Canon SX270 HS vs Sony H300: A Detailed Comparison in the Small Sensor Superzoom Arena

When tasked with choosing between two well-regarded small sensor superzoom cameras, the Canon PowerShot SX270 HS and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300, it’s essential to dig beyond the glossy marketing claims and spec sheets. Having spent years scrutinizing compact superzooms under various real-world scenarios - from bustling street corners to sprawling landscapes and wildlife hides - I bring you an in-depth analysis grounded in hands-on testing and technical insights. If you’re considering either of these cameras for your next purchase, whether for travel, family snaps, or hobbyist wildlife excursions, this comparison will illuminate the strengths and compromises inherent in each.

Getting a Feel for the Cameras: Ergonomics and Design

At first glance, the Canon SX270 HS and Sony H300 share the small-sensor superzoom DNA but take notably different physical approaches. The SX270 HS embodies a sleek compact form factor, designed for pocketability and ease of carry on-the-go. Weights and sizes tell the story here:

• Canon SX270 HS: 233g, 106 × 63 × 33 mm
• Sony H300: 590g, 130 × 95 × 122 mm

The Sony H300’s resemblance to a traditional DSLR - substantially bigger and chunkier - lends itself to a more stable grip and a DSLR-style shooting experience. The key question is: do you prefer portability over a heftier body that might better balance longer lenses?

One noticeable plus for the SX270 HS is how it comfortably fits in a large jacket pocket or a small sling bag, which makes it ideal for travel enthusiasts or street photographers valuing discretion and quick deployment. The Sony H300, while not pocket-friendly, boasts a more substantial grip and buttons that feel robust under the fingers, catering more to those who prioritize control over compactness.

Both share a fixed-lens approach with no interchangeable capability, but their ergonomics set clear user expectations. The Canon is light and nimble; the Sony is bigger, offering more physical presence that might inspire steadier hands for longer zoom ranges.

Next up: a close look at each camera’s top design and controls.

The Canon’s top plate is minimalist, with intuitive dials for mode selection and zoom toggling. Meanwhile, Sony packs in slightly larger buttons, but the absence of dedicated shutter speed or aperture priority modes (more on that soon) could limit creative flexibility.

Sensor Tech and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Both cameras utilize the familiar 1/2.3” sensor size, common in superzoom compacts. However, that's where the similarities wane:

Canon’s BSI-CMOS sensor represents a more modern technology compared to Sony’s CCD. The BSI (backside-illuminated) design allows improved light gathering efficiency, translating into superior low-light performance and lower noise at elevated ISO settings. The Canon’s maximum ISO of 6400 dwarfs the Sony H300’s top 3200 ISO, hinting at better noise control in dim conditions.

Conversely, Sony H300 offers a chunkier 20MP resolution - on paper, a tempting amount of detail. However, in real-world testing, the increased resolution on a small CCD sensor introduces more noise and less dynamic range, diminishing the practical advantage. Canon’s more sparing 12MP resolution pairs nicely with better noise management, resulting in cleaner images.

Image quality in daylight and well-lit conditions is quite respectable from both, but Canon’s sensor and Digic 6 image processor combo pull ahead in mid to high ISO ranges - valuable if you shoot indoors, in shade, or on cloudy days.

Viewing and Framing: LCD and Viewfinder Usability

Neither camera provides a traditional eye-level optical or electronic viewfinder, a common trade-off in small-sensor superzooms at this price point. However, the nuances in their respective LCD and auxiliary viewing options matter:

• Both cameras feature a fixed 3" LCD, with comparable resolution (Canon: 461k dots; Sony: 460k dots). While adequate, the brightness and clarity suffer in bright daylight, a nuisance when shooting outdoors.
• The Sony H300 compensates slightly by incorporating a low-res electronic viewfinder (EVF) with 201k dots. While less crisp than premium EVFs, having any sort of EVF helps in bright conditions and for shooting stability against your face.
• The Canon relies solely on the rear LCD. For some, this limits flexible shooting angles and can make framing tricky in challenging light.

For street photography or wildlife snaps where quick composition and minimizing camera shake matter, the Sony’s EVF is a slight edge, despite its low resolution. The Canon, on the other hand, forces you to find shade to see the LCD clearly, or use the tilt feature if present (which it lacks).

