what are the differences between SX120 and SX110? please help me decide i´m in the market for a new canon point and shoot because my old SX100 had an accident.i really liked it so i thought about getting a new version but i´m not sure which way to goplease somebody help me decidethanks what are the differences between SX120 and SX110? please help me decide i´m in the market for a new canon point and shoot because my old SX100 had an accident.i really liked it so i... » Read More what are the differences between SX120 and SX110? please help me decide i´m in the market for a new canon point and shoot because my old SX100 had an accident.i really liked it so i thought about getting a new version but i´m not sure which way to goplease somebody help me decidethanks « Show Less
309941
Good_Person, Your preference for a "proprietary battery so you can see battery meter on LCD (unlike with the AA batteries)" suggests you haven't used Lumix cameras like our LZ7 and LZ8. The setup menus in these cameras let you choose battery type, so the camera's battery charge indicator is accurate and the camera works well whether you're using disposable alkalines or rechargeable NiMH cells. As far as I know, Canon cameras that use AA cells still don't have this feature. I know for a fact that our PowerShot cameras don't have it. I prefer cameras that can use NiMH AA cells, because AAs are so readily available at reasonable cost, last long, and can be substituted by alkalines if necessary. Good_Person, Your preference for a "proprietary battery so you can see battery meter on LCD (unlike with the AA batteries)" suggests you haven't used Lumix cameras like our LZ7 and LZ8. The setup menus in these cameras let you choose battery type, so the camera's battery charge indicator is accurate and the camera works well whether you're using disposable alkalines or rechargeable NiMH cells. As far as I know, Canon cameras that use AA cells still don't have this feature. I know for a fact that our PowerShot cameras don't have it. I prefer cameras that can use NiMH AA... » Read More Good_Person, Your preference for a "proprietary battery so you can see battery meter on LCD (unlike with the AA batteries)" suggests you haven't used Lumix cameras like our LZ7 and LZ8. The setup menus in these cameras let you choose battery type, so the camera's battery charge indicator is accurate and the camera works well whether you're using disposable alkalines or rechargeable NiMH cells. As far as I know, Canon cameras that use AA cells still don't have this feature. I know for a fact that our PowerShot cameras don't have it. I prefer cameras that can use NiMH AA cells, because AAs are so readily available at reasonable cost, last long, and can be substituted by alkalines if necessary. « Show Less
309942
I have a real problem with the SX120 -- terrible white balance on automatic setting. It does better on program settings, but unless I'm missing something and those carry over into automatic mode . . . rarely do I get decent indoor skin tones.
309943
Thx everyone for the info. I have to say that I´m still undecided but I guess the SX120 is the only one available right now.
309944
I just realized that you're comparing the older SX100 - not the newer SX110 - to the SX120. So my points above is worthless. It only compares the 110 to the 120.You are correct, I only tried that on Canon's. Canon cameras that use their own proprietary battery has a battery meter, and the ones using AA does not.Another upgrade from the SX110 is that you can see more thumbnails at a time.
309945
Get the SX100 as a refurb at a cheap price. You'll never tell the difference.
309946
The SX120 at ISO 800 and 1600 is way better than the SX110, this is the biggest difference I've seen. Search for some reviews that have the same shots at ISO1600 for both cameras and compare the two side by side and it'll jump out at you. I'm not so sure the slightly smaller sensor has much difference, sensor technology improves very slowly too, so maybe it has better signal to noise ratio even though it's more MP on a slightly smaller surface area.I don't like the SX200 for a bunch of reasons, the always up flash is annoying. It has a slower lens than the SX110/120, and it's way more expensive. The SX120 at ISO 800 and 1600 is way better than the SX110, this is the biggest difference I've seen. Search for some reviews that have the same shots at ISO1600 for both cameras and compare the two side by side and it'll jump out at you. I'm not so sure the slightly smaller sensor has much difference, sensor technology improves very slowly too, so maybe it has better signal to noise ratio even though it's more MP on a slightly smaller surface area.I don't like the SX200 for a bunch of reasons, the always up flash is annoying. It has a slower lens than the SX110/120, and it's... » Read More The SX120 at ISO 800 and 1600 is way better than the SX110, this is the biggest difference I've seen. Search for some reviews that have the same shots at ISO1600 for both cameras and compare the two side by side and it'll jump out at you. I'm not so sure the slightly smaller sensor has much difference, sensor technology improves very slowly too, so maybe it has better signal to noise ratio even though it's more MP on a slightly smaller surface area.I don't like the SX200 for a bunch of reasons, the always up flash is annoying. It has a slower lens than the SX110/120, and it's way more expensive. « Show Less
309947
In short, comparing to SX110, at least on paper, SX120 got better processor, but worse sensor and shorter battery life.In other words, I think that at best these models are about the same, at worst SX120 is a step down.About SX200: judging by reviews, it seems that SX110 is (well... was) better in low light. May be that's the reason why Canon dumbed down SX120 so the image quality of different cameras will better agree with their price points.
309948
ISO 1600 comparison between SX110 and SX120:http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/shared/picture.asp?f=28170http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/shared/picture.asp?f=21018
309949
So you would recomend SX200? Or should I just repair my old SX100 and forget about it?
876664
Brad - I don't think you can go wrong with either camera. Add to for your consideration the Sony HX5 - it's on a par with these two. I looked long and hard at all 3 of these, researching specs and comments, as well as trying them out in camera stores, etc. I finally chose the S8100, although only coming out in September the amount of reviews is sparse - but even compared to the S8000 earlier model the improved S8100 proves to be a great camera. One thing I really like is the heft and feel of the camera, as well as the professional and high quality look and detail of the camera. It's a joy to take photos with this camera. The photos from it are stunning.
650799
Good to read:http://www.pocket-lint.com/review/124220-canon-powershot-s120-reviewhttp://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-PowerShot-S120-vs-Canon-Powershot-S110
489800
Sorry, haven't had the opportunity to try and compare the SX1is to the other two models.I'll tell you this though, after taking the SX30is for a test run there is NO WAY I would keep it over my SX20is when it xomes to the discussion of image quality.
2073936
I just read your posting and it has been a month since you put it up so I don't know if your still interested in a comparison, so I will keep it brief. I got the X100 in July and the S95 a year ago but by coincidence I just took some test shots in the back yard this morning to compare the two as I will be using both at a BBQ on Sunday. The S95 looks good until you see it next to the x100. The X100 is the first digital camera I have owned where the photos look a bit more real than the other digital cameras I have used. I also have a Nikon D7000 and did some test shots while on vacation using it and the Nikon 12-24mm lens ( set at 23mm) and the X100 looks better, sharper than the $1000 Nikon12-24 lens. There are some down sides as is mentioned on many websites, but you can get used to them, or at least I did. On the video, I like the S95 by far as it is easier to get usable footage. The X100 is sharper and cleaner by a little bit, but the focus is not as good as the S95. The X100 is a great camera for what it is, and I really like mine.
2279768
I have been doing tons of research online regarding both. The SX20 has excellent reviews about its photo quality compared to the Sony HX1. The benefit to the Sony is that it has 1080p compared to 720p on the Canon. If you want 1080p on a Canon, it will cost an extra $200 for the Canon SX1 is. I personally prefer the Lumix (Panasonic) cameras over both. They use Leica lens which is considered the Rolls Royce of camera lenses. I have used Lumix cameras over the years. I suggest you check out the DMC-FZ35. This camera is highly rated by experts and owners. Each of these cameras has pros and cons against each other however it will all depend on what features you are looking for. If you are looking for camera with loads of manual features, great photo quality and good build, go Canon. If you want easier to use with excellent photo quality, go with the Lumix. The one thing that Canon could improve on is their menu. Many owners had made comments that the menu interface on Canon's is not user friendly. Lumix and Sony have easier to navigate menu's.
2024050
I have both. Very little difference. Both are excellent for a point and shoot!
928346
I am considering CX150 or CX110. Is there any difference between those two except 16GB internal memory in CX150? I have been researching camcorder for more than week and can't decide. Now boils down to one of these two - no reasons...just due to Sony brand. I know there better rated panasonic and canon out there in the similar price range...any comments???
1455354
I think you should get the Panasonic TZ5 (or TZ4 if you don't care about HD video). The TZ's will jump to an Optical 16.7x@ 3MEGAPIXELS, and will be in the $200- 230 area vs. the much more expensive 12x...I have both the TZ5 and SX110. They are both GREAT cameras. The TZ5 is lighter and smaller, and you can take video with optical vs digital zoom (clearer video). I bought the SX 110 , because there is a CHDK modification available for it (Google CHDK). You can do timelapse, RAW format, extend the shutter speed to 64 seconds....but if you are using the camera for the day, I would go with the TZ4 or 5, but you better hurry- all of these cameras are discontinued!
