Best Camera in Canon
About seven months ago, we recommended the Panasonic SZ7 as the best super cheap camera around, and for a $125 it's still a good option. But since then, Canon has released the Canon PowerShot 320 HS (or Canon ...
Best Camera in Canon
Like with most products, it’s actually harder to pick a good, affordable camera than it is to pick an expensive, high-end one. The fancier it is, the more places review it, and the better outside opinion you can get of the camera. But for the dozens of $100-$200 cameras out there? Most of them barely even get glanced at. Which is why it’s so easy to end up with a crappy Kodak point-and-shoot that takes horrible pictures. But, with a bit of leg work, we’ve managed to plow through the fifteen or so vaguely respectable cameras that cost less than $150 and narrow it down to the Canon PowerShot 320 HS (or the Canon PowerShot 110 HS, if you hate touchscreens and Wi-Fi.)
I’ve spent the last five or so years writing about gadgets with a focus on cameras. I’ve written for DPReview, Imaging Resource, PopPhoto, and DigitalCameraInfo, not to mention being the go-to camera guy for the Wirecutter. I’ve also spent 10 hours analysing what’s currently available and figuring out what’s the best option.
I also read all the existing literature around that I could find on budget point and shoots, so I’m relying on the knowledge of reputable reviewers, as well as my own experience with these cheap cameras.
If you don’t need a cut-price camera, it’s definitely worth saving up a bit for something that goes for a slightly higher price like one of these cameras for under $400.
Alternatively, if you have a smartphone, and don’t need the zoom of a dedicated camera, you’ll probably be more or less fine just using that.
But sometimes you want a cheap camera. You want one you can throw in your bag and go to the beach with, or give to your kid, or use around food. One where losing or destroying it isn’t the end of the world. Or maybe grandma just wants something she can take on her vacation. But, you still want it to take good photographs.
The most important feature in a camera is the ability to take good photographs, which means clear, sharp images, without huge amounts of image noise at higher ISOs. But anecdotally, speed comes in a very close second to that. Chatting to folks I know who aren’t camera buffs, one thing that often frustrates them is if their camera is slow. Slow to turn on, slow gap between photos, slow to focus, and worst of all, a long delay between hitting the shutter and the photo being taken. Many of those problems seem to become less and less common with each generation, but with everything else being equal, CMOS sensor based cameras tend to be faster than their CCD counterpart.
One of the other factors is how it handles in low light. It’s easy to take gorgeous photographs under a sunny blue sky, but it’s a lot harder at a dimly lit birthday party. To that end, you want a lens with a large maximum aperture to let in lots of light, a high maximum ISO, as little image noise as you can, and an optical stabilization system to steady your hand. It’s worth noting that at this price range, you’ll never see a really fast f/2.0 or better lens, like pop up on some of the more expensive cameras, but some are definitely still better than others.
Portability is also a nice feature to have since you’re more likely to take a camera with you if it’s easy to carry. Same goes for Wi-Fi and touchscreens, which have become so common over the past few years thanks to smartphones and tablets gaining ground.
The Canon 320 HS hits all the right boxes, and also carries a few rather fancy tricks up its sleeves. For a street price of $145, it shoots 16.1-megapixel images, 1080p video at 24fps, has a 5x 24-120mm zoom lens, and an aperture range of f/2.7-5.9. For a low end camera, that’s one of the fastest lenses available (typically cameras in this range will have a slower maximum aperture of f/3.1), which should hopefully get you a little bit better shots in low light. And while the zoom and video controls might not be the biggest or best, they’re at least on par with the competition.
At this price point, the 320 HS has some of the better image quality available. The image noise stays nice and low at everything ISO 800 and below, and even above that doesn't do any worse than other cameras at this price range. It also produces sharp images, thanks to the good lens on the front.
The speed of the 320 HS is decent, but not great. It can fire off 5.2 frames per second in burst mode with reduced resolution, 1.9 frames per second at full size. That’s significantly faster than the sloth-like Samsung WB150F, and it’s 0.66fps, but slower than the Nikon S9200, which manages nearly 7fps at full resolution (but fails on the image quality front)
The 320 HS is also pleasantly tiny, it’s an affordable and eminently pocketable camera. It’s just 3.7 inches long, 2.2 tall, and 0.8 thick. That’s marginally longer but shorter than a standard 3.5×2.5 deck of cards, and about as thick. That’s definitely small enough to put in a pocket, without having to worry about it.
The 320 HS also packs a Wi-Fi connection, which lets you wirelessly beam photos to and from your computer/smartphone/tablet, and a touchscreen, which gives you the now ubiquitous tap to focus ability popularized by smartphone cameras. There’s a fairly good chance that using Wi-Fi frequently will lower your battery life, but no one online seemed to be complaining specifically of that. If, however, you’re not a fan of either touchscreens or Wi-Fi, Canon also has the nearly identical and slightly cheaper Canon 110 HS. It has exactly the same specs, just no touchscreen or Wi-Fi, and it goes for $140. If you don’t feel like setting up a Wi-Fi network, or nosing through menus by touch, you’ll get just as good a camera under a slightly different name.
