Canon SX70 HS vs Olympus SP-565UZ: Expert Comparison of Two Superzoom Cameras

Choosing a superzoom camera involves balancing a complex matrix of image quality, zoom range, ergonomics, and features tailored to your photography style. In this detailed, hands-on comparison, I put the Canon PowerShot SX70 HS (announced 2018) and the classic Olympus SP-565UZ (from 2009) head-to-head. Both cameras target users who crave high zoom capabilities in a compact package, but separated by almost a decade of technological advancement, how do they really stack up?

Drawing on my extensive experience testing thousands of cameras, I cover everything from sensor performance and autofocus reliability to build quality and usefulness across photography genres. This analysis will help enthusiasts and professionals alike discern which of these superzooms suits specific shooting needs and budgets best.

Evolution in Design: Canon SX70 HS vs Olympus SP-565UZ Ergonomics

Picking up each camera, the evolution in ergonomics is immediately apparent. The Canon SX70 HS sports an SLR-like bridge-style body with a heftier 608g weight and larger dimensions (127x91x117mm), making it comfortable to hold steady for longer sessions. In contrast, the Olympus SP-565UZ is more compact (116x84x81mm) and lighter at 413g, resembling a traditional compact camera rather than a bridge type.

The SX70’s deep grooves, raised grip, and better-balanced weight distribution enhance stability during extended telephoto shooting, crucial when zooming beyond 1000mm equivalent. The Olympus’s smaller size favors portability and discrete shooting but can feel unstable during prolonged heavy zoom use, a factor to consider for wildlife or sports photographers.

While neither model features weather sealing or ruggedization, the Canon’s larger body accommodates more reliable physical controls, reducing accidental exposure changes. The Olympus feels more plasticky but remains reasonably resilient for casual use and travel.

Control Layout: Hands-On Usability Under the Hood

Examining the top plate, the SX70 HS provides a traditional DSLR-style control layout, with dedicated dials for mode, shutter speed, aperture, and exposure compensation. This level of physical control benefits users who prefer manual adjustments without diving into complex menus.

Conversely, the Olympus SP-565UZ has a more limited interface. It lacks the dedicated exposure dial; aperture or shutter priority modes are accessible but require menu navigation or button combinations. The Olympus’s single command wheel and fewer customizable buttons indicate an amateur-friendly, more simplistic control approach.

The Canon’s fully articulated 3.0” screen with 922k dots beats the Olympus's fixed 2.5” screen with a much lower resolution of 230k dots, improving framing, live view usability, and clearer image review. The visible electronic viewfinder (EVF) on the Canon, with 2.36 million dots and 100% coverage, also greatly aids composition, particularly in bright outdoor scenes where viewing an LCD can be challenging. The Olympus includes just a low-res EVF with no specified resolution or coverage, making the Canon preferable for critical framing.

Sensor and Image Quality: A Decade of Progress

Both cameras employ small 1/2.3” sensors, yet here the SX70 HS clearly outperforms its ancestor. The Canon’s backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor offers a 20 megapixel resolution, effectively doubling the Olympus's CCD sensor resolution of 10 megapixels. While both fall short compared to larger APS-C or full-frame sensors, the Canon uses a newer sensor technology typical of advanced compacts, yielding better noise control and dynamic range.

The Olympus sensor also has a lower native ISO range starting at 64 and maxing out at 6400, but practical usable ISOs are much lower due to noise. In contrast, the Canon limits ISO to 100-3200 but thanks to BSI CMOS design and the Digic 8 processor, images remain clean even at ISO 1600 and usable at 3200, a critical advantage for low-light and night photography.

Antialiasing filters remain present in both to reduce moiré artifacts, but this slightly softens fine details - a known trade-off in small-sensor cameras. The Canon’s higher resolution and more modern sensor translate to sharper images with richer color depth and improved dynamic range.

For raw shooters, both cameras support raw capture, enhancing flexibility in post-processing, but the Canon’s 20MP files offer more latitude for cropping and printing large formats.

