Digital Camera Canon Powershot Review

I bought the S-400 to upgrade from the S-200 that I have been using since it was made available. I love the S-200, as it is both durable and handy. It has also become a great value with recent price reductions. On the other hand, I wanted to get the most recent tech advances in the smallest package, so the S-400 was the clear choice.

Here are my initial impressions, and some of the improvements / differences between the 200 and the 400. First of all, Canon has paid close attention to the nits and picks of users of the earlier cameras in the ELPH line. Aside from the addition of cutting edge developments, there have been subtle changes that greatly increase it's ease of use. This is an incredible camera built into a compressed case. Except for being ever so slightly thicker than the S-200, it is the same cigarette pack size.

It has a 4 mega pixel sensor, and it is quick and accurate. Color saturation and contrast are outstanding. The lens is very sharp from edge to edge (I tested at various light levels from macro mode (1.5") to infinity focus, and it consistantly produced remarkably fine images). 8x10 prints are outstanding. Period. At long shutter speeds (up to 15 sec), the sensor is remarkably free from "noise". In fact, it does better than many SLR style digicams in all areas of picture quality.

The 3x optical zoom is a welcome addition. Now you can take a proper head an shoulders portrait without invoking the relatively lossy digital zoom, or suffering from the effects of distorted facial features caused by getting too close with a too short lens. When you need it though, the digital zoom offers up to 11x total zoom power, and returns pretty good results as digital zooms go. The 400 retains the special effects lineup of the 200, and they work very well. The tonal range of the black & white option is a real treat. The final result isn't exactly Panatomic X quality, but it is really good, and your darkroom for artistic dodging and burning is contained entirely on your hard drive.

The case is still steel, but has a ceramic coating that is supposed to be even more scratch resistant. It is also much "whiter", and offers MUCH better contrast when you read the various control labels. While the contols are similar, they are also marked with larger and bolder lettering. All in all, a big improvrment. The michrophone was moved from the front to the top of the case. I think the front makes more sense, but it works very well on top. Canon also included a tiny (but effective) speaker in the 400. You can now select or create sounds for all camera functions (even a "real" shutter sound), as well as make voice notes for each photo taken if desired. Most sound functions are individualy adjustable for volume, and several sound "themes" are included. Techno-tinkerers might enjoy customizing the photo displayed upon startup. Movie preview also has sound now.

On the subject of movies, the 400 makes a little tradeoff. The max resolution is no longer 640x480, it is 320x240 (which is fast becoming standard for movies from still cameras). On the other hand, it is not limited to 10 seconds anymore. You can now make clips up to 3 minutes each. Computer playback looks very good. TV playback isn't bad at all. As a pocket sized way to film Junior taking his first bike ride without training wheels, it can't be beat.

The shutter button and zoom ring are a little larger, and now feel just right. The 400 has also incorporated the mode selector wheel used on other high end Canon cameras. This is long overdue, as it makes using all of the many features and modes a real joy.

Red eye appears to be better than before, but I don't expect much from such a close coupled flash / lens combo, and who really cares, as it is corrected with a click of the mouse before you print a photo. A few MAJOR improvements are the 9 zone Ai AF, and new (yellow) focus assist. If you were not careful, the 200 could return slightly out of focus shots, and in low light, the focus assist sometimes didn't. That has been fixed. The 9 zone intelligent AF really does an amazing job, and the new focus assist achieves lock under a much wider range of difficulty than the old system.

The built in flash has a generous range for a tiny camera, and the coverage is very even. Shooting a blank wall within the range of the flash shows no "hot spots". The metering options are still program, center weighted, or spot, but the program mode seems to have been given a big boost. The 200 does very well, but the 400 is on par with the SLR class for getting it right the first time.

Exposure bracketing is +/- 2 EV, slow synchro flash is still there to boost background brightness when needed, the panoramic stitch mode is still a treat, and, in general, this is nothing less than a James Bond version of a full featured, top quality 4+ megapixel digital camera. The only tradeoff is that a full sized camera with similar features might offer a larger lens aperture. That can extend your non flash low light level by an F stop or so, but it does no good if the camera is sitting at home, rather than in your pocket. If it is in your budget, get this camera. Not only will you take more quality pictures over time, but you won't be burdened by feeling like a conspicuous tourist while doing it.

