What's the difference between this and the Stratos 36 (aside from the 2L difference)?
320888
Basically nothing. If you prefer ziplock use 34, if you like top cover choose the 36. I travel around with train in Europe and use only a 34 version more than a week.
624550
I have the 2.8L lens, and I love it, but I wish it had IS. In my opinion, the only real advantage of the 2.8 is its greater light gathering power, to shoot inside or in deep shadows. The f4 with the IS can do most everything you want, especially if you have a camera with a high ISO. I don't know of any differences in the glass.
922008
Looks like one is "slide lock" and the other is "low profile." The lp seems be wider which looks like it will be more thin when full of liquid. As for the slide lock I think it's when you seal it you take that blue clip and slide it on and it seals the bladder. Whether or not the lp has that feature I'm not sure. That's seems to be the difference though the lp being wider which will allow it to fit into thinner areas in your backpack. I own the SL and loved it and it still for in my osprey backpack water bladder pouch.
1150130
I used to own both these lenses, but sold the 200 f/2.8L. They are very similar lenses. The 200L is, in my opinion, superior if your goal is landscape photography.For all other uses, I'd recommend the 135L. Portraits are easier in small spaces at the shorter focal length. Events are easier since the shorter length and faster aperture equate to much lower-light capability. Ergonomically, the lenses are practically identical. The 200L accepts a tripod ring, which I doubt you'll ever use.Either way, you're not going to make a wrong decision.
1106641
The main difference is in the tube diameters. The 150 has smaller tubes which give higher MPH, but lower CFM, the 350 has larger tubes which give lower MPH, but higher CFM. Both are about equal in real world performance with one's higher MPH just about cancelling out the others higher CFM. It comes down to whether you need to move larger piles of debris, in which case the higher CFM is handy, or you need to move stuck down debris like wet grass and leaves, in which case the higher MPH is handy. Both have more than enough for the average person on a daily route. It's when the leaves start dropping that a bigger blower is the way to go.
1249279
The 570 has more HP and CFM through the housing and pipe to blow a higher volume of air out. The 570 also has an advanced air filtration system that the 560 does not. Hope that helps -Pantano Power Equipment
2080805
Even on high speed the water/vapors last twice as long. Also, the "cup" for the medicated vapor solution is multiple times bigger and not as awkward (it actually is more like a cup than the strange odd shaped reservoir on the previous model). I replaced both of my vaporizers with the new ones and have been extremely pleased
450484
I don't know about the Sirrus but I can tell you that the Stratos has a long frame so if your shorter than 6ft you might find the Stratos uncomfortable. I am 6ft 1in tall and the Stratos is comfortable for me hiking but not biking or sitting. The frame hits the back of my head when biking or sitting.
328624
More power from the LXX (1000 BTU per burner more), built-in thermometer, and better build quality. This is the one I would get.
1214671
I called Scotch about the differences between the TL-901 and the TL-902. They function exactly the same but the TL-902 is newer, lighter and has a side handle for easier carrying.
1762362
I went looking to replace mine after I left it out in the rain. I found the TEKTON first, and bought it, and was very unhappy. Then I found this one, and I much prefer it. I think the price difference is inconsequential.
1273280
I used to own both these lenses, but sold the 200 f/2.8L. They are very similar lenses. The 200L is, in my opinion, superior if your goal is landscape photography. For all other uses, I'd recommend the 135L. Portraits are easier in small spaces at the shorter focal length. Events are easier since the shorter length and faster aperture equate to much lower-light capability. Ergonomically, the lenses are practically identical. The 200L accepts a tripod ring, which I doubt you'll ever use. Either way, you're not going to make a wrong decision.
952872
Not sure of the difference between the two but the one we bought is very flexible. We have 200lb. divers jumping off and it is very flexible.
1907393
There is no difference in functionality as far as I can tell. The only thing that I can think would be the difference would be the market in which the device was originally intended or perhaps the year it was manufactured, but I could not even find the 400l on casio's website when I was looking at purchasing mine. I purchased the 400l because it was significantly cheaper than the straight 400 model when I was looking. I would say pick up the cheaper of the two if you are trying to decide between the two. The one I purchased has worked magnificently, and has done the job I needed it to. I purchased mine to for use in my upper level math and electronics courses at school (University), the only caution I would take is to make sure that your school (assuming that is what you are buying it for) allows the use of CAS calculators. Some do not, and it would suck to purchase such an advanced calculator and not be able to use it on tests or in class.... Though I guess it would still make doing homework easier.
1198454
The 4600 is the latest model. Difference that I can tell is that the 4600 has three specific levels to choose the amount of vapor produced. The 4500 has an infinitely variable controller. I have had the 4500 and now have the 4600. Of the two, I prefer the 4500 vapor controller because in my application I don't want much vapor. On the other hand, it is nice to have three specific levels.Another difference is the form factor. The 4600 is a little higher and not as deep as the 4500. Either way you cannot go wrong.
1197334
Like everyone else has said, they are essentially the same camera. The deciding factor for me was the underwater housings available for them. I love Canon elph cameras for scuba diving, they sure beat the heck out of other bulky alternatives. The housing for the 940 is far superior to the one for the 1400. Canon tried to introduce a new type of housing for the 1400 that limits the functionality of the camera while underwater and is more prone to flooding. The 940 housing is tried and true, giving you full functionality. You can buy an Ikelite housing for the 1400 that is better, but still not as good as the Canon housing for the 940. For most people this probably isn't an issue, but was huge for me. Like everyone else has said, they are essentially the same camera. The deciding factor for me was the underwater housings available for them. I love Canon elph cameras for scuba diving, they sure beat the heck out of other bulky alternatives. The housing for the 940 is far superior to the one for the 1400. Canon tried to introduce a new type of housing for the 1400 that limits the functionality of the camera while underwater and is more prone to flooding. The 940 housing is tried and true, giving you full functionality. You can buy an Ikelite housing for the 1400 that is better, but still... » Read More Like everyone else has said, they are essentially the same camera. The deciding factor for me was the underwater housings available for them. I love Canon elph cameras for scuba diving, they sure beat the heck out of other bulky alternatives. The housing for the 940 is far superior to the one for the 1400. Canon tried to introduce a new type of housing for the 1400 that limits the functionality of the camera while underwater and is more prone to flooding. The 940 housing is tried and true, giving you full functionality. You can buy an Ikelite housing for the 1400 that is better, but still not as good as the Canon housing for the 940. For most people this probably isn't an issue, but was huge for me. « Show Less
328628
I believe the only difference is the LXX has a 2000 more BTU than the the LXE and also has thermostat.