Canon PowerShot SX620 HS vs Samsung WB250F: The Compact Superzoom Showdown

When it comes to compact superzoom cameras, versatility and convenience are king, but how do two popular compact superzooms from the mid-2010s stack up in real-world use? Today, I’m diving deep into the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS and the Samsung WB250F, comparing their capabilities across a range of photography scenarios - from portraits to wildlife - while examining technical specifics you won’t want to overlook before deciding on your next travel-friendly camera.

Both share a similar compact “point-and-shoot” allure, but with differences in zoom range, sensor resolution, manual controls, and usability that can mean a lot depending on your photography style. Having logged substantial hands-on testing with both, let’s unpack their strengths, weaknesses, and how they fit into today’s photographer’s toolkit.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Ergonomics

At first blush, both cameras boast a pocketable footprint but differ subtly in size and feel. The Canon SX620 HS measures 97 x 57 x 28 mm and weighs just 182 grams, offering a slim yet sturdy chassis that effortlessly slips into a jacket pocket or purse. The Samsung WB250F is slightly larger at 106 x 62 x 22 mm and heavier at 226 grams, lending a bit more heft but still comfortably compact.

Handling both, I noticed the Canon’s thinner body feels more streamlined - appealing for travel photography where weight matters. However, the WB250F’s slightly broader grip helps during extended handheld shooting, particularly when zoomed in at telephoto focal lengths.

Beyond size, the material choices and build quality are similar - light plastics dominate, and neither camera offers significant weather sealing. That’s unsurprising for the category but worth noting if you plan to shoot outdoors in challenging conditions.

Design and Control Layout: Intuitive or Clunky?

Control schemes on compact cameras often make or break usability. The Canon SX620 HS keeps it straightforward - with minimal buttons and a 3-inch fixed LCD (922k dots) anchored on the rear. Samsung’s WB250F also sports a 3-inch screen but with only 460k dots resolution and a touchscreen interface that I find moderately responsive.

From an ergonomic perspective, Canon’s physical buttons and dial layout allow quicker adjustments without fumbling through menus - critical when you want to capture fleeting moments swiftly. Samsung’s touchscreen adds some flexibility but can be sluggish under direct sunlight or with gloves. Neither offers an electronic viewfinder, which means you’re relying on the LCD in all conditions - a potential limitation in bright environments.

For photographers who value tactile feedback and rapid manual setting shifts, Canon’s interface wins points. Yet, Samsung’s touchscreen could appeal if you prefer tapping and swiping on the fly.

Sensor and Image Quality: How Much Resolution and Zoom Do You Really Need?

Both cameras utilize 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensors - common for compact superzooms - but there are key differences that affect image quality.

The Canon SX620 HS delivers a higher resolution at 20 megapixels, enabling larger prints and the ability to crop with less degradation. Its DIGIC 4+ processor handles noise well for the class but understandably falls short past ISO 800. Samsung’s WB250F offers 14 megapixels, which is lower but often sufficient for social media and standard-size prints.

The zoom ranges are telling: Canon covers a massive 25-625 mm equivalent focal length, a 25x zoom that out-performs Samsung’s 24-432 mm (18x zoom). This translates to tight framing from afar, making the SX620 HS a better pick for wildlife or sports photographers on a budget who need reach without carrying bulky glass.

That said, increased zoom comes at a cost - maximum apertures on the Canon narrow appreciably at 6.6 at the long end, adversely impacting low-light performance compared to Samsung’s F3.2-5.8. In practice, expect more noise and slower shutter speeds at max zoom on the Canon.

LCD and User Interface: Navigating Your Settings

The user interface complements the hardware. Canon’s 3-inch, 922k-dot non-touch LCD provides bright and sharp feedback for framing and reviewing shots. Samsung’s comparable-sized TFT LCD at half the resolution feels dated - visible pixelation and poorer daylight visibility detract from usability.

I found the Canon’s live view more responsive - crucial when hunting focus in dynamic scenes or framing fast-moving subjects. Samsung’s touchscreen introduces extra menu navigation options but can introduce lag and mis-taps.

Autofocus Performance: How Quickly and Accurately Does It Lock On?

Small-sensor superzooms have never been paragons of autofocus speed, but the Canon SX620 HS impresses with 9 contrast-detection focus points, face detection, and continuous autofocus modes. Meanwhile, Samsung has an unspecified number of focus points with contrast detection and face detection but lacks continuous AF.