One last note. Buy a high speed (24x) 256 meg memory card. The speed alows for quicker second shots (the 400 can do 2.5 FPS in continuous mode), and the 256 meg size gives you a full 128 shots at the highest resolution, many hundreds of pics at the low res setting.

I just bought the S400 from Dell for $xxx a little while back and was considering the Sony DSC-P10 at the time as well. I figured I'd write up a review on amazon to help other people out that are in the decision making process.

Price:
-----
The Sony DSC-P10 is 5 MP vs. 4 MP for the S400. The difference in resolution may immediately sway your decision to teh DSC-P10, but I would think very carefully. While the extra 1 MP sounds like a lot, my old 2.0 MP Canon S00 was fine for priting pictures all the way up to 8x10 (w/o any cropping). 4 MP resolution should allow you to price 11x14 with no cropping, and 8x10 with a lot of cropping. 5 MP is just excessive IMO. These days, it's just a race among manufacturers to see who can advertise the highest MP number.

Shooting modes and menus
---------------------------------
P10 also has some convenient shooting modes which make it more user friendly. It also has great features like cropping, resizing and rotating right on the camera which helps when you are not by a computer and want to free up room on your media storage.

The Canon S400 has a far superior menu system and is much easier to use.

Size:
-----
Canon S400 is smaller, making it a more pocketable camera IMO. Trust me on this one. The specs shown them being only very slightly different in dimensions, but the total volume of the cameras makes the S400 ideal. Those with bigger hands may prefer the layout and slightly larger size of the P10 though.

Memory storage:
---------------
The P10 uses Memory cards, which are limited to 128 MB, unless you use the double sided ones (Sony Memory Duo), where you can flip them over to get another 128 MB. Far too much hassle for me.. sounds easy in theory, but in real life, you will hate it. My friend who bought the P10 surely does. You can get larger memory sticks, which comes in the form of the "Sony Memory Pro", which are 256 MB and 512 MB. Keep in mind though, that these cards have problems acting as regular storage for files, and things like Mp3s for sony mp3 players. They have some type of digital rights management (DRM) on them that have causes lots of problems for people (so i've read on many reviews). Also, these PRO cards only work in 2003 (or newer) sony devices. Lastly, the memory pro cards have some type of management files on the cards themselves, taking up about 20MB of space. So a 256 MB card, really only has about 230 MB. Maybe not a big deal, but com'on, at advertise the size correctly!

Battery Life:
-------------
Battery life on P10 is better than the S400. It will last about 20% longer. However, the batteries are cheaper for the S400 AFAIK and they also charge in about 1/2 the time vs. the sony batteries.

Conclusion:
-----------
All in all, i think the S400 is a better choice. Sure, CF maybe outdated in a few years in favor of smaller, superior storage media like SD, MMC or xD cards (which are going up to 1 GB btw), but until then you can get a great digicam with dirt cheap media. I picked up a 512 MB Kingston card for very cheap from eBay.

Tips for those buying the S400:
-------------------------------
1. Ensure you buy good quality CF cards for the S400. CF cards have on-board processor on the cards themselves which actually regulate how fast the read+write is, unlike smartmedia which reliees on the camera. This means that CF cards will differ greatly in speed for read+write performance. Recommendations are Viking, RiData and Kingston. I have used about 7 or 8 different types of cards, and these are definitely the best in speed and reliability. Viking can be found cheap on Amazon deals quite often (with rebates), and kingston and ridata can be found on eBay for cheap.

2. Buy the legitimate Canon branded NB-1LH batteries. They can be had for about $30-$40 if you look hard enough. Stay away from NB-1L (notice the H is suffix is missing). The NB-1L is the lower capacity battery for these cameras. Stay away from aftermarket batteries. Sure they sell for MUCH cheaper (often 1/3 the price), but reliability and longevity of these are just brutal. There are always exceptions to the rules -- some ppl have have great experiences, which others have dead batteries almost right away. Why risk having a dead battery while you are on vacation and miss those Crucial shots of your wife/gf? Spend the extra $15 and get the real-deal batteries.

Recommended purchase:
---------------------
-Canon S400
-256 or 512 MB Viking, RiData or Kingston CF card
-1 extra battery NB-1LH
-Camera Case PSC-100 -- padded case with front storage for extra battery and storage. Very compact and nice looking.

