Canon PowerShot SX620 HS vs Samsung WB150F: A Hands-On Superzoom Showdown

Choosing the right compact superzoom camera can be surprisingly complex, especially when comparing models that, at first glance, seem to occupy similar spaces in the market. Today, I’m diving deep into two worthy contenders from the small sensor superzoom category: the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS, announced in 2016, and the Samsung WB150F, introduced back in 2012. Both cameras aim to provide versatile zoom ranges and easy portability wrapped in compact bodies, yet their photographic personalities reveal quite different strengths and compromises upon closer inspection.

Over the course of many hours testing both cameras - across a range of genres from portraits to night scenes - I’m excited to deliver a robust, side-by-side analysis. This article is designed for photography enthusiasts and pros contemplating these models or similar superzooms, offering not just specs but clear, experience-based viewpoints on real-world performance.

First Impressions: Size, Handling, and Ergonomics

Much like a handshake sets the tone for a relationship, a camera’s physical feel forms your first tactile connection - and it matters greatly when you’re out in the field for extended shooting sessions.

Right out of the gate, the Canon SX620 HS impresses with a sleek yet confident grip, despite its ultra-compact size. Measuring 97 x 57 x 28 mm and tipping the scales at 182 grams, it feels thoughtful in the hand with a reassuring heft that's just enough to promote stability without fatigue.

The Samsung WB150F is marginally larger at 107 x 61 x 23 mm and slightly heavier, around 188 grams. The flatter profile appeals to those wanting a streamlined carry, but I found the grip less secure during prolonged use, especially when shooting at telephoto extremes or in awkward angles.

Moving to control layout, the Canon exhibits a cleaner, more intuitive ergonomics scheme, something they’ve refined well in their compact lineup. Although not offering touchscreen interaction, its buttons and dials feel placed with an experienced photographer’s muscle memory in mind.

Let’s peek at the top control interface to understand design philosophies better.

Canon’s SX620 HS provides a straightforward dial for mode selection, paired with dedicated buttons for zoom and playback that are easy to reach. Samsung’s WB150F, while offering more manual exposure controls, spreads out its buttons slightly more indiscriminately, which can disrupt quick adjustments in the heat of shooting.

Ergonomics verdict: For comfortable, intuitive operation especially for travel and everyday shooting, the Canon SX620 HS gains the edge. Samsung offers more manual flexibility - something we’ll explore deeper shortly - but at the cost of a slightly less ergonomic fit.

Looking Under the Hood: Sensor and Image Quality

Both cameras share a 1/2.3-inch sensor size, standard for their class, but technology and sensor type mark a significant divergence.

The Canon SX620 HS boasts a 20-megapixel BSI-CMOS sensor paired with Canon’s DIGIC 4+ image processor. This combination is capable of better light gathering, noise control, and overall image rendering, thanks to its backside-illuminated design - a tech advantage over traditional sensors.

The Samsung WB150F packs an older 14-megapixel CCD sensor. While CCDs historically offer pleasing color rendition, they typically lag behind CMOS in high-ISO performance and speed. My field tests confirmed this; images from the Samsung delivered respectable color but suffered from earlier noise onset starting at ISO 800 and above.

Regarding native ISO range, both share a maximum of ISO 3200, but the Canon pushes usable image quality further thanks to superior sensor tech and processing power.

Resolution and image detail: Canon’s higher megapixel count (5184 × 3888 pixels) allows for more cropping freedom and larger prints without significant quality loss. Samsung’s 4608 × 3456 resolution, while slightly less, still holds ground for casual or social media use.

The presence of an anti-aliasing filter on both models helps reduce moiré effects but can slightly soften perceived detail. However, Canon’s sharper processing compensates admirably.

In practical shooting, I appreciated the Canon’s ability to retain highlight and shadow detail – a tribute to its better dynamic range handling – especially in tricky lighting conditions like backlit landscapes or indoor portraits with mixed light.

Mastering Controls: Autofocus, Exposure, and User Interface

A superzoom is only as good as its AF system and usability, especially if you’re aiming for shooting readiness in spontaneous environments like wildlife or street photography.

Autofocus system: Canon offers 9 contrast-detection autofocus points with face detection and continuous AF modes. The system is relatively nimble for this class, locking focus reliably and steadily tracking subjects moving relatively slowly.

Samsung’s autofocus capabilities, limited to contrast detection without continuous AF, feel dated. Lack of continuous AF rendered tracking moving subjects challenging. Focus speed, while decent in bright conditions, lagged slightly under low light.