The 320 HS is a bit of a jack of all trades. It doesn’t have the long zoom of the Nikon S9200 or Samsung WB150F, nor the 60fps 1080p video of the Panasonic SZ7. But it has a fast lens, and manages to be good enough in all of these factors, and to take sharp and low noise images for this price-point.
PCMag’s review of the camera complemented it for both the low image noise at ISOs below 1600, meaning you can shoot with it in relatively dim conditions, and the very sharp lens. The website also measured the camera's speed as 2.2 seconds to power up, a wait of 0.6 seconds between shots, and 0.2 seconds to focus, which they call “fairly par for the course for a compact point-and-shoot.”
TechRadar even thought it handled ISOs higher than that well, saying “Our sensitivity (ISO) test shots reveal that the camera performs very well, holding plenty of detail all the way up to the maximum sensitivity of ISO 3200” and that it’s “Great in low light”. They also liked the feel and lok of the camera, commenting “The build quality is also pleasing and the camera really does look rather smart.”
ePhotoZine, in turn, were impressed by the color reproduction and lens performance, overall saying the camera “takes excellent pictures and has some very appealing features such as its stylish looks, slim metal body and Wi-Fi capabilities.” ePhotoZine’s speed tests produced results similar to PCMag's.
PhotographyBlog’s review touched on the image stabilization system, saying “Anti-shake works very well when hand-holding the camera in low-light conditions or when using the telephoto end of the zoom range,” and they also complemented the short, 3cm macro range.
That’s not to say it’s without flaws. Opinions are divided on how effective both the touchscreen and Wi-Fi actually are on this camera — which is why we’re also recommended a near identical version without those features, the PowerShot 110 HS.
Mark Sparrow of Tech Radar was perhaps the most vocal critic of both systems, citing the negatives of the camera as “The confusing Wi-Fi function, the convoluted menu system and the torturous[sic] touchscreen menu really made this a disappointing camera to use, especially considering its price.”
Jim Fisher of PC Mag called the screen “frustrating” and “difficult to use”, and PhotographyBlog said “The touchscreen interface isn't the best that we've ever used.” On the flip side, ePhotoZine said “the touch screen is very responsive and easy to use”, and Mario Aguilar of Gizmodo called the touchscreen “handsome.”
Likewise, some people were fond of the Wi-Fi system, others less so. Gizmodo dubbed the 320 HS one of “The Best Inexpensive Point-and-Shoot Camera with Wi-Fi”, and while they critiqued the tricky to setup Wi-Fi system, they said “Once it's connected and all of the services are set up, though, the camera's Wi-Fi works quickly.” ePhotoZine said the setup was “easy” and PCMag said “The Wi-Fi features are pretty neat, although understanding how to use them takes a little bit of time.”
The other notable downside of the 320 HS is that the battery life isn’t stellar. Both the 320 HS and the sibling model of the 110 HS have an official estimate of 170 shots on a single charge. Compare this to last year’s pick of the Panasonic SZ7, which was officially rated for 250 shots.
However, as it stands, the Canon 320 HS has some of the better image quality around at this price point, and misses many of the glaring flaws in the competition, which makes it our pick.
There are many, many, many other cameras around this price point. Some of them debuted very cheap, some are more expensive and then made their way down as they got old. However after eyeing up a large number of them, only a handful really deserve a second look.
The Nikon S9200 has everything right on paper, but it doesn’t hold up when it comes to image quality. It has an 18x zoom, a high-res 921,000 dot display, and can fire off full size images at 7fps.
Unfortunately, the S9200 actually hasn’t really been reviewed anywhere, but the more expensive sibling model S9300 is identical (barring a GPS unit), so we can look to reviews of that for image quality. DCResource critiqued it for soft and noisy images even at ISO 125, and the total lack of manual controls, Pocket Lint said the image quality didn’t live up to its predecessor, Trusted Reviews said “Image quality not up to that of its rivals”, and Tech Radar said “overall image quality isn't as good as it could be. The camera has no manual control, and rival models from other manufacturers seem to offer a more compelling overall package.”
The Sony WX70 is another compelling camera on paper, but untested. We can’t give it any sort of recommendation without a decent number of outside sources commenting on how well this camera works.
The Samsung WB150F is a really interesting piece of competition, but it's too slow to be a serious contender. It debuted for $300, but now has a street price of just $125. In the camera’s favor is an 18x zoom lens, Wi-Fi, and good reviews from the likes of PCMag, DCI, and CNET. And while it takes great photos and has Wi-Fi, it’s slow as molasses. The slower CCD sensor means you’re stuck shooting at just 0.66fps. That’s less than a photo a second, even in burst mode. And that’s not really tenable, especially with a long zoom. If you’re at full 18x zoom, and trying to snap a photo of your kids playing sports? That delay means you’ll miss the action. You might as well put a motorcycle engine in a full-size pickup truck.
