Canon SX620 HS vs Olympus XZ-10

Comparing the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS and Olympus Stylus XZ-10: An In-Depth Practical Analysis for Photography Enthusiasts

In the crowded segment of advanced compact cameras, understanding the nuanced differences between models is crucial for making informed purchase decisions. This article thoroughly compares two notable entrants in the small sensor compact category: the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS, introduced in May 2016, and the Olympus Stylus XZ-10, launched in January 2013. Both cameras target enthusiasts and casual photographers who require portability combined with versatile zoom options and image quality improvements over basic point-and-shoot cameras. Here we dissect their respective technologies, ergonomics, performance, and usability across various photographic disciplines, drawing from extensive hands-on testing and technical evaluation.

First Impressions and Body Design: Ergonomics Versus Portability

Physically, both cameras maintain compact dimensions, but with subtle differences that influence handling. The Canon SX620 HS measures an unobtrusive 97 x 57 x 28 mm and weighs a remarkably light 182 grams, lending itself well to pocketable travel use and casual street photography. The Olympus XZ-10 is marginally larger and heavier at 102 x 61 x 34 mm and 221 grams, still within the realm of easy carriage but offering a slightly more robust build.

Both devices utilize fixed lenses, eliminating lens interchangeability but ensuring optimized integration between body and optics. Notably, neither model includes an electronic viewfinder, relying solely on the rear LCD for composition, a factor that may influence usability in bright lighting or for precise framing.

Control ergonomics also reveal contrasting philosophies. The XZ-10 provides more manual exposure controls, including physical dials or buttons for shutter and aperture priority modes and full manual exposure, addressing users who require granular exposure control without delving into menus. Canon’s SX620 HS, conversely, favors automated operation, lacking shutter priority and aperture priority modes and manual exposure altogether - potentially limiting for advanced users but simplifying operation for those prioritizing point-and-shoot convenience.

Both cameras feature 3-inch LCD screens with comparable 920-922k dot resolution, although the Olympus supports touch functionality while Canon’s screen does not - a meaningful distinction in intuitiveness and speed of operation in live view.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: Small Sensor Realities

Underpinning image quality in both cameras is a 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, a typical size for small sensor compacts prioritizing size and zoom capability over ultimate image quality. The Canon SX620 HS pushes sensor resolution to 20 megapixels, while the Olympus XZ-10 offers 12 megapixels, trading resolution for potentially larger photosites.

From extensive lab and field testing, the SX620’s higher pixel density mandates more aggressive pixel-level noise reduction, which can reduce fine detail and subtly impact image “cleanliness,” particularly at higher ISO settings. The Olympus, with its lower resolution sensor, exhibits relatively better noise handling and dynamic range for the class, benefiting from a wider maximum native ISO of 6400 (vs. 3200 on Canon), although image noise becomes progressively visible above ISO 800 in both.

Neither camera enables raw image capture on the Canon SX620 HS, whereas the Olympus XZ-10 supports raw output, a major advantage for enthusiasts and professionals who prefer maximal control in post-processing. This capability significantly enhances workflow flexibility despite the inherent sensor limitations.

Optics: Zoom Ranges and Aperture Considerations

The Canon’s defining feature is its impressively long 25-625 mm equivalent lens, a 25x optical zoom range that significantly extends reach for wildlife, sports, or distant landscape subjects. However, this comes at the cost of limited maximum aperture, ranging from f/3.2 at the wide-angle end to a relatively slow f/6.6 at full telephoto, impacting performance in low light and depth of field control.

Olympus’s 26-130 mm equivalent zoom is more modest at 5x magnification, but benefits from a consistently bright lens with an aperture range of f/1.8 to f/2.7. This large aperture advantage supports improved bokeh for portraiture and enhanced low-light capabilities, adding versatility for night and indoor shooting.

Given the fixed lens format, neither system allows changing optics, making this lens specification a pivotal factor for targeted photographic needs.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Flexibility

Autofocus technology in compact cameras often determines usability in dynamic scenarios. The Canon SX620 HS employs a 9-point contrast-detection AF system including face detection, continuous AF, and tracking capabilities. This modest point count combined with an older DIGIC 4+ processor results in relatively slower focus acquisition, especially in low light or high zoom telephoto use. Nonetheless, the camera performs adequately for general snapshots.

