Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 25, 2005, 12:21 PM   #1
Junior Member
mrag's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13

I started with a Canon Powershot 110 and moved to Canon S400 about 2 years ago. Been very happy with the existing quality (lack of photographer's creativity and eye). Keep thinking I may one day print an 8x10, but so far only tried one using the 110 and it seemed acceptable (to me anyway). I keep promising to read through the users manual to use all the bells and whistles, but probably won't study it. I really have enjoyed the movie mode on the S400. Small physical size important-SD300 size is 'smaller' enough (yet large enough not to get lost). I'm kind of sold on sticking with Canon.

It seems the SD400 would cost $30 more than an SD300. The SD450 would be $66 more than the SD300 ($38 more than the SD400). Now have 1.5" screen so 2" would seem huge (at least it would appear so to start with).

Are the movies that much better than the old S400?
Will a 2.5" screen be that much better to have?
What seems the best deal for a novice type like myself?

Am kind of leaning towards SD300 and using $ for new battery and sd card although it seems we're only talking $66 difference. I've read about the lcd cracking problem (is this mainly the SD300?-it would be a concern).

I've been up and down this board and several other sites. I'm wondering if I'm suffering information overlaod. Thanks for any feedback.
mrag is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 25, 2005, 12:44 PM   #2
Junior Member
narz's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3

i, too, am trying to decide between an SD300 vs. SD400.

the largest photo i would print is 8x10. iwant a really small/compact camera that i can just carry around with me in my pocket.

is it true that despite the SD400 being 5MP that the SD300 takes better photos?

i think the only thing of concern with me is that some of the reviews that i've read about the SD300 say that the screen cracks. is this true? do you think the users were being too rough with them and that's what caused them to crack? have there been issues with teh SD400 cracking??

narz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2005, 4:01 PM   #3
Junior Member
mrag's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 13

I temporarily bought the sd400 (5MP) yesterday. The size and feel and start up time compared to my Powershot S400 (4MP) is truly wonderful-it really is a (shirt) pocket camera (the S400 is a tad big). The 2" screen is great compared to a mere 1.5" screen (I wonder if the SD450's 2.5" screen is just inviting more scratches and possible damage-is bigger really better?). That said, I feel the image quality of the S400 (or the S410) is clearly superior in detail and in color rendition (when comparing one image against the other at least and using the standard "automatic settings"). The flash is "better" (brighter? in the S400) and the S400 seems much more durable. As expected, image size in MB is about 20% higher in the SD400. As I do not normally crop or print 8x10 and typically put my photos on web albums-I'm "losing" about 20% of my sd card's memory (IOW, I could take 30-40 more pictures with the S400 with the same size memory card) and creating bigger image files for others to download. Still need some more night shots and movie tests for my purposes, but the SD300 is looking better and better. I would hope the SD300 could match the photo quality of the "old" S400.

DCResource's review suggests the SD300 might give a slightly "nicer" image than the SD400. I would think the SD400 and SD450 images to be identical although I've seen one poster say the SD450 is a notch better. I borrowed two of Steve's sample images from each of the S400, SD300, SD400 and SD450 samples. Obviously they were taken at different times of the year and time of day (even if it is Florida) and from slightly different vantage points and have been resized for the web. They are the same subject. But is there a noticeable difference to the trained eye (mine are untrained)? A suggestion, view using F11 (full screen) and just click through the (there are only eight total images) thumbnails and note which one of the slide images, if any, is better or worse. Don't try and read the file name until you've decided which you like or don't like. The file name will tell you which camera. I'm curious what others see. I'll leave this image comparison url for the next 30 days or so:


(Update) Was in Circuit City today (10/29) and looked at SD450 (and a Panasonic and Casio-Canon still the choice for a "pocket" camera). I see no reason to buy the SD400-if you really, really need the pixels, get the SD450. I like the idea of the 2.5" screen, but it does seem to be inviting problems both in size (for scratches, etc) and location-it extends almost to the lower edge of the case. Showing others photos on the camera is nice, but 2" does seem quite sufficient for most applications-heck 1.5" has worked fine for me the last two years. All things considered today, it seems the choice would be between the SD300 ($250 and is a bit "flashier" looking-more chrome and stainless)) and now the SD200 ($200) with any savings going towards a high speed 1 GB SD card and spare battery.

mrag 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 3:13 PM.