Out of the fog of noise emerges a surprising contender
Curiosity
The tiny sesnors in digicams are noisy even at ISO 100. Weighed down by ridiculous pixel to sensor ratios - 14mp is about 50 mp/cm² - their sensors struggle to make sense of what the lens sees. The firmware works overtime to intepret the image data, and to represent it in a flattering way - enhancing colours, reducing noise and sharpening details. That creates what we know as image artifacts - when you view the image at 100%, it looks like someone not very skilled filled in the details with an edgy paint brush. Here's a crass example where the firmware had no idea what to make of the plastic weather shielding. (Click on any image for a bigger file).

To an extent, all digicams have this problem so we shouldn't expect DSLR or Micro 43 image quality. Dynamic range is clearly compromised, depth of field is not a real option with tiny sensors and lenses, and blowouts occur as soon as you're anywhere near a light source. Add to that painfully slow focusing, shooting and shot-to-shot times, and you realise that you're not going to find camera perfection in this realm. The best you can hope for is an acceptable compromise. I just wanted to make that point before we go on.
A while ago I read that a Canon IXUS 300HS – known as the SD4000IS Digital ELPH to its fans in America – had been chosen by the UK’s PC Advisor magazine as the best digital camera of 2010. The mag said the 300HS ‘delivers clean and clear images and video footage across a range of shooting and light conditions and is a joy to use. With some fun functions to try out, you get to experiment with photography styles, but you don't sacrifice optic quality or manual functions for the sake of gimmicky extras. In short, a lovely camera ...’ http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/reviews/pc-peripheral/3227211/canon-ixus-300-hs-review/
Looking for a second opinion, I checked with Photography Blog, a pretty reliable source. ‘With a 10 megapixel back-illuminated CMOS sensor and fast f/2.0 lens,’ Mark Goldstein sums up, ‘the IXUS 300 HS was always going to deliver the goods in terms of image quality. Noise doesn't rear its ugly head until ISO 800, with even the fastest 3200 setting proving usable, something that you can't say about too many compact cameras, and chromatic aberrations are also well controlled. Only a slight softness in the corners and some barrel distortion at the 28mm wide-angle setting detract from an otherwise stellar performance.’
The only downer seemed to be the single control wheel that controls all of the cameras tricks. Oh, and the ‘eye-watering price of £375. Yes, pounds. Mark’s final take is: ‘... while the Canon IXUS 300 HS is an undeniably full-featured compact camera that takes great pictures, it's just too expensive to whole-heartedly recommend.’
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_ixus_300_hs_review/conclusion/
Surprise, surprise
By the time I read this, it's a year after the camera’s release, and the price no longer makes the eyes water. In fact, I find I'm rubbing them in disbelief: the 300HS is less than $200 from my favourite Hong Kong supplier. A year is an eternity in digicam land, and the 300HS has been kicked over the fence by the 310HS – the PowerShot ELPH 500 HS in America.
This is a pretty typical example of digicam makers losing what looked like a good plot. The new 310HS adds weight, a fancy touch screen and 12 megapixels to the 300HS’s 10. ‘The Canon IXUS 310 HS' swollen proportions suggest a 16x travel zoom capability might lurk beneath its exterior,’ says Gavin Stoker at Photoblog, ‘so it's a slight disappointment to find a 4.4x optical zoom in its place.’ http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/canon_ixus_310_hs_review/image_quality/
Last year, Canon settled on 10mp for serious digicams like the G12/S95. Panasonic did the same with the Lumix LX5, and Olympus followed suit with its new XZ-1. At the gadget end of the digicam market, Canon went to 12 and 14mp, Panasonic to 14, and Sony and Fuji to 16mp. They can’t help themselves, and the average punter who buys these things hasn’t yet worked out that more pixels are bad news for tiny sensors and more work for the firmware.
