Canon announces SX200IS

[Collin85]

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09021804canonsx200is.asp

12x zoom in a compact body - plenty of people are gonna love this.

[brianch]

this is going to be very popular. its great that it takes lithium ion.. the sx110 took AA batts.

[davidfig]

I want one. 720p is good enough for me. This could become my vacation camera.

[Jon]

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=144&modelid=18329

[CameraLens]

Only f/3.4 at the short end.

[Canay]

I was thinking about purchasing the SD990IS. Should I consider this camera instead. I want a small camera to carry in my purse and have with me all the time.

[LowriderS10]

except for the unfortunate f-stop it looks pretty damn nice!

[Canay]

Does that f-stop mean it won't take as good of close-ups?

[Jon]

Not at all. It just means it will need more light (about 2/3 stop more) to take a picture than its predecessor.

[LowriderS10]

Is it possible that Canon's purposely holding back? Knowing this thing will sell with a relatively slow lens, then wait a year or two before coming out with the same camera but with a faster lens?

[_aravena]

Nice! Much much better design. I might actually pick this up and keep the SD750 in the Jeep for emergencies.

EDIT: Whoa whoa whoa! Anyone see Canon's competition to Olympus!?! Finally! I'm so getting that for my underwater adventures, the SX200IS for carry-round, and my SD750 will sit in my Jeep for...whatever.

[Collin85]

Thanks for sticking Jon.

Lowrider: It's fairly typical for Canon to hold back, given their status as a brand with significant market share. They don't need the super-spec sheets of Panasonic in order to sell cameras.

But at the same time, I can't be confident in accusing Canon of purposely gimping the speed of their lens. A 12x optical zoom lens (with respectable output quality, presumingly) in that tiny package is already quite an achievement.

[Jon]

More likely they couldn't get the IQ of the 5-60 mm lens at the wide end to where they wanted it and still meet the ship date so they forced a smaller aperture at the wide end. It has to collapse pretty small to keep the body size reasonable; that's a major accomplishment. Compare the closed lens size on this with the closed lens size on the 12x zoom S5 IS and you'll agree.

[Canay]

Not at all. It just means it will need more light (about 2/3 stop more) to take a picture than its predecessor.

So if taking pictures inside in low light situations. This would not be as good of a camera for me?

[kini]

No zoom during movies is a deal breaker IMO. For $50 more the Panasonic TZ7 (ZS3) offers zooming during movies, a more useful wide (25mm equivalent) lens, some form of a burst mode, better sound recording, is smaller, and the LCD is MUCH better. Especially if the 230K pixel 3" LCD is anything like the same specced LCD on my 40D which is awful for anything other than the histogram.

Canon missed the boat on this one. If it were priced $50-$75 less, maybe, but for a little more $$$ you get a lot more camera with the Panasonic.
Gene

[hnikesch]

I am sure the Digital zoom will work during video, the optical oom is very noisy (when activated by CHDK on my SD500) Also I want to know if this one has a real aperture or just an ND filter like the SD's

[augenblick]

This is TX2 for me. Yay

[JRU]

Yup and from what I see those batteries will sell for $45 to $55 a pop. That sort of sucks. I was sort of thinking about upgrading my A710IS but with battery prices like that I really do not think so.

I wish Canon would come out with a small (a710) size camera that would take normal batteries and have a miniumal of 12x optical zoom.


this is going to be very popular. its great that it takes lithium ion.. the sx110 took AA batts.

[manipula]

Jesus wept, people will find anything to moan about. :roll:

Til now you'd buy Panasonic's because of the wide lenses, or the fact they did a 10x zoom in a small body, as the Ixus and some of the Powershots were actually picture wise a bit better. Finally they offer something to compete. It'll sell like hotcakes. And all the niggles, seriously? It's a compact camera ffs, not the Hubble telescope. :?

[JRU]

Yup I do moan when they want to charge that much for a battery. I was looking here and I see that some retailers are asking close to $100 for the battery.

http://www.shop.com/Canon_NB_5L_camera_battery_Li_Ion_-17098869-o%21.shtml?trk=1

I wonder how long a battery would last (how many charges) and how many shots it would hold up for. Then you have to figure in a extra charger or at lest a 12v one for the car. On this point my A710is isstill looking pretty good.

