Camera Guys, please come in...

[ram57ta]

My last pocket camera...which was supposed to be a good camera at the time..was a sony TX1. It took good pictures WHEN AND IF the lens motor ever stopped shaking the image...and on rather frequent occasions it took 4 or 5 power cycles to get it to turn on. It had terrible battery life. Sometimes the flash wouldn't work. I will not own another Sony camera.

[Leah]

My last pocket camera...which was supposed to be a good camera at the time..was a sony TX1. It took good pictures WHEN AND IF the lens motor ever stopped shaking the image...and on rather frequent occasions it took 4 or 5 power cycles to get it to turn on. It had terrible battery life. Sometimes the flash wouldn't work. I will not own another Sony camera.

After everyone's suggestion about the S95, that's what I'm looking at now..

[ram57ta]

After everyone's suggestion about the S95, that's what I'm looking at now..

If you give a shit about GPS tagging and 1080p stereo video recording...the S100 adds both. S95 has 720p stereo video and no GPS (and better battery life). Other than those two things I'd go with the S95. I know that YOU of all people...can find a really good deal on one...I've seen them occasionally around 300-330, but have found at least one online store selling them for 289.99 with free shipping.

[Leah]

If you give a shit about GPS tagging and 1080p stereo video recording...the S100 adds both. S95 has 720p stereo video and no GPS (and better battery life). Other than those two things I'd go with the S95. .

Yeah, I really don't. I'd rather have a good battery life...

I know that YOU of all people...can find a really good deal on one...I've seen them occasionally around 300-330, but have found at least one online store selling them for 289.99 with free shipping.

Haha, with a quick search, I found one for $299. with free shipping. I'm not in any hurry so I'll keep my eyes open.

[BERT]

Ok, I have a camera question so I'll keep it on this thread. The local Target store had both of these at clearance prices.

The Canon sx230is for $208 and the Nikon s9100 for $184. I've been reading reviews on both and they both seem pretty cool. I do like the fact that the canon is a bit slimmer. On the other hand I read where the canon takes pics at high resolution at 4:3 but the screen is 16:9 so it leaves black bars on the sides of the pictures. Also it can only take video in 1080p at 24fps instead of 30fps like the Nikon can. These my be minor points but that's why I'm asking cause i don't know shit about cameras.

So, if you camera experts had to choose between these two, which would y'all pick?

[ram57ta]

The 9100 didn't hit the stores until after I bought my sx230-hs but I have read several reviews on it. It seems like a pretty nice camera and its a crap shoot to say one is better than the other....I'd say whichever one feels better in your hands. I actually bought a used sx130 AND a used sx210is on craigslist before deciding to sell them both and get the 230hs....for of all reasons...Canon sells an underwater diving case for the 230 but NOT for the other 2 I had. I do scuba dive and also float the river occasionally and I would like to take pics without ruining my camera. I specifically stayed away from cameras with touch sensitive screens...kinda hard to use them when your 40ft underwater.

[BERT]

The 9100 didn't hit the stores until after I bought my sx230-hs but I have read several reviews on it. It seems like a pretty nice camera and its a crap shoot to say one is better than the other....I'd say whichever one feels better in your hands. I actually bought a used sx130 AND a used sx210is on craigslist before deciding to sell them both and get the 230hs....for of all reasons...Canon sells an underwater diving case for the 230 but NOT for the other 2 I had. I do scuba dive and also float the river occasionally and I would like to take pics without ruining my camera. I specifically stayed away from cameras with touch sensitive screens...kinda hard to use them when your 40ft underwater.

After making my post I read some reviews on the Nikon there are lots of bad reviews on it, saying the shutter starts to stick and it freezes up while using the video feature. And the Canon had less negative feedback, so it looks like I might be looking in that direction. I would think about the s95 but I'm afraid the zoom wouldn't be enough to get a close pic at a sporting event. Is this true or am I wrong?

[ram57ta]

After making my post I read some reviews on the Nikon there are lots of bad reviews on it, saying the shutter starts to stick and it freezes up while using the video feature. And the Canon had less negative feedback, so it looks like I might be looking in that direction. I would think about the s95 but I'm afraid the zoom wouldn't be enough to get a close pic at a sporting event. Is this true or am I wrong?

The S95 and S100 are fantastic cameras...but they are better suited to up close shots with fine detail. They have a much better lens with much higher sensitivity and they take great night shots. BUT....the zoom lens is an afterthought on them. 3x is as good as your gonna get. I imagine someone has figured out a way to add an external zoom lens to them...but at that point I'd prolly just get a DSLR. I love the zoom on the sx230...and just because its not an S95 dont be fooled into thinking it can't take good pics...it takes better pics than most of the cameras I've owned...under MOST conditions. My old Olympus C4040-zoom took unreal night shots...and the Panasonic Lumix I got rid of last summer did too...but they were too bulky for my use and I found myself wanting something smaller. The 230hs fits the bill nicely and does what I want. If you get one...I would suggest getting a GLASS screen protector AND a GLASS lens cover (I bought ones made for the 210is and they fit like a glove.