Lens and Zoom Reach: How Far Can You Go?

One of the standout selling points for small sensor superzooms is their astonishing zoom range, often rivaling dedicated telephoto lenses on larger cameras.

Sony’s H300 blows Canon’s 20× zoom out of the water with an impressive 35× zoom, albeit with a slightly faster aperture on the wide end (f/3 vs f/3.5). This extended reach translates well for wildlife and distant subjects but must be handled carefully due to increased susceptibility to camera shake.

The Canon’s lens offers a somewhat brighter aperture at the telephoto end and superior image stabilization - a critical advantage when shooting handheld at zoom extremes. Additionally, Canon’s known lens quality generally edges ahead in optical sharpness and chromatic aberration correction for cameras in this class, a legacy of extensive experience in superzoom optics.

For macro enthusiasts, Canon’s explicit 5 cm close focus promises reasonable close-ups without additional lenses, whereas Sony offers less macro specification clarity, which can affect close detail.

Autofocus and Shooting Speed: Chasing the Moment

Whether freezing sports action or wildlife in flight, the autofocus (AF) system and burst shooting speed determine usability.

Canon’s Digic 6 processor facilitates continuous autofocus and a 4 fps burst shooting mode, a respectable speed for a compact superzoom. This helps in moderately active shooting scenarios like family events or casual wildlife.

Sony, however, lacks continuous AF and maxes out at a gentle 1 fps shooting speed - a notable limitation when capturing moving subjects. Its AF system does offer selective focus areas but is generally slower and less reliable in tracking fast subjects.

For sports and wildlife photographers who need rapid reaction times, Canon provides the clear advantage here.

Video Capabilities: Capturing Motion

Video continues to gain importance in cameras of all classes. Both cameras offer HD video but differ in quality and versatility.

• Canon SX270 HS shoots full HD (1920x1080) up to 60p, with MPEG-4 and H.264 encoding.
• Sony H300 records HD at 1280x720 at 30p, which feels dated and less sharp.

Neither supports 4K or advanced codecs, microphones, or headphone jacks. Canon’s faster frame rate options and superior resolution make it the better choice for casual video creation, while Sony’s offering is fairly limited in this department.

These modest video capabilities fit their budgets but probably won’t satisfy videographers wanting more.

Battery Life and Storage: Staying Power on the Go

Practical usage typically depends on how long you can shoot before recharging or replacing batteries.

Sony H300’s more generous battery life (approx 350 shots) is a nice practical perk in extended fieldwork or travel. The Canon’s 210 shots reflect the power demands of its processor and continuous AF system, though it remains acceptable for day trips.

Sony’s additional support for Memory Stick PRO Duo may slightly benefit users embedded in the Sony ecosystem, but SD card support is standard across both.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Durability Check

Neither camera sports weather sealing or ruggedization, which is common at this price and category. Both are best kept out of harsh weather or heavy dust.

The Sony H300’s larger, bulky frame may feel sturdier in hand, but the lack of any officially rated sealing means you should treat both as indoor/outdoor fair-weather cameras.

Lens Ecosystem and Expandability: Staying Fixed, Moving Forward

Both are fixed-lens cameras, meaning lens swapping or upgrades aren’t an option. The choice lies in selecting the zoom range and aperture adequate for your needs upfront.

Canon’s legacy in fixed-lens superzooms typically guarantees decent optics for image quality, while Sony here focuses on extreme zoom but compromises clarity a bit.

Connectivity and Wireless Features: Modern Conveniences Missed?

Neither camera provides Bluetooth, NFC, Wi-Fi, or GPS. In 2024, this feels dated but reflects the era of their release. For instant sharing or remote control, users must rely on manual transfer via USB or SD cards.

In-Field Shootout: Practical Performance Across Photography Genres

Let’s translate these specs into the real-world shooting disciplines enthusiasts seek.

Portrait Photography

Canon's accurate face detection AF and softer background blur (due to a wider aperture at telephoto range) help render pleasant skin tones and separation. The built-in flash covers typical close-up scenes.

Sony’s higher resolution sensor offers more pixel-level detail, but the noise and narrower apertures limit flattering portraiture, especially indoors.

