As well as being compared against other travel zooms, the Canon PowerShot SX260 HS is also often compared to pro digicams and super zooms. The Canon PowerShot SX260 HS's top rivals come from Canon (such as the PowerShot SX280 HS and the PowerShot SX700 HS) and Panasonic (such as the Lumix ZS20 and the Lumix DMC-FZ35)

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon SX260 HS compared to other travel zoom competitors include: it has a built-in GPS, records movies in 24p and creates panoramas in-camera.

However, on average it doesn't take 3D photos, has a slightly shorter battery life (210 shots vs 260 shots), is older (february, 2012 vs march, 2013) and is less popular.

Canon PowerShot SX280 HS

Canon PowerShot SX280 HS
1 year newer
$270 - $360

Significant advantages of the SX280 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SX280 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No 24p support
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching

common strengths of the SX280 HS and SX260 HS

  • Built-in GPS
  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Canon PowerShot SX700 HS

Canon PowerShot SX700 HS
2 years newer
$279 - $368

Significant advantages of the SX700 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly higher resolution screen: 922k dots vs 461k dots
  • Has an external mic jack
  • Significantly longer battery life: 360 shots vs 210 shots

Significant disadvantages of the SX700 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No built-in GPS
  • No 24p support
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching

common strengths of the SX700 HS and SX260 HS

  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Panasonic Lumix ZS20

Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20
similar age
$300 - $399

Significant advantages of the ZS20 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Takes 3D photos
  • Has a touch screen
  • Has in-camera HDR

Significant disadvantages of the ZS20 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No 24p support

common strengths of the ZS20 and SX260 HS

  • Built-in GPS
  • Very high speed movies: 220 fps vs 240 fps
  • In-camera panoramas

Canon PowerShot SX240 HS

Canon PowerShot SX240 HS
similar age
$269

Significant advantages of the SX240 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SX240 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No built-in GPS

common strengths of the SX240 HS and SX260 HS

  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these
  • In-camera panoramas

Canon PowerShot SX600 HS

Canon PowerShot SX600 HS
1 year newer
$179 - $180

Significant advantages of the SX600 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SX600 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No built-in GPS
  • No 24p support
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching

common strengths of the SX600 HS and SX260 HS

  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Canon PowerShot SX270 HS

Canon PowerShot SX270 HS
1 year newer
$372

Significant advantages of the SX270 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the SX270 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No built-in GPS
  • No 24p support

common strengths of the SX270 HS and SX260 HS

  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • In-camera panoramas
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

compared toPro digicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon SX260 HS compared to pro digicam competitors include: it has much more zoom (20x vs 3.6x), records movies in 24p, creates panoramas in-camera and has a built-in GPS.

However, on average it has a slightly smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs nikon CX 13.2x8.8mm), doesn't shoot RAW, has a much narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/1.8), has a slightly lower resolution screen (461k dots vs 922k dots) and is slightly larger (compact 106x61x33 mm vs compact 100x59x29 mm).

Canon Powershot S100

Canon Powershot S100
4 months older
$244 - $400

Significant advantages of the S100 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Shoots RAW
  • Much wider aperture: f/2.0 vs f/3.5
  • Much less shutter lag: 250 ms vs 510 ms

Significant disadvantages of the S100 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly less zoom: 5x vs 20x
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching

common strengths of the S100 and SX260 HS

  • Very small: Compact 99x60x28 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these
  • Built-in GPS

Canon PowerShot S110

Canon PowerShot S110
7 months newer
$179 - $249

Significant advantages of the S110 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Shoots RAW
  • Much wider aperture: f/2.0 vs f/3.5
  • Has a touch screen

Significant disadvantages of the S110 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly less zoom: 5x vs 20x
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
  • No built-in GPS

common strengths of the S110 and SX260 HS

  • Very small: Compact 99x59x27 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these
  • Very light: 198 g vs 231 g

Canon PowerShot S120

Canon PowerShot S120
1 year newer
$391 - $399

Significant advantages of the S120 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Much wider aperture: f/1.8 vs f/3.5
  • Shoots RAW
  • Much less shutter lag: 173 ms vs 510 ms

