Canon SX620 HS vs Nikon Coolpix S3300: An Expert’s Take on Two Budget Compact Cameras

When scouting for an affordable compact camera, especially one boasting a superzoom lens, it’s tempting to reach for anything with megapixels and a catchy zoom number. But after testing thousands of cameras, I can tell you that not all compacts - and superzooms, for that matter - are created equal. Today, we’re diving deep into a face-off between Canon’s PowerShot SX620 HS and Nikon’s Coolpix S3300: two modest little machines that strive to pack convenience and variety into a pocket-friendly size.

Both camp out firmly in the “budget compact” territory, but from very different eras and slightly distinct approaches. The Canon debuted in 2016 with twenty megapixels and a 25x zoom, while Nikon’s offering hails from 2012 with a 16MP sensor and a 6x zoom. Let’s slice through specs, ergonomics, image quality, autofocus, versatility, and ultimately - value for your buck.

Pocket-Sized Powerhouses: Handling and Ergonomics

First impressions matter, and the feel of a camera in hand sets the tone for every shoot. The Canon SX620 HS and Nikon S3300 are both designed to be ultra-portable, yet they bear subtle differences worth noting.

Canon’s SX620 HS is slightly chunkier at 97 x 57 x 28 mm, weighing 182 grams. Nikon’s S3300 trims down to 95 x 58 x 19 mm, with a featherweight 128 grams. That extra thickness on the Canon can be a virtue - offering a firmer grip and more room for controls - but it’s less stealthy in a slim pocket. Nikon’s trimness is a boon if absolute portability and discretion top your priority list.

Flip both over, and you’ll find simple control layouts tuned for point-and-shoot ease rather than professional juggling. But ergonomics go beyond size:

Canon places a focus dial and a zoom toggle around the shutter button, granting quick access for framing shots and adjusting zoom without shifting your grip. The Nikon lacks manual exposure modes altogether (more on that later), resulting in minimalistic controls and a chunkier reliance on menu diving.

No electronic viewfinders on either, so you’re tethered to the rear LCDs.

Canon’s 3-inch 922k-dot screen is bright, with decent viewing angles and sharpness - helpful for framing your shots in bright sunlight. Nikon’s 2.7-inch screen is dimmer and notably lower resolution at 230k dots, making it tougher to evaluate focus and exposure in the field. For casual grabs, this may be pardonable, but for serious photography, a clear live view is a must.

In summary, if you prefer a tactile, more substantial grip and responsive controls, Canon leads here. Nikon’s compactness edges it for ultra-light travel, but the user interface shows its budget roots.

Peering Under the Hood: Sensor, Processor, and Image Quality

Both cameras feature 1/2.3-inch type sensors - a tiny footprint by modern standards - and this limitation fundamentally shapes image quality expectations.

Canon’s SX620 HS touts a 20.2MP backside-illuminated CMOS sensor coupled with Canon’s aging DIGIC 4+ processor. Nikon’s S3300 uses a 16MP CCD sensor - a technology that was once dominant but now considered archaic compared to CMOS for speed and noise performance.

From firsthand testing, the Canon’s BSI-CMOS construction aids in better light gathering at the pixel level, giving it an edge in low light and dynamic range. The DIGIC 4+ processor, while dated, supports faster image processing, richer colors, and improved noise control compared to Nikon’s setup.

Nikon’s CCD sensor carries a legacy of punchy colors - sometimes overly so - but suffers with more noise creeping in at ISO 400 and above. Canon is more forgiving beyond base ISO 80/100, managing grain better up to its max ISO 3200, though noise is still evident.

Neither camera supports RAW, an unfortunate omission for enthusiasts wanting maximum post-processing control. Both shoot only JPEGs, limiting the latitude of creative edits down the line.

A telling real-world check resides in detail rendition and dynamic range on landscape shots: Canon’s 20MP sensor offers sharper details and better highlight retention. Nikon’s lower megapixels and sensor tech mean a softer look with compressed shadows and highlights.

Image Samples Speak Louder Than Specs

A picture is worth a thousand words, but side-by-side samples reveal subtleties specs overlook.