So the 300HS is looking good with an f/2 lens and a 10mp backlit CMOS sensor, and a great price. But why would anyone in their right mind buy last year’s model? That’s like buying yesterday’s newspaper, isn’t it? Not quite - a camera doesn't go off like food, so it's is just as good as it was last year and, as we’ll see, progress in digicam land is evanescent.
Second Thoughts
As I think about the bargain the IXUS 300HS presents, I remember what’s wrong with all of these toys compared to a real camera. I remember how bad the Canon S95 was at ISO 800 in real life, despite the glowing reviews, and I’m losing interest fast.
Canon S95 ISO 800
Check here for the full review and comparisons http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/02/canon-s95-the-search-for-pocket-size-perfection-ends-in-failure.html
Looking for more guidance, I came across a review of the 300HS in the great oracle known as dpreview.com. The guys here only review the crème de la crème of digicams, and the IXUS gets a 74 point rating (these guys have a rigorous point-scoring system for their exhaustive reviews). They write: ‘The SD4000 IS is born into a long and well-respected line of compact cameras and does its family proud. It offers flexibility, image quality and a good level of user control while remaining distinctly easy to use. Only the screen (large chunks of which are regularly unused), is a disappointment.’
It’s a 16x9 screen and a 4x3 sensor, but surely you can set the shooting menu to 3x2 which would be a closer fit. Anyhow, I check the other digicams reviewed at this revered site and find to my amazement that none exceeds the 300HS’s 74 point rating. That’s correct, not one, and the Olympus XZ-1 is the only camera to equal it. Here are the scores:
Canon Ixus 300HS 74
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonsd4000is/page10.asp
Olympus XZ-1 74
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/OlympusXZ1/page12.asp
Canon PowerShot G12 73
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/CanonG12/page9.asp
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 73
Canon PowerShot S95 72
Nikon CoolPix P7000 65
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q42010highendcompactgroup/page18.asp
Nikon CoolPix P300 70
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp
Kind of helps to put the IXUS 300HS in persepctive.
Entrapment
It’s shame Nikon can’t get its act together with digicams, but that’s another story. Here we have a Canon IXUS lording it up in very elite company, in fact expensive company as all the cameras listed here are $400 to $500. Comparing apples with apples, the Olympus from my favourite supplier DWI in HK (http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/store/index.asp) is $399 compared to the Canon IXUS 300HS at $197. And the Olympus is bigger and less pocket-friendly. Same with the Panny LX5 and the Canon S95. Same price, same size as the XZ-1.
If I’m going to buy a new one of these things, it has to fit into a normal pocket (not one of those stupid saddle bags they sew onto cargo pants). The reviews say the 300HS is small and slim and fits easily into normal pockets. OK, I’m convinced.
First Impressions
When I unpack the camera a couple of days later, I have to admit that I love the design. It’s a sleek and elegant piece of metal sculpture, smooth to the touch and nice to hold in your hand. It’s solid but not heavy, compact but not tiny, it feels well-made.
Sadly, function has been sacrificed at the altar of minimalist design. On the top plate from the right, we have the shutter with the zoom ring around it, the power switch, and a 3-way switch for AUTO, Program mode and video. On the back, a huge 16x9 screen takes up 80% of available space. To the right is a control wheel with a Func Set button inside, flanked by 2 buttons – one for replay and the other for Menu.
Courtesy of Imaging Resource http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SD4000IS/SD4000ISA.HTM
The design may be slick, but the navigation is as clunky as it gets. If Canon had cut the screen size back to 3x2, there’d be room for an MASP/modes wheel plus 3 or 4 more buttons. As it is, the unused bits of screen left and right mostly function to explain what the single control wheel is doing or not doing – it’s a bit like Alladin’s lamp: you have to rub it just the right way.
