Canon SX720 HS vs Casio EX-ZR300: An In-Depth Comparison for Small-Sensor Superzoom Enthusiasts

When we delve into the compact superzoom category, promising versatile focal ranges in pocketable bodies, the Canon PowerShot SX720 HS and Casio Exilim EX-ZR300 stand out as noteworthy contenders from the mid-2010s. Both sport 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensors and fixed lenses that stretch far into telephoto territory, targeting eager hobbyists craving reach, convenience, and image quality beyond smartphone capabilities.

I’ve put both cameras through rigorous comparative testing scenarios spanning a broad swath of photographic disciplines. This article is an expert-level, user-first evaluation that delves into nuances of their sensor technology, autofocus systems, ergonomics, image output, and more. My aim is to empower you with actionable insights founded on hands-on experience, not specs alone. Let’s see how these compacts fare in the trenches of real photography.

First Impressions & Handling: Size, Ergonomics, and Controls

Handling characteristics can make or break your shooting experience, especially with travel and walk-around cameras designed for spur-of-the-moment captures. Both cameras are compact, but subtle size and design differences shape usability.

The Canon SX720 HS clocks in at 110x64x36 mm and weighs roughly 270 grams, versus the Casio EX-ZR300’s 105x59x29 mm and 205 grams. While the Canon feels a touch chunkier in hand, it affords a more secure grip thanks to its slightly contoured chassis and deeper grip shelf. The Casio’s sleeker frame and lighter toll appeal to those prioritizing agility and minimal pocket bulk.

Moving to controls, the Canon offers a classic top-plate layout with dedicated exposure mode dials and buttons, while Casio sticks to a pared-back approach with fewer physical controls, relying more on menu navigation. This is a critical tactile difference: the Canon’s control scheme favors photographers who appreciate manual tweaking and quick access to shooting modes in the field.

In practice, the Canon SX720 HS’s buttons have firmer travel and distinct tactile feedback - a boon when adjusting settings on the fly, especially outdoors or in low light. Casio’s controls feel softer with smaller buttons, potentially frustrating if you shoot with gloves or need quick operational muscle memory.

Sensor and Image Quality: Resolution, Processing, and Real-World Output

Central to image quality, both cameras employ 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensors of identical physical dimensions: 6.17 x 4.55 mm, yielding an active area of nearly 28 mm². However, Canon offers a 20.3MP resolution count, besting Casio’s 16MP. What does this mean in practice?

The Canon’s higher pixel density translates into slightly crisper detail at base ISO, a noticeable bonus for crops or moderate enlargements. However, this comes with the usual caveat: smaller pixels increase noise susceptibility at higher ISO settings due to lower photon gathering per pixel.

Canon’s DIGIC 6 processor delivers solid noise suppression and sharper edge rendering, resulting in cleaner images up to ISO 800 compared to the Casio, which leverages its Exilim Engine HS but lacks Canon’s refined noise algorithms. Casio’s images show more aggressive noise reduction past ISO 400, at the expense of fine detail retention and texture.

Color rendition varies subtly. Canon’s color handling leans toward neutral and natural, yielding lifelike skin tones and landscapes, while Casio has a slight push toward warmer hues, injecting a touch of punchiness that some might find appealing for snapshots but potentially problematic for color-critical work.

Both cameras feature an anti-aliasing filter helping mitigate moiré but smoothing some finer textures, a trade-off typical in consumer compacts.

Display and User Interface: LCD Quality and Shooting Feedback

Having a sharp and responsive LCD screen radically impacts framing and reviewing, especially given the omission of electronic viewfinders on both models.

Canon’s 3-inch LCD offers 922k-dot resolution, which is significantly sharper and more detailed than Casio’s 3-inch 461k-dot ‘Super Clear TFT’ display. This disparity is immediately visible in daylight use, where the Canon displays menus and image playback with crisper text and more vibrancy.

However, neither screen offers touchscreen operation, which feels dated in 2024 terms but was common for their release era.

In everyday shooting, Canon’s display and interface offer a more intuitive navigational flow, further solidifying that camera’s appeal for efficient use in the field. The EX-ZR300’s UI can feel sluggish at times, especially digging into manual exposure modes.

