Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 12, 2007, 4:16 PM   #11
Junior Member
NathanShumaker's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8

One of the first things that a new Canon PowerShot SX100 IS owner should do is attach the included wrist strap. The SX100's cheap feeling plastic body is very slippery and has already squirted out of both of my hands on one occasion. Fortunately, I had the camera tethered to my wrist so no damage was done.

Soon after this lesson, we purchased a set of sticky cell phone grip pads from Wal-Mart and stuck them to several locations on the SX100 IS body. This made the camera much easier to hold securely and is highly recommended. Canon should consider adding such simple but valuable improvements to the SX100's successor.

While I knocked the SX100 for its poor burst performance, its shot-to-shot speed when the flash is engaged is even more miserable. The user must wait up to ten seconds for the flash capacitors to recharge between snapshots. This is attributable to Canon's decision to use only two AA batteries instead of the four usually found in Canon's A-series cameras. The S3 and S5 also hold four batteries.

Hopefully, Canon will increase the SX100's replacement battery capacity to 4 AA's. The SX100 is already the bulkiest of the current field of compact superzooms, but it is similar in size to a typical Canon A-series camera, so this improvement should easily be possible.

I have been disappointed to witness at least one professional reviewer misrepresent the SX100's video capabilities. The SX100 can neither optically zoom nor change focus while recording. The camera can, however, digitally zoom while recording video, but this results in hideous pixelization, so it is of very little utility.

There is reason to believe that Canon originally designed the SX100 with an articulating display since early promotional material mentioned this feature. An articulating display would greatly improve the SX100's handling since it is very difficult to keep a scene framed and the camera steady at arm's length at 10x zoom even with optical image stabilization.

If a camera maker is going to eliminate the viewfinder on a superzoom, the least that it can do is add an articulating display to compensate for this handicap.

After using the Canon PowerShot SX100 IS for several weeks, it is impossible to not be disappointed. Canon clearly cut many corners with this camera to boost profit margins. These compromises undercut quality and usability. Hopefully this does not signal a downward trend for Canon.

Potential Canon SX100IS buyers should first seriously consider full featured superzooms like the Canon S5, Kodak Z812-IS or the Panasonic FZ8 or FZ18 first. The Canon PowerShot SX100 IS simply has too many serious feature and quality compromises.
NathanShumaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2007, 11:04 AM   #12
Junior Member
daregan's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1

I created an account just to respond to this post:

No one who takes any serious pictures uses ISO above 200, and besides, this is a digital camera, it should take great pictures first, all else second. Besides, if you really want video, you should get a camera that takes MPEG4.

According to dpreview:

Sony H3 wide angle = 38, Canon = 36

Sony min. aperature = 3.5, Canon = 2.8

LCD screen resolution Sony = 115k, Canon = 172k

Battery Sony = proprietary, Canon = AA's (2 so it's not so dang bulky)

And to top it all off it seems you can get the Canon for slightly less than the Sony. Looks like Canon is beating the pants off the Sony H3.

I have the Sony H1, the Canon is basically the same size minus the H1's lens.

Be VERY wary of a Kodak. I've yet to use a Kodak camera that has proper exposure for tricky shots, such as overriding the flash. Panasonics tend to be noisy. The only other camera I'd suggest would be Sony.
daregan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 12, 2007, 9:36 AM   #13
Junior Member
manojchavda's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1

Hello all,

Some points:
  • Despite the SX100 not having optical zoom or ability to change focus during video recording, I found the video quality pretty good. Even though this is no video recorder; quality is far from atrocious.[/*]
  • The SD card and batteries are under the same flap. The SD card is recessed into the body, and is released by pushing it down and letting it spring up. Unless you turn the camera upside-down while removing the SD card (why would you do this?) there's no danger of the batteries spilling out.[/*]
I love the fact that the camera is compact and that it uses regular AA batteries and an SD card (nothing proprietary); it would be bulkier with 4 batteries.

As for the image quality - don't shoot above ISO 400.

manojchavda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2007, 9:31 AM   #14
Junior Member
richardstuart's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1

Sony DSC-H3 comes with a lens hood. User's Guide recommends using it when shooting in bright sunlight (to avoid distracting light). Lens hood is bulky so either you can't put camera in case, or you have to screw on lens hood each time you shoot. Not convenient.

Canon SX 100 IS doesn't need lens hood.

Do you really need it with Sony? If yes, how does Canon function well without needing one.
richardstuart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2008, 4:47 PM   #15
whyzor's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 33

I tried the SX100 a few months ago and returned it. It was a nice camera, fast lens. But the major issues I had were:

- Chromatic aberration (purple fringing) was more severe than other cameras from what I've noticed. It's one of the prices to pay for such a large zoom range.

- Battery consumption was bad, probably due to a bigger, more power hungry motor to wind the bigger lens.

- A bit bulkier than I'd like. I like the big lens since it's fast (big aperture to let in more light). But the body was too thick and could probably use some optimization. A thinner body with the same big lens would be fine.

- Flash recycle time was slow, but I prefer they kept the 2AA battery source. Flash doesn't always fire at full power, so sometimes you can get faster recycle times depending on how close your subject is. Maybe the next version will be thriftier.
whyzor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2008, 11:02 PM   #16
Senior Member
mtclimber's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143


I honestly believe that you gave up much too easily. The Canon SX-100 is a very versitile and capablecamera, that truly and reallydeserves your full attention. It can do much more than you might have suspeted. Are ready for a few surprises. Well, get ready. Those surprise photos will be right here.

Sarah joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 26, 2008, 11:45 AM   #17
Senior Member
Setter Dog's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 630

I use a Canon A710 and a Canon TX1. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I love the handling quality of the 710. It can be operated with one hand from turn on, through zoom, to turn off. The viewfinder is great. I'm a video taker and the VGA is excellent with good OIS and acceptable sound. Unfortunately, it doesn't zoom during video.

The TX1 is a really fine camera, small and pocketable. Exceptionally well built and fun to use, providing you have two hands available and can concentrate on what you're doing. The tiny LCD and fiddly controls make it tough to use casually and certainly not with one hand. For controlled situations, the great HD and stereo sound make it my go to camera.

Here's hoping Canon will humor those of us that like video by putting HD and zoom video in an A series camera soon.
Setter Dog is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:30 AM.