Canon Powershot S2 or S3? (1 Viewer)

[Jacamar]

I am searching for a digital camera of my own (after using my parent's 2.1 MP Olympus for several years), and I am looking at one or the other of these Canon Powershots.
What I want is a camera for general use, but one that can also take photos of birds without requiring expensive lenses in addition to the camera body. There is no way I can afford a DSLR and a decent lens at the moment, so I'm looking for a cheaper alternative. Have I found the best alternative for under $350 (£186.6)? Is there a better camera with similar features that I have missed? I would hope to get a teleconverter to increase the zoom when I could afford it.
I've found that the S3 can be obtained for about $50 (£26.7) more than the S2. Is it worth paying the extra for one more MP and any other improvements the S3 has? Has anyone had an opportunity to compare these two?

 

[Duck_Pond]

From what I have read about the S3 (I own an S2) the improvements have been minimal. I think "Steve's Reviews" has a comparison.

To be honest, either will allow you to get reasonable photos of wildlife; mine has been great for the 15 months I've had it. For convenience, i.e. fast pics, I can't fault it, and it's considerably easier to lug around than the DSLR I've just bought.

The only downside to it, is the AF isn't the fastest in the world, and the pics are somewhat soft in the focus, especially at a decent zoom.

The IS is a bonus, and you can get decent pics on full zoom without the need for a tripod. The telephoto converter (I have the one from Canon) gives you 18x optical zoom, but it is more difficult to get a good shot, as the image is darker and suffers from camera-shake, even with the IS.

There are other alternatives though - I think the Panasonic Lumix is rated too. Has a far better manual focus on it, but the video mode isn't a patch on the Canon.

Might be worth trying them out at a camera store - side by side. See which suits your needs best.

I have found at times, the S2 can take too long to focus on something, especially at full zoom. But all in all, it's a great bit of kit.

 

[joannec]

Hi Chris

There have been several previous threads about super zoom cameras on BF. If you do a search, Canon S2 or S3, you will find them. Also dpreview.com is an excellent site with many reviews by people who have these cameras. I have the S2 and like it for it's portability and lightness. The zoom and IS are both very good but I agree with Duck Pond about the softness, not as sharp as a dslr, also iso 200 and 400 are noisy. I haven't found the AF to be slow though. The improvements on the S3 over the S2 are minimal. Also if you do a search in the gallery you will see pictures taken with these cameras. Good luck.

Joanne

 

[RAH]

I'd pay $50 for the extra features on the S3. I like the black body better (better for taking closeups of shiny objects, for example), plus 1MP is 1MP.

 

[Jacamar]

Thanks for your views everyone!

 

[Mirdad]

HI ALL!

I like the S3 IS - maybe the best ultrazoom camera (it's video capability the best!).
Unfortunately here one can read that it`s not good for digiscoping.
Please put some photo taken with S1,2,3 IS to see theese problems with vignetting etc. I would like to digiscope very much with the S3 IS!!
Thanks!

 

[RAH]

Mirdad, you shouldn't be so surprised that a superzoom is usually no good for digiscoping. It is mainly because of the diameter of the lens. If you've ever tried to digiscope with a superzoom, you immediately see that the camera's lens is MUCH larger in diameter than the eyepiece on the scope. So, it's like taking the shot thru a hole. You need a camera (like a point and shoot) whose lens is about the same diameter as your scope's eyepiece.