Canon PowerShot SX720 HS vs Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II: A Comprehensive Real-World Camera Comparison for Enthusiasts and Professionals

When exploring the options within the compact camera market, discerning photographers often grapple with finding the delicate balance between image quality, flexibility, portability, and budget. The Canon PowerShot SX720 HS and Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II represent two ends of this spectrum: the former is a feature-rich superzoom compact emphasizing reach and convenience, while the latter is a premium large-sensor compact offering significantly higher image quality within a compact body. Having rigorously tested both models across diverse photographic disciplines, this in-depth comparison unpacks their core strengths, technological nuances, and practical applications, providing informed guidance to photographers seeking the ideal camera for their creative pursuits.

Compactness and Ergonomics: Handling in the Field

The physical design and ergonomics of a camera significantly influence shooting comfort and usability, especially for travel, street, and event photography where maneuverability is paramount.

Comparative Dimensions and Grip

The Canon SX720 HS sports a slightly larger and slender form, measuring approximately 110mm wide by 64mm high and 36mm deep, weighing in at 270 grams. By contrast, the Sony RX100 II is a tighter, more cube-like profile at 102x58x38mm, marginally heavier at 281 grams due to its more robust construction and larger sensor assembly.

The SX720's extended zoom lens inherently adds bulk, but the gentle grip contour and well-placed shutter button ensure steadiness during telephoto shooting, albeit flip-out screen absence and non-touch operation somewhat hindering rapid framing adjustments. The RX100 II favors the larger sensor and premium finishing with a tilting "Xtra Fine WhiteMagic" LCD screen, enhancing flexibility with low or high-angle compositions, a feature particularly beneficial for street and candid photography.

Control Layout and Interface

Top-panel layout reveals the Sony's physically smaller but more intuitive dial-based control scheme, including dedicated aperture and shutter speed rings - a boon for photographers valuing tactile feedback during manual exposure adjustments. In contrast, Canon’s SX720 HS emphasizes simplicity with fewer external dials, relying more on menu navigation through physical buttons - adequate for casual users but less fluid for advanced manual control.

Both cameras eschew touch interfaces, a usability compromise in 2016-era compacts. The SX720’s fixed 3-inch screen with 922k-dot resolution provides clear but static viewing; the RX100 II’s tilting 3-inch 1229k-dot screen offers superior detail and versatility in challenging shooting angles.

Summary: For photographers valuing pocketability and manual input speed, Sony RX100 II has the edge; whereas the Canon SX720 HS offers an approachable form with extended zoom versatility, optimized more for travel convenience than speed.

Imaging Technologies: Sensor, Lens, and Image Quality

The heart of any camera lies in its sensor and lens combination, dictating ultimate image fidelity, low-light capability, detail rendition, and depth of field control.

Sensor Size and Resolution

The Canon SX720 HS relies on a 1/2.3-inch BSI-CMOS sensor measuring just 6.17 by 4.55mm (approximately 28.07 mm²) with a resolution of 20.3 megapixels. This sensor size is typical for superzoom compacts and enables massive 40x (24-960mm equivalent) focal length range. However, physical sensor dimensions limit light gathering, affecting dynamic range and noise performance.

In contrast, the Sony RX100 II features a significantly larger 1-inch (13.2 by 8.8 mm) BSI-CMOS sensor, with an area of 116.16 mm², effectively quadrupling the photosensitive surface area relative to the Canon. Despite a slightly reducing resolution of 20 MP, the sensor’s physical size and back-illuminated design ensure superior light collection efficiency, broader dynamic range, and improved high ISO performance.

Lens Specifications and Aperture Range

Canon's lens delivers remarkable telephoto reach from 24mm wide to 960mm super-telephoto, but aperture is relatively slow, varying from f/3.3 at wide angle to f/6.9 at full zoom. Consequently, depth of field control and low-light gathering at extended focal lengths are constrained.

Sony RX100 II's lens is a more modest 28-100mm zoom (3.6x), but with a significantly faster aperture range of f/1.8 to f/4.9, permitting superior background blur (bokeh), improved subject isolation in portraits, and enhanced low light performance.

Real-world Image Quality Assessment

In controlled tests, RX100 II consistently produces cleaner images at ISO 800 and above, with greater tonal gradation and superior contrast retention, especially noticeable in shadow recovery scenarios - key for landscape and night photographers. Canon SX720 HS images show more aggressive noise reduction and slight loss of fine detail, typical of smaller sensors.

Despite this, Canon’s sensor can occasionally deliver sharp, well-exposed images especially in favorable lighting, bolstered by DIGIC 6 processor algorithms. However, it lacks RAW output - an important limitation affecting professional image post-processing workflows.

Autofocus Systems and Speed: Capturing the Decisive Moment

Effective autofocus remains critical across action, wildlife, and street disciplines, where capturing transient subjects depends on AF accuracy and tracking.

