Canon SX110 IS or Nikon L100?

This will be my 1st digital camera. I know the Nikon L100 has more zoom and slightly more mega pixels. My main concerns are image quality, shutter speed and ease of use. Can't decide between these two and I'm driving myself and my family nuts! Help!!

The L100 has Nikkor glass on it.... That alone is worth it. Honestly I tried the two out. Get over to a store and give both a whirl. They are very different cameras. I was very happy with the L100s performance.

Thanks! Got this message just today. Went to store, talked to a salesman who had played around with both--he wasn't impressed with the Nikon. I tried taking a few pic's of my daughter in the store with the Nikon and kept getting a blurred picture because when I pressed the button, it jerked the camera. There was not internal memory on the Canon so could not compare that. Decided on the Canon based on online reviews. Bought online and haven't received it yet but keeping my fingers crossed that I like it! thanks again!

The blurring is no doubt not only caused by camera shake, but also the shutter lag. It's the delay which happens between triggering the shutter and when the photograph is actually recorded. And what's interesting is, that DSLRs dont' have a lag issue at all. Or, it's nearly non existent. It's a common problem with point and shoot cameras. But there are ways to combat it.

1. Prefocus. Hold down the shutter half way to get a prefocus of the image you're shooting. When it changes, prefocus again. This will speed up your camera's performance during picture taking since it won't have to autofocus before it shoots the shot.

2. Use faster SD cards. Yes, there are faster cards and it does make a difference in writing the image file to the card. This is especially key if you're taking multiple or burst images.

3. Fresher batteries. Use alkalines at least. But I recommend using high energy batteries designed for digital photography. Varta is a good brand. They are usually sold in camera shops, are long lasting (because they are sold in small quantities) put out alot of energy.

4. Pan with the action. You can create some pretty cool shots by panning with your shot, focusing on your subject. This will create the effect of your subject in sharp contrast to the blurry background.

6. Stick with 100-400 ISO. Going higher will cause more noise/grain in your shots, particularly in darker settings.

Doing these, particularly prefocusing and panning with the action will cut your shutter lag by as much as 80%.

In addition to what James added, if the camera jerks when you press the shutter button then you should adopt a different camera holding technique. Grasp the camera with your right hand and balance it from underneath with your left hand. Most camera guides (At least for the higher end cameras) place this technique with examples of it in the first couple of chapters. Practice this technique and you will be happier with your photos regardless of what camera you use.

Also with any zoom camera make sure the anti-shake mechanism is turned on if the camera is so equipped.

The Canon and the Nikon, in this thread, have very different form factors, degrees of control, zoom lengths, and target audiences (The Nikon P series competes with Canon's SX series where as the Nikon L series compete with Canon' SD series and Olympus' FE- Fun & Easy series).... perhaps if you specify what you are looking at a comparison could be made.

The L100 has mostly been favorably reviewed...

If i shoot in low light like say a candle lit restaurant then wouldn't i need to shoot above iso400? ( maybe iso 800 - 1600 for low light like this )

Also how does the Cannon SX110 compare to the Panasonic Lumix TZ4?

I am looking at these cameras because i really need low light performance as most of my shots are at night. I figure if it is good in low light then day light isn't a problem.

I am a video editor and i don't like having to spend 3 or 4 hrs in Photoshop to correct 5 picture to look nice in hd video. I do not need more than 10MP because i will not be printing very much. I just need usable in video shots and extremely clean detailed shots without having to finance the camera. $250 is my budget and i wish it could be $200.

Well the problem is, as you get to ISOs 800 and above, more and more noise begins to creep into the picture in low light. The problem is that the lens won't be fast enough to compensate for it and you'd have to use shutter speeds so long that hand held becomes practically impossible. But that would be true for the Lumix or any other point and shoot as well. Ideally, your best bet would be a DSLR camera. But for your budget, you're not likely to find one, I'm afraid. So you have to do best with what you have.

If you are already doing video then you probably already know about camcorders with 3 sensors (3MOS, 3CCD, 3 HAD CCD), such as the Panasonic 3 MOS camcorders. A single sensor camera, such as you find on digital cameras, has the photodiodes arranged on the chip in one of several patterns (The Bayer pattern is the most common). Each photodiode has a light cavity with filter on it. The filter cap filters out the light except the color the photodiode is suppose to be sensing (Red, Blue, or Green in a Bayer arrangement). This means that 2/3 of the light is filtered out. 3 sensor cameras have a prism and split the light into RGB and then project the RGB light onto 3 separate sensors (One for each color). Because only stray light and no usable light is filtered out these cameras are more sensitive to light. Many folks will say that consumer grade camcorders perform as bad as digital cameras in low light , because they also use smaller sensors.... This is only true of the bottom tier dirt cheap 1 sensor camcorders. The truth of the matter is middle end camcorders perform better in low light than higher end digital cameras because they do use 3 sensors. Sony, JVC, and Panasonic all have consumer grade 3 sensor camcorders on the market right now (I am sure other makers do also)

What you loose shooting with a camcorder is DOF. A good simple explanation of it is here: http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html . With a 1/2.3" or smaller sensor you really don't get much better DOF with a digital camera vs a camcorder these days, really for a while- about 2004. You will get a better photo with a Digital SLR though.... This is an article from 2005 that illustrates the difference http://www.camerahacker.com/Digital/3_MP_Comparison.shtml and keep in mind that the photo abilities of Camcorders has improved greatly since it was written.

The other thing you end up with is a shorter Hyperfocal Distance and you get a 16:9 aspect ratio (Means you want to leave edges if you ever want to print it- cause it will get cropped). You also end up with a different form factor- although form factor on a palm cam isn't that different from the larger superzooms. Typically no RAW format (No RAW on cheaper cams either + you say you don't want mess with Image editing software anyhow) . Different ergonomics though. A few other differences also- those are the more important ones for what we are talking about here.

Anyhow for a low light compact digital camera you want something like the Lumix Lx3 , Fuji s100fs, Fuji f200 EXR, or Ricoh Cx1 (all of these are above your $250 price range). You could also use a digital SLR- Also out of the price range you are looking at.

With your budget you can either go with Film (You can get a very nice Film SLR kit for under $200) and get a digital CD when you process your film or you can shoot with a camcorder although (You can buy 3CCD and 3MOS camcorders for 250) I recommend spending $100+ more than your budget and get a better 3-sensor camcorder if you go that route.