Pressing left, right, top or bottom will give you quick access to flash, distance and exposure settings. The function button opens a quasi-manual mode lets you choose things like ISO and White Balance and even aperture and shutter speed. Once you set it on AV mode, you then use the same control wheel as a dial to
The IXUS 300HS features an f/2 lens at the wide open end, which goes to f/5.3 on the far side. Zoom range is 18-70mm in APS-C DX speak or 28-105mm in 35mm film/FX jargon. It’s the first Canon digicam with a backside-illuminated CMOS sensor, but the size is just 1/2.3 inches, not the ‘larger’ 1/1.7 sensor of the S95. The gravy on this dish is a high-speed burst mode up to 8.4 frames per second, high-speed movie capture for slow-motion video clips, and improved low-light image quality.
It doesn’t shoot RAW, and I really don’t care. It springs to life quickly, which is more important, and it focuses and shoots fairly fast as well. Shot-to-shot times are still a yawn but you can always use drive mode for multiple shots - it's very fast. If you use a decent spec SD card and shoot JPEG (Fine) between ISO 125-400, you get close to 4 fps and unlimited frames
Rest of the specs here (and an editor’s choice award):
http://www.photoreview.com.au/Canon/reviews/slimline/canon-ixus-300-hs.aspx
So this is the first IXUS the first in a long line of resolutely automatic models to give us A and S modes. I should know: I own one. An old IXUS 960IS
This shot was taken with the IXUS 300HS, reminding us that digicams are much better shooting close-by objects than distant landscapes. The old IXUS from 2007 in the picture was no slouch in its day: it scored a 9 out 10 for image quality at Trusted Reviews.
http://www.trustedreviews.com/Canon-IXUS-960-IS_Digital-Camera_review
Comparing Canons with Canons
That’s right. We have the old IXUS 960IS, the new IXUS 300HS and the ghost of the S95. Here are a few samples from the new 300HS:
A tough shot with extreme contrasts testing dynamic range - not bad
this one's tougher and we have some blow-outs
Bad light at ISO 800. Not good but the 300HS does no worse than the S95
A shop window 'en passant'
Big shot, wide angle, bad light, not bad apart from the blowouts
Very poor light and the 300HS holds things together pretty well at ISO 1600
A real surprise
The 300HS does better in poor light than the S95, no question. Must be that HS sensor - never mind the size, feel the sensitivity. So what we have here in effect is an improvement on the S95 at half the price - from the same maker. You work it out, I can't. This is a slicker and smaller package as well, and the battery lasts longer - about 250 shots. It looks good, it feels good, it works better than I expected. I think the boys a dp.review are right on the money with that 74 point rating.
There's only one problem: it doesn't really improve on the overall image quality of the old IXUS 960IS. Yes, it's faster, more responsive, and offers more control, but the IQ is not that different. Here are some of its images:
Sydney from Cremorne Point at sunrise
Another weekend, another wedding
Magnolia
Ivan and Beth's old Beetle in fading light at ISO 800
There be Dragons
Summing Up
The overall impression that formed in my mind when I looked at the image files from the three cameras wasn't how different they were but how similar. Yes, all that propaganda about advances in capturing digital images is just that: propaganda. Not much has changed since 2007. And all that talk about sensor sizes is rot: on the whole, the 300HS does a better job in poor light than the S95, but neither is a real advance on the old IXUS 960IS.
Not in terms of Image Quality, or build quality - the 960IS feels like it's cut from a solid stainless teel billet. In speed of operation, the IXUS 300HS is a big step forward, except for the rebound after a shot which still takes seconds. The design offers much to admire, and this is what the IXUS range has always been about. It really delivers on that score, and the camera grows on you in a special way because it's just nice to have and to hold if you pardon the expression, but I wish Canon had stuck with traditional navigation.
Kim
P.S.: I have to eat some of my words here: wondering why that old IXUS 960IS/ PowerShot SD950 IS produces such great images, I re-read a couple of reviews and discovered that it has inside it a 1/1.7 inch sensor. Mind you that still doesn't explain the good performance of the 300HS.