S300 - Is it worth it?

[Dennis T]

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Jean-Pierre]

Well I had a S100 I exchange it for a S300, I can say that the s300 is a very very nice camera, it take GREAT pic! The color are much more beautiful than the S100. I think for the same price as the S20 you could buy the S300 + a 128 MB CF card

 

[wantabetterdigitalelph]

I would not even consider the s20 since the s10 pics are often better than the s20 and the s10 is cheaper in price. The s300 has the advantage because of the smaller size.

 

[R. Craig Westcott]

Dennis,

Like you, I came down to these two cameras. . . Price was also a concern of mine, but I found a retail store that does some online sales and, well, that did it for me:

Canon PowerShot S300 - $540 US
Canon Lithium-Ion Battery Pack NB-1L - $34 US
Canon Waterproof Case WP-DC100 - $155 US

Obviously, I went with the Canon PowerShot S300 (which I am expecting delivery of by the end of the week). . .

Like you, resolution was a factor, but considering the size of the camera, I was prepared to take a minor hit on resolution and settle for the 2 Mp versus the 3 Mp. . . I checked the samples pictures of all the cameras I was looking at and, really, couldn't find much difference between the resolutions. . . Add to that that I am planning on taking this camera everywhere with me (which the S300 makes very possible with its diminutive size) and features such as rechargable batteries (one of which is included with a charger when you buy the camera) and the waterproof case and plusses stack up quickly in the in the S300's functionality category!

If you would like, e-mail me and I will be sure to pass along the name of the store. Cheers!

Craig.

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Jeremy]

I've read that the sony p1 takes horrible pictures at night. i would have bought it back in the fall because it was so small and produced amazing pictures, but due to its distateful night photography, I decided to pass. I'm now considering the s300, but am worried it will have the same problems at night because of its small lens. I was wondering how indoor/night photography is w/ the s300. can u post any samples for us to see? does the af assist lamp help w/ focusing? please let me know so i can buy a cam already! thanx!!

• Jeremy

Well I had a S100 I exchange it for a S300, I can say that the s300
is a very very nice camera, it take GREAT pic! The color are much
more beautiful than the S100. I think for the same price as the S20
you could buy the S300 + a 128 MB CF card

 

[Gary Becker #43985]

Dennis,

Think about how much you would carry the 2 cameras. I have a Nikon 990 and the S100. Bought the Nikon 5 months before the Canon. I can honestly say that I have shot atleast 50 times more pictures with the S100. That's because it travels so well. I can take it everywhere in a jacket pocket (or in the summer, in the front pocket in a pair of shorts).

FYI, I don't like Canon's case because it is too thick to put in your pocket. I am trying to get one like their APS Elph 370 (thin leather).

I'm considering the S300, but only if it's not too much larger. As for 2 vs 3 mp, I don't see much of a difference in an 8x10 print on my Epson 870. I have made quite a few panorama shots and they print great.

Noise is a problem (more on a monitor than printing) and color is sometimes on the cool side. But you can correct this fairly easy.

Bottom line, if I had to get rid of one of my cameras, I'd keep the S100.

Sorry for rambling on, good luck with your choice,

Gary

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Jean-Pierre]

I got the S300 for about 4 days now, It seem to take great pictures in low light situation. I'll have some sample soon

In low light the s300 do twice better than the s100

 

[bob d]

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

There is really no right answer to this question. There is no denying the fact that the S300 is a very cool camera and Canon did a fine job packing so much photographic power into such a small size.

Unfortunately, the laws of physics dictate that a small lens means less light focused on the CCD, which means inferior low light pictures. The S300 is also lacking in the area of manual controls. There is no doubt that you are giving up quality in order to get a small size.

As others have pointed out, the highest quality camera does you no good at all if you don't have it with you when you need it because it's so big.

So there is no right answer. If you decide to choose a bigger camera, check out the Sony DSC-S75 which is about to be released any day now. It will have a suggested price of $699, and all the reviews seem do indicate that no camera in that price range will take as good of a picture. Go to the Sony forum and read all the excitement that the S75 is stirring up.

