Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80
91 Imaging
36 Features
43 Overall
38
91 Imaging
44 Features
35 Overall
40
Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Key Specs
(Full Review)
- 12MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 3" Fixed Display
- ISO 100 - 6400
- Optical Image Stabilization
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 25-500mm (F3.5-6.8) lens
- 233g - 106 x 63 x 33mm
- Launched March 2013
- Old Model is Canon SX260 HS
- New Model is Canon SX280 HS
(Full Review)
- 16MP - 1/2.3" Sensor
- 2.70" Fixed Display
- ISO 125 - 6400
- 1920 x 1080 video
- 28-140mm (F3.5-5.5) lens
- 193g - 123 x 62 x 30mm
- Launched May 2022
- Earlier Model is Ricoh WG-70
President Biden pushes bill mandating TikTok sale or ban Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Overview
Below is a extensive assessment of the Canon SX270 HS and Ricoh WG-80, former being a Small Sensor Superzoom while the other is a Waterproof by rivals Canon and Ricoh. There exists a noticeable gap among the resolutions of the SX270 HS (12MP) and WG-80 (16MP) but they use the exact same sensor size (1/2.3").
Photography GlossaryThe SX270 HS was launched 10 years earlier than the WG-80 and that is a fairly sizable difference as far as camera technology is concerned. The two cameras come with the identical body type (Compact).
Before diving in to a full comparison, below is a simple synopsis of how the SX270 HS scores versus the WG-80 with respect to portability, imaging, features and an overall grade.
Pentax 17 Pre-Orders Outperform Expectations by a Landslide Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Gallery
Below is a sample of the gallery pictures for Canon PowerShot SX270 HS & Ricoh WG-80. The complete galleries are viewable at Canon SX270 HS Gallery & Ricoh WG-80 Gallery.
Reasons to pick Canon SX270 HS over the Ricoh WG-80
| SX270 HS | WG-80 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Display dimension | 3" |  | 2.70" | Larger display (+0.3") |
| Display resolution | 461k |  | 230k | Crisper display (+231k dot) |
Reasons to pick Ricoh WG-80 over the Canon SX270 HS
| WG-80 | SX270 HS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Launched | May 2022 |  | March 2013 | More recent by 111 months |
Common features in the Canon SX270 HS and Ricoh WG-80
| SX270 HS | WG-80 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manual focus |  | Dial accurate focusing | ||
| Display type | Fixed |  | Fixed | Fixed display |
| Selfie screen |  | Absent selfie screen | ||
| Touch display |  | Absent Touch display |
Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Physical Comparison
If you are aiming to lug around your camera regularly, you will want to take into account its weight and proportions. The Canon SX270 HS offers physical dimensions of 106mm x 63mm x 33mm (4.2" x 2.5" x 1.3") accompanied by a weight of 233 grams (0.51 lbs) and the Ricoh WG-80 has measurements of 123mm x 62mm x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") along with a weight of 193 grams (0.43 lbs).
Check the Canon SX270 HS and Ricoh WG-80 in our completely new Camera plus Lens Size Comparison Tool.
Keep in mind, the weight of an ILC will change based on the lens you are working with at that time. Below is the front view measurement comparison of the SX270 HS vs the WG-80.
Taking into account dimensions and weight, the portability grade of the SX270 HS and WG-80 is 91 and 91 respectively.
Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Sensor Comparison
Normally, it can be hard to visualize the contrast in sensor measurements purely by researching technical specs. The graphic below will help provide you a more clear sense of the sensor dimensions in the SX270 HS and WG-80.
As you have seen, the two cameras have got the exact same sensor measurements but different resolution. You can anticipate the Ricoh WG-80 to provide you with extra detail utilizing its extra 4 Megapixels. Greater resolution will help you crop photos much more aggressively. The older SX270 HS will be disadvantaged when it comes to sensor technology.
Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Screen and ViewFinder
Japan-exclusive Leica Leitz Phone 3 features big sensor and new modes Photography Type Scores
Portrait Comparison
Sora from OpenAI releases its first ever music videoStreet Comparison
Snapchat Adds Watermarks to AI-Created ImagesSports Comparison
Apple Innovates by Creating Next-Level Optical Stabilization for iPhoneTravel Comparison
Samsung Releases Faster Versions of EVO MicroSD CardsLandscape Comparison
Meta to Introduce 'AI-Generated' Labels for Media starting next monthVlogging Comparison
Photobucket discusses licensing 13 billion images with AI firms
Canon SX270 HS vs Ricoh WG-80 Specifications
| Canon PowerShot SX270 HS | Ricoh WG-80 | |
|---|---|---|
| General Information | ||
| Company | Canon | Ricoh |
| Model | Canon PowerShot SX270 HS | Ricoh WG-80 |
| Type | Small Sensor Superzoom | Waterproof |
| Launched | 2013-03-21 | 2022-05-19 |
| Physical type | Compact | Compact |
| Sensor Information | ||
| Chip | Digic 6 | - |
| Sensor type | BSI-CMOS | BSI-CMOS |
| Sensor size | 1/2.3" | 1/2.3" |
| Sensor measurements | 6.17 x 4.55mm | 6.17 x 4.55mm |
| Sensor area | 28.1mm² | 28.1mm² |
| Sensor resolution | 12MP | 16MP |
| Anti aliasing filter | ||
| Aspect ratio | 1:1, 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 | 1:1, 4:3 and 16:9 |
| Full resolution | 4000 x 3000 | 4608 x 3456 |
| Max native ISO | 6400 | 6400 |
| Lowest native ISO | 100 | 125 |
| RAW pictures | ||
| Autofocusing | ||
| Manual focus | ||
| AF touch | ||
| AF continuous | ||
| AF single | ||
| Tracking AF | ||
| Selective AF | ||
| AF center weighted | ||
| Multi area AF | ||
| AF live view | ||
| Face detect focusing | ||
| Contract detect focusing | ||
| Phase detect focusing | ||
| Number of focus points | - | 9 |
| Cross focus points | - | - |
| Lens | ||
| Lens mounting type | fixed lens | fixed lens |
| Lens focal range | 25-500mm (20.0x) | 28-140mm (5.0x) |
| Maximal aperture | f/3.5-6.8 | f/3.5-5.5 |
| Macro focus range | 5cm | 1cm |
| Crop factor | 5.8 | 5.8 |
| Screen | ||
| Display type | Fixed Type | Fixed Type |
| Display diagonal | 3 inch | 2.70 inch |
| Resolution of display | 461 thousand dots | 230 thousand dots |
| Selfie friendly | ||
| Liveview | ||
| Touch friendly | ||
| Viewfinder Information | ||
| Viewfinder type | None | None |
| Features | ||
| Slowest shutter speed | 15s | 4s |
| Maximum shutter speed | 1/3200s | 1/4000s |
| Continuous shooting rate | 4.0 frames per sec | - |
| Shutter priority | ||
| Aperture priority | ||
| Expose Manually | ||
| Exposure compensation | Yes | - |
| Set WB | ||
| Image stabilization | ||
| Integrated flash | ||
| Flash range | 3.50 m | 5.50 m (at Auto ISO) |
| Flash options | Auto, On, Off, Red-Eye, Slow Sync | On, off |
| Hot shoe | ||
| Auto exposure bracketing | ||
| WB bracketing | ||
| Exposure | ||
| Multisegment | ||
| Average | ||
| Spot | ||
| Partial | ||
| AF area | ||
| Center weighted | ||
| Video features | ||
| Video resolutions | 1920 x 1080 (60, 30 fps), 1280 x 720 (30 fps) 640 x 480 (30, 120 fps), 320 x 240 (240 fps) | 1920 x 1080 @ 30p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 120p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 60p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM1280 x 720 @ 30p, MOV, H.264, Linear PCM |
| Max video resolution | 1920x1080 | 1920x1080 |
| Video format | MPEG-4, H.264 | MPEG-4, H.264 |
| Microphone support | ||
| Headphone support | ||
| Connectivity | ||
| Wireless | None | Built-In |
| Bluetooth | ||
| NFC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| USB | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) | USB 2.0 (480 Mbit/sec) |
| GPS | None | None |
| Physical | ||
| Environment sealing | ||
| Water proof | ||
| Dust proof | ||
| Shock proof | ||
| Crush proof | ||
| Freeze proof | ||
| Weight | 233 grams (0.51 lb) | 193 grams (0.43 lb) |
| Dimensions | 106 x 63 x 33mm (4.2" x 2.5" x 1.3") | 123 x 62 x 30mm (4.8" x 2.4" x 1.2") |
| DXO scores | ||
| DXO All around score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Color Depth score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Dynamic range score | not tested | not tested |
| DXO Low light score | not tested | not tested |
| Other | ||
| Battery life | 210 pictures | 300 pictures |
| Style of battery | Battery Pack | Battery Pack |
| Battery model | NB-6L | D-LI92 |
| Self timer | Yes (2 or 10 sec, Custom) | Yes (2 or 10 secs, remote) |
| Time lapse shooting | ||
| Type of storage | SD/SDHC/SDXC | Internal + SD/SDHC/SDXC card |
| Card slots | 1 | 1 |
| Cost at launch | $284 | $300 |