One of the most compelling alternatives is still our pick from last year, the Panasonic SZ7. You can read all about what’s good with it on our review. But ePhotoZine rated the Canon higher than the SZ7. And while the implementation might not be perfect, the inclusion of Wi-Fi is still a nice feature, and being able to easily beam photos to your smartphone or Facebook is nothing to scoff at. But that begs the question, why not just skip the camera in the first place?
There’s a reason the low-end camera market is hurting right now, and that’s because everyone uses their smartphone for the majority of the sort of snap-happy, straightforward photography that a cheapo point-and-shoot used to be used for. Flickr’s three most popular cameras of all time are the iPhone 4S, iPhone 4, and iPhone 5. The camera makers have reacted to this by making low-end cameras more smartphone-like (you could argue that’s why the 320 HS has a touchscreen and Wi-Fi), and by pouring most of their efforts into the higher end stuff.
Ok, so your cellphone camera doesn’t have an optical zoom. And it probably doesn’t have aperture and ISO adjustments. But it does have a seemingly infinite variety of apps, so that you can shoot timelapses, HDR, panoramas, and just about everything else that you wouldn’t find in a super-cheap camera. Plus, it’s already in your pocket. I love the panorama feature on my iPhone 5, I use it constantly.
One major reason you might opt for a cheapo camera instead of your smartphone is that it’s a bit less heartbreaking if something happens to it. A dead smartphone is a major problem, but a dead $150 camera is survivable.
These sorts of cameras get updated a couple of times a year. So every few months a new crop will come through, and previously slightly more expensive models will drop down to a more acceptable price. These new cameras sometimes include features that have trickled down from more expensive models, which is why we’re starting to see cameras that have features like touchscreens and Wi-Fi for less than $150.
Especially keep your eyes open just before the holidays, and a large number of these will be released for Black Friday and the Christmas shopping season.
In all honesty, the super cheap compact camera is a dying breed. For most people, I'd say either use your smartphone, or go a step up with a good camera for around $250. But if you really do want a camera that's less than $150, we'd recommend the Canon PowerShot 320 HS. The comparatively low image noise, sharp photographs, and kinda-fast lens put it ahead of most of the competition at this price point. And while the touchscreen and Wi-Fi may not be perfect, they're still good features to have on hand. Plus if something sad happens to it, it won't be the end of the world.
Jim Fisher, PCMag, Canon PowerShot Elph 320 HS, 3.5/5, June 08, 2012. "The Canon PowerShot Elph 320 HS is a small shooter with a large touch-screen LCD and Wi-Fi. Its lens is sharp, but only covers a 5x zoom range, and the practicality of the touch screen is questionable."
Mark Sparrow, TechRadar, Canon IXUS 240 HS review, 3/5, June 15, 2012. "The good points of the Canon IXUS 240 HS are the smart styling, the sweet lens, responsive shutter and the competent low-light performance. But unless you really must have Wi-Fi and a touchscreen, look at something else, since these gimmicks aren't worth the higher price tag."
Daniel Bell, ePhotoZine, Canon IXUS 240 HS Wi-Fi Digital Camera Review, 4/5, April 23, 2012. "The Canon IXUS 240 HS takes excellent pictures and has some very appealing features such as its stylish looks, slim metal body and Wi-Fi capabilities. If these features are appealing to you then the camera won't disappoint, but up against others with the same resolution and zoom, there are many cheaper options. If you are out shooting for an extended period of time you might find the battery life quite restricting and therefore may need a spare, thus adding to the cost. The IXUS 240 HS also records at full 1080p HD and the touch screen is extremely easy to use."
Mark Goldstein, PhotographyBlog, Canon IXUS 240 HS Review, 5/5 "Recommended", May 24, 2012. "Ultimately the IXUS 240 HS comes most highly recommended to casual photographers looking for a bang up-to-date point and shoot that importantly produces good looking images. If you don’t mind paying a price premium for all the extra bells and whistles, then the Canon IXUS 240 HS makes a great pocket companion."
Mario Aguilar, Gizmodo, The Best Inexpensive Point-and-Shoot Camera with Wi-Fi, 3.5/5, April 19, 2012. "These cameras are right for the non-iPhone-using consumer who wants a wireless way to shoot and post images and video online. For that buyer, we recommend the Canon 320 HS. It was a little more complicated to configue, but once it got going, the Wi-Fi features were faster and the design was a notch better than the Samsung WB150f."
Jeff Keller, DC Resource, Nikon Coolpix S9300 Review, July 11, 2012. "Overall, I found that the Coolpix S9300 is a decent travel zoom camera, but there are several competitors that I think are better choices. While it does offer a nice point-and-shoot feature set, the mediocre photo quality, poor battery life, and other annoyances prevent me from recommending it."
