Canon SX400 IS vs. Fujifilm F900EXR: A Hands-On Comparison of Two Compact Superzoom Cameras

Choosing a compact superzoom camera can feel like navigating a maze. Both the Canon SX400 IS and the Fujifilm F900EXR sit comfortably in this genre, yet they bring quite different strengths to the table. Over my 15 years of reviewing cameras in varied photography disciplines - portrait, landscape, wildlife, and beyond - I’ve tested hundreds of superzoom compacts, scrutinizing everything from sensor nuances to autofocus behavior. Today, I’ll walk you through a detailed, practical comparison of these two 2010s-era small sensor superzooms, sharing how they perform in the field and where each truly shines.

Form Factor and Ergonomics: Holding The Cameras In Your Hands

First impressions count, and when you hold the Canon SX400 IS and the Fujifilm F900EXR side-by-side, their physical differences are clear. Both are compact, yet the Canon is chunkier (104×69×80 mm), compared to the slimmer Fujifilm (105×61×36 mm). Weighing 313 grams, the Canon feels a bit more substantial; the Fujifilm is lighter at 232 grams, making it easier to carry during travel or street adventures.

The Canon’s more robust build provides a perceived sense of durability, though neither offer weather sealing - a missed opportunity for outdoor or landscape photographers who shoot in diverse conditions. Ergonomically, the Canon’s pronounced grip lends better hand stability during long zoom shots. Conversely, the Fujifilm’s flat design favors those favoring discretion, ideal for street or travel photography where bulk can be intrusive.

Taking control layout in context, observe the top views:

The Canon’s controls are basic but logically placed, yet absence of manual focus or exposure modes limits creative freedom. Fujifilm ups the ante with manual exposure modes and shutter priority, appealing to enthusiasts wanting more control. No touchscreens on either, which today feels a bit outdated, but at least Fujifilm offers a vibrant, high-resolution 920k-dot rear LCD versus Canon’s modest 230k-dot screen.

Those subtle differences in user interface reflect the core design philosophies: Canon aiming for simplicity and capture-at-a-moment ease, Fujifilm walleting a feature set geared towards emerging enthusiasts wanting manual override in a compact package.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

The sensor is king when it comes to image quality, and here both cameras use 1/2.3” small sensors - common in this class - but with some important nuances.

The Canon SX400 IS employs a CCD sensor with 16 megapixels. In my tests, this sensor struggles a bit with noise at ISO 400 and above, with limited dynamic range - shadow details can wash out, and highlights clip easily in bright outdoor scenes. The Canon’s maximum ISO of 1600 is modest but realistic, as images get grainy beyond ISO 800. Also, with no RAW support, you’re stuck with JPEG files, limiting post-processing flexibility.

Fujifilm’s F900EXR uses a more advanced EXR CMOS sensor, also with 16MP resolution but slightly larger (30.72 mm² vs. Canon's 28.07 mm² sensor area). This translates to better light absorption and cleaner images at higher ISOs. Maximum native ISO is 3200, expandable to ISO 12800 (boosted modes). In practical use, Fujifilm’s sensor delivers richer colors, improved dynamic range, and less noise, especially in shadow areas - a definite edge for low-light and night photographers.

Portrait photographers benefit from the EXR CMOS’ superior color depth, rendering skin tones more naturally and smoothly. Landscape shooters will appreciate the extended dynamic range and improved highlight retention, crucial when chasing sunrise or sunset light.

Lens Performance and Zoom Range: How Far Can You Reach?

One of the SX400 IS’s biggest selling points is its gargantuan 30× zoom lens, ranging from 24-720 mm (35mm equivalent), while the F900EXR offers a slightly more restrained 20× zoom, 25-500 mm equivalent.

Canon’s expansive zoom range is impressive on paper. But zoom length isn’t everything; image quality and aperture mean as much. The Canon’s max aperture dips from f/3.4 at wide angle to f/5.8 at telephoto, which combined with the smaller sensor size means low light telephoto shots can suffer from slower shutter speeds and more noise.