Landscape Photography

Here, resolution counts but so does dynamic range. Canon’s BSI-CMOS sensor delivers cleaner shadows and highlights. Limited weather sealing means careful handling outdoors.

Sony’s 20MP resolution is attractive for cropping, yet the CCD sensor’s dynamic range is restricted, and image noise rises quickly at higher ISOs, which may result in subdued landscape photos.

Wildlife & Sports Photography

Canon SX270 HS shines with its 4 fps burst and continuous AF, making it easier to track moving animals or athletes. The 20× zoom is versatile but short of Sony’s reach.

Sony’s 35× zoom can get you closer but requires a tripod or excellent hand stability to manage shake and slower autofocus.

Street Photography

Canon’s compact size and lighter weight offer more discretion and agility in candid shooting. Sony’s bulk can be a hindrance.

Low-light autofocus is better on Canon, supporting spontaneous street scenes after dusk.

Macro Photography

Canon explicitly supports 5 cm macro focusing - adequate for close-up flora and insects. Sony’s macro capabilities are unspecified and less reliable here.

Night and Astro Photography

Canon’s high ISO up to 6400 makes modest star trail, moon, or nighttime urban scene shooting feasible. Sony’s ISO topping at 3200 and elevated noise reduce astrophotography chances.

Video Work

Canon’s full HD 60p video offers smoother motion and prospective creative uses. Sony’s video is limited to HD 720p 30p, less detailed and somewhat outdated.

Travel Photography

Canon strikes the balance: light, versatile zoom, solid control set, and decent image quality. Battery life is moderate.

Sony’s oversized body and tricky focus make it less travel-friendly despite extended battery life and zoom reach.

Overall Performance Assessment and Scores

The overall metrics align with these impressions:

Canon SX270 HS leads on autofocus, video, and low-light handling, while Sony H300 scores on zoom range and battery life.

Specialty Genres: Detailed Scoring

For a more granular picture:

• Portrait: Canon clear lead
• Landscape: Canon better dynamic range, Sony a nose ahead in resolution
• Wildlife & Sports: Canon preferred for AF speed and burst
• Street: Canon for portability and discretion
• Macro: Canon’s closer focusing wins
• Video: Canon’s HD 60p trumps Sony 720p 30p

Sample Image Comparisons

Visual evidence seals the deal:

Canon SX270 HS front Canon SX270 HS screen back Sony H300 front Sony H300 screen back

Canon images show more natural colors, less noise, and sharper subjects in varied lighting. Sony captures impressive distant subjects but falls short in clarity and shadow detail.

Price-to-Performance: Wallet Considerations

Current pricing places them near parity - Canon ~ $284, Sony ~ $249. Sony’s bargain zoom is attractive, but after factoring image quality, autofocus, and broader usability, Canon offers better value for most.

Verdict: Which Camera Should You Choose?

Pick the Canon PowerShot SX270 HS if you want:

• A portable, lightweight camera that balances zoom and image quality
• Reliable autofocus for action and portraiture
• Full HD 60p video capability
• Better low-light performance for indoor shooting or night
• A straightforward, user-friendly interface

Go with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H300 if you:

• Need an extreme zoom range (35×) for distant wildlife or surveillance-style shooting
• Don’t mind carrying a heavier camera body
• Prioritize longer battery life between charges
• Primarily shoot in good light conditions where ISO noise is less critical
• Want a low-resolution EVF for shooting in bright sun

Final Thoughts

In my extensive testing experience, the Canon SX270 HS emerges as the more balanced, versatile superzoom compact, suited for most enthusiasts and casual professionals. The Sony H300 caters better to niche users chasing maximum zoom at the expense of portability and image finesse.

Choosing between them demands honestly evaluating your shooting priorities: zoom range versus image quality, size versus battery endurance. Either way, both cameras remain accessible entry-points into superzoom photography, building blocks towards mastering composition, light, and timing without breaking the bank or carrying a full DSLR kit.

Happy shooting!

If you liked this thorough, side-by-side analysis of the Canon SX270 HS and Sony H300, stay tuned for more deep dives into cameras that blend cutting-edge tech with practical usability.