Audley Jarvis, Trusted Reviews, Nikon Coolpix S9300 review, 7/10, July 31, 2012. "While the S9300's 18x optic is a little lacking in zoom power compared to its 20x rivals, the camera does distinguish itself in other areas – most notably with its high-speed shooting abilities. Sadly this is somewhat undone by image quality though, which isn’t as good as that produced by some of its rivals. Overall then, while the S9300 certainly has its merits, it’s not quite enough to keep up with the competition."
Christofer Lloyd, TechRadar, Nikon Coolpix S9300 review, 2.5/5, August 17, 2012. "Nikon has crammed a wide range of valuable features into the relatively slim body of the Nikon Coolpix S9300. Overall it is an enjoyable camera to use and feels sturdy. However, the underwhelming battery life, imperfect general image quality and questionable reliability make rival models a wiser choice."
Jim Fisher, PCMag, Samsung WB150F, 3.5/5, April 10, 2012. "It's not perfect, but the nicely priced compact Samsung WB150F camera packs a sharp 18x zoom lens and integrated Wi-Fi so you can email or upload your pics to Facebook easily."
Christopher Snow, DigitalCameraInfo, Samsung WB150F, 7.6/10, March 2, 2012. "The truth is, nobody released a high-quality camera for under $200 in 2012. Yet out of all the sub-$200 cameras (or cameras that fell under $200 due to a price drop, like this one), the WB150F earned the highest scores. If you absolutely cannot spend more than $200 for a camera, here’s your best choice. We understand people are on a budget, may not have a smartphone, and still want a new camera for themselves or as a gift."
Nik Rawlinson, CNET UK, Samsung WB150F review, 4.5/5, March 20, 2012. "The WB150F is a great-looking camera that produces a punchy set of snaps. The built-in Wi-Fi makes it easy to share your pictures directly without first downloading them to your computer, but we'd have liked to have seen Samsung push this feature a little further. Still, at £190, it's a bargain."
Daniel Bell, ePhotoZine, Panasonic Lumix DMC-SZ7 Digital Compact Camera Review, 3.5/5, April 10, 2012. "The Panasonic Lumix SZ-7 has a decent amount of zoom packed into a compact body, making it an ideal camera for taking on your holidays as it is very easy to carry around. The zoom can be extended using intelligent zoom and the camera takes a decent picture, shoots up to ISO 3200 at full resolution and records full 1080p HD videos."
Kelcey Smith, Andy Westlake, DPReview, Canon PowerShot S100 Review, 72%, "Silver Award", December 2011. "The Canon S100 is particularly well-suited to two types of photographers: compact camera shooters looking to upgrade to a similarly small camera with more control, raw mode and better image quality, and ILC photographers looking for a truly compact 'take anywhere' pocket camera with much of the same manual control as their larger cameras. The addition of GPS and full HD video recording make the S100 feel more complete than the S95, which was a very capable camera but in some respects lagged slightly behind on its feature set when compared to the competition. The additional lens range, too, is very welcome, and makes the S100 just that little bit more versatile than its predecessors."
Shawn Barnett, Stephanie Boozer, and Zig Weidelich, Imaging-Resource, Canon PowerShot S100, February 23, 2011. "Canon's premium pocket digital camera, the PowerShot S100, gets a facelift, plus the addition of a wider lens, higher resolution video, a few more megapixels, and built-in GPS. It's not quite as fast in the autofocus department as we like to see, but otherwise it's an incremental improvement in all areas, making Canon's premium pocket camera even better."
Christopher Snow, DigitalCameraInfo, Canon PowerShot SX260 HS, 9.1/10, August 15, 2012. "Canon’s SX260 HS has posted the best scores of any travel zoom camera that we’ve tested so far in 2012, and we think there’s a pretty good chance it will carry this title all the way to our end of the year awards. But test scores aside, we really just enjoyed shooting with it. The camera is quick, compact, comfortable, and produces above-average photos in many different situations. This is an ideal travel companion."
Tim's a freelance science and tech writer, whose work has appeared at io9, PopPhoto, DigitalCameraInfo, the Verge and the Wirecutter. He's an avidly average photographer, travel addict, and occasionally dabbles in mad cheffery.
About seven months ago, we recommended the Panasonic SZ7 as the best super cheap camera around, and for a $125 it’s still a good option. But since then, Canon has released the Canon PowerShot 320 HS (or Canon IXUS 240 HS in Europe), and after a number of price drops, for less than $150 you get just as good of a camera, but with built-in Wi-Fi and a touchscreen.
The Sony RX100 is the best compact camera you can buy, but $650 is a lot of money. If you want to spend a lot less, the $300-$400 Panasonic LX7 is a fantastic advanced camera alternative, with sharp and accurate images, although it is not the smallest camera. It replaces our current pick, the Canon S100, which has been king for a while.
For a compact camera that will take great photos and HD video whether you're splashing around in a swimming pool, snorkeling through a school of fish or just horsing around on terra firma, the Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS, at $380, is the one to get.