Ebay has some sellers selling the non Canon batteries at a much cheaper price are those any good?

The new Canon SX200IS does have my interest and it a possible I will get one but on the other hand if I need few extra batteries and they run close to half the price of the camera it makes you think.

Jesus wept, people will find anything to moan about. :roll:

Til now you'd buy Panasonic's because of the wide lenses, or the fact they did a 10x zoom in a small body, as the Ixus and some of the Powershots were actually picture wise a bit better. Finally they offer something to compete. It'll sell like hotcakes. And all the niggles, seriously? It's a compact camera ffs, not the Hubble telescope. :?

[manipula]

By the time it hits the shops it'll be the same price as any other Li-ion battery, just as it always is.

[Jon]

The NB-5L is being used in Canon cameras already. It's the same one as in the SD990. You can get them from Sterlingtek for $11 or so.

[JRU]

MEEE LIKIEEEEEE! Now that makes a big difference............

TY

The NB-5L is being used in Canon cameras already. It's the same one as in the SD990. You can get them from Sterlingtek for $11 or so.

[hbdragon88]

Ok, so they finally go wide-angle, and ditch the AA batteries...and they jack up the megapixels again, make the camera even slower than before...not impressed. The SX110 was too little of an upgrade, but the SX200 seems to be a jump on...what?

The SX series was priced at $250, a step up from the A line but a lot less expensive than the $500 G line. Now at $350...I dunno. HD video doesn't appeal to me too much, 8 MP/9 MP was already enough. Here's hoping the 200 has faster flash focusing and recycling times.

[manipula]

Ok, so they finally go wide-angle, and ditch the AA batteries...and they jack up the megapixels again, make the camera even slower than before...not impressed. The SX110 was too little of an upgrade, but the SX200 seems to be a jump on...what?

The SX series was priced at $250, a step up from the A line but a lot less expensive than the $500 G line. Now at $350...I dunno. HD video doesn't appeal to me too much, 8 MP/9 MP was already enough. Here's hoping the 200 has faster flash focusing and recycling times.

I think you miss the point of what the camera is. The harsh reality is that very few people who buy these things actually care about half the stuff you mentioned. The SX100/110 whilst being very good, sold at something like a 1-in-30 ratio where we are against the Panasonic TZ15 (TZ5) simply because it had AA batteries and no wide angle. Canon answer this, and they'll now sell like hot cakes, and at this sort of level, the reality is, that's what they're bothered about, turning over numbers, not chasing the ultimate photographer's tool.

Buying a compact camera, any compact camera, is not about moaning over what is missing, and what they should have done better, it's about picking the one which has the least limitations for you. It's as simple as that.

That said, I do expect the thing to be very, very good. Canon rarely make anything that's rubbish unlike other brands, and in general for compacts their cameras are amongst if not the best in terms of picture quality, so finally answering the WA lens, and the batteries, and it'll do very good.

[ColdBrew]

Sounds like a nice camera to me. I wish the lens was faster but it has lots of other good features.

Any chance they will produce a underwater housing for this camera? Or maybe the lens is too slow to shoot underwater...

[manipula]

Sounds like a nice camera to me. I wish the lens was faster but it has lots of other good features.

Any chance they will produce a underwater housing for this camera? Or maybe the lens is too slow to shoot underwater...

I doubt it, but it's probably more because I expect the lens to protrude a long way when fully zoomed out than anything else. Most of their other stuff with longy zoomy bits haven't had cases.

[winterstar]

I went to the canon site to compare it to mine.. and they don't even list my camera anymore!! Does that mean it's obsolete?

[manipula]

Yes it does. There's been an SX110IS too since yours...

[hbdragon88]

I think you miss the point of what the camera is. The harsh reality is that very few people who buy these things actually care about half the stuff you mentioned. The SX100/110 whilst being very good, sold at something like a 1-in-30 ratio where we are against the Panasonic TZ15 (TZ5) simply because it had AA batteries and no wide angle. Canon answer this, and they'll now sell like hot cakes, and at this sort of level, the reality is, that's what they're bothered about, turning over numbers, not chasing the ultimate photographer's tool.