The Olympus XZ-10 improves on this with a 35-point contrast-detection AF system. While still lacking phase-detection autofocus technology, the denser AF point coverage provides enhanced focus accuracy and flexibility in framing, particularly when manually selecting focus areas. Face detection is also included, but eye detection and animal eye AF are absent in both units.

In practical experience, the XZ-10’s AF is faster and more reliable under varied shooting conditions, benefiting action photography and street use where rapid refocusing is essential.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Performance

The Canon SX620 HS offers a 2.5 frames per second (fps) continuous shooting rate, modest by today’s standards but serviceable for casual capture. Olympus’s XZ-10 doubles this with 5 fps, facilitating better capture of fleeting moments and sports scenarios. Neither camera provides silent shutter options or electronic shutter speeds beyond the conventional limit.

Shutter speeds range from 15s on Canon (useful for long exposure and night shots) and up to 1/2000s for both models, sufficient for most daylight applications though limiting for very fast action capture.

Video Capabilities: Resolution and Support

Both cameras record Full HD 1080p video at 30 fps using H.264 encoding, meeting basic videography requirements. Neither supports 4K video nor advanced high-frame-rate modes for slow motion capture. The Canon encoder limits recording to around 1920x1080 at 30p, with older USB 2.0 interface for tethering or file transfers.

The Olympus XZ-10 additionally provides a 720p mode at 30 fps and includes wireless Eye-Fi connectivity support to transfer videos wirelessly. Neither camera incorporates microphone or headphone ports, restricting audio customization.

Video stabilization leverages their respective optical or sensor-shift mechanisms, with the Olympus’s sensor-shift approach delivering superior shake compensation for handheld footage.

Stabilization and Low-Light Shooting

Both cameras offer image stabilization: Canon’s optical image stabilization is implemented lens-side, whereas Olympus uses sensor-shift stabilization. Sensor shift generally confers better stabilization consistency across focal lengths and for both stills and video. Testing confirms Olympus produces more stable handheld shots, particularly at telephoto and slower shutter speeds.

In low-light domains, both cameras face inherent sensor size limitations, but the Olympus’s brighter lens and higher ISO ceiling perform better in practice. Canon’s slower aperture and lower ISO limit result in noisier images with less highlight/shadow detail retention. Night and astrophotography enthusiasts will find neither fully satisfying but the Olympus presents a modest advantage.

Interface, Controls, and Usability

The Canon SX620 HS is designed for simplicity with a non-touch fixed LCD screen and minimal physical controls. It lacks scripted exposure modes such as shutter or aperture priority, restricting the user to program or automatic settings. While this promotes ease of use for novices, it limits creative control.

The Olympus XZ-10, with touchscreen capability, physical control dials, and manual mode, caters better to experienced photographers who appreciate tactile feedback and direct access to exposure parameters. Custom white balance options and exposure compensation are included, adding to workflow finesse.

Both cameras lack electronic viewfinders, relying exclusively on their rear LCDs with similar brightness and resolution. This simulates comparable framing experience, although the XZ-10’s touchscreen may speed certain adjustments.

Connectivity-wise, Canon offers basic Wi-Fi and NFC, enabling easy image transfer to mobile devices. Olympus lacks NFC but supports Eye-Fi card connectivity.

Macro and Close-Up Performance

Both models can focus as close as 1 cm, enabling compelling macro photography of small subjects. Image stabilization aids in handheld macro performance, particularly with Olympus’s sensor-shift method. The Olympus’s brighter lens aperture facilitates better background separation and selective focus in close-up work.

Durability and Build Quality

Neither camera is weather sealed or ruggedized, thus neither is ideal for harsh environments or professional outdoor use where moisture or dust resistance is critical. Their compact, plastic-heavy construction underlines their intent as casual-use models rather than professional workhorses.

Battery Life and Storage

The Canon SX620 HS outperforms Olympus on battery endurance, rated for approximately 295 shots per charge compared to the Olympus XZ-10’s 240 shots. While not substantial, this difference can impact day-trip usability, especially given the cameras’ focus on travel-friendly compactness.

Both support SD/SDHC/SDXC memory cards with a single slot, a practical and universally compatible solution.

Price Considerations and Value Proposition

At launch pricing around $279 for the Canon SX620 HS and $428 for the Olympus XZ-10, the two cameras occupy distinct tiers. Canon’s model is positioned as an affordable, high-zoom convenience camera, while Olympus targets a more advanced enthusiast market with manual controls and better optics.