Digital cameras are leaping ahead in image quality but there's still something to be said for the spontaneity and charm of an instant camera. I like the Fujifilm Instax 210, at $60.
The Wirecutter is a list of great technology by Brian Lam and FriendsNeed help finding a different gadget? Just Ask!Material on The Wirecutter is copyrighted. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.
I’ve spent the last five or so years writing about gadgets with a focus on cameras. I’ve written for DPReview, Imaging Resource, PopPhoto, and DigitalCameraInfo, not to mention being the go-to camera guy for the Wirecutter. I’ve also spent 10 hours analysing what’s currently available and figuring out what’s the best option.
I also read all the existing literature around that I could find on budget point and shoots, so I’m relying on the knowledge of reputable reviewers, as well as my own experience with these cheap cameras.
If you don’t need a cut-price camera, it’s definitely worth saving up a bit for something that goes for a slightly higher price like one of these cameras for under $400.
Alternatively, if you have a smartphone, and don’t need the zoom of a dedicated camera, you’ll probably be more or less fine just using that.
But sometimes you want a cheap camera. You want one you can throw in your bag and go to the beach with, or give to your kid, or use around food. One where losing or destroying it isn’t the end of the world. Or maybe grandma just wants something she can take on her vacation. But, you still want it to take good photographs.
The most important feature in a camera is the ability to take good photographs, which means clear, sharp images, without huge amounts of image noise at higher ISOs. But anecdotally, speed comes in a very close second to that. Chatting to folks I know who aren’t camera buffs, one thing that often frustrates them is if their camera is slow. Slow to turn on, slow gap between photos, slow to focus, and worst of all, a long delay between hitting the shutter and the photo being taken. Many of those problems seem to become less and less common with each generation, but with everything else being equal, CMOS sensor based cameras tend to be faster than their CCD counterpart.
One of the other factors is how it handles in low light. It’s easy to take gorgeous photographs under a sunny blue sky, but it’s a lot harder at a dimly lit birthday party. To that end, you want a lens with a large maximum aperture to let in lots of light, a high maximum ISO, as little image noise as you can, and an optical stabilization system to steady your hand. It’s worth noting that at this price range, you’ll never see a really fast f/2.0 or better lens, like pop up on some of the more expensive cameras, but some are definitely still better than others.
Portability is also a nice feature to have since you’re more likely to take a camera with you if it’s easy to carry. Same goes for Wi-Fi and touchscreens, which have become so common over the past few years thanks to smartphones and tablets gaining ground.
The Canon 320 HS hits all the right boxes, and also carries a few rather fancy tricks up its sleeves. For a street price of $145, it shoots 16.1-megapixel images, 1080p video at 24fps, has a 5x 24-120mm zoom lens, and an aperture range of f/2.7-5.9. For a low end camera, that’s one of the fastest lenses available (typically cameras in this range will have a slower maximum aperture of f/3.1), which should hopefully get you a little bit better shots in low light. And while the zoom and video controls might not be the biggest or best, they’re at least on par with the competition.
At this price point, the 320 HS has some of the better image quality available. The image noise stays nice and low at everything ISO 800 and below, and even above that doesn't do any worse than other cameras at this price range. It also produces sharp images, thanks to the good lens on the front.
The speed of the 320 HS is decent, but not great. It can fire off 5.2 frames per second in burst mode with reduced resolution, 1.9 frames per second at full size. That’s significantly faster than the sloth-like Samsung WB150F, and it’s 0.66fps, but slower than the Nikon S9200, which manages nearly 7fps at full resolution (but fails on the image quality front)
The 320 HS is also pleasantly tiny, it’s an affordable and eminently pocketable camera. It’s just 3.7 inches long, 2.2 tall, and 0.8 thick. That’s marginally longer but shorter than a standard 3.5×2.5 deck of cards, and about as thick. That’s definitely small enough to put in a pocket, without having to worry about it.
The 320 HS also packs a Wi-Fi connection, which lets you wirelessly beam photos to and from your computer/smartphone/tablet, and a touchscreen, which gives you the now ubiquitous tap to focus ability popularized by smartphone cameras. There’s a fairly good chance that using Wi-Fi frequently will lower your battery life, but no one online seemed to be complaining specifically of that. If, however, you’re not a fan of either touchscreens or Wi-Fi, Canon also has the nearly identical and slightly cheaper Canon 110 HS. It has exactly the same specs, just no touchscreen or Wi-Fi, and it goes for $140. If you don’t feel like setting up a Wi-Fi network, or nosing through menus by touch, you’ll get just as good a camera under a slightly different name.
The 320 HS is a bit of a jack of all trades. It doesn’t have the long zoom of the Nikon S9200 or Samsung WB150F, nor the 60fps 1080p video of the Panasonic SZ7. But it has a fast lens, and manages to be good enough in all of these factors, and to take sharp and low noise images for this price-point.