Buying a compact camera, any compact camera, is not about moaning over what is missing, and what they should have done better, it's about picking the one which has the least limitations for you. It's as simple as that.

That said, I do expect the thing to be very, very good. Canon rarely make anything that's rubbish unlike other brands, and in general for compacts their cameras are amongst if not the best in terms of picture quality, so finally answering the WA lens, and the batteries, and it'll do very good.

Oh, no, no, no, you misinterpret me. I have no doubts that Canon has a gold mine on their hands, and know that average people don't care about picture noise and love the idea of HD video. I've seen it. Someone bragged to me that his G10 had double the MP of my 20D, for instance, and a neighbor of mine enthused about how great the G10 was.

But I am still curious as to speculate on Canon's marketing plan.

For awhile now, I've thought the SX line was the perfect kind of bridge camera - a step up from the A model, with full manual controls, the jog-wheel from the G9, a much bigger size, and manual focus. It also has a superzoom without the bulk of an S model. On the other end, it lacks the hot shoe, RAW support, and optical viewfinder that the G line has. I would complain about the vari-screen, but by the time the SX100 came out, the that screen was gone for good.

Canon seems to have taken a completely different direction with the SX200 - G-series-like megapixels (between the 12 on the G9 and th 14 on the G10), HD video, the S/G series wide-angle, and a price tag between the SX and the G line. Is it a new niche they're trying to market towards? Or what?

[manipula]

I dunno.

I dunno if it's a compex as that. Perhaps it's just priced as it is because that's where the Panasonic and soon-to-be Olympus models are at.

[cdifoto]

Oh, no, no, no, you misinterpret me. I have no doubts that Canon has a gold mine on their hands, and know that average people don't care about picture noise and love the idea of HD video. I've seen it. Someone bragged to me that his G10 had double the MP of my 20D, for instance, and a neighbor of mine enthused about how great the G10 was.

But I am still curious as to speculate on Canon's marketing plan.

For awhile now, I've thought the SX line was the perfect kind of bridge camera - a step up from the A model, with full manual controls, the jog-wheel from the G9, a much bigger size, and manual focus. It also has a superzoom without the bulk of an S model. On the other end, it lacks the hot shoe, RAW support, and optical viewfinder that the G line has. I would complain about the vari-screen, but by the time the SX100 came out, the that screen was gone for good.

Canon seems to have taken a completely different direction with the SX200 - G-series-like megapixels (between the 12 on the G9 and th 14 on the G10), HD video, the S/G series wide-angle, and a price tag between the SX and the G line. Is it a new niche they're trying to market towards? Or what?
You're overthunking it. It's a small camera with a huge zoom range. Simple as that.

[JPHdesigns]

Was in the market for a convenience camera and I like this one! Saw it on the website just now. Not sure if it's worth the price tag of it? msrp 350 right now. Need something with the awesome canon quality but also convenient enough for those times I can't lugg the 20d around. Was looking at the 890 and 790is before. Don't really care for the video part of it though...but it would be nice to have to use once in a blue moon. I don't know, give me some feedback guys haha I don't know! $350(200is) vs 125$ (790 or 890)?

[lensmen]

Canon is being curel to me leh.

Now I saw the size, the SX200IS is great as a carry around camera. What m i to do with the 3 mths old SX10IS or my year+ old SX100IS ?

[lensmen]

......
Any chance they will produce a underwater housing for this camera? Or maybe the lens is too slow to shoot underwater...

They may think that u/w cam with 12X zoom doesn't make sense...the camera's flash won't reach it. **sigh** i missed the waters...

[JRU]

The same as what I'm doing with my A710 IS put it up for sale:x:x:x

Canon is being curel to me leh.

Now I saw the size, the SX200IS is great as a carry around camera. What m i to do with the 3 mths old SX10IS or my year+ old SX100IS ?

