The Canon SX730 HS vs. Olympus VR-330: In-Depth Superzoom Compact Showdown

When it comes to small-sensor superzoom compacts, Canon and Olympus have long been staples for enthusiasts wanting a versatile camera without lugging around heavy gear. I’ve spent weeks testing the Canon PowerShot SX730 HS and the Olympus VR-330 extensively, observing how each fares across a variety of shooting disciplines and real-world scenarios. Both are compact “point-and-shoot” style cameras but with distinct specs, handling, and performance characteristics that make them appeal to different types of photographers.

In this deep dive, I’ll walk you through sensor technologies, ergonomics, lens capabilities, autofocus systems, and image quality. Ultimately, you’ll see which camera suits practical photography needs - from portraits and landscapes through wildlife and video - whether you’re a casual traveler, enthusiast, or professional needing a quick backup option.

Form Factor and Handling: Building Comfort Into Your Workflow

First impressions matter, especially when you want a camera to be a daily companion. The Canon SX730 HS sports a slightly larger and more robust body at 110 x 64 x 40 mm and weighing in at 300g, compared to the Olympus VR-330’s smaller 101 x 58 x 29 mm and featherweight 158g. The extra heft of the Canon translates into a more substantial grip and balanced ergonomics, which I personally find more comfortable during long shooting sessions.

The Olympus, with its slender profile, slinks easily into pockets and bags without adding bulk. It’s truly a grab-and-go option for street photography or travel days when every gram counts.

Both share a fixed lens design and compact body types, but the Canon’s tilting 3-inch LCD screen (922k dots) vastly outperforms the Olympus’s fixed 3-inch screen at only 460k resolution. The flexibility to angle the Canon’s screen helps immensely with low- or high-angle shooting awkwardness.

Controls-wise, the Canon features an accessible manual mode, aperture priority, shutter priority, and manual focus options, giving you full creative control that the Olympus lacks; it only offers basic automatic modes without exposure compensation. However, the Olympus maintains a simpler button layout for users preferring straightforward point-and-shoot operation.

If you prefer manual exposure and want a camera that feels like a traditional shooter in your hands, the Canon wins ergonomics and control design hands-down. Olympus sticks to the basics but rewards portability enthusiasts.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: A Tale of Two Sensors

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3-inch sensor size - a common footprint in superzoom compacts - measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm with an area around 28 mm², offering a familiar balance between sensor size and lens reach. However, sensor technology and resolution diverge, impacting image quality notably.

• Canon SX730 HS: 20.3 Megapixels, BSI-CMOS sensor, DIGIC 6 processor
• Olympus VR-330: 14 Megapixels, CCD sensor, TruePic III processor

The Canon’s backside-illuminated CMOS sensor is significantly more modern, delivering better high ISO performance, dynamic range, and color depth compared to the Olympus’s older CCD design. The more advanced DIGIC 6 processor also accelerates noise reduction and image processing, making JPEGs sharper and cleaner in daylight and low-light.

At native sensitivities (max native ISO 3200 on Canon vs. ISO 1600 on Olympus), the Canon images exhibited visibly more detail retention and lower noise under my lab and field tests.

However, the Olympus’s sensor still holds up fairly well in bright outdoor conditions, delivering respectable color accuracy but with less tonal gradation in shadows and highlights. Its lower resolution results in less cropping freedom but smaller file sizes.

In practical terms, the Canon caters better to enthusiasts needing flexibility under varied lighting, whereas the Olympus suits casual shooters mostly working in abundant daylight.

Lens and Zoom: Stretching Your Reach Versus Versatility

A defining feature of superzoom compacts is their focal length range, and these two cameras serve different priorities here:

• Canon SX730 HS: 24-960 mm (40x optical zoom), f/3.3-6.9
• Olympus VR-330: 24-300 mm (12.5x optical zoom), f/3.0-5.9

Starting at a wide 24 mm equivalent, both handle landscapes and interiors well, though the Canon’s brighter aperture at the wide end (f/3.3 vs. f/3.0, almost neck-and-neck) translates to similar wide-angle brightness.

But where the Canon excels dramatically is on the telephoto end: a mammoth 960 mm reach. This super-telephoto capability is a boon for wildlife, sports, or distant subjects, where framing tight shots from afar is critical. The Olympus’s 300 mm maximum zoom is adequate for general telephoto needs but less versatile for subtle wildlife or sports action.