Exposure modes and manual controls: A critical divide lies here. The Samsung WB150F is remarkably generous for a compact, featuring shutter priority, aperture priority, and full manual exposure modes, along with exposure compensation and custom white balance. This allows serious hobbyists to exercise creative control usually reserved for higher-tier cameras.

The Canon SX620 HS, however, lacks manual exposure modes and shutter priority, offering only automatic or scene modes with exposure compensation missing altogether. For some, this limits creative flexibility, though Canon’s target demographic likely values automation ease more.

Let’s have a look at the rear displays to see how these controls translate visually.

Canon’s 3-inch fixed LCD boasts a 922k-dot resolution - significantly sharper and easier to judge than Samsung’s 3-inch 460k-dot screen. The clearer display aids in precise focusing, composition, and settings adjustments, an understated but impactful advantage during fieldwork.

While neither model includes a viewfinder, the Canon’s stronger reliance on screen usability and image preview gives it a practical edge, especially under bright outdoor lighting.

Zooming In: Lens Specs and Image Stabilization

Arguably the star attraction for these cameras lies in their telephoto capabilities.

Canon SX620 HS sports an impressive 25-625 mm (25x optical zoom) lens with apertures from f/3.2 at wide angle to f/6.6 at full telephoto.

Samsung WB150F offers an 18x zoom with 24-432mm focal range and slightly faster apertures (f/3.2-5.8), though the narrower zoom range loses out in reach.

In practice, Canon’s extra reach brought wildlife subjects closer and made high-magnification landscape details achievable without carrying heavy telephoto lenses. However, the narrower maximum aperture at long zoom reduced light intake, demanding steadier hands or better stabilization.

Both cameras feature optical image stabilization. Canon’s stabilization works smoothly, noticeably reducing blur in handheld shots at long focal lengths or lower shutter speeds. Samsung’s stabilization is effective but a touch less confident when zoomed fully - likely due to older tech.

Moreover, Canon’s 1cm macro focus range (versus Samsung’s 5cm) facilitates closer close-ups and greater versatility for macro enthusiasts or product photographers.

Performance in Different Photography Genres

To help you see where these cameras truly shine - and where they struggle - I conducted targeted tests for major photography categories. Here’s how they stack up:

Canon SX620 HS front Canon SX620 HS screen back Samsung WB150F front Samsung WB150F screen back

Portrait Photography

Skin rendering and eye detection are paramount. Canon’s face detection autofocus is responsive and relatively accurate, capturing detail-rich skin tones, though the small sensor limits shallow depth of field and creamy bokeh, especially beyond f/3.2 wide open.

Samsung’s color reproduction skews a bit cooler and less natural, while autofocus hunting resulted in missed opportunities in candid portraits.

Canon advantage: Better AF and skin tone accuracy. Samsung’s manual aperture control offers theoretical creative control but limited practical impact due to sensor size.

Landscape Photography

Here dynamic range, resolution, and weather sealing matter most.

Neither camera offers environmental protection - so outdoor use calls for caution.

Canon’s stronger sensor and higher resolution produce more detailed, vibrant landscapes with better shadow recovery.

Samsung falls behind due to lower resolution and limited dynamic range, particularly in harsh light.

Canon edge: Better fidelity for scenic shots. Samsung adequate for casual users.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Tracking speed, burst rates, and AF responsiveness come to fore.

Samsung boasts a 10fps continuous shooting mode - impressive for a compact - but AF is single shot only, limiting follow-up captures’ sharpness.

Canon’s continuous shooting is slower at 2.5fps, but continuous AF improves focus reliability on moving subjects.

Neither camera is ideal for serious fast-action shooting, but I found Canon better suited for wildlife stills, Samsung more a point-and-shoot choice for occasional bursts.

Street Photography

Discretion, low-light performance, and portability are key.

Both cameras are pocketable, but Canon’s better low-light capability (cleans images up to ISO 800 and 1600) and brighter rear screen convince me it’s the more street-friendly option.

Samsung’s lower resolution screen and noisier images reduce confidence in dim urban scenes.

Macro Photography

Close focus capability impacts this genre.

Canon wins with 1cm minimum focusing distance and effective stabilization, enabling sharp, close-up captures even handheld.

Samsung’s 5cm closest focus means more working distance but less intimate framing.

Night and Astro Photography

High ISO noise and exposure flexibility reign.

Canon’s sensor and Digic processor provide marginally cleaner images at ISO 1600 and 3200; its longer shutter speeds (up to 15 seconds) enable star trails or light painting, though no manual bulb mode is available.

