Canon PowerShot SX110 IS
All the zoom you could ever need
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Review Canon seems to release a new Digital Ixus camera every few months or so, but it has been more restrained when it comes to its PowerShot range.
Take the PowerShot SX110 IS. It’s the successor to the PowerShot SX100 IS, which was launched back in autumn 2007. As the name suggests, the SX110 is more an evolutionary camera than a revolutionary one. At first glance, it’s hard to tell the difference between the old and the new versions, but some changes have been made, both in terms of features and design.
Canon's PowerShot SX110 IS: 9Mp snapper with super zoom
Whereas the SX100 had an eight-megapixel CCD, the SX110 offers nine megapixels - and a 1/2.3in CCD rather than the 1/2.5in one used on the SX100. There’s a 3in LCD screen in place of a 2.5in display, and at 245g, the SX110 is less weighty than its 266g predecessor, although, with a width of 111mm, it's 2mm wider.
Like the SX100, the SX110 is a super-zoom camera with a 10x optical zoom - it has a 6-60mm f2.8-4.8 lens, equivalent to a 36-360mm lens on a 35mm camera - and aims to bridge the gap between compacts and full-blown digital SLRs.
This is a rather chunky camera and that’s mainly down to the fact that it’s powered by two AA batteries. The SX110 can use either alkalines or NiMH rechargeables but, rather disappointingly, comes supplied with the former. Likewise, it uses SD/SDHC cards, and Canon provides a paltry 32MB SD card that will store the grand total of seven images at the highest resolution.
A quick tour of the SX110 reveals a small speaker on the top left, next to which is the flash - more on this later - a large control dial, power button and zoom rocker-switch.
COMMENTS
I like the longer zoom
Two of my sprog have different models of their powershots that have the 4X optical zoom and my only real complaint has been that it's only 4 instead of 10X. That's a good thing to add, though I agree that their chintzy little sd card is a waste. Why not at least 2gb? they aren't that expensive now and there's no reason to look cheap (as opposed to inexpensive).
Paris, 'cos I would take tele piccys of her for sure
Re: Digital Cameras Should be *Digital*
No, it's not artificial, and is a feature of the sensor.
High ISO capability is achieved by amplification of the analogue output from the sensor. All sensors have a certain amount of inherent "noise", and when in low light conditions the output of the sensor has to be amplified in order to render an image signal worth processing, that noise is amplified too, and in extreme cases may exceed the image signal.
As sensor technology improves (in terms of photosite area and efficiency), the inherent signal to noise ratio improves, allowing more amplification to be possible before the output image excessively degrades - which in turn equates to higher and higher ISO capability of the cameras involved.
Of course, now high ISO has become almost as much of a marketing gimmick as megapixels, camera manufacturers are now cranking up the maximum ISO (i.e. sensor amplification) without actually improving the underlying sensor efficiency. Anyone can claim their camera has ISO of a million, but it doesn't mean the images won't be total mush.
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