One should temper this enthusiasm with Canon’s narrower apertures and slower lens toward 960 mm, which can affect autofocus speed and low-light sharpness compared to shorter zoom ranges.

Both lenses allow macro focusing down to 1 cm, offering decent close-up possibilities, though neither is specialized for macro photography.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Tracking

Autofocus systems are vital for capturing fleeting moments, and here the Canon’s contrast-detection system, supplemented with face detection and continuous AF modes, shows clear advantages.

• The Canon supports AF single, continuous, and tracking, with face detection enabled but no phase-detection or animal eye tracking.
• The Olympus offers AF single and tracking via contrast detection but doesn’t provide manual focus options.

In testing fast-moving subjects, like street performers and birds, the Canon generally locks on quicker and sustains focus better during tracking sequences, thanks to a more responsive processor and newer AF algorithms.

The Olympus sometimes lagged when panning or tracking under less ideal lighting, exhibiting focus hunting behavior.

Though neither camera rivals flagship mirrorless autofocus systems, the Canon’s system will serve better for wildlife and sports hobbyists hunting action shots; the Olympus fits basic everyday use.

Shooting Experience: Speed, Burst, Battery Life, and Storage

Continuous shooting speed and battery life dive into workflow practicality:

• Burst rate: Canon’s 5.9 fps vs. Olympus’s lack of a specified burst rate.
• Max shutter speed: Canon 1/3200 sec vs. Olympus 1/2000 sec.
• Battery life: Canon rated at 250 shots, Olympus unspecified but smaller battery capacity (LI-42B).

Canon’s noticeably faster shutter and burst make it capable of capturing dynamic action sequences, albeit without advanced buffer depth. Olympus’s slower shutter speed limit and no continuous shooting spec suggest a more relaxed shooting pace.

Both rely on a single SD/SDHC/SDXC card slot, but the Canon supports newer UHS-I cards for faster write speeds, which benefits high-burst or Full HD video recording.

From a power standpoint, the Canon’s battery performance is average for compacts; if you anticipate long travel days or high-volume shooting, consider carrying spares.

Video Capabilities: From Vlogs to Candid Moments

Superzoom compacts often serve as casual video cameras, and the Canon and Olympus diverge here:

• Canon: Full HD 1920x1080 recording at 60p, H.264 codec, AAC audio; no microphone port.
• Olympus: HD 1280x720 recording at 30 fps maximum, Motion JPEG format, no audio external inputs.

Canon’s Full HD at 60p delivers smoother motion capture, excellent for casual video projects or social media. The Olympus’s limited 720p video is acceptable but dated and less flexible.

Neither camera includes image stabilization optimized for video beyond the CX-style optical/sensor-shift lens IS, which helps but doesn’t match in-body stabilization or dedicated gimbals.

The Canon’s tilting screen suits self-recording or vlogging, although no flip-out articulation limits front-facing framing; the Olympus’s fixed screen is more limiting for video composition.

Overall, if video is a priority, the Canon SX730 HS is a definitive choice here.

User Interface and Connectivity: Keeping Up with Modern Demands

Touchscreens are common now but not present on either camera. Canon’s interface relies on traditional buttons and dials complemented by a bright, tilting screen that improves usability outdoors and at unusual angles. Olympus’s older interface has a lower-resolution fixed screen and fewer direct controls but is straightforward and less intimidating for beginners.

Connectivity is an area where the Canon leaps forward:

• Built-in Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and NFC for easy image transfer and remote control.
• HDMI output and USB 2.0 port.
• Olympus lacks any wireless features, relying entirely on physical cable transfers.

For today’s connected shooters wanting easy social media sharing or remote camera control, Canon delivers a much more seamless experience.

Durability and Weatherproofing

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, waterproofing, or rugged designs, which is typical for this class. The Canon’s larger body may offer a little more protection in handling, but don’t expect professional-grade weather resistance from either.

If your photography routinely encounters harsh conditions, looking at higher-tier cameras or rugged compacts would make more sense.