Significant disadvantages of the S120 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly less zoom: 5x vs 20x
  • No 24p support
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching

common strengths of the S120 and SX260 HS

  • Very small: Compact 100x59x29 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Very light: 217 g vs 231 g
  • Thin: 1.1" vs 1.3"

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100
3 months newer
$498

Significant advantages of the DSC-RX100 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Much larger sensor: Nikon CX 13.2x8.8mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm
  • Much wider aperture: f/1.8 vs f/3.5
  • Shoots RAW

Significant disadvantages of the DSC-RX100 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly less zoom: 3.6x vs 20x
  • No 24p support
  • Doesn't record high-speed movies: None vs 240 fps

common strengths of the DSC-RX100 and SX260 HS

  • Very small: Compact 101x58x35 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • In-camera panoramas
  • Very light: 213 g vs 231 g

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon SX260 HS compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a slightly larger screen (3.0" vs 2.8"), is significantly smaller (compact 106x61x33 mm vs prosumer size 120x82x92 mm), records movies in 24p, creates panoramas in-camera and is thinner (1.3" vs 4.2").

However, on average it has a slightly narrower aperture (f/3.5 vs f/3.0), has slightly less zoom (20x vs 42x), doesn't have a screen which flips out, lacks a built in HDR feature and has much more shutter lag (510 ms vs 335 ms).

Nikon Coolpix L830

Nikon Coolpix L830
1 year newer
$195 - $246

Significant advantages of the L830 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly higher resolution screen: 921k dots vs 461k dots
  • Has in-camera HDR
  • Significantly longer battery life: 390 shots vs 210 shots

Significant disadvantages of the L830 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No 24p support
  • Significantly larger: Prosumer size 111x75x91 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • No built-in GPS

common strengths of the L830 and SX260 HS

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size 111x75x91 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Canon PowerShot SX510 HS

Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
1 year newer
$207 - $250

Significant advantages of the SX510 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Much better macro capability: 0 cm vs 5 cm

Significant disadvantages of the SX510 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
  • No built-in GPS
  • Significantly thicker: 3.1" vs 1.3"

common strengths of the SX510 HS and SX260 HS

  • Fairly small: Standard size 104x70x80 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these

Canon PowerShot SX520 HS

Canon PowerShot SX520 HS
2 years newer
$199 - $249

Significant advantages of the PowerShot SX520 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly more zoom: 42x vs 20x

Significant disadvantages of the PowerShot SX520 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No 24p support
  • Significantly larger: Prosumer size 120x82x92 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Doesn't record high-speed movies: None vs 240 fps

common strengths of the PowerShot SX520 HS and SX260 HS

  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS
  • Light weight: 441 g vs 231 g

Canon PowerShot SX50 HS

Canon PowerShot SX50 HS
7 months newer
$349 - $500

Significant advantages of the PowerShot SX50 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly more zoom: 50x vs 20x
  • Has a flip-out screen
  • Has in-camera HDR

Significant disadvantages of the PowerShot SX50 HS (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Much larger: Professional size 123x87x106 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
  • No built-in GPS

common strengths of the PowerShot SX50 HS and SX260 HS

  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Canon Powershot SX40

Canon Powershot SX40
4 months older
$405

Significant advantages of the SX40 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Significantly wider aperture: f/2.7 vs f/3.5
  • Has a flip-out screen
  • Much better macro capability: 0 cm vs 5 cm

Significant disadvantages of the SX40 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Much larger: Professional size 123x92x108 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Lacks in-camera panoramic stitching
  • No built-in GPS

common strengths of the SX40 and SX260 HS

  • Very high speed movies: 240 fps vs 240 fps
  • Both support 24p, which is uncommon in cameras similar to these
  • Better sensor types: CMOS vs CMOS

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35
2 years older
$544

Significant advantages of the DMC-FZ35 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • Wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/3.5
  • Much longer battery life: 470 shots vs 210 shots
  • Has in-camera HDR

Significant disadvantages of the DMC-FZ35 (vs the SX260 HS)

  • No 24p support
  • Lower resolution movies: 720p @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 24fps
  • Significantly larger: Prosumer size 118x76x89 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm

common strengths of the DMC-FZ35 and SX260 HS

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size 118x76x89 mm vs Compact 106x61x33 mm
  • Light weight: 367 g vs 231 g