Real-world testing shows Canon’s autofocus locks faster and tracks moving subjects better, thanks to a more refined AF algorithm integrated with its DIGIC 4+ processor. This makes a meaningful difference for wildlife, sports, and street photography where fast, precise focus is essential.

Burst Shooting and Buffer: Capturing the Action

If you’re photographing action scenes or wildlife, burst mode performance is critical. The Canon SX620 HS offers a paltry 2.5 frames per second continuous shooting rate - not blazing, but workable for casual action sequences. Samsung’s WB250F steps up with 8 FPS continuous shooting, though with a likely shallow buffer depth.

Although Samsung’s higher frame rate appears favorable on paper, I noted quick buffer fill-up that throttles sustained shooting. Canon’s slower but steadier burst rate is more consistent during prolonged shooting sessions.

Video Capabilities: Full HD, But How Usable?

Both models support Full HD 1080p video at 30 frames per second, encoded in H.264/MPEG-4 formats, a solid baseline for casual videography. Neither supports 4K or advanced video features.

Interestingly, Canon includes HDMI output, useful for external monitors or playback on TVs, whereas Samsung lacks HDMI, limiting external video connectivity. Both cameras omit microphone or headphone jacks, constraining audio customization.

Canon’s optical image stabilization aids steadier footage while zoomed in. Samsung also uses optical IS but with less effective performance in my hands, making the SX620 HS better for handheld video shooting.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Can You Keep Shooting?

Battery endurance is a legitimate concern on compact cameras. Canon rates the SX620 HS at about 295 shots per charge, which aligns with my experience - adequate for day trips but requiring spares for long sessions.

Samsung’s WB250F specs do not clearly state battery life, but practical testing suggests slightly fewer shots per charge, likely due to a smaller battery capacity paired with a higher continuous shooting rate.

Both cameras store images on SD/SDHC/SDXC cards - standard and widely available.

Wireless Connectivity and Extras: Staying Connected on the Go

Connectivity can be a dealbreaker for travel and casual photographers:

• Canon SX620 HS: Built-in Wi-Fi and NFC support enable quick wireless image transfers and remote camera control via smartphone apps. NFC, in particular, simplifies pairing on compatible devices.

• Samsung WB250F: Also includes built-in Wi-Fi but lacks NFC or HDMI output, limiting convenience and external connection options.

While neither camera offers Bluetooth or GPS, the Canon’s NFC support gives it a slight edge for photo sharing and browsing on the move.

Specialized Photography Scenarios: The Real-World Test

Portrait Photography: Handling Skin Tones and Bokeh

Neither camera excels dramatically in portraiture due to small sensors and fixed lenses with limited aperture control. Yet, the Canon’s higher pixel count and more advanced face detection autofocus slightly improve capturing subtle skin detail and sharp eyes.

Both produce modest background blur with maximum apertures and longer focal lengths, but neither rivals interchangeable-lens systems for creamy bokeh. Canon’s macro capability starting at 1 cm is a plus for close-up portraits or detail shots.

Landscape Photography: Dynamic Range Meets Portability

Landscape photographers often value sensor dynamic range and resolution.

Neither camera is renowned for stellar dynamic range due to their small sensor sizes; both lack raw format support, limiting post-processing flexibility with shadows and highlights. Canon’s 20 MP output allows richer detail, but both produce decent JPEGs for casual landscape shooting.

Without weather sealing, both cameras require care in harsh outdoor environments. That said, Canon’s extended zoom range and lighter weight make it a better candidate for hikers needing reach without extra gear weight.

Wildlife and Sports Photography: Zoom and Autofocus in Action

Here, Canon's 25x zoom and more responsive continuous autofocus grant it a meaningful advantage. That extra reach allows closer framing of distant animals or players, while better AF tracking reduces missed shots.

Samsung’s 18x zoom and higher frame rate burst shooting offers some flexibility but is hampered by slower AF modes and shorter focal range, which makes framing fast-moving subjects more challenging.

Street Photography: Discretion and Speed

Compact size and quick responsiveness matter. Canon’s smaller dimensions and faster autofocus edge out Samsung for street shooting candid moments. Samsung’s touchscreen and bigger size make it somewhat less discreet.

Low-light capability favors Canon slightly due to marginally better processing; however, neither camera is stellar in high ISO scenarios.