Samsung’s max shutter of 16 seconds helps but limited ISO quality and lack of exposure lock hinder long exposure creativity.

Video Capabilities

Video remains basic on both; Canon wins with full HD (1920x1080p @ 30fps) output, whereas Samsung tops out at 720p.

Neither offers microphone or headphone jacks, limiting audio quality and monitoring options.

Both feature MPEG-4 and H.264 codecs.

In my hands-on tests, Canon footage looked cleaner and less jittery, helped by better image stabilization.

Travel Photography

Versatility, battery life, and portability matter.

Canon’s smaller size, better stabilization, and longer battery (rated at 295 shots vs unknown for Samsung) favor it for travel.

Samsung’s manual controls may please advanced users, but bulk and older tech weigh it down.

Build Quality, Weather Resistance, and Durability

Neither camera is weather-sealed or ruggedized - no dustproof, shockproof, or waterproof claims. That’s common in the small sensor compact superzoom realm; expect protection only via your own travel cases or housings.

The Canon SX620 HS exhibits solid build quality for its price, with reassuring button feedback and minimal creaks.

Samsung WB150F feels somewhat plasticky but was generally durable.

Connectivity, Storage, and Battery Life

Connectivity can streamline workflows:

• Both cameras offer built-in Wi-Fi; Canon adds NFC for quicker pairing.
• Canon includes HDMI output, enabling connection to external monitors or TVs - Samsung lacks this.
• Both use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards; Canon supports SDXC storage, good for large photo/video files.
• USB 2.0 interfaces are similar and standard.

Battery details show Canon’s rated life at 295 shots per charge (CIPA standard), a respectable figure. Samsung’s battery life is not officially rated, but real-world use suggested shorter endurance, especially with Wi-Fi activated (WB150F’s manual lists SLB-10A batteries, typically lower capacity).

Price and Value Assessment

At approximately $279 for Canon SX620 HS and $230 for Samsung WB150F (pricing as of data), the two cameras slot similarly in entry-level superzoom pricing.

Canon’s sharper sensor, longer zoom, improved image quality, and better ergonomics justify a modest price increase.

Samsung’s broader manual controls present a value proposition for enthusiasts prioritizing exposure flexibility over optical performance.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Genre-Specific Performance Ratings

For an at-a-glance reference, I scored the cameras across photography types based on combined sensor, AF, usability, and output.

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Choose Canon PowerShot SX620 HS if:

• You want longer zoom reach with better image quality and stabilization.
• Your priority is straightforward operation with reliable autofocus (ideal for travel, portraits, landscapes).
• Sharp display and connectivity options (NFC, HDMI) are important to your workflow.
• You favor slightly better video performance and longer battery life.
• Compact size with ergonomic grip improves your shooting experience.

Choose Samsung WB150F if:

• You desire more manual control for exposure settings (full M, aperture & shutter priority).
• Budget constraints matter and you can accept compromises in sensor performance.
• You shoot mostly in good light and appreciate a fast 10fps burst mode (albeit with AF limitations).
• You are comfortable working with a less refined interface and weaker low light performance.
• You want a budget superzoom that covers casual family or social photography.

Final Thoughts: A Superzoom Tale of Two Eras

Having lived with both the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS and Samsung WB150F extensively, the choice boils down to what you value most. Canon’s 2016 model is clearly the more polished and versatile superzoom - it benefits from newer sensor tech, sharper image processing, and better usability that make it suitable for travel, wildlife, and everyday photography. Samsung’s 2012 WB150F, despite being a bit dated, still holds niche appeal for shooters who want hands-on control in an inexpensive package, willing to trade image quality for manual exposure prowess.

Neither camera suits professionals seeking raw capture, weather sealing, or fast-action tracking, as their compact superzoom design inevitably involves compromises.

That said, in the world of affordable superzooms striving to deliver a little bit of everything, Canon’s SX620 HS walks away with the lead for overall real-world performance, ease of use, and image quality.

If you’re chasing a capable pocket superzoom with few headaches and solid wireless sharing, the SX620 HS is my recommendation. For enthusiasts who want manual control to experiment creatively without breaking the bank, the Samsung WB150F remains a contender - just be prepared to work within its limitations.

Thanks for reading this in-depth comparison. If you have any questions about these cameras or superzoom photography in general, feel free to reach out. I always appreciate engaging with fellow enthusiasts and helping demystify camera tech based on genuine hands-on experience.

Happy shooting!

end