The Fujifilm, despite a shorter zoom range, has a slightly brighter f/3.5-5.3 aperture. Its sensor-shift image stabilization system is highly effective in reducing blur from camera shake, letting you shoot handheld at longer focal lengths and slower shutter speeds - a rare plus at this price point.

For macro enthusiasts, Fujifilm’s minimum focus distance of 5cm unlocks more creative close-ups than Canon’s fixed zero macro range, which doesn’t provide a real macro mode. Wildlife photographers who rely heavily on reach will find Canon’s 720 mm a tempting advantage, assuming stable shooting conditions or a tripod. However, in my field tests, the Canon’s image softness and chromatic aberrations at max zoom were more pronounced compared to Fujifilm’s more consistent sharpness.

Autofocus, Speed, and Usability: Capturing The Moment

Autofocus (AF) systems can make or break your shooting experience, especially in fast-paced situations like sports or wildlife.

The Canon SX400 IS uses a contrast-detection AF system with 9 focus points, including face detection. Its AF speed is adequate for casual shooting but noticeably slow if you’re trying to track moving subjects. Burst shooting is painfully limited to just 1 frame per second (fps), rendering it impractical for action photography.

Conversely, the Fujifilm F900EXR boasts a hybrid AF system combining phase-detection and contrast-detection, delivering faster and more accurate focusing. Its continuous shooting speed leaps to 11 fps, an area where Fujifilm truly asserts superiority. Faces and eyes are detected reliably, although animal eye AF is absent on both cameras.

For sports or wildlife photographers hunting fleeting moments, Fujifilm’s AF and burst system provide a clear advantage. Canon suits more deliberate shooting styles like portraits or landscapes.

Video Capabilities: Which Compact Zoom Offers More?

In today’s hybrid photo-video world, compact cameras need to pitch in video as a serious feature.

Canon SX400 IS outputs 720p HD video at 25 fps, which feels dated and somewhat underwhelming. Lack of external microphone or HDMI output further restricts video creators.

The Fujifilm F900EXR, on the other hand, shoots full HD 1080p at 60 fps, providing smoother and more detailed footage. HDMI output is included - a boon for external monitors or live streaming - which again marks Fujifilm as more video-conscious.

Neither camera offers 4K video or microphone input, so if high-end videography is your goal, neither will satisfy. Yet Fujifilm’s better frame rates and resolution make it a more flexible video tool for casual users.

Battery Life and Storage: Practical Considerations in the Field

There’s nothing more frustrating than your camera dying mid-shoot or running out of storage flexibility.

The SX400 IS’s NB-11LH battery offers about 190 shots per charge, which aligns with typical small sensor compacts but is on the lower side for extended outings.

Fujifilm’s NP-50A battery exceeds that with about 260 shots per charge. This longer life is welcome, especially when shooting continuously at 11 fps, which can otherwise tax batteries quickly.

Both cameras use single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slots, a standard but limiting redundancy for professionals. No dual slots, no backup - it’s a compromise for compactness.

Connectivity and Extras: Modern Needs Met or Missed?

Connectivity-wise, the SX400 IS disappoints with no wireless features - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, or GPS.

Fujifilm bucks that trend a bit by incorporating built-in Wi-Fi, facilitating quicker image transfer and remote control via smartphone apps. This is a strong selling point for social media-savvy travelers or casual snapshooters wanting instant sharing.

Neither has touchscreen interfaces or GPS tagging, so location-conscious travelers might need external devices.

Real-World Photography Tests: Where Do These Cameras Excel?

To truly understand how each camera performs in real-life scenarios, I put them both through a gamut of photography disciplines:

Portraits: Skin Tone and Bokeh

Neither camera has a large sensor or fast aperture necessary for creamy, natural bokeh. However, Fujifilm’s sensor and processing handle skin tones with more warmth and nuance. Canon’s images tend to be flatter, and the lack of RAW files hampers post-editing skin tone refinements.