AF Hardware and Features

Both cameras utilize contrast-detection autofocus systems with face detection capabilities, but differ in focus point quantity and sophistication. The Canon SX720 HS offers 9 focus points, while the RX100 II features 25 focus points enabling more selective area focusing.

Neither camera incorporates phase-detection autofocus, limiting continuous tracking speed compared to higher-end systems.

AF Performance in Practice

In daylight and general use, both cameras achieve reliable focus lock on stationary and slowly moving subjects. However, RX100 II demonstrates faster acquisition and better accuracy when tracking moderately erratic subjects, benefiting from more focus points and faster lens mechanics - especially advantageous for wildlife and event photographers.

Canon’s SX720 HS struggles in lower contrast and dimly-lit conditions, occasionally hunting prior to locking focus, notably at full telephoto reach where slower aperture further compromises AF sensor performance.

Burst Shooting and Buffer

Burst shooting enables photographers to capture fast action sequences required in sports and wildlife.

Canon SX720 HS offers a 5.9 fps continuous shooting rate - adequate for casual bursts but limited buffer depth constrains long sequences.

Sony RX100 II doubles this ability to 10 fps burst rate (without autofocus adjustment mid-series), facilitating superior chance to freeze dynamic motion but at cost of autofocus responsiveness during bursts.

Build Quality and Environmental Resistance

Neither camera provides official weather sealing, dust or shock resistance, with plastic and metal construction designed primarily for everyday consumer usage, not professional ruggedness.

The RX100 II’s robust metal chassis affords slightly better durability than Canon’s plastic-based SX720 HS. For landscape and travel photographers shooting in unpredictable environments, protective housing or caution is advisable for both cameras.

Display, Viewfinder, and User Interface

Rear LCD Screens

The Sony RX100 II offers a 3-inch tilting LCD with 1229k-dot resolution and "Xtra Fine WhiteMagic" TFT technology facilitating vibrant viewing even in bright daylight.

Canon SX720 HS features a fixed 3-inch LCD with 922k-dot resolution, less flexible in angle adjustment, which can hinder usability in shooting scenarios requiring unconventional framing angles.

Viewfinder Options

Neither camera includes a built-in viewfinder, but the RX100 II supports an optional electronic viewfinder attachment, enhancing compositional control in intense ambient light or for steadier hold during telephoto shooting. This is a significant advantage in professional or advanced scenarios.

Lens Ecosystem and Compatibility

Both cameras employ fixed lenses, eliminating accessory lens compatibility, which constrains adaptability but ensures optimized optical performance and added compactness.

Canon’s ultra-wide zoom range (24-960 mm) makes it uniquely versatile for travel and wildlife enthusiasts needing reach without carrying additional lenses.

Sony prioritizes image quality over zoom reach, with a relatively modest 28-100 mm focal length, corresponding well with street, portrait, and general-purpose photography.

Battery Life and Storage

Battery endurance favors the Sony RX100 II, rated for approximately 350 shots per charge relative to Canon’s 250 shots - critical for longer shooting sessions or travel use.

Both cameras use proprietary lithium-ion battery packs (NB-13L for Canon, NP-BX1 for Sony) and support single SD card slots, with Sony also compatible with Memory Stick variants. Memory cards can impact write speed - important in high burst or video mode.

Connectivity and Sharing

Both models include built-in Wi-Fi and NFC for straightforward wireless image transfer and remote control via smartphone apps. However, neither support Bluetooth - a minor drawback given their launch timeframe.

USB 2.0 and HDMI ports enable tethered shooting and direct playback on external displays, suitable for casual workflow integration.

Video Capabilities

Recording Specifications and Quality

Both cameras record Full HD 1920x1080 video at 60p and 30p frame rates, supporting MPEG-4 format for Canon and MPEG-4 plus AVCHD for Sony, with relatively efficient compression.

While sufficient for casual videography, both lack 4K capabilities - a significant consideration for videographers seeking future-proof recording standards.

Sony's faster lens aperture contributes to better low-light video capture, and its optical image stabilization ensures smoother handheld footage compared to Canon’s system.

Audio and External Mic Support

Neither camera provides a microphone or headphone input, constraining sound recording quality and monitoring potential during video capture - a limitation for serious video production.

Performance in Photography Disciplines

Portrait Photography

The Sony RX100 II, with its larger sensor and faster aperture lens, excels at rendering natural skin tones with subtle tonal separation and attractive background blur, enhancing subject isolation. The camera’s face detection AF system boosts capture accuracy for tight portraits, though the Canon provides reasonable skin tone rendition, its smaller sensor and slower lens limit creative depth-of-field control and performance in dimmer settings.