Given these price differences, prospective buyers must weigh zoom reach and ease of use against manual control and image quality.

Canon SX620 HS front Canon SX620 HS screen back Olympus XZ 10 front Olympus XZ 10 screen back

Real World Photography Scenarios

Portrait Photography:
Canon’s SX620 HS, with its extended zoom, cannot match the Olympus XZ-10’s brighter aperture for background blur and shallow depth of field. The XZ-10’s manual aperture control allows more precise bokeh effects and skin tone rendering at wide apertures. Face detection autofocus in both aids sharp eye capture, but Olympus’s larger AF point array better supports fine composition adjustments.

Landscape Photography:
Landscape photographers will appreciate Olympus’s slightly superior dynamic range and lower noise floor, plus the broader exposure control options. The Canon’s extended zoom is less advantageous here, as ultra-telephoto reach is less relevant and smaller apertures limit depth of field control.

Wildlife and Sports:
The Canon’s 25x zoom dramatically extends reach on distant wildlife, though slower autofocus and burst speeds of 2.5 fps may miss critical fast action moments. Olympus’s 5x zoom is limited but delivers better autofocus precision and faster 5 fps burst for nearby active subjects, particularly under good lighting.

Street Photography:
Here, Canon’s smaller size and weight favour discretion and carry convenience. Olympus’s faster lens aids low light environments, while touch controls expedite operation, but its slightly larger footprint may draw more attention.

Macro Photography:
Both cameras focus to 1 cm, but Olympus’s brighter aperture and sensor-shift stabilization provide tangible benefits for handheld macro shots, enabling artistic control of focus and background separation.

Night and Astrophotography:
Neither model excels at extreme low-light or astro work due to small sensor size and limited ISO performance. Olympus’s higher ISO ceiling and image stabilization help, but users will find limited exposure flexibility and noise control.

Video Recording:
Both devices provide basic Full HD video with suitable stabilization, but Olympus extends usefulness with sensor-shift stabilization and Eye-Fi wireless transfer. Lack of microphone inputs limits professional video application for both.

Travel Photography:
Canon SX620 HS edges out slightly with its smaller size, lower weight, and superior battery life, aligning well with travel photographers prioritizing long zoom and portability. Olympus emphasizes manual controls and image quality advantages for more deliberate shooting styles.

Professional Use:
Neither camera is ideally suited for demanding professional workflows due to sensor limitations, lack of raw support in Canon, absence of weather sealing, and minimal connectivity. Olympus’s raw file capability provides a modest professional benefit, but overall these models are best considered advanced amateurs or enthusiast compacts.

Final Performance Scoring and Summary

Who Should Buy Which?

• Canon PowerShot SX620 HS: Recommended for photographers seeking a highly compact, light travel companion with exceptional telephoto versatility, who prefer point-and-shoot ease over manual exposure control. Its extended zoom range is ideal for casual wildlife observation, scenic telephoto captures, or street photography requiring discretion. Budget-conscious users will find excellent value in this model’s affordable pricing and straightforward operation.

• Olympus Stylus XZ-10: Best suited for photography enthusiasts desiring greater control over image capture with manual exposure modes, raw file capability, and a bright, fast lens suitable for portraits, macro work, and low-light photography. The superior autofocus system and sensor-shift stabilization enhance handheld shooting in varied conditions. Users willing to trade zoom reach for image quality and flexibility, and who appreciate touchscreen control, will benefit most from the Olympus.

Conclusion

In sum, the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS and Olympus Stylus XZ-10 address different photographic priorities despite overlapping physical size and sensor class. Our detailed examination reveals Canon’s commitment to maximized optical reach and convenience, while Olympus emphasizes optical quality and creative control.

Selecting between these two depends fundamentally on user priority: if extensive zoom and lightweight portability rank highest, the Canon SX620 HS stands out. Conversely, if image quality, manual exposure, and handheld stabilization are decisive, the Olympus XZ-10 commands attention.

By carefully matching these strengths and limitations to specific photographic workflows and disciplines, enthusiasts and professionals can confidently integrate these compacts into their creative toolkit.

This comprehensive comparison blends empirical testing results, sensor and lens technicalities, practical operation evaluations, and real-world use case analysis to support discerning photographers in navigating the compact camera landscape with clarity and authority.