Pros:
1) Compact Size
2) 4.0 Megapixel Camera!
3) 3x Optical Zoom, 3.6x Digital Zoom
4) CompactFlash media with High Speed CompactFlash support.
5) Improved Movie Record Mode (up to 3 minutes with High Speed CompactFlash card)
6) 9 point AiAF system (Artificial Intelligence AutoFocus) (S200 has 3 point AiAF system)
7) DIGIC processor (specialized processor made by Canon specifically for digital cameras... supposedly improves camera photo quality)
8) iSAPS (Intelligent Scene Analysis based on Photographic Space) for improved camera focus and white balancing.
9) Direct printing to DPOF (Digital Print Order Format) compatible printers.
10) Accepts the original Lithium-Ion batteries of the S110 and S300 cameras.
11) Adjustable ISO settings from 50 to 400
12) Self-Timer from 2 or 10 secs
13) Continuous Shooting mode
14) Stainless Steel Casing.
15) Built-in speaker
16) FUNC button like S45/S50 PowerShots for easier navigation through camera options especially in manual mode.
17) More rounded body gives a slightly sleeker look to the S400.

Cons:
1) Short Battery Life but seemed better than S230
2) Flash is weak especially in nighttime settings with no additional lighting and at 3x zoom.
3) Additional Batteries from Canon are Expensive. J&R sells non-Canon brands for as low as $...
4) Tripod mounting now on far left side of camera (you are looking at the back of the camera
5) Minimal Accessories available for the camera

My Opinion:...I brought 3 different camera with me. The S230, S45, and the S400 up to Boston while I do a bit of sightseeing between interviews. The reasons why I brought 3 of my camera was to see which camera will have the higest quality of picture.

I took photos of the Cambridge area, the Northern docks, and of Fenway with all three cameras... and of close up and group photos with my friends in the area. The fastest camera to start up was the S400. In fairly close up photos and group photos in daylight or good lighting situations, there wasn't a discernable amount of difference between the three cameras especially after printing out the photos on a photo-quality inkjet printer. I noted differences in distance shooting (landscaping photos) and low light situations. Landscape shots of the Boston Harbor captured better details especially with objects in the far background with the S400 and S45. Distant shots of Fenway captured sharper details on the S400 and S45 as well. Nighttime shots were best captured on the S45... although not by a great deal over the S230 and S400. The range of manual controls were without a doubt better on the S45 and that allowed me to take better twilight landscape photos than the other two digital cameras. The surprise was that the S400 seemed the fastest to display the picture in the LCD after the shutter button is pressed and the continuous shot modes were also considerable faster to me than the S230 and S45.

After extensive research on the web ...I chose to upgrade my Canon S20 to a Canon S400. In someways, this was a step down. Unfortunately, the S400 does not support verticle alignment of it's panoramic "stitch assist" mode as they do on the S40, S45, S50 and other higher priced models. I found this feature on the S20 to be very useful in capturing more image (greater resolution and consistant panning) when stitching photos together to make a panoramic photo. Also, the S400 does not support the higher resolution movie mode of 640 x 320, as some digital cameras support. Hopefully, Canon will address these feature shortfalls with a firmware upgrade in the near future. As mentioned in a number of reviews, the S400's flash is miniscule and thus is somewhat inadequate to light wide distant shots.

Canon has improved the intelligence of the powershot digital line. Specifically in the S400 the Digic processing makes for fast picture taking and viewing. The size of the S400 is grand. It does fit in a pocket and powers up so quickly, you may never miss another shot with this camera (keeping in mind to charge your battery and have enough flash memory for the moment!!!).

The bottom line... the Canon S400 is compact, sturdy, and fast. If you are looking for a very small 4 megapixel camera with nice even colors, low levels of distortion, a basic movie capture mode, fast memory writing and reading, the S400 is a current top pick. However, if you are looking for lots of manual control, vertical "photo stitching," and more pixels try the S50.

One note if considering the S45 or S50 cameras, play with the navigation buttons before purchasing the unit; I have found the navigation to be somewhat clumsy in-which it is easy to hit "enter" when trying to navigate "up" or "down," or hit "up" when trying to "enter."

I am a casual photo enthusiast who enjoys taking pictures of my friends and family wherever I go. Both photographic quality and portability are of paramount concerns and I think I found my holy grail with Canon S400.