[Big Hands]

No zoom during movies is a deal breaker IMO. For $50 more the Panasonic TZ7 (ZS3) offers zooming during movies, a more useful wide (25mm equivalent) lens, some form of a burst mode, better sound recording, is smaller, and the LCD is MUCH better. Especially if the 230K pixel 3" LCD is anything like the same specced LCD on my 40D which is awful for anything other than the histogram.

Canon missed the boat on this one. If it were priced $50-$75 less, maybe, but for a little more $$$ you get a lot more camera with the Panasonic.
Gene

1) Movie shooting may or may not be high on one's list of priorities when buying a point and shoot, so lack of zoom in movie mode may be a deal breaker for you, but not for everyone. Also, I believe CDHK may have addressed this in earlier SX models if it's that important to someoene.

2) A 'deal breaker' on the TZ7 for me would be the lack of 'shutter priority' and 'aperture priority' modes. That's important to me.

3) The Canon does have a burst mode (called 'continuous drive'), but if it is like the one on the SX100, it's not real fast.

There appears to be some give and take between these two particular models and the TZ7 seems to be another nice offering from Panasonic (and for another $50 you should expect some advantages), but saying Canon "missed the boat" with the SX200 as though it is a statement of fact seems a bit extreme.
==========================

Time will tell if the Lithium battery is an actual improvement as the flash recycle time is still listed as "under 10 seconds". If it doesn't improve that, I don't see it as an improvement since I don't have issues with battery life even though I do have some pretty heavy shooting days with the SX100. JMHO.

The 28mm wide angle is a definite improvement although at the cost of going from f/2.8 to f3.3 as the max aperture. Still, I think it may be worth the tradeoff.

It will also be interesting to see if newer technology will allow for packing even more megapixels onto smaller sensors.

That is quite an increase in price in price over the other SX models. I guess it depends on what features are important to an individual as the whether or not it is worth it.

Good to see that the SX line appears to be successful enough to justify it's continued existence, but it will be interesting to see if the $100+/- price increase will be offputting to consumers.

[brianch]

Going to pick one of these up when I can =D I think its great. I thought the SX110IS was a great buy, the only thing I had to complain about is the build quality and the AA batteries. The SX200IS is aluminum plus it now uses a rechargeable Lith-ion and the 720p video is going to be convenient to have.

[JRU]

Have been looking at info on the Cannon site and was wondering of anyone knows if that camer records the audio in stereo or is it a mono movie?

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0902/09021804canonsx200is.asp

12x zoom in a compact body - plenty of people are gonna love this.

[Jon]

I don't think it does stereo - the photos I've seen don't seem to show dual microphone openings.

[GC2]

is the lens wide angle?

Also u can zoom while recording videos right?

[Jon]

It's as wide as any PowerShot released to date, including the SD800 and SX1 at 28 mm equivalent focal length. As to zooming while shooting, digital zoom has been possible with many PowerShots (and given the reduced image size of video, hasn't been the problem some would have it); latest PowerShot models have begun incorporating optical zoom as well. Whether this one does or not, if the DPReview announcement in the first post on the thread doesn't mention it, we'll have to wait and see.

[Karl Johnston]

What's the deal with having 12 mpx over 8? I mean come on that's such a small ratio to go up and it won't even make a difference..they should've kept the 8 mpxs for the entire series. Then maybe the ISO would at least be more usable in a variety of conditions and the digic 4 could really shine.

[ungern]

What's the deal with having 12 mpx over 8? I mean come on that's such a small ratio to go up and it won't even make a difference..they should've kept the 8 mpxs for the entire series. Then maybe the ISO would at least be more usable in a variety of conditions and the digic 4 could really shine.
Most clueless people think more is better. They buy it and pay for the more MP, so Canon makes them. Sad, but true.

I'm with you all the way on this one.

[JRU]

So I would be better off just keeping my A710 IS w/7.1 mp? I do not know that much about cameras and the only thing that really interested my is that the SX was somewhat smaller and has the 12x zoom.

Also I was sort of looking at the Panasonic TZ7/ZS3 as a upgrade. Again I like the zoom and on top of that is does have the stereo recording......

TIA

Most clueless people think more is better. They buy it and pay for the more MP, so Canon makes them. Sad, but true.