If I had lots of money to spend, I'd buy BOTH the Sony S75 and the Canon S300.

 

[DC38552]

Off-topic, Jeremy, did you ever get those 8x10s from the finisher? I'm interested to hear how good 2 MP shots look when printed. I'm THIS close to jumping right in and buying the S300, but I'd love to know how the printouts look. Thanks!

• Jeremy

Well I had a S100 I exchange it for a S300, I can say that the s300
is a very very nice camera, it take GREAT pic! The color are much
more beautiful than the S100. I think for the same price as the S20
you could buy the S300 + a 128 MB CF card

 

[EJN]

To come back directly to your original question - yes, I think the 300 is worth it from what few 'sample in-shop' pics Ive seen -but I still don't think it is up the standard of value/quality of a camera more upscale such as the S-20. It is a great pity that for some ridiculous reason US buyers have to spend on a battery/charger .. we get that in the box here in UK.

I've had a G1 for some 3 months now and after getting over the initial 'learning curve' with this camera I think I can say Ive got it mostly mastered and it is certainly a very fine camera. One or two features like the LCD you just don't appreciate until you later pick up another camera - then it hits you what excellence the G1 is.

Anyway, I wanted a spare little carry-about extra so I started looking at the 300. Crazy, but at the shop we discovered that the new battery was flat of course and Canon do not (even here) supply with it a mains unit, only a charger unit, so we just couldn't plug in and work. This led my eye to the S-20 standing next to it. The 300 of course is slightly bigger than the old 100, not a lot but a bit - the S-20 is so little worthwhile difference in size, beauty and quality that it is a directly comparable camera - better of course in that the S-20 takes M/drive if you wish and I think probably has one or two other little things better . You get what you pay for these days so it's no use thinking that for 300 price you're going to get S-20 camera. The nitty-gritty was that I bought the S-20 and believe me it is a VERY VERY good camera. The battery IS something to contend with but I've bought a QUEST double-life bolt-on that fits the base of the camera and is a double capacity NiMH - there is a plastic dummy body like the Canon battery that connects to camera to make it work, so you can also carry the original Canon battery as a THIRD - or QUEST sell a self-copy of the Canon NiMH for half the price and every bit as good. If you NEED to save money then the 300 is I think a good purchase, but if you can afford to go for the S-20 it is very much worthwhile so I think anyway. Are the S-20 coming down in price in US as they are here? That's one reason I found it attractive - you have what was a very pricey camera now at around two-thirds the price .. what more of a bargain, plus the shirt-pocket advantage. (Yesterday I carried it on a small 'shoot' in my INSIDE jacket pocket, it would go I'm sure in trouser pocket.)

P.S. The only deficiency I found (just like the expensive Coolpix and many others) is that yesterday in bright sun the LCD was pretty hopeless, but that can be said for most. It made me realise how good the G1 is - that is vastly more usable in sun without great difficulty.

EJN

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[YC]

I wouldn't agree more with Bob.

If you don't use the camera for daily life then a bit bigger camera such as Sony S75 will give you much more with only a little more dollars, should be less than US$650 if it hits the market.

But if you want to use it daily and carry it in the pocket than S100 or 300 would be best cam for you as you can't carry the others like these two cams.

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

There is really no right answer to this question. There is no
denying the fact that the S300 is a very cool camera and Canon did
a fine job packing so much photographic power into such a small
size.

Unfortunately, the laws of physics dictate that a small lens means
less light focused on the CCD, which means inferior low light
pictures. The S300 is also lacking in the area of manual controls.
There is no doubt that you are giving up quality in order to get a
small size.

As others have pointed out, the highest quality camera does you no
good at all if you don't have it with you when you need it because
it's so big.

So there is no right answer. If you decide to choose a bigger
camera, check out the Sony DSC-S75 which is about to be released
any day now. It will have a suggested price of $699, and all the
reviews seem do indicate that no camera in that price range will
take as good of a picture. Go to the Sony forum and read all the
excitement that the S75 is stirring up.

If I had lots of money to spend, I'd buy BOTH the Sony S75 and the
Canon S300.

