Updated (February 2010): Compare the Canon EOS Rebel T2i vs Canon PowerShot SX20 IS

Canon PowerShot SX20 IS vs Canon Rebel T2i

Winner
Canon PowerShot SX20 IS

51

Canon EOS Rebel T2i

46

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
 

Reasons to buy the Canon Rebel T2i

Screen size
Large screen
3"
Screen resolution
High resolution screen
1,040k dots
Startup delay
Almost no delay when powering up
400 ms startup delay
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS Rebel T2i.
Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon PowerShot SX20 IS.

competitors

Canon PowerShot SX20 IS Competitors

Nikon D5300

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$390 - $597 body only

$475 - $697 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Startup delay Much less startup delay
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Canon PowerShot SX530 HS

Canon PowerShot SX530 HS

Super zoom

$235 - $279

Screen size Much larger screen
Zoom Much more zoom
Aperture Narrower aperture
Canon PowerShot SX10 IS

Canon PowerShot SX10 IS

Super zoom

$499

Shutter lag Much more shutter lag

Canon EOS Rebel T2i Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$325 body only

$380 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Battery life Slightly longer battery life
Weight Slightly lighter
Screen resolution Significantly lower resolution screen
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$500 body only

$500 with 18-135mm lens

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Startup delay Much more startup delay
Canon Rebel T5i

Canon Rebel T5i

Entry-level DSLR

$429 - $649 body only

$520 - $599 with 18-55mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Overall image quality Worse image quality

discussion

Canon PowerShot SX20 IS
PowerShot SX20 IS
Canon

Report a correction
Canon EOS Rebel T2i
Rebel T2i
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments