Sony SR11 vs Canon HG20: From what I've heard, these are the few differences: 1. sony has a view finder and hg20 doesn't. 2. low light performance of sony is a little better than canon. 3. sony has 5.1 sound as compared to 2.1 of canon because of all...
846059
I thought I would buy a Canon HG20 because my current camcorder and camera are a Canon, but once I actually held both the Canon HG20 and the Sony SR11 in my hand, there was no doubt that the Sony SR11 was worth the price difference. The construction quality, placement of controls and the vivid LCD screen of the Sony SR11 make it a superior choice over the Canon HG20. I had my Canon camcorder for 8 years so I always look to buy a quality product that I will use for a long time. I would recommend you go to a store to compare the Sony and the Canon to see the difference in person.
107354
I was looking at buying either the Sony HX10, or the HX20 and saw your question. Although there really aren't any reviews on the Sony HX cameras yet (1 review doesn't count), the Cannon SX 260 has several, and a consistent theme is noise when recording video... to me this is a deal breaker, also the Sony HX 10 is 18mp & 1080 HD vs the 12mp & 720 HD on the Cannon. I'm leaning toward buying the Sony HX10, but are waiting for at least 10 reviews.
755317
The Sony does very well including situations with mixed light sources such as daylight and house lamps. It also works surprisingly well in low light situations, however the longer exposure times required can lead to blurred images because of the longer shutter time. I often have better results using available light than I do using the flash which is not powerful enough to reach too far. This is not to suggest that the Canon wouldn't work as well or better.
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.
1447681
I didn't see any difference. I am very happy with mine, it woulds like I believe it should. There was only one issue with the viewfinder which in my opinion become too easily detached, but I am sure that's only my model. I would say do more research on this 1d in comparison to others. You can always buy and return it to if you don't mind spending a few bucks on shipping it back if you don't like it.
1642163
Looking at the Sony and the Powershot myself - Looks like the Sony excels in speed of taking pictures but has less of a zoom and canon has a better viewfinder and takes an add on flash- maybe someone could comment on the quality of photos and other features...
2024050
I have both. Very little difference. Both are excellent for a point and shoot!
163825
Check out the links below for reviews on both. you can compare the sample photos side by side. also the Sony high iso looks better. personally I think that the Sony has warmer more vibrant color although the night shot looks better on the Canon. I just ordered the Sony so we shall see. I also like the looks of the Sony better. well, good luck in your search.http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/sony/dsc_w55-review/index.shtmlhttp://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sd1000-review/index.shtml
488637
I originally bought the Sony W90 based on specs. My first one was defective. It took pictures, but only the pictures in very bright light were acceptable. I exchanged for another W90 and although better, it still had VERY high levels of noise even with flash. I returned that one and bought a Canon 800IS. The Canon has taken EXCELLENT pictures even in low light. The image stabilization works well and the pictures taken with ISO 1600 are about the same noise level as the sony at 400 and 800 ISO. At 800 ISO the Canon produces better pictures than the Sony at 100 ISO. For my money...The Canon is better hands down.
2087729
I actually tried the HF S200 and was disappointed with its low light performance, so I returned it and placed an order for the HF M400. I don't need all of the bells and whistles, and still photos are not a requirement for me for a video camera. I think their logic in using the pro sensor makes sense. I got the same response when I asked Canon. If you compare them side by side though, the only thing the HF M400 is missing is some of the manual controls, the ability to take high-quality still photos, and a larger display. Other than that, for pure video quality and low light performance, the HF M400 should come out on top (I hope). I actually tried the HF S200 and was disappointed with its low light performance, so I returned it and placed an order for the HF M400. I don't need all of the bells and whistles, and still photos are not a requirement for me for a video camera. I think their logic in using the pro sensor makes sense. I got the same response when I asked Canon. If you compare them side by side though, the only thing the HF M400 is missing is some of the manual controls, the ability to take high-quality still photos, and a larger display. Other than that, for pure video quality and low light... » Read More I actually tried the HF S200 and was disappointed with its low light performance, so I returned it and placed an order for the HF M400. I don't need all of the bells and whistles, and still photos are not a requirement for me for a video camera. I think their logic in using the pro sensor makes sense. I got the same response when I asked Canon. If you compare them side by side though, the only thing the HF M400 is missing is some of the manual controls, the ability to take high-quality still photos, and a larger display. Other than that, for pure video quality and low light performance, the HF M400 should come out on top (I hope). « Show Less
2090474
I purchased both these cameras at the same time, the sony at my local best buy and a panasonic on amazon. They are pretty close to the same, the sony has a little more true color indoors but the panasonic has more vibrant colors outdoor. The sony looks a little more washed out outside. I was impressed with both cameras low light recording. The image stabilizer worked a little better on the sony I thought, the problem I have with the panasonic is that it almost tries to overcorrect the shake. It seemed any time I used the touch screen while recording (ie...zooming) I notice a slight jump in the picture. I think with a little practice I can eliminate this by how hard I tap the screen, but it's touchy. I didn't seem to have that problem with the sony. The panasonic gets a little warm in your hand, but considering I use it in a hockey arena it doubles as a hand warmer! The panasonic comes with a video light and a hotshoe and u have more manual settings. The software that comes with both is crap, plan on buying third party editing software no matter wich way u go. Is the difference worth the $70 more I paid for the sony? probably not, I can buy an extra battery and SD card for the pan. If you could find them for about the same price though, I would go for the sony.
1098984
Looks like Sony has stopped production of HDR SR11 and HDR SR12. That may account for higher prices of these good camcorders now. Weirdly, HDR SR10 still shows up at sony website.
1132960
Because LX 7 and RX100 are the top two smaller camera on the market disregard the price difference. LX7 has bigger lens, better night photo. Sony has bigger sensor...
1183538
The canon has 1.2 vice 1.4 and slightly less chromatic aberration (purple color fringing) when wide open. The sigma is much faster to focus and just as sharp. It's not so much a "quality" as paying a premium for the canon L red ring and the extra glass needed to achieve 1.2.
1692751
Sony informed me within days after registering my new DSC-H20/B they are the same camera and B is for the color Black. It is a good question because you never can tell with thousands if not hundreds of Brand Name Models.
650801
I didn't like the image quality of either of them. I think the sensor is too small. The s120 is better than the s110 with faster focusing and a better sensor. I may consider spending a little more for the Sony rx100 with a bigger sensor (price dropped).
1564445
Beware the Sony "cineframe" options -- they look terrible. I have a Sony HC3 and while it's a fine little camera in 1080i 60i mode, the pseudo-24p stuff looks awful.The HV20 promises TRUE 24fps recording, plus a cinematic gamma curve, plus OIS, plus manual audio level controls, plus better lowlight performance. I wasn't even planning on buying a new camera, but I'm buying an HV20. At $1099, it's a great deal!