exceptional for adventurous close-ups in tricky environments.

Performance Across Popular Photography Genres

How do these cameras hold up when tested across different genres? I gathered extensive sample images and evaluated nuanced performance in each category.

Canon SX240 HS screen back Pentax WG 3 front Pentax WG 3 screen back

Portrait Photography

Portrait quality relies heavily on natural skin tone rendition, bokeh (background blur), and autofocus accuracy on faces and eyes.

With face detection and manual controls, Canon SX240 HS delivers smooth, warm yet accurate skin tone reproduction. Its longer zoom range adds compositional flexibility for flattering portrait framing from a distance, though the relatively small sensor limits natural bokeh ability.

Pentax WG-3 also offers face detection, but its smaller zoom range and limited manual control hinder consistent portrait results. The fast f/2 aperture at the wide end helps for softly blurred backgrounds in tight shots, but the small sensor size caps shallow depth-of-field effects. Both cameras’ optical systems suffer some softness at maximum apertures.

Landscape Photography

Landscape photographers prize resolution, dynamic range, and weather durability.

Canon’s 12 MP sensor captures decent detail, but dynamic range is moderate, with shadows often lacking depth in high-contrast lighting. No weather sealing restricts outdoor use during adverse conditions.

Pentax WG-3’s higher 16 MP output is sharper, and it boasts superior ruggedness, making it suitable for mountain hikes or beach shoots, where drop or water resistance matters immensely.

Wildlife Photography

Wildlife needs fast, accurate AF and long reach.

Canon’s 20x zoom combined with continuous AF makes it more capable of capturing distant wildlife, though the 2 fps burst is limiting for fast subjects.

Pentax falls short due to limited zoom reach and comparatively slower AF but could serve casual wildlife shooters in bright conditions, especially underwater macro fauna.

Sports Photography

Fast continuous shooting and precise AF tracking are paramount.

Pentax’s 10 fps burst rating theoretically beats Canon’s 2 fps, but slower AF and lack of advanced tracking limit performance on fast fast-paced sports. Canon’s slower continuous shooting is unlikely to satisfy serious sports shooters.

Street Photography

Portability, discreetness, and low-light performance come first.

Canon’s smaller body and telephoto flexibility allow subtle street candid shots, although reliance on LCD instead of viewfinder might distract. WG-3 is bulkier but rugged against street weather hazards, suitable for all-weather shooting.

Both perform similarly in low light, but Canon’s somewhat lower noise at mid ISO grants it an edge.

Macro Photography

The Pentax WG-3 wins hands down here, offering focusing down to 1 cm, making it excellent for bug and detail shots. Canon’s 5 cm minimum allows moderate close-ups but cannot compete.

Night and Astrophotography

Small sensors limit both cameras in this area.

Canon’s lower noise and more conservative ISO settings compare favorably. Neither supports long exposures via bulb mode or RAW format, restricting astro enthusiasts.

Video Capabilities

Both support 1080p HD video, but Canon caps at 24 fps, while Pentax offers 1080p at 30 fps plus 720p at 60 fps. Neither has microphone/headphone jacks, limiting advanced audio control.

Canon’s Digic 5 processor provides slightly better compression and smoother video. Pentax adds timelapse recording - an interesting bonus.

Travel Photography

Canon’s extensive zoom, compact body, and decent battery life (approx 230 shots) make it a versatile travel mate.

Pentax’s rugged build caters to adventure travel - think diving, hiking, cycling - but with limited zoom versatility.

Professional Work

Neither camera meets pro standards: no RAW, limited dynamic range, slow AF, no weather sealing in Canon’s case, and limited manual control in Pentax’s. These cameras suit enthusiast and lifestyle use more than strict professional workflows.

Connectivity, Battery Life, and Storage

Connectivity is minimal on both, with USB 2.0 and HDMI outputs only. Neither has Bluetooth or NFC, although the WG-3 supports Eye-Fi wireless cards for image transfer.

Battery life is similar: Canon offers about 230 shots per charge, Pentax slightly better at 240, tested under moderate use.

Both use single SD/SDHC/SDXC slots with no dual card redundancy.

The Verdict: Which One Should You Choose?

Summarizing my hands-on tests and technical analysis:

Choose Canon SX240 HS if…

• You want a compact travel zoom camera with a versatile 20x zoom.
• You prefer manual exposure controls for creative flexibility.
• Portraits and telephoto reach are priorities.
• Your budget is limited.
• You are not shooting in harsh weather or extreme outdoor conditions.

Choose Pentax WG-3 if…

• You require a tough, waterproof camera for underwater and rugged outdoor use.
• Macro photography is your main focus - particularly close-up detail in nature.
• You want faster burst shooting for casual action.
• Ease of use and durability outweigh high zoom range.
• You shoot frequently in adverse environmental conditions.

Final Thoughts

The Canon PowerShot SX240 HS and Pentax WG-3 are specialized tools, each excelling in different photographic niches. Canon is the versatile superzoom petite marvel I reach for when exploring urban environments, distant scenes, or portraits needing manual control and zoom reach in a pocket-sized form.

The Pentax WG-3, meanwhile, is a rugged, splash-proof companion for adventure shooters, those who dive, hike, or venture into the elements where other compacts falter. Its macro prowess and durability make it unique in this pairing.

Neither camera challenges modern mirrorless or advanced compacts on image quality or pro-level controls, but understanding their core strengths and limitations ensures your choice aligns with your shooting style and environment.

I hope this thorough comparison helps you make an informed choice. If you lean towards a compact zoom friend for everyday and travel photography, Canon’s SX240 HS still impresses. But for fearless outdoor explorers who demand a camera that can take a beating (and keep shooting), the Pentax WG-3 stands as a rugged gem.

Happy shooting!