Kodak AZ901 vs Canon 200D

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Canon EOS 200D (labelled Canon SL2 in some countries) are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in January 2016 and June 2017. The AZ901 is a fixed lens compact, while the 200D is a DSLR. The cameras are based on a 1/2.3-inch (AZ901) and an APS-C (200D) sensor. The Kodak has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the Canon provides 24 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Kodak AZ901		Canon 200D
Fixed lens compact camera		Digital single lens reflex
22-1980mm f/3.1-6.8		Canon EF mount lenses
20.2 MP – 1/2.3" sensor		24 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/60p Video
ISO 100-3,200		ISO 100-25,600 (100 - 51,200)
Electronic viewfinder (202k dots)		Optical viewfinder
3.0" LCD – 920k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)		Swivel touchscreen
5 shutter flaps per second		5 shutter flaps per second
400 shots per battery charge		650 shots per battery charge
139 x 104 x 119 mm, 777 g		122 x 93 x 70 mm, 453 g

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check 200D offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Canon EOS 200D? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Kodak AZ901 and the Canon 200D is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The 200D can be obtained in two different colors (black, white), while the AZ901 is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Canon 200D is notably smaller (22 percent) than the Kodak AZ901. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the AZ901 nor the 200D are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the AZ901 has a lens built in, whereas the 200D is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the 200D and their specifications in the Canon EF Lens Catalog.

Concerning battery life, the AZ901 gets 400 shots out of its Kodak LB-070 battery, while the 200D can take 650 images on a single charge of its Canon LP-E17 power pack.

The following table provides a synthesis of the main physical specifications of the two cameras and other similar ones. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, you can move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible camera comparisons there.

Body Specifications

#		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Kodak AZ901	139 mm	104 mm	119 mm	777 g	400	n	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
2.		Canon 200D	122 mm	93 mm	70 mm	453 g	650	n	Jun 2017	549	ebay.com
3.		Canon 2000D	129 mm	101 mm	78 mm	475 g	500	n	Feb 2018	449	amazon.com
4.		Canon 77D	131 mm	100 mm	76 mm	540 g	600	n	Feb 2017	899	ebay.com
5.		Canon G9 X Mark II	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	206 g	235	n	Jan 2017	529	ebay.com
6.		Canon M100	108 mm	67 mm	35 mm	302 g	295	n	Aug 2017	499	ebay.com
7.		Canon M5	116 mm	89 mm	61 mm	427 g	295	n	Sep 2016	979	ebay.com
8.		Canon G9 X	98 mm	58 mm	31 mm	209 g	220	n	Oct 2015	529	ebay.com
9.		Canon 100D	117 mm	91 mm	69 mm	407 g	380	n	Mar 2013	549	ebay.com
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	130 mm	80 mm	93 mm	640 g	300	n	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
11.		Nikon B700	125 mm	85 mm	107 mm	565 g	350	n	Feb 2016	499	ebay.com
12.		Nikon P900	140 mm	103 mm	137 mm	899 g	360	n	Mar 2015	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic ZS70	112 mm	67 mm	41 mm	322 g	380	n	Apr 2017	449	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic FZ2500	138 mm	102 mm	135 mm	915 g	350	n	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
15.		Sony HX350	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	652 g	300	n	Dec 2016	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX90V	102 mm	58 mm	36 mm	245 g	360	n	Apr 2015	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	130 mm	93 mm	103 mm	660 g	300	n	Feb 2014	499	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The AZ901 was launched at a lower price than the 200D, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Kodak AZ901 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Canon 200D an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the 200D is 1086 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 1.6. The sensor in the AZ901 has a native 4:3 aspect ratio, while the one in the 200D offers a 3:2 aspect.

With 24MP, the 200D offers a higher resolution than the AZ901 (20.2MP), but the 200D nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 1.18μm for the AZ901) due to its larger sensor. Moreover, the 200D is a somewhat more recent model (by 1 year and 5 months) than the AZ901, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units.

The resolution advantage of the Canon 200D implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the 200D for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Kodak AZ901 are 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm for good quality, 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm for very good quality, and 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm for excellent quality prints.

The 200D has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The corresponding ISO settings for the Canon EOS 200D are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-51200.

In terms of underlying technology, the AZ901 is build around a BSI-CMOS sensor, while the 200D uses a CMOS imager. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Kodak AZ901	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/30p	20.3	11.7	806	48
2.		Canon 200D	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.6	13.4	1041	79
3.		Canon 2000D	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.6	11.9	1009	71
4.		Canon 77D	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.6	13.3	971	78
5.		Canon G9 X Mark II	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.9	12.5	522	65
6.		Canon M100	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.5	12.9	1272	78
7.		Canon M5	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.4	12.4	1262	77
8.		Canon G9 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	21.5	12.3	495	63
9.		Canon 100D	APS-C	17.9	5184	3456	1080/30p	21.8	11.3	843	63
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	Full Frame	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	24.3	12.7	2221	85
11.		Nikon B700	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	20.4	11.8	818	48
12.		Nikon P900	1/2.3	15.9	4608	3456	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	727	47
13.		Panasonic ZS70	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	4K/30p	19.1	10.6	106	36
14.		Panasonic FZ2500	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	4K/30p	23.0	12.6	538	70
15.		Sony HX350	1/2.3	19.9	5152	3864	1080/60p	20.5	11.9	896	49
16.		Sony HX90V	1/2.3	18.0	4896	3672	1080/60p	20.2	11.6	738	47
17.		Sony HX400V	1/2.3	20.2	5184	3888	1080/60p	20.1	11.4	629	45
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the 200D provides a faster frame rate than the AZ901. It can shoot movie footage at 1080/60p, while the Kodak is limited to 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the AZ901 has an electronic viewfinder (202k dots), while the 200D has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Kodak AZ901 and Canon 200D along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