I'm with you all the way on this one.

[ungern]

Not sure about that though.
My Ixus870 (SD880) produces slightly better pictures than my parents' old G6, even though that one has a bigger lens, less MP and I guess, bigger sensor. All this thanks to the Digic4 in the newer Ixus and perhaps improved lens.

Points to consider (IMHO):

Size of CCD (bigger=better) vs. Megapixel count (less=better)
Newer processor can work some magic
Largest available aperture settings (larger=lower ISO used)I always wait for professional reviews before buying, as they have excellent ways to check the extreme situations on ISO/resolution/lens/etc...

Don't know about the Panasonics, but they are reviewed I think, go check them out. Perhaps you won't gain that much on upgrading?

[Jon]

If you like working at the long end of your lenses' reach, go for the SX. Both the longer zoom range and the higher pixel count will help. The longer zoom will put a bigger image on the sensor. The higher pixel count will let you crop it more if the zoom doesn't have quite as much reach as you really needed. It's true that all else being equal, the sensor with the lower pixels/mm^2 will have the less noisy image, but that's assuming no change in the circuitry between revisions. The 10D had much less noise than the D60 despite having identically sized sensors (both in area and in pixels - 6.3 MP in a 15x22.5 mm sensor). The D60, in fact, was capped at ISO 1000, while the 10D went up to ISO 3200 with every bit as good quality. For that matter, the 20D, with 8.2 MP on the same size sensor, blew both of them away.

To the extent that you don't need high megapixel counts unless you're making large prints and few PowerShot users go beyond 4x6" prints it's true that the 12 MP is unnecessary. We like to think we have a more discerning membership, capable of taking photos that deserve to be enlarged to the point that those extra MP will matter. And if you don't think you're to that point now, stick around (and hold onto your wallet). You can be.

[hnikesch]

I take my SD series images to 20" X 30", Meijer will print them for about $20.00 each, I mount them in my office and basement. I started going that large with my 4mp S400 and get great results from my SD 900 and SD 990IS Jon is correct the 14.7 mp on my 990 allows lots of cropping room as it only has a 3.7X optical zoom, It also enables better results using the Digital zoom (to a point)

[JRU]

I see that the price Gouging has already started :cry:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-PowerShot-SX200-IS-Black-Power-Shot-SX200IS-NEW_W0QQitemZ270357227741QQcmdZViewItemQQptZDigita l_Cameras?hash=item270357227741&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C 240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50

There even higher than Amazon's pre order price. Yikes. I just sold my A710is and now I'm sort of regretting it. Perhaps I will go with the Sx110?

[joysmahal]

Hey guys,

Just thought I'd share the first hands on review that I could find online for the Canon SX200 IS.

From Digital Camera Resource: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sx200-review/index.shtml

note from review no optical zooming while recording in HD:
If you want that on a Canon camera, you'll have to step up to the PowerShot SX1 or SX10 models. You can use the digital zoom, if you want, and the image stabilizer is always available.

[JRU]

Perhaps a hack around it in the future would be possible?

Hey guys,

Just thought I'd share the first hands on review that I could find online for the Canon SX200 IS.

From Digital Camera Resource: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sx200-review/index.shtml

note from review no optical zooming while recording in HD:

[JRU]

Thanks and I also noticed that it has poor battery life........ Hmm makes me re-think the SX110 IS?

John

Hey guys,

Just thought I'd share the first hands on review that I could find online for the Canon SX200 IS.

From Digital Camera Resource: http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sx200-review/index.shtml

note from review no optical zooming while recording in HD:

[hbdragon88]

Thanks and I also noticed that it has poor battery life........ Hmm makes me re-think the SX110 IS?


I've owned an SX100 and 110 since August. I've used two sets of rechargeable AA batteries to power it. I took 2165 photos with the SX100 and 2285 photos with the SX110 over 17 battery recharages. That amounts to about 261 photos per battery charge. I hardly ever use flash, though, since I have my 20D and the superior 420EX to cover most of my flash needs.

EDIT: Hohoho. They claim 450 photos per battery charge on the 110...I use Tenergy 2600 MaH NiMH batteries.