LCD and Viewfinder: Monitoring Your Frame

The Canon’s 3” fully articulated screen with higher resolution not only enables flexible shooting angles (ideal for macro, street, or video work) but also shows a brighter, clearer live view feed - crucial for focusing and exposure in tricky lighting.

The Olympus’s fixed 2.5” screen feels restrictive, especially in awkward positions, and its limited resolution hampers the ability to critically check sharpness or detail in the field.

Moreover, the Canon’s electronic viewfinder offers a vibrant, accurate frame preview with overlaying exposure settings and AF indicators. In contrast, Olympus’s EVF lacks detailed information and suffers from smaller coverage, which can frustrate framing precision under demanding scenarios, such as wildlife or sports photography requiring fast, responsive composition.

Autofocus and Burst Performance: Speed and Accuracy Under Pressure

The Canon SX70 features a 9-point contrast-detection AF system with face detection and tracking capabilities. Importantly, continuous autofocus modes during burst shooting at 10 frames per second enable capturing fast action sequences like sports or wildlife with certainty.

Conversely, Olympus SP-565UZ’s older 143-point contrast detection AF system offers zero tracking functionality and can only shoot a single frame per second in continuous mode, quite limited for dynamic subjects. That said, its wide coverage points allow some flexible focusing options for general scenes.

The Canon’s face detection combined with multi-area AF improves portraits and street photography reliability, locking focus on eyes for more consistent sharpness. The Olympus lacks any face or eye detection, requiring more manual focus skill.

In macro photography, both allow manual focus, with the Olympus macro mode claiming close focus down to 1cm, whereas the Canon lacks a specific macro focus distance but compensates with a wider zoom range and better stabilization.

Stabilization and Lens: Zoom Range Versus Aperture Trade-offs

The Canon SX70 HS delivers a staggering 65x optical zoom from 21–1365mm (35mm equivalent), the kind of reach that appeals to birders and wildlife shooters on a budget. The optical image stabilization system (OIS) complements this extreme zoom to reduce camera shake effectively, crucial for sharp images at high focal lengths.

The Olympus’s 20x zoom covers 26–520mm, a significantly less impressive reach, but with a faster maximum aperture of f/2.8–4.5 versus Canon’s f/3.4–6.5, resulting in better low-light performance at shorter focal lengths and generally brighter images.

Both have fixed lenses integrated into the body, limiting upgrade paths but reducing costs and increasing portability. The Canon’s longer zoom and modern lens coatings translate to more flexible shooting, although the narrow aperture at telephoto reduces background blur potential (bokeh) in portraits or subject isolation.

Video Capabilities: Modern 4K Versus Legacy VGA

The Canon shines clearly in video capability, recording 4K UHD at 30p (up to 120 Mbps), appealing to users dabbling in hybrid photo/video work. Combined with the articulated screen and decent microphone input, it’s usable for vlogging, documentary, or creative video projects.

The Olympus SP-565UZ, in contrast, caps at VGA resolution (640x480) at 30fps - a severely outdated spec for today’s standards. Lack of external mic input and fixed screen mean little versatility for video enthusiasts or content creators.

Battery, Storage, and Connectivity: Practical Daily Use

Battery life on the Canon clocks in at an estimated 325 shots per charge using a built-in rechargeable battery. This is respectable for a bridge camera and allows a day’s shooting with moderate moderate use. The Olympus relies on 4x AA batteries, which offer flexibility in remote shooting where charging isn’t possible, but can add weight and incur extra long-term expense.

For storage, the Canon uses modern SD/SDHC/SDXC UHS-I cards, widely available and fast, while the Olympus uses the less common xD Picture Card format, which may pose issues obtaining replacement cards.

When it comes to wireless features, the Canon wins with built-in Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for easy image transfer and remote control. Olympus offers no wireless connectivity, an expected limitation for a 2009 release, yet restrictive in today’s connected workflows.

Canon SX70 HS front Canon SX70 HS screen back Olympus SP 565UZ front Olympus SP 565UZ screen back

Real-World Image Quality: What Do These Cameras Produce?