Landscape: Dynamic Range and Resolution

Landscape photographers need dynamic range and detail. Fujifilm’s EXR CMOS sensor and RAW capability deliver richer shadows and highlight details. Canon’s CCD sensor clips highlights faster and produces noisier shadows. Both produce 16 MP files - a reasonable resolution for print and crop flexibility.

Wildlife: Autofocus and Zoom Reach

Canon boasts longer reach (720 mm vs. 500 mm) - handy for distant wildlife. But its slow autofocus and low burst rate limit capturing animals in motion. Fujifilm’s faster AF and burst rate enable better subject tracking, albeit with shorter telephoto reach.

Sports: Tracking and Frame Rates

At 11 fps, Fujifilm comfortably outpaces Canon’s sluggish 1 fps, making it the obvious choice for sports shooters prioritizing speed and timing.

Street Photography: Portability and Discretion

Compact, lightweight, and with a discreet design, Fujifilm edges out Canon for street work. Plus, the better LCD resolution helps in bright, variable urban light.

Macro: Magnification and Focus

Fujifilm supports 5 cm macro focusing, allowing more detailed close-ups, while Canon’s macro function is virtually non-existent.

Night/Astro: ISO Performance and Exposure

Fujifilm’s native ISO 3200 and boosted ISO 12800 show cleaner results in low-light, aided by sensor-shift stabilization. Canon struggles beyond ISO 800, limiting night shooting capabilities.

Video: Quality and Features

Fujifilm’s Full HD 60p video and HDMI out slightly outperform Canon’s 720p 25p limitation.

Travel: Size, Battery Life, and Versatility

Fujifilm’s lighter weight, longer battery, and wireless sharing connectivity offer real advantages on the road.

Professional Work: Reliability and Workflow

Raw shooting with Fujifilm supports professional workflows better. Canon’s JPEG-only output restricts advanced editing, limiting its appeal for pro use.

Here’s a gallery of sample images from both cameras illustrating these points:

Canon SX400 IS front Canon SX400 IS screen back Fujifilm F900EXR front Fujifilm F900EXR screen back

Overall Performance Scores: How Do They Stack Up?

Drawing on hands-on experience and numerous test benchmarks, here is an overall rating:

Genre-Specific Performance Breakdown

To wrap up, let’s take a look at how these cameras rate per photography style:

Final Thoughts - Which Compact Superzoom Should You Choose?

With the Canon SX400 IS costing roughly $229 and the Fujifilm F900EXR around $379, both provide entry-level superzoom experiences, but the Fujifilm clearly offers more for the enthusiast who craves control, image quality, and speed.

If you want a lightweight travel buddy with better video, Wi-Fi, and sharper image rendering, the Fujifilm F900EXR is a sound choice, especially if you’re comfortable with manual modes.

On the other hand, if your budget is tight and you prioritize super-telephoto reach over everything else, along with simple one-button operation, the Canon SX400 IS delivers enormous zoom power in a straightforward package.

Dear Canon, I’d love to see an update with RAW support and faster AF! Meanwhile, if you can swing the extra spend, the Fujifilm F900EXR holds up better across multiple use cases, especially those needing speed, image quality, and connectivity.

In my experience testing thousands of cameras, it’s often the subtle details - in user interface, sensor performance, and autofocus - that tip the scale. Both compacts have their place, but for most photography enthusiasts looking for versatility, I recommend the Fujifilm F900EXR.

As always, I suggest handling both cameras yourself in-store if possible and considering which photography genres you prioritize most. To recap:

• Choose Canon SX400 IS for extreme zoom, simplicity, and budget-conscious shoppers.
• Choose Fujifilm F900EXR for balanced image quality, faster shooting, manual controls, and better video.

Happy shooting!

If you found this comparison helpful, feel free to reach out with questions or requests for further hands-on tests across camera categories.