Choosing Between the Canon SX500 IS and Sony A68: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Over my 15 years testing cameras, countless models have crossed my desk - ranging from pocket-friendly compacts to full-frame beasts carrying enough glass to start a small lens museum. Today’s challenger duel features two cameras from very different generations and design philosophies: the Canon PowerShot SX500 IS, a 2012-era small sensor superzoom compact, and the 2015 Sony SLT-A68, an entry-level DSLR alternative with an electronic viewfinder. Both have their unique places in the camera universe, and by hands-on experience, I’m here to help you decipher what each machine really brings to your photography adventures - and whether it’s step-up, step-back, or sideways from your current kit.

Let’s dig in, lenses ready, and peel back the layers beyond spec sheets.

Roughing It Out: Size, Feel, and Handling

First impressions matter. I always say a camera should feel like an extension of your hands - something that encourages clicking, not fiddling. Physically, these cameras are in different weight classes and footprints, reflecting their categories: compact superzoom vs. DSLR-style.

The Canon SX500 IS is pocket-friendly, tipping the scales at just 341 grams and measuring a neat 104x70x80 mm. Its compact body and fixed 30x zoom lens (that’s 24-720mm equivalent - impressive on paper) promise ultimate portability. But with compactness comes trade-offs: the thin grip and smaller control buttons often require a bit more hand gymnastics, especially during extended shooting sessions.

Contrast this with the Sony A68: at 610 grams and 143x104x81 mm, it’s substantially chunkier - closer to what I think of as “serious camera size.” This heft supports comfortable handling over long periods, with a deep, sculpted grip and a plethora of physical controls - shutter speed dial, aperture ring on some lenses, and more. If you’ve dipped your toes into DSLRs, this should feel familiar, even reassuring.

What about top design and control layout? The smaller SX500 keeps things minimal and intuitive, suitable for those who prefer simplicity. Meanwhile…

…the Sony A68 flaunts a more traditional DSLR layout, with dedicated dials and an articulated LCD screen, gearing itself toward users who crave direct control without menu diving. This extra complexity, while initially daunting, ultimately accelerates your workflow once you’re up to speed.

Under the Hood: Sensor and Image Quality Insights

After handling size and ergonomics, I always zero in on the sensor - the heart of image quality. Sensor size, technology, and resolution shape everything from noise performance to dynamic range.

The Canon SX500 IS uses a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor - tiny by today’s standards - and outputs 16 megapixels. Meanwhile, the Sony A68 packs a much larger APS-C CMOS sensor, boasting 24 megapixels.

Why does this matter? The Sony’s sensor is roughly 13 times larger in area than the Canon’s, enabling it to collect significantly more light. This translates to better low-light performance, higher resolution detail, and improved dynamic range - critical for capturing scenes with bright skies and shadow detail, a perennial challenge for smaller sensors like the SX500’s.

Although the Canon’s CCD sensor was a decent performer back in 2012, it lacks the noise control benefits of modern CMOS technology. Its max native ISO tops out at 1600, and noise becomes noticeable in dim conditions. In contrast, the Sony A68’s native ISO ranges from 100 to 25600, giving you flexibility to shoot in darker environments with cleaner results.

Granted, mega-megapixels do not always guarantee better images - lens quality, processing algorithms, and user skill play huge roles - but given the sensor technology gap, the Sony is a clear winner here for image fidelity and versatility.

Looking at the Back: Screens and Viewfinders for Real-World Shooting

Your viewing and framing experience can make or break a shoot, especially on-the-go or in tricky lighting.

The Canon SX500 features a fixed 3-inch TFT LCD with modest 461k-dot resolution - adequate but showing its age. It’s bright enough for most daylight conditions but struggles in direct sun. Crucially, the SX500 lacks any sort of viewfinder, forcing you to compose entirely on the rear screen, which may be less comfortable for longer sessions or low light.

Conversely, the Sony A68 sports a 2.7-inch tilting LCD of the same 461k-dot resolution but adds a 1,440k-dot electronic viewfinder with 100% coverage and 0.57x magnification.

The EVF is a game-changer for precision framing and stability - you instinctively bring the camera closer to your eye, steadying your shot. The articulated screen also opens up creative angles for macro, street, or video shooting that the SX500 cannot match.