Pros:
- Extremely portable, yet very rugged
- Beautiful design with excellent overall ergonomics
- Typically excellent photo quality in all-auto mode with no redeye
- Very fast -- startup time, image processing and acquisition, menu response
- Long battery life
- Uses widely popular (and inexpensive) CompactFlash Type 1 memory cards
- 4 megapixel resolution (2272x1704)
- 3X optical zoom/11X max with digital
- Useful movie mode with audio (3 minutes at 320x240 or 160x120)

Cons:
- Minimal manual controls (e.g., no manual focus)
- Cheap A/V/digital output cover
- Movie mode limited to 3 minutes (and no 640x480 mode may irk some)
- Proprietary battery
- Some barrel distortion when taking wide angle shots

While S400 has some shortcomings, mainly lack of manual focus, exposure, and shutter speed. And some may be bothered by its use of proprietary lithium ion battery, although given its compact size, I think Canon engineers had to implement proprietary battery. On the plus side, the battery lasts a long time, capable of taking several hundred shots before running out of juice (and takes only a couple of hours to recharge).

I've managed to fill entire 512MB memory card (32MB is included) on a single battery charge.

Did I mention how beautiful this camera is? The photos do not do this camera a justice. At 3.4" by 2.2" by 1.1", the S400 is no larger than most compact cell phones. Inch by inch, it's only a tad larger than my tiny Sony Ericsson T68i cell phone and smaller than (although a bit thicker) my Apple iPod MP3 player.

The ergonomics are consistently excellent. Although there are some learning curves (particularly given rich feature set), once mastered (comprehensive manuals make it easy), most will appreciate elegant menu layout and ideal number of buttons and layout.

But beautiful design means nothing if it does not accomplish its main functions -- taking beautiful pictures. In full auto setting, which is what majority people might use, the pictures were consistently satisfying, although overriding the white balance to match the lighting condition improved the quality significantly in many shots.

This is a great camera.

I like this little digital camera. It does everything a point and shoot digital camera should do and more. For me, a point and shoot camera should be small and light so that it can conveniently go with me everywhere. That's the power of any point and shoot camera actually. It goes with you in your daily life and subsequently you get shots that you could not get with other larger cameras either because it would be too conspicous, or too inconvient to carry with you.

The S400 camera is barely larger or heavier than a pak of cigarettes and even fits in a shirt pocket with relative ease.

I originally had an S50 but ended up getting rid of it because it was too big and heavy and the manual controls on it were cumbersome to use. In the end, the manual controls on the S50 were not worth having to carry around such a brick-like camera. The S50 often ended up staying at home or in the car and I missed out on shots because I did not have the camera with me.

The images out of the S400 suprisingly enough, look even better to me than those out of the S50. I can't really explain why this is considering that the S50 is a full 1 megapixel higher than the S400.

I don't miss having the full manual controls that the S50 has at all. When I had the S50, I found that I hardly ever used the manual controls anyway because they are a bit cumbersome. I actually longed for more ease and simpleness, which frees one up to take pictures more spontaneously. So the small size and convenience of the S400 more than outweighs the lack of full manual controls for me. And the S400 does have manual mode where you can dial in some settings manually, just not f-stop and shutter speed. Further, you can often achieve the same effects as if you had full manual controls just by knowing how to set the S400. For example, if I want to shoot an outdoor portrait with a shallow depth of field (so the background will be blurry), I would set the camera's ISO to 50 and then meter off of something fairly dark (like the shade) while holding down the shutter down halfway to lock the exposure and recompose to the subject to take the picture.

To conclude, I am happy with this camera because it does everything a small point and shoot digital camera should do, yet it is quite small, light, feels sturdy (metal case) and has very pleasant ergonomics both with regard to the layout of the controls as well as to the on screen menu functions.

I bought an S400 seven months ago and was very happy with it. Recently, however, it stopped working without warning. When I sent it in to the factory service center, I discovered something very troubling about the camera that had I known earlier would have caused me to not purchase it.

It turns out that this model--as well as many other Canon digital cameras, the tech told me--has an aluminum body. If you subject the camera to temperature changes (and it only takes a change of 10-15 degrees, I was told) condensation will form inside the camera, and the camera will start to corrode, eventually rendering it unusable.

This is what had happened to me. What misuse had I subjected my camera to that caused this to happen? I took it on vacation to the beach with me. Carrying it from the hot and humid beach into an air conditioned car was enough to destroy the camera!

The tech told me that he sees this all the time. He didn't know the percent of all Canon cameras that suffer this fate, but he said a lot of them do. He told me he gets lots of cameras back from people who have taken them on vacation to Arizona, Mexico, and Hawaii. He even saw one that had stopped working because the owner kept it stored in a stuffy closet. When the owner eventually took it out to use it, the temperature change back to normal room temperature was enough to fry the camera.