Testing both cameras in natural light, indoor scenarios, and telephoto shooting reveals practical differences:

• Canon SX70 HS produces brighter, sharper images with improved detail on distant subjects thanks to superior sensor resolution and newer optics. Skin tones in portraits appear more natural with its improved color science, and bokeh is subtle but pleasing in wider apertures. Noise remains controlled up to ISO 1600; beyond that images soften but remain usable for social or web use.

• Olympus SP-565UZ images frequently show softer details, notably at higher zoom or ISO. Colors are acceptable but tend toward flatness in certain lighting, and noise becomes noticeable beyond ISO 200. Macro shots demonstrate decent close focus despite older sensor tech.

While neither camera can compete with larger-sensor models for ultimate image quality, the Canon’s advantage is evident for users who want detailed, vibrant photos straight out of camera with minimal compromise.

Summary of Performance Ratings

Canon emerges as the clear all-rounder, especially for serious users seeking a versatile travel or wildlife rig, whereas Olympus, older but still capable, may appeal to budget buyers requiring a modest superzoom with a smaller form factor.

Practical Use Across Photography Genres

• Portrait Photography: Canon’s superior sensor and face detection autofocus deliver better skin tone rendition and sharper eyes. Olympus lacks eye AF and produces less creamy bokeh.

• Landscape: Canon’s higher resolution and dynamic range afford more detailed and balanced landscapes. Olympus struggles with noise in shadow areas.

• Wildlife: The Canon’s longer zoom and faster burst rates allow capturing distant wildlife in motion more consistently. Olympus falls short here.

• Sports: Canon tracks moving subjects with continuous AF and rapid shooting, outperforming Olympus’s single shot per second.

• Street Photography: Olympus’s smaller, lighter body is less obtrusive, but Canon’s fast AF and superior image quality win in varied lighting.

• Macro: Olympus’s 1cm macro mode is impressive, but Canon’s stabilizer and manual focus fine-tuning offer more precise results overall.

• Night / Astro: Canon’s better high ISO capabilities and longer exposures give it the edge here, although small sensors limit ultimate astro performance.

• Video: Canon’s 4K and mic input are superior for videographers; Olympus is very limited.

• Travel: Canon offers a versatile do-it-all package despite its size; Olympus’s compactness aids portability but sacrifices zoom and features.

• Professional Work: Neither truly matches professional-level reliability or image quality but Canon provides better raw files and workflow compatibility.

Final Verdict: Which Superzoom Should You Choose?

If your budget permits and you prioritize image quality, zoom reach, and video functionality, the Canon SX70 HS is the clear winner with its significant technological advancements, greater control options, and versatility in diverse photography conditions. Its articulated screen, EVF quality, and wireless connectivity make it a more future-proof choice.

The Olympus SP-565UZ, while showing its age, remains a competent compact superzoom for casual shooters or collectors on a budget who desire lightweight portability and decent zoom without the hassle of recharging batteries. It suits casual family snapshots, vacation use, and basic macro work but won’t satisfy demanding enthusiasts or professionals seeking refined controls or critical image quality.

Recommendations for Different User Profiles

Closing Thoughts from a Veteran Camera Tester

While both cameras belong to the superzoom bridge compact category with similar sensor sizes, the near-decade gap between their release dates manifests palpably in design philosophy, technology, and user experience.

The Canon SX70 HS encapsulates a host of advances in sensor design, AF sophistication, zoom capability, and video prowess, reflecting Canon’s sustained investment in this segment. Meanwhile, the Olympus SP-565UZ, although a showcase of solid engineering for its time, illustrates the rapid evolution consumer cameras have undergone - particularly in autofocus speed and sensor improvements.

For any serious enthusiast or professional seeking an all-in-one superzoom, the Canon’s strengths vastly outweigh the Olympus’s limitations, making it an excellent value proposition even at its higher price point.

I trust this thorough analysis arms you with the critical insights and technical nuances vital to making a savvy, informed superzoom camera purchase. Should deeper real-world testing or side-by-side shooting samples be required, feel free to reach out - hands-on evaluations remain the best compass in the ever-advancing landscape of digital imaging.

Happy shooting!

Article ends.