494403
I owned both the G11 and the SX20...I decided to keep the G11 and sold the SX20 because for my needs the G11 fit the bill. If you need a high zoom all the time then definitely go with the SX20. I had the G9 which I loved it and decided to upgrade to the G11 it's the best camera I have own. I just went on a Caribbean Cruise and took over 1,000 shots and couldn't be happier with them all. The proof is in the photos so you can start with this post on my photoblog and use the calendar or click on the next post and see the results yourself. If you have any questions you can leave me a comment with your email address... http://www.photoblog.com/lynnsgallery2/2010/02/09/st-thomas.html
438669
FYI: My SX10 failed for lens error after 2 years and a few months. I had also noticed in the past few months lesser picture quality for no specific reason. I did use it as a field camera so it took some minor abuse. I'm going for the SX20 as I like the functionality and the price is right for a camera for use in rough country.
876663
Brad - I don't think you can go wrong with either camera. Add to for your consideration the Sony HX5 - it's on a par with these two.I looked long and hard at all 3 of these, researching specs and comments, as well as trying them out in camera stores, etc. I finally chose the S8100, although only coming out in September the amount of reviews is sparse - but even compared to the S8000 earlier model the improved S8100 proves to be a great camera. One thing I really like is the heft and feel of the camera, as well as the professional and high quality look and detail of the camera. It's a joy to take photos with this camera. The photos from it are stunning. Brad - I don't think you can go wrong with either camera. Add to for your consideration the Sony HX5 - it's on a par with these two.I looked long and hard at all 3 of these, researching specs and comments, as well as trying them out in camera stores, etc. I finally chose the S8100, although only coming out in September the amount of reviews is sparse - but even compared to the S8000 earlier model the improved S8100 proves to be a great camera. One thing I really like is the heft and feel of the camera, as well as the professional and high quality look and detail of the camera.... » Read More Brad - I don't think you can go wrong with either camera. Add to for your consideration the Sony HX5 - it's on a par with these two.I looked long and hard at all 3 of these, researching specs and comments, as well as trying them out in camera stores, etc. I finally chose the S8100, although only coming out in September the amount of reviews is sparse - but even compared to the S8000 earlier model the improved S8100 proves to be a great camera. One thing I really like is the heft and feel of the camera, as well as the professional and high quality look and detail of the camera. It's a joy to take photos with this camera. The photos from it are stunning. « Show Less
154005
To L. Jones : I have a new SX230HS, and this was an excellent post ! You are right on. I also have a feeling you are a Canon support rep., but thanks anyway ! You are right, some people believe there is a magic $200 camera out there, the size of a disposable, and the performance of a Canon DSLR. I think the SX230 is a very usable unit.A lot of $100 cameras can stop motion outdoors, but I'm not aware of any $200 camera that can in low light unless you use flash.
108518
DO NOT BY THE FUJIFILM!! I did and it's ABSOLUTE CRAP. I get better photos from my old Fujifilm A500, the point & shoot Fuji A500 takes better photos. Light/color and White Balance are crap in the S1000fd. I take photos for my Etsy shop with my Fuji A5oo, it surpasses the S1000fd, which is quite surprising!
2204728
Ok so this is what I'm going off of. The Cannon SX10IS is the same price as the P90 but the P90 has 24x zoom and 12.1 MP... The price differential came from somewhere. I'm putting my bets on the image processor. I personally own the SX10IS and I could not be happier. My friend who owns the Cannon Rebel XSi tries to say how his buy is much more justified. So far the only things I have found better is his white balance, optional remote trigger, and the capability to shoot in RAW. Otherwise our cameras are very similar.
1796829
@Coog makes good points for a new G series, however, my number one interest in the G12 is the viewfinder. This is simply where the S100 doesn't make the cut. The fully articulating rear screen on my S5 IS has enabled many, many otherwise unobtainable shots. Being able to hold the camera in positions where one's head can't go simply enables shots that would otherwise be missed. With that, I hope that Canon does continue the G series, swapping sensors and processors as prices come down. I need these sub-$400 cameras because I'm pretty hard on pocketables. The last two only lasted 4 months each.
818478
I just bought my Sx110 IS yesterday--and after taking about 15 pictures and trying out the video, I got the battery low warning. I can only hope that the problem is with the batteries being old. According to my manual, I should get 140 images and 5 hours of playback time with them. The only other batteries they recommend in the manual are AA-size NiMH-3AH. I'd like to use Lithium batteries, but I'm worried that they are not listed in the manual as OK. I see that Canon Chick uses them, what about the rest of you?