Real-World Photography Scenarios Compared

Let’s pivot now to specific photography genres to see how these cameras stack up in practice:

Portrait Photography

The Canon’s higher resolution sensor and face detection AF enhance sharpness on eyes and skin tones, vital for pleasing portraits. The camera’s wider dynamic range helps preserve subtle shadow details in faces while its 24mm wide angle is great for environmental portraits.

Olympus’s lower megapixel count and weaker autofocus make portraits less crisp, with softer details and occasionally sluggish focus on faces. Lack of exposure compensation control is a drawback when balancing skin tones in varied lighting.

In short, Canon wins for portraits hands down.

Landscape Photography

Wide angles on both cameras are serviceable for landscapes, but image quality sets Canon ahead due to better dynamic range, detail resolution, and a brighter LCD for composing in sunlight.

Neither camera offers weather sealing, so caution is needed outdoors. The Olympus’s limited zoom hampers versatility for distant vistas, whereas Canon’s broad zoom lets you reframe creatively.

Wildlife and Sports Photography

Superzoom reach on Canon’s 960mm equivalent focal length opens up distant wildlife capture. Its faster continuous shooting and AF tracking further support action shots.

The Olympus’s 300mm max zoom is insufficient for meaningful wildlife photography, and autofocus performance is comparatively sluggish.

Sports shooters prioritized Canon’s quicker shutter and burst.

Street Photography

Here, the Olympus’s compact size and light weight make it attractive. Its quiet operation and simple interface mean less distraction.

Canon is bulkier but offers manual control for users wanting creative exposure presets while still being pocketable.

For low-light street shooting, Canon’s higher ISO capability gives it an edge.

Macro and Close-Up

Both cameras support 1cm macro focusing, but Canon’s sharper optics and image processing deliver cleaner close-ups with better color rendition. Olympus falls a little flat in delivering punchy details in tight focus conditions.

Night and Astro Photography

Neither camera is ideal for long exposures or astrophotography due to sensor size limits and no raw output. Canon’s higher ISO ceiling and slower shutter speeds help a little but expect grain and limited dynamic range.

Video Usage

Canon’s Full HD at 60p with AAC audio outpaces Olympus’s HD 720p limitations. The tilting screen aids framing, too.

Travel Photography

Canon falls in the middle ground between Olympus’s ultra-light convenience and interchangeable-lens system bulk. Battery life is moderate, but zoom and image quality justify the extra weight for many travelers wanting versatility.

Professional Use

Neither are primary professional cameras but Canon’s manual controls, wider ISO range, and higher resolution make it a more workable backup or casual shoot solution.

Olympus’s limited controls and lack of raw output restrict professional usability.

Comprehensive Scores and Final Recommendations

Based on my evaluations and hands-on tests, here’s a summarized performance overview across key categories:

And a detailed genre-specific comparison:

Who Should Choose Canon SX730 HS?

• You want the longest zoom reach for wildlife or sports.
• You value advanced manual controls, aperture/shutter priority, and manual focus.
• You shoot portraits or landscapes wanting better image quality and dynamic range.
• You need Full HD 60p video with good stabilization and connectivity.
• Your budget accommodates the mid $300-$400 price bracket.
• Desire Wi-Fi/NFC for easy sharing.
• You don’t mind a slightly larger, heavier compact.

Who Should Opt for Olympus VR-330?

• You want the smallest, lightest option primarily for casual everyday use.
• Portability outweighs zoom reach (12.5x zoom is enough).
• You prefer a fully automatic shooting experience without manual complexity.
• Budget constraints favor the sub-$220 price point.
• You don’t need Wi-Fi or advanced video features.
• For simple snapshots and travel photos in well-lit conditions.

Closing Thoughts

Both cameras deliver solid value in the small sensor superzoom segment, but the Canon SX730 HS’s more modern sensor, greater zoom, manual controls, and video features make it the more versatile choice for enthusiasts seeking creative flexibility and quality. The Olympus VR-330 appeals more to novices or those prioritizing convenience and budget over advanced capabilities.

After personally running thousands of test shots and usage scenarios, it’s clear: Canon’s SX730 HS remains the superior all-rounder in today's market for superzoom compacts, while the Olympus VR-330 finds its niche as a handy casual companion.

Happy shooting - and remember, the best camera is the one you enjoy using most!

Canon SX730 HS front Canon SX730 HS screen back Olympus VR 330 front Olympus VR 330 screen back