Autofocus Systems: Speed, Accuracy, and Face Detection

A camera’s AF system defines its practical capabilities across genres - from portraiture to wildlife. Both models utilize contrast-detection AF exclusively with nine focus points in Canon’s case and an undefined number for Casio.

Canon’s system supports continuous autofocus, center priority, face detection, and subject tracking. In my tests, the SX720 HS exhibited faster and more reliable autofocus lock-on in challenging light, assisted by its more modern DIGIC 6 processor. Subject tracking, while not perfect, proved useful for moving targets up to moderate speeds.

Casio’s EX-ZR300 lacks face detection autofocus entirely and only supports single-shot focusing with tracking. This is a significant limitation for portrait and street shooters who value rapid focus adjustments on changing scenes.

Neither camera supports advanced AF features like phase detection or animal-eye tracking, which became common in later models, so wildlife and fast action photographers may find their performance limited.

Zoom Range and Lens Quality: Reach vs Flexibility

Both cameras feature fixed lenses integral to their superzoom identity, with very different focal lengths.

• Canon SX720 HS: 24-960 mm equivalent (40x zoom), max aperture f/3.3-6.9
• Casio EX-ZR300: 24-300 mm equivalent (12.5x zoom), max aperture f/3.0-5.9

The Canon’s gigantic 40x reach is extremely attractive for wildlife, travel, and sports shooters needing maximum telephoto reach without schlepping reflex lenses. However, it comes with a narrower maximum aperture at the tele end, limiting low-light usability and bokeh potential.

Casio’s more modest 12.5x zoom preserves roughly one stop more light at the tele end (f/5.9 vs f/6.9). This aids faster shutter speeds and less noise under dim conditions but restricts reach considerably.

In terms of optical quality, Canon’s lens delivers decent sharpness in the wide-to-mid range but understandably softens at extreme zoom due to physical constraints of compact superzoom lenses. Chromatic aberration and distortion remain well-controlled on both cameras, thanks to in-lens correction.

For close-up work, both cameras impress with a 1 cm macro focus range, commendable for compact cameras.

Burst Shooting and Continuous Performance

Burst rates are vital for sports, wildlife, or candid street photography where decisive moments strike in fractions of seconds.

The Canon SX720 HS achieves approximately 5.9 frames per second in continuous shooting mode, allowing for respectable subject tracking. The EX-ZR300 specifies no clear continuous shooting rate, indicating a design not optimized for action.

In practice, Canon’s buffer accommodates bursts of several frames before slowing, offering a flexibility boost. Casio’s slower readout and processing pipeline limit sustained burst capture, relegating it more to static subjects or leisure capture.

Low-Light and High ISO: Noise Performance and Stabilization

Small sensor cameras struggle in low light, but lens design and image processing matter greatly.

Both devices max out native ISO at 3200, with no extended boost mode. Canon’s DIGIC 6 processor again flexes an advantage: it manages noise better up to ISO 800, with gradual degradation beyond that. Images maintain usable detail without excessive grain.

Casio implements sensor-shift optical image stabilization (OIS), which aids steady shots at slower shutter speeds but cannot compensate for sensor-level noise amplification at high ISO.

The Canon also offers optical image stabilization but without sensor-shift - more typical of compact lens designs.

Neither camera features advanced night modes or astro-specific exposure options, limiting astrophotographers relying on extended exposure or dark frame subtract.

Video Capabilities: Resolution, Frame Rates, and Formats

Both cameras support Full HD (1920 x 1080) video, but with noteworthy differences in frame rates.

Canon records 1080p at 60 and 30 fps, while Casio caps at 1080p 30 fps. Canon’s higher frame rate enables smoother motion capture, desirable for sports, event, or casual videography.

Regarding codecs, Canon uses MPEG-4 and H.264, a standard mix, while Casio relies solely on H.264. Neither supports 4K or slow-motion beyond Casio’s lower resolutions (120-1000 fps at VGA or below) for specialized slow-motion clips. Casio offers higher frame rates at reduced resolution for experimental, creative capture.