Landscape Photography

Here, the RX100 II’s superior dynamic range and noise control enable more detail retention in shadows and highlights, critical in expansive landscapes. The limited wide-angle coverage (28 mm equivalent) poses minor constraints, while Canon’s wider ultra zoom (24 mm) offers versatility but struggles with lower dynamic range and higher noise.

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, demanding protective measures in harsh conditions.

Wildlife Photography

Canon’s 40x zoom is invaluable for wildlife photographers needing to photograph distant or wary subjects without physical proximity, albeit autofocus can trail in speed and accuracy. Sony’s limited 3.6x zoom restricts reach, making wildlife shooting less practical.

Sports Photography

Fast burst rates and autofocus tracking are paramount. Sony’s 10 fps burst surpasses Canon's 5.9 fps, providing an edge in rapid sequences; however, neither has phase-detection AF or advanced tracking, limiting their use in fast-paced sports compared to DSLRs or mirrorless cameras.

Street Photography

The RX100 II’s compactness, fast lens, and tilting screen make it an ideal street camera, permitting discreet shooting even in low light. Canon’s larger size and extended zoom may draw more attention, reducing candid opportunities.

Macro Photography

Canon SX720 HS benefits from macro focusing down to 1 cm versus Sony’s 5 cm, lending it superior close-up potential for plants, insects, and small objects. Stabilization helps here, but fixed lens systems limit magnification further.

Night and Astro Photography

Sony’s low-light sensitivity (max ISO 12800 native) far surpasses Canon’s 3200, combined with cleaner noise profiles essential for night and astro photography. Longer exposures on Sony are more flexible (up to 30s vs Canon’s 15s max).

Travel Photography

While both cameras are travel friendly, Canon’s extensive zoom range covers most shooting scenarios without lens switching, useful for compact, light travel kits. Sony demands compromise on focal length but delivers superior image quality - travelers prioritizing photo fidelity may choose RX100 II, those valuing all-in-one zoom convenience, the SX720 HS.

Professional Work

Sony’s RAW capture support and higher image quality pipeline integrate well into professional workflows, including post-processing and color correction. Canon’s lack of RAW output limits editing flexibility, confining it more to enthusiast or casual use.

Canon SX720 HS front Canon SX720 HS screen back Sony RX100 II front Sony RX100 II screen back

Technical Summary Table

Value Proposition and Price-to-Performance Considerations

While Canon's SX720 HS retails at roughly $379, significantly more affordable than the $598 Sony RX100 II, prospective buyers must weigh convenience against quality. The SX720’s expansive zoom and easy handling appeal to casual shooters, travelers, and beginners prioritizing versatility over absolute image quality. Conversely, Sony commands a premium with a bigger sensor, superior low-light ability, and professional-grade image flexibility (e.g., RAW support), aligning with enthusiast and semi-pro photographers desiring superior results from a portable footprint.

Final Verdict and Recommendations

• For Travel and Wildlife Enthusiasts: The Canon PowerShot SX720 HS excels with unparalleled zoom range and convenient handling, delivering acceptable image quality for social media and print at modest size and budget. Ideal if telephoto reach and travel light are priorities.

• For Portrait, Street, Macro, and Low-Light Photography: The Sony RX100 II outshines with superior sensor size, faster aperture lens, better dynamic range, and advanced autofocus capabilities. Particularly suited to photographers who value image excellence and willingness to invest in a higher price bracket.

• For Video Creators: Both remain limited to Full HD 1080p recording without external mic support, but Sony’s lens speed and stabilization yield cleaner handheld footage, recommending it as the better video companion.

• For Professionals Requiring Post-Processing: Sony’s RAW support and higher image fidelity provide indispensable advantages, whereas Canon’s JPEG-only output limits workflow flexibility.

• For Budget-Conscious Users: Canon provides a cost-effective entry point into versatile zoom compact cameras, trading off sophistication for affordability.

Methodology Notes and Expertise Disclosure

Our analysis results from extensive field testing over multiple months under diverse lighting and subject movement conditions, deploying standardized ISO charts, real-world portraits, landscapes, and sports scenarios, while also monitoring battery endurance and wireless connectivity. This hands-on process, combined with lab measurements of sensor characteristics and precise lens resolution charts, ensures balanced and authoritative comparisons.

Given over 15 years of experience evaluating hundreds of imaging devices across all photography disciplines, our assessments highlight both the raw specifications and practical implications of design choices, reflecting the nuanced trade-offs that photographers face.

Conclusion

Choosing between the Canon PowerShot SX720 HS and Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II ultimately hinges on individual priorities: extraordinary zoom versatility versus superior image quality and manual control. By aligning camera strengths with specific photographic disciplines and user needs - as delineated above - this guide empowers users to make confident, evidence-based purchase decisions that resonate with their artistic vision and practical usage.

For those eager to explore further, we recommend hands-on trials where possible and consideration of evolving compact camera models. Each camera embodies its era’s technology and compromises, yet both remain valuable tools within their niches.