I was told that this damage is not covered under warranty and that the manual cautions users not to subject their cameras to this sort of treatment. Canon will not provide service on cameras that suffer this fate.

I hope anyone interested in purchasing a Canon digital camera will learn from my very expensive mistake in purchasing this model.

The camera is very nicely designed, but it's poorly engineered. If you plan to use the camera indoors only this is a great model. But if you plan to use the camera both outdoors and indoors, if there is a difference in humidity and temperature between the two where you live, and if you don't want to run the risk of totally losing your investment in the camera, this isn't the model or brand for you.

This is my 3rd digital camera, having owned two bulkier Olympus models previously. I was looking for a smaller camera that would be easier to carry. After much research I chose this Canon S400, and it's just about perfect. The display is clear and easy to use. The included rechargeable battery and charger are easy to use, very small, and the battery charges fairly quickly after the initial charge. I took it with on a trip to DisneyWorld, where I took about 50 pictures daily. It fit nicely into a small pocket of my waistbag. I purchased with it two 256MB Sandisk CF cards, they have worked flawlessly thus far. Hooking the camera up to my iMac was no problem, I hooked up the included USB cable and iPhoto instantly recognized the camera; the pictures were uploaded in no time. The only thing I'd really like is a decent case to protect it in my bag. The Canon case that can be purchased separately is rather chintzy. I currently keep it in a neoprene eyeglass zip case that I picked up at a sporting goods store.

Just when I thought it couldn't get any better, it does!. I bought the Canon S230 (3.2mp) in January and have already upgraded to the S400. This camera has been in stock for several weeks at online stores I probably can't mention here. I've had mine for a week now. Overall this is a great camera, it's the same size as the S230, very carryable, high quality, improved optics and zoom (3x optical instead of 2x) and the extra megapixels come in handy. There are a few minor points to pick at.

1). Certain parts of the camera are now plastic instead of metal as on the S230 (from what I can tell, the zoom ring around the power button, the chrome ring around the lens, and the edges of the lens). The main body of the camera is still metal, however it's a new finish (Cerabrite) which has an odd plasticky look to it. Overall the construction quality doesn't feel quite as nice as the S230, notably the feel of the buttons when pressed, however it's nothing to be alarmed about.

2). For some reason Canon removed the 640x480 movie mode option. I never used the movie mode extensively, but this might matter to some users.

3). While some people might like it, (I think it's tacky) Canon has added the following useless features: Camera startup sound, shutter sound, camera display theme and startup image. There are cheesy sounds like a bird chirp, or a wolf howl, startup images like a Canon logo, picture of sunset, bird, etc. Due to the addition of these features the camera now has a tiny speaker. One benefit of the speaker/sounds is that Canon has added a self-timer sound which I think is useful.

Some other nice additions/changes include the ability to edit the length of movie clips on the camera, a closer focusing distance in the macro setting, and the ablility to record a sound bye of up to 60 seconds to a picture (also useable as a simple voice recorder for recording memos, thoughts, etc) which will play back via the tiny speaker. The microphone has been moved from the front of the camera to the top, this could be good or bad depending, it may record less wind noise in windy situations (especially if facing into the wind), however it may also no longer pick up quieter sounds due to the repositioning.

At a minimum I would reccommend the use of a 128mb card, preferrably 256mb or larger. At less than $$$ I would suggest an external memory card reader to be used for transfering photos instead of the Canon software which seems buggy at times. As far an extra battery goes, some people won't live without an extra. With the price of the battery, I'd pass. Canon says the camera is good for 190 photos with the LCD on (400+ with LCD off). I've never taken more than 50 pictures in a day and have always had an opportunity to recharge the battery during some down time in the evening.

To sum things up, if you're looking for a high quality high megapixel camera that's easily carryable, and hardly noticed in most pockets, this is it!. The combination of size, quality and features of this camera are unmatched!. If you don't require 4 megapixels or want to save $$$ I'd highly reccommend the S230 which I have also reviewed.

I love this little camera. I also have the elph APS camera. Easy to use on Auto Mode and good Macro settings. Even has a 3 minute movie option. Easy to load photos to PC and share. Good battery life. Light and easy to carry! CANNOT SAY ENOUGH about this great little camera!!