[JRU]

Thank you for the info, I do have one more question. Can the Sx110 Zoom while taking movies?

Now it looks like a choice between the Sx110 and the Panasonic ZS3.

TY,
John

I've owned an SX100 and 110 since August. I've used two sets of rechargeable AA batteries to power it. I took 2165 photos with the SX100 and 2285 photos with the SX110 over 17 battery recharages. That amounts to about 261 photos per battery charge. I hardly ever use flash, though, since I have my 20D and the superior 420EX to cover most of my flash needs.

EDIT: Hohoho. They claim 450 photos per battery charge on the 110...I use Tenergy 2600 MaH NiMH batteries.

[sweetlu60]

I know many people are upset about the use of the proprietary battery, however, this battery is used on most of the SD line (and in my case I have a recently failed SD700 that uses this battery) and is quite readily available. I know people will discuss the Sterling Tek batteries as a good cheap alternative and I have purchased them for my old 10D, but I would recommend the Canon batteries.

I purchased my 10D in 2004 and purchased 3 BP511's from SterlingTek at the same time, because I did not want to be out in the field and worried about having charged batteries. Within a year, the Sterlingtek batteries would not hold the same charge as the Canon battery, so I needed to buy a new Canon battery. Since then I have only bought Canon batteries for my SLRs. I currently have about 8 of the BP511s for my two 40D's and I have 2 NB-5L's for my SD700.

As for the argument for or against the AA batteries, my second point and shoot camera was a Vivatar that I bought in 2002 for a 3 month trip to Eastern Europe. I thought it would be great to have the AA batteries because they would be easy to find and it was. However, I found the Vivatar would only use about half of the capacity on the batteries before it failed to function. Meanwhile, I could easily use the used batteries in my MP3 player for another 11 hours per battery, and I was only using the viewfinder on the camera not the LCD, when I got back to the States I went on to get rechargeables, but I had to carry so many and it took so long to charge, it simply frustrated me.

So in closing, if you are buying a $350 USD camera, the additional $37 USD for a second battery is only 10% of the cost of the camera and not that big of a deal.

[JRU]

I see that the SX200 IS is now available at www.Abtelectronics.com (http://www.Abtelectronics.com) , www.newegg.com (http://www.newegg.com) , www.amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com) , and www.bhphotovideo.com (http://www.bhphotovideo.com)

Tempting but I will wait for the ZS3 Panasonic

I know many people are upset about the use of the proprietary battery, however, this battery is used on most of the SD line (and in my case I have a recently failed SD700 that uses this battery) and is quite readily available. I know people will discuss the Sterling Tek batteries as a good cheap alternative and I have purchased them for my old 10D, but I would recommend the Canon batteries.

I purchased my 10D in 2004 and purchased 3 BP511's from SterlingTek at the same time, because I did not want to be out in the field and worried about having charged batteries. Within a year, the Sterlingtek batteries would not hold the same charge as the Canon battery, so I needed to buy a new Canon battery. Since then I have only bought Canon batteries for my SLRs. I currently have about 8 of the BP511s for my two 40D's and I have 2 NB-5L's for my SD700.

As for the argument for or against the AA batteries, my second point and shoot camera was a Vivatar that I bought in 2002 for a 3 month trip to Eastern Europe. I thought it would be great to have the AA batteries because they would be easy to find and it was. However, I found the Vivatar would only use about half of the capacity on the batteries before it failed to function. Meanwhile, I could easily use the used batteries in my MP3 player for another 11 hours per battery, and I was only using the viewfinder on the camera not the LCD, when I got back to the States I went on to get rechargeables, but I had to carry so many and it took so long to charge, it simply frustrated me.

So in closing, if you are buying a $350 USD camera, the additional $37 USD for a second battery is only 10% of the cost of the camera and not that big of a deal.

[Taity]

Hello all,

My SX200 IS was delivered yesterday, i'm transferring from an IXUS 50, which was my preferred "point and shoot" camera.. I have a 40D for the serious stuff.

First impressions are suitably impressive, no real "shots in anger" but the test shots I have been taking around the office are pretty damn good.

I'll get some pics uploaded shortly.

