what are the differences between SX120 and SX110? please help me decide
160923
There is no real difference betweeen the two, other than adding the newer digic 4 processor (replacing the older digic 3 processor on the SX110). I don't think this is worth a premium over the SX110. As already discussed in other discussion page, the sensor is slightly smaller (BAD!), and they upped the megapixel to 10 (up from 9 -- almost useless). I really don't understand Canon why they released this camera without anything really worth upgrading from the SX110. I would rather recommend you the SX200, which have much more features, like wide angle, longer zoom, proprietary battery so you can see battery meter on LCD (unlike with the AA batteries), has quicker flash recharge time, speaker is placed on better position, has additional features like color swap, color options like vivid red/blue/green, you can erase part of a movie, and is slimmer. Or, if you want more pro but not going DSLR way, check out the new G11.
1897849
I do not know the difference, but I love my EPC 1200. I would not trade it in either.
1893354
Hello Amy. I see that you've not gotten a reply yet for a few days. I own the Canon SX130is camera that is nearly identical to that of the next version, the SX150is. I even owned the previous model of mine now, SX120is. THe only reason for the upgrade was to get HD video and stereo sound. Other than that, I loved that camera too. I've not studied the others you are deciding on but just looked them over. THere's not a "night & day" major difference between them. Differences of 2x zoom power is not major IMHO. Frames per second in burst mode shooting is. Size may be a factor too. But I can tell you why I like my camera. A manual flip up flash allows unmistakeable control over the flash and keeps the camera from waisting power charging for a flash that you didn't need for that shot. The option of complete manual settings is a must. And the advantage of using AA batteries gives you limitless flexibility of power. Don't let the negative reviews tell you that you cannot take lots of photos with this camera. If you get some high capacity rechargable batteries and enough for an extra set, you'll be good. Several here have recommended Sanyo Eneloop brand cells. That they come precharged and hold that charge for extended periods of storage time. A friend of mine used them and swears by them. I use Ansmann 2850 mAh batteries (which are higher capacity) and they give me nearly 200 more shots in my Canon SX20is than what is rated in the camera manual.
489802
I think the SX40 may be better than SX30 but there is no RAW output. Maybe time for a T3i!
948237
I recently bought the SX10IS and it's a nice camera, zoom is kind of noisy for the price, so I am sending it back and waiting on the SX1IS to come in. I want the faster burst rate, the HD movie quality and the remote control features.
1057668
Hello Larry, i checked the #11 and i do not find any difference, mines work very good and it is upgradeable. i hope i helped you..
154000
I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little faster than the rest of the pack. I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little... » Read More I'd like to suggest the sx40 because it's fabulous. However, it is larger than the sx230 and won't fit in the pocket. The smaller you get the less perfection a camera has, whereas it can't possibly please every need.But canon has done decent job trying to fit in a fast camera with 7FPS [really cool, but a smaller file size]. I find it hard without a viewfinder to shoot birds in flight other than off a limb. This camera is small, so without high shutter speeds fast moving animals can be blurred. You really have to have a good technigue on small cameras. The sx230 is a little faster than the rest of the pack. « Show Less
948238
Yes, back to your original post. I guess the sx1 is for those wanting the benfits of a CMOS sensor, greater zoom (over the sx200 which looks like a great pocket camera), true 1080p HD video, and standard AA battery usage (rechargable, of course, but standard in a pinch), and RAW+JPEG, all things I like very much.p.s. on that review site above the image quality of the rebel xsi is quite inferior to either the sx1 or sx10!
119783
M. Dean, can you elaborate a bit? I'm having the identical dilemma. Never owned a digital camera, and the SX110 looks neat, but am thrown by lack of viewfinder and bulkiness.
887821
You could check out the comparison on this Canadian website, with lots of additional information: http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon_PowerShot_SX130_IS-vs-Canon_PowerShot_SX210_IS But it doesn't mention another major difference: The SX130IS is powered by two standard-AA-sized batteries (that's why it is bulkier and heavier than the SX210IS). Maybe you are already using (or considering to use) AA rechargeable batteries for other devices, so that you have got (or want to buy) a charger for them? The best choice would be Sanyo Eneloop rechargeables (or other brands of so-called low-self-discharge batteries), as they keep up the voltage required by digital cameras longer than normal rechargeables, and keep up their power for several months when not in use. In the long run, this is cheaper and eco-friendlier than single-use batteries, and more flexible than the special battery included in most cameras, as you can buy single-use batteries anywhere as an emergency backup. After all, if the technical data and reviews don't help you to decide, I recommend you to look at both cameras in a shop, to compare in real life how it feels to use them.
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.
825084
CX150 has been dead for a long time. Its replacement was the CX200, I prefer the CX300 of course. They just go up in quality and price. CX200 is the cheapo model and the CX400 is the reasonably expensive one. They have a lot more that just increase in price and quality. I prefer the CX300 because they are sub $50 and are great. The CX400 is ok, kinda overpriced for what they are, really just nicer looking CX300s. They with a holder, case, and a bunch of other stuff,
779655
You can find some rumors about dates here: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8438.0 And given that the RX100 costs 40% more than the S100, I'm not sure comparing them makes any real sense.
154002
Thank you! I haven't heard of the sx40 i'll check it out. I really like the specs. On the sx230. The images looked better than the Sony hx9 I was gonna get. But the canon seem to beat it with quality of picture. Thanks again
2024049
Sorry. I am not familiar with sx240 to give you any comparison information.
1540758
My boyfriend has the 1100, and I have the 750. Having it over a year now, I would say... go with the 1100. The picture quality and everything in relation to picture taking is practically the same; it's just the external features that set the two apart. Now, I don't know if my battery's getting old or whatever, but the huge screen does wear out the battery, I must admit. I charge it perfectly every time, yet... using it two hours later or something, the low battery will show up. Makes me angry and makes me want to upgrade, even. So, yeah, go smaller screen for 750.
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.