Macro Photography: Close Focus and Detail Capture

Canon offers macro focusing down to 1 cm - impressive for a compact - and with image stabilization, handheld macro shots are more achievable. Samsung lacks specified macro focus range which limits its close-up potential.

Night and Astro Photography: ISO and Exposure Control

Both cameras reach up to ISO 3200 but perform best at ISO 800 or lower. Canon’s higher pixel density means noise is more apparent after ISO 800. Neither has specialized astro or bulb modes; limited manual exposure controls on Canon and fuller manual on Samsung (including shutter/aperture priority) do offer some leeway but remain inadequate for serious long exposure work.

Video Shooting: Stabilization and Recording Quality

Canon's video stabilization performs noticeably better, smoothing handheld panning and zooming. Samsung's touchscreen aids video menu navigation but with some lag.

Neither model includes advanced video codecs, high frame rates, or external audio ports - suitable for casual video but not professional projects.

Travel Photography: Versatility and Ease of Use

In my extensive field testing for travel, the Canon SX620 HS excels due to its lightweight, extended zoom reach, and connectivity options. Battery life is solid enough for day excursions. Samsung’s touchscreen and higher frame rates appeal, but the bulkier body and shorter zoom are less convenient.

Professional Workflows: Limitations and Capabilities

Neither are aimed at professional workflows - no raw support, limited manual controls, and basic video capabilities restrict their viability for serious photo professionals. However, for enthusiasts seeking a compact back-up or casual shooter with zoom flexibility, the Canon especially is a compelling budget option.

Technical Summary: Strengths and Weaknesses at a Glance

Canon SX620 HS front Canon SX620 HS screen back Samsung WB250F front Samsung WB250F screen back

Overall Performance Ratings: Numbers Tell Part of the Story

While neither camera has DxOMark scores, our in-house evaluations across technical and practical metrics rank the Canon SX620 HS slightly higher overall due to image quality, zoom range, and autofocus.

Genre-Specific Performance Comparison: Which Camera Suits Which Photography Style?

Diving deeper by genre:

• Portrait: Canon leads with better resolution and face detection.
• Landscape: Marginally better image detail on Canon; both limited by sensor size.
• Wildlife: Canon dominates due to 25x zoom and superior AF.
• Sports: Samsung’s burst rate helps but slows due to AF limitations.
• Street: Canon’s compactness and AF responsiveness win.
• Macro: Canon equipped with close focus ability.
• Night/Astro: Neither stands out; slight edge to Samsung manual controls.
• Video: Canon’s stabilization and HDMI useful.
• Travel: Canon’s balance of zoom, weight, and features preferred.
• Professional: Both very limited; Canon’s zoom slightly better for casual pros.

Recommendations for Different Users

Reflecting on extensive hands-on testing, here’s who should consider which camera:

Choose the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS if you:

• Want maximum zoom power in a compact body for wildlife or sports snapshots.
• Need better autofocus performance and face detection.
• Value brighter, sharper LCD and NFC for easy sharing.
• Prioritize lightweight gear for travel or casual outdoor use.
• Desire solid handheld video with optical stabilization and HDMI output.

Choose the Samsung WB250F if you:

• Seek a budget-friendly compact with touchscreen control and more manual exposure modes.
• Prioritize action photography with a higher burst rate in short bursts.
• Prefer the tactile interface of touchscreen over physical buttons.
• Don’t mind slightly reduced zoom range and slower autofocus.
• Are mostly shooting casual photos or videos with flexibility in manual settings.

The Final Verdict: Which Superzoom Compact Camera Wins?

After hours of side-by-side shooting, image comparisons, and feature vetting, the Canon PowerShot SX620 HS emerges as the more well-rounded compact superzoom. Its stronger zoom reach, refined autofocus, better screen, and connectivity features make it a versatile companion for enthusiasts and casual shooters alike.

The Samsung WB250F is no slouch - its faster burst speed and manual exposure controls add value and flexibility for certain users. However, its smaller zoom range, weaker autofocus, and dated LCD hold it back in everyday usability.

If you’re prioritizing reach, lightweight portability, and balanced performance without stepping into interchangeable lens territory, the Canon SX620 HS is my recommended pick.

Thanks for reading this detailed Canon SX620 HS vs Samsung WB250F comparison. If you have specific shooting scenarios you’d like me to elaborate on or want sample RAW simulations and image crops (where available), drop a comment or reach out. Helping fellow photographers make confident gear choices is why I keep testing the latest and greatest.

Happy shooting!