PCMag’s review of the camera complemented it for both the low image noise at ISOs below 1600, meaning you can shoot with it in relatively dim conditions, and the very sharp lens. The website also measured the camera's speed as 2.2 seconds to power up, a wait of 0.6 seconds between shots, and 0.2 seconds to focus, which they call “fairly par for the course for a compact point-and-shoot.”
TechRadar even thought it handled ISOs higher than that well, saying “Our sensitivity (ISO) test shots reveal that the camera performs very well, holding plenty of detail all the way up to the maximum sensitivity of ISO 3200” and that it’s “Great in low light”. They also liked the feel and lok of the camera, commenting “The build quality is also pleasing and the camera really does look rather smart.”
ePhotoZine, in turn, were impressed by the color reproduction and lens performance, overall saying the camera “takes excellent pictures and has some very appealing features such as its stylish looks, slim metal body and Wi-Fi capabilities.” ePhotoZine’s speed tests produced results similar to PCMag's.
PhotographyBlog’s review touched on the image stabilization system, saying “Anti-shake works very well when hand-holding the camera in low-light conditions or when using the telephoto end of the zoom range,” and they also complemented the short, 3cm macro range.
That’s not to say it’s without flaws. Opinions are divided on how effective both the touchscreen and Wi-Fi actually are on this camera — which is why we’re also recommended a near identical version without those features, the PowerShot 110 HS.
Mark Sparrow of Tech Radar was perhaps the most vocal critic of both systems, citing the negatives of the camera as “The confusing Wi-Fi function, the convoluted menu system and the torturous[sic] touchscreen menu really made this a disappointing camera to use, especially considering its price.”
Jim Fisher of PC Mag called the screen “frustrating” and “difficult to use”, and PhotographyBlog said “The touchscreen interface isn't the best that we've ever used.” On the flip side, ePhotoZine said “the touch screen is very responsive and easy to use”, and Mario Aguilar of Gizmodo called the touchscreen “handsome.”
Likewise, some people were fond of the Wi-Fi system, others less so. Gizmodo dubbed the 320 HS one of “The Best Inexpensive Point-and-Shoot Camera with Wi-Fi”, and while they critiqued the tricky to setup Wi-Fi system, they said “Once it's connected and all of the services are set up, though, the camera's Wi-Fi works quickly.” ePhotoZine said the setup was “easy” and PCMag said “The Wi-Fi features are pretty neat, although understanding how to use them takes a little bit of time.”
The other notable downside of the 320 HS is that the battery life isn’t stellar. Both the 320 HS and the sibling model of the 110 HS have an official estimate of 170 shots on a single charge. Compare this to last year’s pick of the Panasonic SZ7, which was officially rated for 250 shots.
However, as it stands, the Canon 320 HS has some of the better image quality around at this price point, and misses many of the glaring flaws in the competition, which makes it our pick.
There are many, many, many other cameras around this price point. Some of them debuted very cheap, some are more expensive and then made their way down as they got old. However after eyeing up a large number of them, only a handful really deserve a second look.
The Nikon S9200 has everything right on paper, but it doesn’t hold up when it comes to image quality. It has an 18x zoom, a high-res 921,000 dot display, and can fire off full size images at 7fps.
Unfortunately, the S9200 actually hasn’t really been reviewed anywhere, but the more expensive sibling model S9300 is identical (barring a GPS unit), so we can look to reviews of that for image quality. DCResource critiqued it for soft and noisy images even at ISO 125, and the total lack of manual controls, Pocket Lint said the image quality didn’t live up to its predecessor, Trusted Reviews said “Image quality not up to that of its rivals”, and Tech Radar said “overall image quality isn't as good as it could be. The camera has no manual control, and rival models from other manufacturers seem to offer a more compelling overall package.”
The Sony WX70 is another compelling camera on paper, but untested. We can’t give it any sort of recommendation without a decent number of outside sources commenting on how well this camera works.
The Samsung WB150F is a really interesting piece of competition, but it's too slow to be a serious contender. It debuted for $300, but now has a street price of just $125. In the camera’s favor is an 18x zoom lens, Wi-Fi, and good reviews from the likes of PCMag, DCI, and CNET. And while it takes great photos and has Wi-Fi, it’s slow as molasses. The slower CCD sensor means you’re stuck shooting at just 0.66fps. That’s less than a photo a second, even in burst mode. And that’s not really tenable, especially with a long zoom. If you’re at full 18x zoom, and trying to snap a photo of your kids playing sports? That delay means you’ll miss the action. You might as well put a motorcycle engine in a full-size pickup truck.
One of the most compelling alternatives is still our pick from last year, the Panasonic SZ7. You can read all about what’s good with it on our review. But ePhotoZine rated the Canon higher than the SZ7. And while the implementation might not be perfect, the inclusion of Wi-Fi is still a nice feature, and being able to easily beam photos to your smartphone or Facebook is nothing to scoff at. But that begs the question, why not just skip the camera in the first place?
There’s a reason the low-end camera market is hurting right now, and that’s because everyone uses their smartphone for the majority of the sort of snap-happy, straightforward photography that a cheapo point-and-shoot used to be used for. Flickr’s three most popular cameras of all time are the iPhone 4S, iPhone 4, and iPhone 5. The camera makers have reacted to this by making low-end cameras more smartphone-like (you could argue that’s why the 320 HS has a touchscreen and Wi-Fi), and by pouring most of their efforts into the higher end stuff.
Ok, so your cellphone camera doesn’t have an optical zoom. And it probably doesn’t have aperture and ISO adjustments. But it does have a seemingly infinite variety of apps, so that you can shoot timelapses, HDR, panoramas, and just about everything else that you wouldn’t find in a super-cheap camera. Plus, it’s already in your pocket. I love the panorama feature on my iPhone 5, I use it constantly.
One major reason you might opt for a cheapo camera instead of your smartphone is that it’s a bit less heartbreaking if something happens to it. A dead smartphone is a major problem, but a dead $150 camera is survivable.
These sorts of cameras get updated a couple of times a year. So every few months a new crop will come through, and previously slightly more expensive models will drop down to a more acceptable price. These new cameras sometimes include features that have trickled down from more expensive models, which is why we’re starting to see cameras that have features like touchscreens and Wi-Fi for less than $150.
Especially keep your eyes open just before the holidays, and a large number of these will be released for Black Friday and the Christmas shopping season.
In all honesty, the super cheap compact camera is a dying breed. For most people, I'd say either use your smartphone, or go a step up with a good camera for around $250. But if you really do want a camera that's less than $150, we'd recommend the Canon PowerShot 320 HS. The comparatively low image noise, sharp photographs, and kinda-fast lens put it ahead of most of the competition at this price point. And while the touchscreen and Wi-Fi may not be perfect, they're still good features to have on hand. Plus if something sad happens to it, it won't be the end of the world.
Jim Fisher, PCMag, Canon PowerShot Elph 320 HS, 3.5/5, June 08, 2012. "The Canon PowerShot Elph 320 HS is a small shooter with a large touch-screen LCD and Wi-Fi. Its lens is sharp, but only covers a 5x zoom range, and the practicality of the touch screen is questionable."
Mark Sparrow, TechRadar, Canon IXUS 240 HS review, 3/5, June 15, 2012. "The good points of the Canon IXUS 240 HS are the smart styling, the sweet lens, responsive shutter and the competent low-light performance. But unless you really must have Wi-Fi and a touchscreen, look at something else, since these gimmicks aren't worth the higher price tag."
Daniel Bell, ePhotoZine, Canon IXUS 240 HS Wi-Fi Digital Camera Review, 4/5, April 23, 2012. "The Canon IXUS 240 HS takes excellent pictures and has some very appealing features such as its stylish looks, slim metal body and Wi-Fi capabilities. If these features are appealing to you then the camera won't disappoint, but up against others with the same resolution and zoom, there are many cheaper options. If you are out shooting for an extended period of time you might find the battery life quite restricting and therefore may need a spare, thus adding to the cost. The IXUS 240 HS also records at full 1080p HD and the touch screen is extremely easy to use."
Mark Goldstein, PhotographyBlog, Canon IXUS 240 HS Review, 5/5 "Recommended", May 24, 2012. "Ultimately the IXUS 240 HS comes most highly recommended to casual photographers looking for a bang up-to-date point and shoot that importantly produces good looking images. If you don’t mind paying a price premium for all the extra bells and whistles, then the Canon IXUS 240 HS makes a great pocket companion."
Mario Aguilar, Gizmodo, The Best Inexpensive Point-and-Shoot Camera with Wi-Fi, 3.5/5, April 19, 2012. "These cameras are right for the non-iPhone-using consumer who wants a wireless way to shoot and post images and video online. For that buyer, we recommend the Canon 320 HS. It was a little more complicated to configue, but once it got going, the Wi-Fi features were faster and the design was a notch better than the Samsung WB150f."
Jeff Keller, DC Resource, Nikon Coolpix S9300 Review, July 11, 2012. "Overall, I found that the Coolpix S9300 is a decent travel zoom camera, but there are several competitors that I think are better choices. While it does offer a nice point-and-shoot feature set, the mediocre photo quality, poor battery life, and other annoyances prevent me from recommending it."
Audley Jarvis, Trusted Reviews, Nikon Coolpix S9300 review, 7/10, July 31, 2012. "While the S9300's 18x optic is a little lacking in zoom power compared to its 20x rivals, the camera does distinguish itself in other areas – most notably with its high-speed shooting abilities. Sadly this is somewhat undone by image quality though, which isn’t as good as that produced by some of its rivals. Overall then, while the S9300 certainly has its merits, it’s not quite enough to keep up with the competition."