Both lack microphone and headphone jacks, limiting audio control. However, Canon supports HDMI output, facilitating external recording - a slight advantage for enthusiasts.

Battery Life and Storage: Staying Power on the Road

Battery endurance is critical for travel or day-long shoots. The Canon’s NB-13L battery allows for about 250 shots per charge, while the Casio’s NP-130 nearly doubles that figure at 500 shots.

This is a big deal in real usage; the Casio comfortably covers longer outings with less worry about spares or recharging.

Both accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards via a single slot, standard fare with no proprietary restrictions.

Connectivity: Wireless and Tethering Options

The Canon SX720 HS features built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for quick image transfer and remote shooting, befitting modern sharing habits.

Casio, released earlier, only includes Eye-Fi card compatibility - requiring special SD cards for wireless image transfer, less convenient and less reliable.

Neither camera includes Bluetooth or GPS, so location tagging and constant connectivity remain out of reach.

Durability and Build Quality: Weather Sealing and Robustness

Neither camera claims environmental sealing - no dustproofing, splash resistance, or shockproof features. Both rely on typical consumer-grade plastic and metal construction, adequate for everyday use but requiring care in severe conditions.

Comprehensive Image Comparisons and Scores

Let’s look at real-world samples that demonstrate each camera’s character.

Canon SX720 HS front Canon SX720 HS screen back Casio EX ZR300 front Casio EX ZR300 screen back

Canon’s images show richer detail preservation and cleaner skin tones, especially in midrange ISO shots. Casio’s shots tend to appear slightly warmer but softer at edges and shadows.

An aggregated rating across key performance criteria favors Canon in resolution, autofocus, and video, while Casio leads modestly in battery life.

Breaking down genre suitability:

• Portraiture: Canon’s face detection and smoother color reproduction make this a better choice. Casio lacks face AF, hampering quick portraiture.
• Wildlife: Canon’s 40x zoom is a significant advantage for distant subjects.
• Sports: Canon’s higher continuous shooting rate and better AF tracking suit sports better.
• Street Photography: Casio’s smaller size and lighter weight aid portability; however, Canon’s faster AF and more ergonomic controls help quick candid shooting.
• Macro: Both are comparable with similar macro focus capabilities.
• Night & Astro: Neither shines here, but Canon’s marginally better high ISO keeps it ahead.
• Video: Canon’s 60p Full HD video is the clear winner.
• Travel: Casio’s battery endurance and compact form help, but Canon’s zoom versatility and Wi-Fi connectivity offset this.

Who Should Buy Which Camera?

Choosing between the Canon SX720 HS and Casio EX-ZR300 boils down to priorities and shooting style.

• If reach, autofocus performance, video capability, and image detail matter most – especially in wildlife, sports, and portraiture - the Canon SX720 HS firmly takes the lead.

• If battery life, lighter weight, and simpler operation are paramount - for casual street photography, travel, or longer trips without charging - the Casio EX-ZR300 remains an appealing, budget-friendlier option.

Final Thoughts: Legacy Compacts for a Changing Market

Both cameras represent their release era’s pragmatic take on superzoom camera design, successfully delivering substantial zoom ranges and flexible exposure modes in pocketable packages.

The Canon SX720 HS benefits from newer processing tech and a longer zoom, making it a robust tool for enthusiasts on moderate budgets wanting greater versatility.

Casio’s EX-ZR300 shines as an ultra-compact companion with outstanding battery life and straightforward operation, though it falls short in autofocus sophistication and zoom reach.

While neither competes with today’s mirrorless or smartphone sensors in image quality or innovation, they hold practical appeal for specialized users seeking affordable, no-nonsense superzooms.

I personally enjoyed the Canon’s handling and image quality in field tests, finding it a reliable travel buddy. Meanwhile, the Casio’s endurance impressed me on multi-day walks, though I longed for faster autofocus.

Summary Table of Key Technical Specs

Whether you prioritize zoom flexibility or battery endurance, these cameras provide commendable solutions within their compact category constraints. I hope this detailed side-by-side evaluation guides you toward the best fit for your photographic aspirations.

Happy shooting!