Taity

[Taity]

Quick shut down video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_vZXDSCKmk

[Taity]

http://images47.fotki.com/v1462/photos/7/374437/7389003/IMG_0063-vi.jpg

http://images46.fotki.com/v1483/photos/7/374437/7389003/IMG_0066-vi.jpg

http://images46.fotki.com/v1483/photos/7/374437/7389003/IMG_0067-vi.jpg

[Brianbar]

Hello all,

My SX200 IS was delivered yesterday, i'm transferring from an IXUS 50, which was my preferred "point and shoot" camera.. I have a 40D for the serious stuff.

First impressions are suitably impressive, no real "shots in anger" but the test shots I have been taking around the office are pretty damn good.

I'll get some pics uploaded shortly.

Taity
Maybe you can answer this question now that you have one. I read a review that one big dislike with the SX200IS, was that the flash pops up EVERY time you switch on.

Brian

[manipula]

True.

Got them in at work now. Nice, zoom's a tad noisy in operation. Other than, just like a big Ixus.

[Goddessstar]

Hi everyone! I just got the Canon SX200is and I have two questions:
1) it doesn't have the superfine compression ~ only Fine and Normal. Is this a significant problem? I like my images sharp, clear and high quality ~ will the 12 mp make up for the greater compression? Am I over worrying?

2) I find that when I take pictures of landscapes that when "blown up" on the software to look at the detail, they look very soft, nothing with sharply defined edges...I know it is focused, not blurry...and I know it focuses as when I take pictures of people or objects they usually come out with sharper edges when "blown up"...is this a function of the greater compression? The camera? Or do most digital cameras have this issue? (this is my first digital camera).
Would greatly appreciate your input ASAP as I am a week into my 30 day return window! Thank you!
Blessings ~

[dave_bass5]

Well i was all set to get a SX200 but went for a TZ7 instead.
Im not going to say one is better than the other but the things that swung it for me was the live Histogram, zooming whilst filming, intelligent exposure (it lightens up just the dark areas of the image), you can shoot in 3:2 which for me is great as it matched my 40D AR and no flash popping up all the time.
Having looked at some samples on line i do like the IQ of the SX200, especially the video but the features i mention above are very handy to have.

[manipula]

After having had them around for a week or so now, and having recently received Panasonic TZ6's too, I've come to a conclusion on the SX200. Buy the Panasonic, it's way better.

[Brianbar]

Thanks for the updates on the SX200IS, by what you have said and what I've read, I will go for the Panasonic.
It was a concern for me on the SX200 about the flash popping up every time you switch on, and the zoom was a BIG issue.
Does the TZ7 have a different model number in Canada?
Brian

[JRU]

Here in the states its the ZS3 so perhaps its the same in CA. I wrote Panasonic to see when it finally be released here as I was told the last week in April (I would not hold my breath though)

ZS3/TZ7 is my choice also.

Thanks for the updates on the SX200IS, by what you have said and what I've read, I will go for the Panasonic.
It was a concern for me on the SX200 about the flash popping up every time you switch on, and the zoom was a BIG issue.
Does the TZ7 have a different model number in Canada?
Brian

[merovingian]

After having had them around for a week or so now, and having recently received Panasonic TZ6's too, I've come to a conclusion on the SX200. Buy the Panasonic, it's way better.

I'm on the verge of getting the SX200 this weekend b/c of the AV and TV modes.

Does the TZ6 and 7 have this facility?????????????

[dave_bass5]

I'm on the verge of getting the SX200 this weekend b/c of the AV and TV modes.

Does the TZ6 and 7 have this facility?????????????

No, its much more a point and shoot.
The TZ7 outshines the SX200 in many ways but it does lack control.
I always used to go for camera's with Tv and Av modes but found i hardly ever used them and when i did i probably could have got the camera to do all the work.

Still, i know some people treasure these controls.

[CameraLens]

I like Tv on the SX110 IS because it automatically chooses the flash brightness but if you shoot manual then you have to choose and it's a guessing game.

[HungryWriter]

I got the SX200IS last week for my birthday. It was between that and the Panasonic. The zooms were pretty awesome but if I'm stepping away from the G6 I still wanted the control.