Both cameras lack touchscreens or selfie-friendly interfaces, but the Sony’s EVF and versatile screen tilt add real-world comfort and compositional flexibility, especially in bright outdoor scenarios.

Zoom vs Zoom: Lens Reach and Optical Performance

Now let’s party like it’s 2012 - the Canon’s 30x optical zoom is its headline feature, reaching a whopping 720mm equivalent focal length. This is handy for casual wildlife snaps or distant subjects without lugging around lenses.

But before you rush off to shoot endangered squirrels, a word of caution from personal experience: superzoom compacts often struggle with image sharpness and chromatic aberration at the telephoto end. The SX500 IS partially addresses this with optical image stabilization, but the dimmer lens at F5.8 at maximum zoom noticeably hampers low light and autofocus speed.

The Sony A68, being an interchangeable lens system, relies on your glass selection - Sony’s A-mount offers 143 compatible lenses, ranging from fast primes to pro telephotos. This flexibility means you can tailor performance to your style and budget. The built-in sensor-based stabilization system extends this further, especially when paired with non-stabilized lenses.

Though the A68's kit lens might not match the SX500’s zoom reach outright, superior glass quality and faster apertures easily allow you to isolate subjects and produce professional-grade images.

Focusing on Autofocus: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

In practical photography, autofocus performance often defines successful capture more than specs on paper.

The Canon SX500 IS features a contrast-detection AF system with a single focus point and face detection. It’s adequate for static conditions but slow to lock focus in low light or on moving subjects. Continuous autofocus and tracking are effectively absent, with a sluggish 1 fps burst rate limiting action photography.

The Sony A68 shines as a serious enthusiast’s tool here, sporting Sony’s advanced phase-detection AF array with 79 focus points - including 15 cross-type points - for fast, precise autofocus over a wider area.

Continuous AF tracking and multi-area focus modes excel with moving wildlife or sports subjects, while the camera boasts 8 fps burst shooting - a substantial advantage for capturing decisive moments.

My testing confirms the Sony’s autofocus as a joy in fast-paced scenarios, where the Canon’s contrast-based AF causes missed frames or hunt/focus delays.

How About Low Light and High ISO Performance?

Nothing tests a sensor's mettle like pushing into dim environments or night photography.

The Canon caps native ISO at 1600 and ups it a notch with digital tricks - but reminders from my test shoots show increasing noise and reduced sharpness beyond ISO 400, making low-light handheld shots challenging.

The A68 pushes ISO up to 25600 with impressive noise management for its class, courtesy of the large APS-C sensor and efficient Bionz X processor. This equates to usable shots in dimly lit venues or night street scenes - something I found invaluable during evening photography outings.

Putting Them to Work Across Photography Genres

Let’s see how each camera fares across the board.

Canon SX500 IS front Canon SX500 IS screen back Sony A68 front Sony A68 screen back

Portraits

• Canon SX500 IS: Skin tones render naturally under good light, but limited aperture range and lack of shallow depth of field limit portrait creativity. The fixed lens and modest bokeh capabilities deter artistic background blur. Face detection helps avoid missed focus on faces but can’t replace precision AF.
• Sony A68: Larger sensor and interchangeable lenses offer rich skin tone rendition and creamy bokeh with fast primes. Eye detection AF isn’t onboard, but precise AF point selection and tracking improve portrait focus reliability.

Landscape

• Canon: Good resolution for prints up to moderate sizes; dynamic range limited by sensor size leads to blown highlights or crushed shadows in high contrast scenes.
• Sony: Superior dynamic range and resolution provide magnificent landscape detail and tonal gradations. Weather sealing? Neither offers it, but the Sony's build is more robust.

Wildlife

• Canon’s extensive zoom is tempting but compromised by slow AF and low burst rate.
• Sony's quicker AF with 79 points and rapid 8 fps burst ability makes it a superior choice, assuming you invest in a suitable telephoto lens.

Sports

• Sony’s faster shutter speeds, burst rate, and AF tracking contrast sharply with the Canon’s slower, more deliberate shooting cadence. The A68 is the clear pick for action.

Street Photography

• Canon’s compact form benefits discreteness and portability.
• Sony is more obtrusive but tilting LCD aids shooting from the hip or at awkward angles.

