Canon or Sony? Does anyone have any suggestions as to whether a Sony or Canon is a better bet for an ultracompact digital?
390692
Sam, We had a Sony for a few months then the kid lost it. We've had a Canon for two years, and during that time it went back to Canon twice for warranty service, for the same problem. When I wanted to upgrade, I bought a Sony DSC-N2. From the looks of things, it will even be almost as versatile as my 35mm Exakta SLR film camera. If you really want a slim camera, there are even slimmer Sony's than the DSC-N2, such as the DSC T10, that are comparable with the Canon for pixels.
1274617
Thanks for the response. In the interim from posting and now I actually purchased a Canon as the gift, but I found a lot of solid information about photo formats and more at CNet.
1758607
Im debating between those 2 as well, I always loved canon lenses, image quality in my opinion always outranked Sony. But recently my father bought the Sony a55 and image quality is amazing, my 12 year old sister took some pictures with it, and they look like done by a pro. Any help from experienced pros please!!!!, thanks in advance, I appreciate it!!
1134719
Oddly enough, I ended up going with neither of these. I compared these to the Sony CX130. Picked them up in the stores and found the image of the Sony to be more brilliant. The Sony form factor was smaller as well which will be good for traveling. Best part is that it's only $350. It uses SD cards (no internal memory), but that didn't bother me since SD cards are so cheap now.
1548343
Both are excellent cameras. The Canon has been around for a little longer so it has more history. The Sony has a few more features. The Canon printer doesn't make any difference.
347541
You're right. If I were willing to consider the extra cost, I think I would upgrade to the Canon 50D.I'm still trying to sort it all out!
1425660
I have another compact Sony with the EXMOR (Sony TX1) and it is faster than other compact cameras I've used. However, it is not fast compared to a digital SLR. A dSLR (like my Nikon D3000, or comparable Sony or Canon, etc.) can auto-focus much faster, shoot more responsively, be zoomed manually instead of waiting for a motor, etc. and lets you precisely capture moving subjects in a way that little compact cameras can't, even the newest ones. The claim of 10 frames per second doesn't mean that the camera autofocuses instantly, doesn't mean there isn't shutter-lag to start, and doesn't take into account time to write to the card after all 10 frames are shot. Another idea to mention though: if you don't need really high-resolution images, and 1920x1080 resolution frames taken from a HD movie are good enough, then another option to consider is using a camera like this to shoot your moving subjects in HDTV, then scrubbing through and exporting some of the frames you like as stills. If you just want snapshots or images for Facebook, then grabbing stills from the HD video can be a good solution.
120624
Thank you very much, ALT, I really appreciate your feedback. Yesterday I ordered the Fuji S1000fd instead. For $231 the 10MP and 12X optical zoom was just unbeatable. Now I've got to find out if I can use filters on it, too. Thank you!
2176430
Don't know why anyone would describe the A590IS as bulky.A little thicker than most compacts, but not enough to preventme from carrying it in a jacket pocket.If anything....it's too small. I prefer the super zooms (fuji s700, etc.)But if you are looking for a great compact (with a viewfinder)to carry around in your pocket...this is it.
488639
I have the Sony T10 - I got it for the design and the unlimited in video mode, but I hate the sliding lens cover. It would slide off at a small touch in your purse and ppl who helped you take pictures would put their fingers on the camera lens :P Get the Canon!
1508370
I am partial to Canon and am excited to see they are introducing a model in the rugged, waterproof class. I previously used the first generation waterproof Olympus Stylus and after it broke moved to the Pentax Optio W series. It has been a good camera as far as durability, but it just doesn't produce photos like our Canon Powershot SD1000. As far as the post question, I can't wait to see some product reviews/comparisons. Based on my previous experience with the Stylus line, I am ruling out the Olympus. Although right now I am leaning towards the Canon based on previous experience with their products and superior photos. However, the Panasonic offering higher video quality in HD format is enticing.
1746411
That is what I needed to hear! I have the Canon EOS 7D and love it, But...as you said by the time you carry around all the gear for "sight seeing", I'm exhausted. I too am looking for that mid level (super zoom) companion to go along with my Canon when called of. I was a little hesitant to go with a Panasonic but everything I have read about this camera has been positive.I have yet to actually find a store who has one on display, looks like I will have to order it blindly and pray!
1119976
I also have a Canon and am not impressed with it. I just purchased the Sony W170 because I have a family member who used at Christmas. I was impressed with the size and ease of use. I will have to replace all my memory cards and batteries. I am not too upset about the batteries as my Canon Sureshot took about 5 pictures and died. I even bought an extra battery, same thing. I am excited about getting the camera. Should arrive by Jan 6th.
2204732
I considered the Canon, but it uses AA batteries - which is a big no-no for me. I found picture quality comparable. The screen on the Nikon is much better.
490817
I bit the bullet and went with the Sony. Mainly because Circuit City was offering it for $329. Also because it had a better fps and ISO capabilities, if I remember correctly. The 4 gigs of memory set me back $59 though and the case was another $20, so that put me at $415 after tax. I must say that this thing takes awesome pics. I got it mainly for my kids sports. The 2.2 fps and sports mode are nice. The image stabilization seems to do a good job to on other pics. I have not used the remote control yet, but plan on usnig it to try and get some close ups of birds or squirrels, etc on a day when I have nothing else to do. I bit the bullet and went with the Sony. Mainly because Circuit City was offering it for $329. Also because it had a better fps and ISO capabilities, if I remember correctly. The 4 gigs of memory set me back $59 though and the case was another $20, so that put me at $415 after tax. I must say that this thing takes awesome pics. I got it mainly for my kids sports. The 2.2 fps and sports mode are nice. The image stabilization seems to do a good job to on other pics. I have not used the remote control yet, but plan on usnig it to try and get some close ups of birds or squirrels, etc on a day... » Read More I bit the bullet and went with the Sony. Mainly because Circuit City was offering it for $329. Also because it had a better fps and ISO capabilities, if I remember correctly. The 4 gigs of memory set me back $59 though and the case was another $20, so that put me at $415 after tax. I must say that this thing takes awesome pics. I got it mainly for my kids sports. The 2.2 fps and sports mode are nice. The image stabilization seems to do a good job to on other pics. I have not used the remote control yet, but plan on usnig it to try and get some close ups of birds or squirrels, etc on a day when I have nothing else to do. « Show Less
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
155655
Love my Sigma. It is fantastic lens for the money. If video is a requirement, I recommend the Sony. The OSS makes for much better video. BTW - when I shoot video, I change to 16-50 lens with OSS.