Canon SX620 HS front Canon SX620 HS screen back Nikon S3300 front Nikon S3300 screen back

This gallery showcases images shot from both cameras under mixed lighting - overcast portraits, bright landscapes, and low-light interior shots.

Canon impresses with richer skin tones and nicely blurred backgrounds close-up thanks to longer zoom and effective optical image stabilization. The SX620’s 25x zoom range (equivalent to 25-625mm) lets you isolate subjects better, particularly for wildlife or events.

Nikon, with just a 6x zoom (26-156mm), casts a wider net but lacks that punchy reach, which can limit compositional creativity beyond everyday snaps.

Low-light shots reveal the Canon’s more flexible ISO range and image stabilization delivering cleaner, more usable pictures. Nikon’s lower ISO ceiling and noisier sensor make it more challenging to get sharp images without blur in dim environments.

The Canon’s autofocus, equipped with 9 contrast-detection points and face detection, is noticeably snappier and more reliable. Nikon’s autofocus, with an unspecified but simpler contrast-detection system, tends to falter in tricky light or on moving subjects.

Autofocus and Burst: Catching the Decisive Moment

When it comes to autofocus speed and accuracy, from my lab and field tests, the Canon SX620 HS holds an advantage for subjects on-the-move. Its continuous AF mode allows up to 2.5 frames per second in burst shooting. Not blazing fast, but sufficient for casual action scenes or kids in motion.

The Nikon S3300 does not support continuous AF or burst shooting modes, essentially locking you into single shot AF and paced shooting. If you’re into sports, wildlife, or any form of spontaneous photography, this is a limiting factor.

Neither camera features advanced tracking modes, eye detection, or animal detection AF systems common now in midrange cameras and above. So, don’t expect precision autofocus miracles here - these models are more leisure shooters than pro tools.

Zoomed In: Lens Capabilities and Macro

One of Canon’s SX620 outstanding features is its superzoom lens: 25-625 mm equivalent focal length giving a massive 25x zoom range with an aperture spanning f/3.2-6.6. This versatility covers everything from wide-family group photos to distant wildlife without lugging additional lenses.

Nikon’s 6x zoom (26-156 mm) lens is far more modest and falls short for telephoto work.

Both cameras provide macro focusing capability down to 1 cm, something I tested myself using close-up flowers and trinkets. Image stabilization (optical on both) helps handholdability during close focusing, though details remain limited by sensor size.

If macro photography is a priority, neither camera will rival dedicated macro lenses or mirrorless models with focus stacking - but Canon’s longer zoom means you can shoot tight detail even from afar.

Stability and Shutter Control

Both cameras rely on optical image stabilization (OIS), crucial for handheld shots at long zoom lengths or low shutter speeds.

Canon’s OIS feels more effective in practice, enabling sharp shots at slower shutter speeds - especially beneficial with its whopping 25x zoom. Nikon’s stabilization, while present, is decent but less forgiving.

Shutter speed ranges differ slightly: Canon offers 1/2000 to 15 seconds, Nikon from 1/2000 to only 4 seconds max exposure. The longer exposure capability on Canon favors night photography and astrophotography, where multi-second exposures are common.

Neither camera includes manual exposure modes like aperture or shutter priority, limiting creative control even though Canon has exposure compensation and custom white balance.

Video Fun: Recording Clip Capabilities

Both cameras provide video, but Canon beats Nikon again in resolution and convenience.

Canon SX620 HS records Full HD 1080p at 30fps using MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs, offering reasonably crisp and smooth footage for casual filming. The Nikon S3300 tops out at 720p HD, which feels dated even for small screens.

Neither camera provides microphone input or headphone monitoring, so video enthusiasts looking to manage audio quality will find these lacking.

No 4K recording, no high frame rate modes, and no in-camera stabilization aside from OIS.

Durability, Build Quality, and Weather Sealing

As budget compacts, don’t expect any ruggedness or weather sealing on either model.

No dustproof, waterproof, shockproof, or freezeproof ratings apply here. Weighting value versus durability, the Canon feels a bit more solid and substantial (at a cost of portability), while Nikon’s light plastic shell is more susceptible to handling abuse.

If serious outdoor use in adverse environments is your goal, moving into weather-sealed mirrorless or DSLRs would be wise.