Macro

• Canon’s 1cm macro focus distance is impressive, but fixed zoom lens limits artistic control.
• Sony’s interchangeable lenses and sensor stabilization support finer focusing for close-ups.

Night / Astro

• Sony’s high ISO and superior sensor give it a definitive edge for astrophotography. Long exposures capped at 30s on Sony compared to 15s on Canon, but with remote controls and more options on the Sony side.

Video Capabilities

• Canon shoots 720p @ 25fps with no mic input - not stellar for serious video.
• Sony delivers 1080p at 60i/30p/24p with mic input, HDMI out, and superior codec options - taking the lead for multimedia creators.

Travel

• Canon’s pocketability wins points here, with the wide zoom range good for one-lens travel kits in a pinch.
• Sony’s compromise in size/weight but versatility and image quality make it more of a traveler’s camera if you can carry the gear.

Professional Use

• Sony supports RAW output, Sony’s standard lens mount ecosystem, and offers a more reliable workflow integration.
• Canon lacks RAW and extensive customization, making it unsuitable for professional applications.

Build Quality and Battery Life

Neither camera is weather sealed, so dodging rain or sand is advisable.

Sony’s body is sturdier, matching its DSLR lineage, while Canon’s compact plastic shell feels less robust.

Battery life is another real-world factor:

• Canon SX500 IS manages about 195 shots per charge.
• Sony A68 grosses 510 shots (CIPA standard), a notable advantage for extended outings without frequent recharges.

Connectivity and Storage Flexibility

Both cameras support Eye-Fi card wireless transfer for photos.

USB speed caps at 2.0 on both - no surprises.

Sony’s addition of HDMI port and external flash sync expand usability for advanced workflows, whereas Canon remains basic.

Sony supports both SD memory and older Memory Stick Pro Duo cards, reflecting its Sony ecosystem roots. Canon sticks to standard SD formats.

Price Considerations and Value

The Canon SX500 IS was offered around $299 at launch - affordable for beginners or casual shooters seeking a versatile zoom in a pocketable package.

The Sony A68 commands about $581 (used or discounted state today), reflecting its DSLR-ish autofocus, larger sensor, and better overall specs.

Your budget dictates choices here - but value isn’t just price; it’s usability, image quality, and long-term satisfaction.

I’ve summarized my performance assessments visually:

…and broken down genre-specific scores for a clearer picture:

Wrapping It Up: Which Camera Should You Choose?

If You’re a Casual Snap-Happy Traveler or Need Ultra-Compact Convenience

• The Canon PowerShot SX500 IS is a decent pick for simple family photos, travel shots where carrying less is key, or situations needing a colossal zoom in a tiny package.
• It’s affordable, easy to operate, and fits well in a jacket pocket - not requiring lens changes or deep technical knowledge.

If You’re an Enthusiast Seeking Image Quality, Control, and Growth Potential

• The Sony SLT-A68 is by far the superior tool - offering a large APS-C sensor, sophisticated autofocus system, video features, RAW shooting, and the foundation to grow via interchangeable lenses.
• Ideal for portrait, landscape, wildlife, sports, and creative photography requiring flexible control and robust image quality.
• Though physically larger, the workflow benefits and future-proofing more than compensate for the extra weight.

A Final Word from Experience

I’ve spent many days hiking with the Canon SX500 IS tucked into my jacket, appreciating the surprise of that long zoom and the quick point-and-shoot nature. But when the light dims or the action intensifies, that same camera showed me its limits.

Conversely, the Sony A68 became a reliable companion during demanding shoots, letting me capture decisive moments with confidence - albeit at the cost of more kit to carry and a learning curve to master.

Neither camera is cutting-edge today - technology marches on - but comparing them side-by-side highlights significant strides in sensor tech, autofocus, and user experience that matter deeply to serious photographers.

In the end, your choice boils down to priorities: portability and simplicity with Canon’s compact or quality, control, and versatility with Sony’s DSLR-style. For those willing to invest some time and money into craft, the Sony A68 rewards richly. For budget-minded casual shooters who favor ease and zoom reach, the Canon SX500 IS remains a viable companion.

Photography is as much about moments as gear - whatever you pick, I hope this paints a clear picture for your next best shot.