The pictures are fantastic - experienced low light indoor ZOOM to capture my graduate from quite a distance with some nice pictures that I would have not been able to do with another point and shoot, and its small enough to slip into my pocket yet sturdy enough to feel solid in my hands. The look is also quite retro.

I had concerns with the pop-up flash when i bought it, and I addressed that with the sales person. He said yes, that is something people mentioned but, as I've found, it has not gotten in the way of anything!

I give this 5 out of 5 stars for a point and shoot in this price range and with the flexibility!

[okrent3209]

Does anyone know if the PowerShot SX200 IS can do AEB?

[jejeje]

Not 100% sure about the AEB, but I don't think the SX200 IS has it. I got mine yesterday and only tested the zoom so far.

I decided to get this camera to use where I can't be arsed to bring the 5D2/50D, like music festivals and such. Therefore the 12x was one of the deciding points.

Below is an example of the zoom for those who's considering weather to buy the camera or not. The two images side by side are uncropped and have just been resized from 4000x3000 to 800x600 for practical reasons.

http://jeje.je/pix/misc/sx200is.jpg

[Bodryn]

this is going to be very popular. its great that it takes lithium ion.. the sx110 took AA batts.

Nuts to rechargeables. I have a lot of gadgets around now that I can't get batteries for, and the original rechargeables won't hold a charge. But I have stuck with AA's in all my Canon digital cameras and they take a LOT of pix before the batteries have to be replaced. If I wanted rechargeables I could always choose to use rechargeables in these cameras.

[Philscbx]

No zoom during movies is a deal breaker IMO. For $50 more the Panasonic TZ7 (ZS3) offers zooming during movies, a more useful wide (25mm equivalent) lens, some form of a burst mode, better sound recording, is smaller, and the LCD is MUCH better. Especially if the 230K pixel 3" LCD is anything like the same specced LCD on my 40D which is awful for anything other than the histogram.

Canon missed the boat on this one. If it were priced $50-$75 less, maybe, but for a little more $$$ you get a lot more camera with the Panasonic.
GeneJust so you know, you hit it straight.
After tons of research and actual in hand testing, I received 2nd copy of ZS3 yesterday.
To add, Manual settings was the least picked criteria.
I have all the Manual I need in the other gear.
Cheers

[Salleke]

I have hold the SX200 IS and the TZ7 in my hands and I must say that the Canon was nicer to hold.
And that I wanted to buy it. I really, really loved this camera.

The fact that the flash pop's up when switching the camera on was annoying but not a deal
breaker. But for such a modern camera and while it has to compete with the TZ7, Canon
has crippeld it for not adding zoom during videorecording.

I have seen many stupid things from Canon but this nearly make me p... my pants.
The folks that have approved the relaese of this camera at Canon should be fired and
placed on the biggest marketsquare in Tokio, so folks can trow tomatos at them ... :mad::mad::mad:

Shame on you Canon for thinking that your custumers are dumb ...

Thank God there are other nice camera's around ...

Good luck...

[GimpyPoop]

Got this camera a couple of weeks ago for my birthday ad I really like it!
I'm with y'all who despise the perpetually popped-up flash, seriously Canon, what the hell?! Another gripe is the focus time lapse - I read about it and sure enough I find my camera has issues focusing every now and then. However, I haven't really experimented much with this camera so maybe it's some user error as well!
I haven't really utilized the magnificent 12X zoom as I'm not really a zoom photographer, but this is a nice addition to my arsenal as I've parted with all my zoom lens. Also this camera does take better IQ photos than my SD1000 (it's not quite as good as the G10 and other CMOS sensor-ed cameras in the Canon line, though) and the flash distribution is more even and consistent.
Overall I'm quite pleased with this camera! I wanted something with a little more manual functions than my SD1000, but not the un-portable size of my 30D. I love the interface as per usual. Although it's comprised principally of plastic, it feels substantial and sturdy in my henads.

[kerrysroxy]

Can people please post sample shots ? and maybe video ?

I am thinking about buying this camera but i am not sure yet. I need to decide this weekend.