Re: [OM] advice on Canon point and shoots

[Chuck Norcutt]

Be very careful of the specific model numbers and check all specs very 
carefully.  I would suggest you double check whether the ELPH 100 has an 
HS suffix like the 300 HS.  HS designates a new higher ISO sensor.  The 
300 HS has a zoom starting at 24mm but the 100 HS starts at 28mm equivalent.

Here's a review of the 300 HS
<http://www.steves-digicams.com/news/just_posted_our_canon_powershot_elph_300_hs_review.html>

 From the review: "For those who do like to have a bit more control, the 
300 HS offers Program mode with access to more advanced settings like 
ISO, white balance, exposure compensation, etc."

Here's a review of the 100 HS
<http://www.steves-digicams.com/camera-reviews/canon/powershot-elph-100-hs/canon-powershot-elph-100-hs-review.html>

If the 100 doesn't carry the HS suffix it may in fact be the same as 
this SD100 (SD/ELPH name depends on the market)
<http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/support/consumer/digital_cameras/powershot_sd_series/powershot_sd100#Specifications>

All the lower end models with the same focal length zoom range probably 
perform fundamentally the same as the lens/sensor is just a single 
assembly.  However other external or menu controls may be different. 
The HS is certainly different as it's a new sensor design.

On the B&H web site the 300 HS is quite a bit more expensive than the 
100 HS which is to be expected since it does have more features 
including the 24 vs 28mm lens.

Chuck Norcutt


On 1/5/2012 10:13 AM, John Hudson wrote:
> I have some credit card points to spend which my wife would like to enjoy in
> the form of a new point and shoot digital camera. The credit card catalogue
> has two offerings from Canon:
>
> Power Shot ELPH 100 Silver, Model 4924B002
>
> Power Shot ELPH 300 HS Black, Model 5096B002
>
> The credit card points for the 300 are 20% more than for the 100 whereas on
> the Canon.ca web site the 100 is almost 8% more expensive than the 300.
>
> According to Canon web site the features and specs od both cameras are
> almost identical including an "effective" pixel rating of 12.1 mp, a "1/2.3
> inch" CMOS [whatever that means?], a 3" LCD screen and a 24-120mm zoom lens
> as expressed in 35mm terms..
>
> No reference is made anywhere to the file format in which image files can be
> stored.
>
> Does anyone have any recommendations about these cameras ?
>
> jh
>
-- 
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/