Sony DSC W120 or Canon IXUS 70?

meurglys0 · May 1, 2008

Now I have been reading reviews and ratings, looking at samples, trying to decide on what camera to buy for a week now...

Finally I have narrowed it down to two cameras. Actually the specs of Sony W120 looks superior than Canon Ixus 70's, but it's the brand name that makes me hesitate.

Sony W120 has 4x optic zoom, while Ixus 70 has 3x.
Sony W120 has ISO values up to 3200, while Ixus 70's goes up to 1600.
Sony W120 has a feature called "Super SteadyShot Optical Image Stabilization" while Ixus 70 doesn't.
Plus along with Sony W120 the store gives me SANDISK SDMSV-1024-E10 1 GB MS PRO and CASELOGIC TSC2G camera case while I will have to spend more money to buy these stuff if I choose Ixus 70, which will make it more expensive than Sony W120 (Without these adittional stuff they cost the same).
Compared sample shots at http://www.cameras.co.uk/html/sample-images-select-1.cfm
or sample shots at individual review pages
http://www.cameras.co.uk/reviews/sony-dsc-w120.cfm
http://www.cameras.co.uk/reviews/canon-ixus-70.cfm

all look fine to my eyes, though a friend of mine suggested Canon's are better and more colorful (I had thought that the color difference was due to different seasons and weather conditions; you may tell me what you think about those sample shots too). When rating Cameras.co.uk gives Ixus 70 84 total points and to Sony W120 it gives 80 points.

There are more than 500 customer comments at Amazon.com for Canon Ixus 70, only about 50 of them with negative rating; and there are only 7 customers who reviewed and rated the Sony, all ratings are great though...

I have come to conclusion that most cameras handle scenes with good lighting, however it's the low-lit or indoor shots that call the shots. And technically many specs play role in performing better in low-lit scenes some of which are better in Sony W120.

I want to be able to shoot in low-lit scenes, and get good results with moving images too.

So my question is: Is image stabilisation feature very important? Should I buy the Canon no matter what, because it's a canon? Or should I buy Sony DSC W120?

meurglys0 · May 3, 2008

Nobody has any advice???

f8lranger4x4 · Jul 22, 2008

I just got the Sony w120 today and i'm going hiking tomorrow takeing lots of pics I'll tell u how the pics come out.

reg · Jul 22, 2008

It's just a point and shoot, they're both going to give about the same results.

Do'Urden's Eyes · Jul 23, 2008

reg said:
It's just a point and shoot, they're both going to give about the same results.

lol its just a point and shoot. I was never really into point and shoots but im sure there are ones that have superior quality in terms of colour rendering and sharpness. Again like many people always say: dont just look at specs, go grab the damn cameras for yourself and pretend like your using it in the field. Go with your heart!

Oh and the image stabilization will work wonders for you in low lighting conditions. that what its meant for. if low light shooting is what you plan to do lots then go for that one. Image stabilization will be useless for you in most outdoor brightly lit areas, unless youre fully zoomed into something far away.

potownrob · Jul 23, 2008

Are you sure you wouldn't want a camera with a wider angle lens like the Sony W150 or Canon SD800 or SD870 (not sure what their IXUS equivalents are)? If you don't have a lot of money the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX33 can be had for well under 200 USD. I'm just speaking from experience, from buying cheap digital cameras and then realizing that I could really use the wide angle for close-ups (of people, things and rooms) and landscape shots. Of the ones you listed I would probably go with the Canon despite it not having IS. I would try to either move up to a model with IS or an older model with IS (I know how expensive the Canons can get). I wouldn't be fooled by the high ISO promises of the Sonys (or any P&S camera) - they are known for producing very noisy pics. While the Canon won't be much if any better with low-light shots, it should produce more consistent shots. Also don't be too worried about having to buy a memory card for the Canon; you can get a fast 4gb SD card for under 30 USD here. I have read that the Sony memorystick cards are faster than the fastest SD cards though - not sure how true this is nor how limiting the camera will be.

Edit: I'd try to get a camera with IS too, even though Ken Rockwell seems to think most P&S shooters won't need it. I think it'll help either way, especially in low light and especially if you can't or don't want to use the flash.

freelunch · Jul 24, 2008

I bought a Canon IXUS 70. I bought it because my Canon IXUS 400 took a good picture, because it was small and because it is a bloody gorgeous piece of sculpture. I am very happy with my purchase. However, if you shoot a lot of close ups, flowers and the like, you may wish you'd purchased a camera with better control over the focus.

reg · Jul 24, 2008

Do'Udren's Eyes said:
lol its just a point and shoot. I was never really into point and shoots but im sure there are ones that have superior quality in terms of colour rendering and sharpness.

:roll:
I wasn't trying to be funny, but I can't help but think that you are.

It is just a point and shoot, and they're both under $200. You aren't going to find a P&S that will be better than a DSLR, EVER. The only ones that come close aren't in the price range OP is talking about, and by the time you hit that point you should probably be shopping for a DSLR anyway.