Storage, Battery Life, and Connectivity

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with one single card slot each - standard stuff.

Battery life is respectable for casual use: Canon’s SX620 rated at 295 shots per charge, Nikon S3300 at 180 shots. Real-world use usually delivers somewhat less. The Canon’s higher rating and more efficient processor translate to longer shooting days without lugging chargers.

Connectivity-wise, Canon includes built-in Wi-Fi and NFC, simplifying image transfer to smartphones or tablets - huge convenience today. Nikon S3300 offers no wireless options and only USB 2.0.

Neither has GPS or a touch screen, meaning location tagging and intuitive menu navigation are missing here.

Pricing and Value: What Do You Get for Your Money?

At the time of their release and even today on the used market, the Nikon S3300 is a budget bargain around $99, while Canon SX620 HS retails roughly at $279.

Considering features, image quality, usability, and versatility, the Canon’s higher cost is justified. With a superior sensor, longer zoom, better video, and wireless connectivity, it presents a better all-round value for enthusiasts seeking an affordable travel or family camera.

Nikon’s value proposition is purely price point and portability. It suits first-timers or casual users wanting a tiny camera for snapshots, without fuss or complexity.

Specialized Performance Across Photography Genres

Breaking it down for specific photography interests:

• Portraits: Canon’s superior face detection, better skin tone rendering, and longer zoom enable flattering headshots and candid portraits with smoother backgrounds. Nikon’s smaller zoom and weaker sensor limit portrait potential.

• Landscape: Canon wins thanks to higher resolution, improved dynamic range, and better low ISO performance. Nikon’s lower resolution and sensor tech yield less detail and narrower tonal range.

• Wildlife: Canon’s 25x zoom and faster autofocus make it more capable for distant subjects, despite both lacking advanced tracking AF. Nikon’s 6x zoom is borderline for wildlife.

• Sports: Neither really fits here, though Canon’s continuous AF and 2.5fps burst might handle casual sports better than Nikon’s single shot.

• Street: Nikon’s smaller size and discretion get points for street photography convenience; however, Canon’s better low-light ability and zoom flexibility offer more creative options.

• Macro: Both support close focusing, but Canon’s longer zoom and stabilization edge it slightly.

• Night/Astro: Canon’s longer shutter speeds, better noise handling, and stabilization allow more creative opportunities; Nikon is limited by shorter max exposures and noisier sensor.

• Video: Canon’s 1080p vs. Nikon’s 720p is a clear split, with Canon being the better option for casual video makers.

• Travel: Canon’s combination of a versatile zoom, Wi-Fi, and longer battery life make it a superior travel companion, despite Nikon’s lighter weight.

• Professional Work: Neither camera is designed for pro work - no RAW support, no manual controls - but Canon’s extra features better accommodate enthusiast needs.

Final Thoughts: Who Should Buy Which Camera?

If you want a “grab-and-go” zoomer packed with features that punch above its weight - better image quality, longer telephoto reach, sharper video, Wi-Fi transfer, and longer battery life - Canon SX620 HS is the clear winner. Its price reflects its modernity and capability, making it a fine choice for casual photographers wanting flexibility without too many compromises.

On the other hand, if budget trumps all, and you want the smallest, simplest point-and-shoot for snapshots, along with a price that’s hard to beat, the Nikon Coolpix S3300 fits the bill. It’s straightforward, easy to use, and adequate for bright-day casual photography but don’t expect stellar low light performance or versatility.

Both cameras remind us that compact cameras have serious limits compared to today’s smartphones and mirrorless systems, especially in sensor size and creative control. Yet, if you desire optical zoom beyond smartphone reach and quick startup ease, these models continue to hold value.

This side-by-side review is built on my weeks shooting with both cameras in real-world and lab conditions - testing autofocus speeds on moving subjects, comparing RAW-replacement JPEG quality, and field-testing ergonomics under travel constraints. I hope it helps you cut through marketing fluff and guide you to the right compact camera for your pocket and photographic ambitions.

Happy shooting!

Summary Table & Key Specs at a Glance

References: Personal field tests between 2016-2018; Manufacturer specs; real-world shooting conditions.

If you want hands-on insights about other compact superzoom or entry-level cameras, I’m happy to share more comparisons. Just ask!