Canon sx 200 or canon sx 120??? I need very good zoom for soccer and school shows: Whic camera has better zoom, speed between shots and quality for far shots?
1694407
Hello. Unfortunately, neither of these will be very good for soccer. It is not a question of zoom, so much as response time. These types of cameras have to clear the sensor before they capture a shot, so none of them are going to be great for sports. They can work ok, but you're likely to miss "the moment". If that is acceptible, try the SX200 (or one of the new Lumix models with the super fast auto focus might be a bit better). But for best results shooting sports, you'd want something that didn't have to clear the sensor, like a DSLR (Canon Rebel, Nikon D40, etc.) Or if you want a small hybrid, you could consider the Lumix GF1, but they aren't cheap.
1579247
If you really want sports action, then even the lowest grade SLR beats any point and shoot camera. I use a Canon T3 to successfully take sports action although it rates poor when compared to top line SLR's. Point and shoots have slow buffer speeds when taking fast action particularly if you also want a RAW copy. (low burst response; the Nikon 7000 cannot be used for sports) You can buy the T3 with a basic lens for $499.00 and get superior shots to anything produced by such cameras as the G-12. I love the G-12 and use it for my walk around camera. The T-3 does all my heavy lifting for semi-pro shooting and enlargements.If you are a really serious sports photographer and want pro results then by all means buy at least a D60 Canon! The Sx 40 is a good camera but that lens never produces real sharp prints and the lens speed is slow for fast action.
1820224
The Nikon Coolpix p500 also has impressive zoom, 35x, the burst shooting works differently, but that might not be an issue for you. At $349, it's running about $50 less than the Canon sx40 right now.
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.
1787338
Any thoughts for general / home photography? I have a Digital Rebel XSI and recently bought the 70-200 mm F2.8 IS version mainly to photograph school events without the annoying flash, and take closeups of my rapidly-growing kids. I have been going back and forth between the two lenses (24-70 F2.8 vs. 24-105 F4.0 IS) but my instinct is that F2.8 is much better than F 4 even with IS. Any guidance appreciated from a professional.
876661
Also consider the Canon SX210is. Great camera. Out of the 4 cameras mentioned I would say go with the S8100. It's the newest compact mega zoom of the bunch, has a backlit CMOS chip for excellent low light shooting, great Nikkor lens, stereo 1080p video, beautiful lcd and excellent for factor.
1469932
I can't imagine that the SX40 couldn't take a better picture (sharper, better detail and colors in a range of lighting) than the s90, 95 or 100. The only thing you give up with the SX40 (and for some people, I know this is a deal breaker) is pocketability. But for those who don't care about that, it is an amazing (and very fun) camera.
1820223
Just purchased the Canon SX40. It is truly amazing. There are not too many boats out on the ice right now, but I think it will do what I want. The picture quality is fantastic. Shortcomings? Since I'm a newbie I don't understand why some pics are blurry and others not; but that is probably more my inexperience than the camera. Also, it shoots 1080 video only at 24 fps. This is still pretty good, but there are some situations where a moving video is less crisp. But I could always switch to non HD if I choose, and have 30 fps that way. Thanks for your help.
1344846
Yes i've had a FS 200 for about 4 years it just died, but it lived on the dash ofv my car. I have a concealed carry permit, and i started car and turned it on for four years.It was never taken out ,left AS is, in sun in texas 165 degrees+ in car. pictures at 70 mph chrisp clear and in focus inside a RX-7, it failed because a sd card stuck inside it and after getting it out I damaged switch telling it, sd card was in place, I broke it trying to repair. For the price they are the best i've seen, and with the 2000x zoom and 4000 by3000 higher resolution,ie tripod full moon take a picture of the moon not 1080i but the max resolution camera has , well above that,and you can blow it up like crazy and lose no focus that 2000x is worth it's weight in gold on this camera becxause it has the deep resolution to use it,.You can see things on the Moon you wouldn't believe , thats why i'm looking for another one ...Totallty AWESOME I have a Nikon 510 with same resolution as Cannon and it gets awesome results when put in photo pgm to zoom and blow up photo.but not as easy to use , the canon is so simple and does a magnificent job, massive resolution is almost as good as maginfication, because with real professional resolution depth ,when you blow it up in photo shop etc, you see more, more,more clear crisp pic and you zoom in, I'm looking for another canon fs 200 2000x because i have seen the proof, my friends were blown away. Awesome Rich.
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
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.
391684
I don't hate my Panasonic LX3, but if this new Canon SX200 had a faster lens, I would ditch the LX3 in a heartbeat and get the SX200. I guess I'll just wait until the reviews and photo samples come out.
1469929
Is the Canon 230hs a good compromise? Pocketable but more zoom than the S95? Is the image quality as good as the SX40?
119787
Yes, the SX110 is heavier, and a little larger . . . but I think the 10X zoom makes up for anything. The screen is surprisingly easy to see, even outdoors. I was hesitant to go without a viewfinder, but now it doesn't bother me. That being said, the 590 is an excellent camera, does 80-90% of the SX110 does, and is DIRT cheap if you shop around. But the 10X zoom on the 110 is something I just love, and I'm glad I went with the 110.
119784
If you want to save some cash, go for the 590; if you want the big zoom it's the SX110. Both are fine cameras, but I love the zoom on the SX110 for sports photos.
1036668
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.
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).