Core Features

#		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Kodak AZ901	202	n	3.0 / 920	swivel	n	1/2000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
2.		Canon 200D	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
3.		Canon 2000D	optical	n	3.0 / 920	fixed	n	1/4000s	3.0/s	Y	n
4.		Canon 77D	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	6.0/s	Y	n
5.		Canon G9 X Mark II	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	8.2/s	Y	Y
6.		Canon M100	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	6.1/s	Y	n
7.		Canon M5	2360	n	3.2 / 1620	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	Y	n
8.		Canon G9 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	6.0/s	Y	Y
9.		Canon 100D	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/4000s	4.9/s	Y	n
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	3680	n	3.0 / 1040	fixed	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	n	Y
11.		Nikon B700	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	Y
12.		Nikon P900	921	n	3.0 / 921	swivel	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Panasonic ZS70	1166	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
14.		Panasonic FZ2500	2360	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	12.0/s	Y	Y
15.		Sony HX350	202	n	3.0 / 922	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
16.		Sony HX90V	638	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
17.		Sony HX400V	210	n	3.0 / 921	tilting	n	1/4000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The 200D has a touchscreen, while the AZ901 has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the AZ901 and the 200D write their files to SDXC cards. The 200D supports UHS-I cards (Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s), while the AZ901 cannot take advantage of Ultra High Speed SD cards.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and Canon EOS 200D and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

#		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Kodak AZ901	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
2.		Canon 200D	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
3.		Canon 2000D	Y	mono / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
4.		Canon 77D	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
5.		Canon G9 X Mark II	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
6.		Canon M100	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
7.		Canon M5	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
8.		Canon G9 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
9.		Canon 100D	Y	mono / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
11.		Nikon B700	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
12.		Nikon P900	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
13.		Panasonic ZS70	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Panasonic FZ2500	Y	stereo / mono	Y	Y	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
15.		Sony HX350	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Sony HX90V	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
17.		Sony HX400V	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-

It is notable that the 200D has a microphone port, which can help to improve the quality of audio recordings by attaching an external microphone. The AZ901 does not feature such a mic input.

The AZ901 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Kodak. In contrast, the 200D has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on ebay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the 200D was succeeded by the Canon 250D. Further information on the features and operation of the AZ901 and 200D can be found, respectively, in the Kodak AZ901 Manual (free pdf) or the online Canon 200D Manual.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Which of the two cameras – the Kodak AZ901 or the Canon 200D – has the upper hand? Is one clearly better than the other? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Kodak PixPro AZ901:

• More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
• Ready to shoot: Comes with a built-in lens, while the 200D requires a separate lens.
• Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
• More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in January 2016).

Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS 200D:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 20.2MP), which boosts linear resolution by 11%.
• Better image quality: Is equipped with a larger and more technologically advanced sensor.
• Richer colors: The sensor size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
• More dynamic range: Larger sensor captures a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
• Better low-light sensitivity: Larger sensor produces good images even in poorly lit environments.
• Better video: Provides higher movie framerates (1080/60p versus 1080/30p).
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1040k vs 920k dots).
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
• More flexible: Makes it possible to change lenses and thus to use specialty optics.
• More compact: Is smaller (122x93mm vs 139x104mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
• Longer lasting: Gets more shots (650 versus 400) out of a single battery charge.
• Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
• Easier device pairing: Supports NFC for fast wireless image transfer over short distances.
• Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
• Faster buffer clearing: Has an SD card interface that supports the UHS-I standard.
• More modern: Was introduced somewhat (1 year and 5 months) more recently.

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the 200D is the clear winner of the contest (20 : 5 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional sports photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a street photog, and a person interested in family portraits has distinct needs from a landscape shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Kodak AZ901 and the Canon 200D place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Superzoom Camera and Best DSLR Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the AZ901 or the 200D perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.

Expert reviews

This is why expert reviews are important. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

#		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Kodak AZ901	..	..	..	..	3.5/5	3/5	Jan 2016	499	amazon.com
2.		Canon 200D	4/5	+ +	4/5	78/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2017	549	ebay.com
3.		Canon 2000D	3/5	o	3.5/5	..	3.5/5	3.5/5	Feb 2018	449	amazon.com
4.		Canon 77D	4.5/5	..	4/5	82/100	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2017	899	ebay.com
5.		Canon G9 X Mark II	4/5	..	4/5	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2017	529	ebay.com
6.		Canon M100	3/5	+	..	..	4/5	3.5/5	Aug 2017	499	ebay.com
7.		Canon M5	4/5	+	4/5	82/100	4/5	4/5	Sep 2016	979	ebay.com
8.		Canon G9 X	3.5/5	+ +	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Oct 2015	529	ebay.com
9.		Canon 100D	4/5	+	..	78/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2013	549	ebay.com
10.		Leica Q Typ 116	5/5	..	..	80/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	4,249	ebay.com
11.		Nikon B700	..	+	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2016	499	ebay.com
12.		Nikon P900	..	..	..	77/100	4/5	4/5	Mar 2015	599	ebay.com
13.		Panasonic ZS70	..	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Apr 2017	449	ebay.com
14.		Panasonic FZ2500	..	+	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	Sep 2016	1,199	amazon.com
15.		Sony HX350	..	..	..	..	..	4/5	Dec 2016	449	ebay.com
16.		Sony HX90V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4.5/5	Apr 2015	429	ebay.com
17.		Sony HX400V	4/5	+ +	..	..	4/5	4/5	Feb 2014	499	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check 200D offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. As an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.

~

Check AZ901 price at
amazon.com
Check 200D offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.