Christofer Lloyd, TechRadar, Nikon Coolpix S9300 review, 2.5/5, August 17, 2012. "Nikon has crammed a wide range of valuable features into the relatively slim body of the Nikon Coolpix S9300. Overall it is an enjoyable camera to use and feels sturdy. However, the underwhelming battery life, imperfect general image quality and questionable reliability make rival models a wiser choice."
Jim Fisher, PCMag, Samsung WB150F, 3.5/5, April 10, 2012. "It's not perfect, but the nicely priced compact Samsung WB150F camera packs a sharp 18x zoom lens and integrated Wi-Fi so you can email or upload your pics to Facebook easily."
Christopher Snow, DigitalCameraInfo, Samsung WB150F, 7.6/10, March 2, 2012. "The truth is, nobody released a high-quality camera for under $200 in 2012. Yet out of all the sub-$200 cameras (or cameras that fell under $200 due to a price drop, like this one), the WB150F earned the highest scores. If you absolutely cannot spend more than $200 for a camera, here’s your best choice. We understand people are on a budget, may not have a smartphone, and still want a new camera for themselves or as a gift."
Nik Rawlinson, CNET UK, Samsung WB150F review, 4.5/5, March 20, 2012. "The WB150F is a great-looking camera that produces a punchy set of snaps. The built-in Wi-Fi makes it easy to share your pictures directly without first downloading them to your computer, but we'd have liked to have seen Samsung push this feature a little further. Still, at £190, it's a bargain."
Daniel Bell, ePhotoZine, Panasonic Lumix DMC-SZ7 Digital Compact Camera Review, 3.5/5, April 10, 2012. "The Panasonic Lumix SZ-7 has a decent amount of zoom packed into a compact body, making it an ideal camera for taking on your holidays as it is very easy to carry around. The zoom can be extended using intelligent zoom and the camera takes a decent picture, shoots up to ISO 3200 at full resolution and records full 1080p HD videos."
Kelcey Smith, Andy Westlake, DPReview, Canon PowerShot S100 Review, 72%, "Silver Award", December 2011. "The Canon S100 is particularly well-suited to two types of photographers: compact camera shooters looking to upgrade to a similarly small camera with more control, raw mode and better image quality, and ILC photographers looking for a truly compact 'take anywhere' pocket camera with much of the same manual control as their larger cameras. The addition of GPS and full HD video recording make the S100 feel more complete than the S95, which was a very capable camera but in some respects lagged slightly behind on its feature set when compared to the competition. The additional lens range, too, is very welcome, and makes the S100 just that little bit more versatile than its predecessors."
Shawn Barnett, Stephanie Boozer, and Zig Weidelich, Imaging-Resource, Canon PowerShot S100, February 23, 2011. "Canon's premium pocket digital camera, the PowerShot S100, gets a facelift, plus the addition of a wider lens, higher resolution video, a few more megapixels, and built-in GPS. It's not quite as fast in the autofocus department as we like to see, but otherwise it's an incremental improvement in all areas, making Canon's premium pocket camera even better."
Christopher Snow, DigitalCameraInfo, Canon PowerShot SX260 HS, 9.1/10, August 15, 2012. "Canon’s SX260 HS has posted the best scores of any travel zoom camera that we’ve tested so far in 2012, and we think there’s a pretty good chance it will carry this title all the way to our end of the year awards. But test scores aside, we really just enjoyed shooting with it. The camera is quick, compact, comfortable, and produces above-average photos in many different situations. This is an ideal travel companion."
Tim's a freelance science and tech writer, whose work has appeared at io9, PopPhoto, DigitalCameraInfo, the Verge and the Wirecutter. He's an avidly average photographer, travel addict, and occasionally dabbles in mad cheffery.
About seven months ago, we recommended the Panasonic SZ7 as the best super cheap camera around, and for a $125 it’s still a good option. But since then, Canon has released the Canon PowerShot 320 HS (or Canon IXUS 240 HS in Europe), and after a number of price drops, for less than $150 you get just as good of a camera, but with built-in Wi-Fi and a touchscreen.
The Sony RX100 is the best compact camera you can buy, but $650 is a lot of money. If you want to spend a lot less, the $300-$400 Panasonic LX7 is a fantastic advanced camera alternative, with sharp and accurate images, although it is not the smallest camera. It replaces our current pick, the Canon S100, which has been king for a while.
For a compact camera that will take great photos and HD video whether you're splashing around in a swimming pool, snorkeling through a school of fish or just horsing around on terra firma, the Olympus Tough TG-1 iHS, at $380, is the one to get.
Digital cameras are leaping ahead in image quality but there's still something to be said for the spontaneity and charm of an instant camera. I like the Fujifilm Instax 210, at $60.
The Wirecutter is a list of great technology by Brian Lam and FriendsNeed help finding a different gadget? Just Ask!Material on The Wirecutter is copyrighted. Reproduction without permission is prohibited.
No comments:
Post a Comment