 

[greg38174]

Is it just me or are others annoyed that so many "new" model are coming out at the 2MP range? With 3MP under $500, they pawn 2yr old technology off on us with new lenses? Thanks

 

[EJN]

But if you want to use it daily and carry it in the pocket than
S100 or 300 would be best cam for you as you can't carry the others
like these two cams.

Sorry to disagree but I carry the S-20 in just the same way as the general feeling toiwards the 100 (a bit less so on the 300 as it IS a tiny bit bigger). But as I've said in other posts here or elsewhere, my S-20 was carried yesterday in my inside jacket pocket (it COULD have gone in my trouser pocket) because I had the G1 with me as well at the time. The S-20 is very pocketable or 'carryable' any way you want- and with 3.3Meg + M/drive.

EJN

 

[Jeremy]

umm, you've got the wrong Jeremy... i have no clue what you're talking about. sorry!

• Jeremy

Well I had a S100 I exchange it for a S300, I can say that the s300
is a very very nice camera, it take GREAT pic! The color are much
more beautiful than the S100. I think for the same price as the S20
you could buy the S300 + a 128 MB CF card

 

[Ron Boetger]

Here is my question - The S100 comes with a recharable battery and a very small charger. Does the S300 come with a battery and charger?

Thanks

Ron

EJN

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Jeremy]

You can find your answer in Phil's review!

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canondigitalixus300/page2.asp

Thanks

Ron

EJN

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Tiny]

EJN

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

I agreed totally. Don't be fooled, as the S20 is a very good camera. I have initial doubt about the colour cast and its quality. Since I have got it (Second hand for a price of $A600 with the charger and battery) and after experiment with it. I have learned that the colour cast is indeed very evident when shoot outdoor. This downside can easily corrected using Photoshop 'Colour Balance', Photogenetic 'Colour Temperature', or JPEG Wizard 'Hue (Red Green slide)'. The 3Meg pixel is breath taking, I just don't believe my eyes as this was from such a small camera, and it is very much better than result obtained from a scanner. I have the Epson Perfection 1640SU Photo with very low noise CCD. But S20 still win out in Quality. I loved it, and highly recommended. After all, you need to learn digital correction and play with it when you intended to use a digital camera.

QTP

 

[Patrick43207]

not at all! Coolpix 775 will way fit to your demanding for sure! The worlds smallest 3X digi camera! Only 6.5OZ $450 rechargable battery INCLUDED!!!The 3X zoom much better than S300's. Its 38mm to 115mm long range enough for any usage. 2X zoom already not the mainstream anymore no matter S20 or S300(too expensive 3X)!

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.

 

[Barry Margolius]

Yes. The S300 comes with the same rechargeable battery as the S100, and a similar charger.

-barry

Here is my question - The S100 comes with a recharable battery and
a very small charger. Does the S300 come with a battery and
charger?

Thanks

Ron

 

[Barry Margolius]

Just a couple of corrections:

The Coolpix 775, which will not be available for a few months, is the world's lightest 3x camera, but NOT the smallest. My calculations make it about 33% larger than the S300 (254,000 cubic mm vs. 179,000 cu mm).

The 775 definitely will be cheaper (at least for now), but I think it's a bit premature to say that the 3X zoom is "much better than the S300". On what lens test do you base this?

My final problem with recommending the 775 is that if you wait for the next camera to be delivered, you will never actually buy a camera. By the time you buy the 775 in July, the summer will be half over,... AND there will be some other camera just announced to get you to wait a little longer.

Frankly, I think it's a very tough call. The 775 looks to be a very good camera that's aggressively priced, but it's a few months away. I think the S300 is an excellent camera. I like the small size, convenience, and durability. It IS a bit pricey. I guess it all boils down to how soon you want your camera.

-barry

Is the S300 worth it at msrp $600? The camera is only 2.1 mp while
u can get a 3 mp S20 for that same price. Which would be a better
choice? I am planning on buying the S20 or the S300, i'm leaning
towards the S300 more because it comes with rechargeable batteries
and a charger, while the S20 does not which means I must spend
another $100 on the Dk-110. Do you think the S300's quality is
enough for me since I'm just an average user? Thanks.