Sony T300 Sony H10 Canon IXUS85IS Canon IXUS970IS can anyone help me pick one

If you don't take into account **, it is naturally 970 best.

You also added an h10

So why not consider Canon's SX 100?

In terms of picture quality, I recommend the A650

Invincible under 3000.

The Sony T300 has a decent camera. Easy to operate. I bought one in Japan and came back. It's all in Japanese. But it's not that hard to operate!

The above is a comparison I have made, a comparison between the i series. Look. I use the T300 myself, and I am very satisfied with the design of the T300, but the image quality is ......Don't dare to compliment ......Since you have chosen Canon, I won't say more......

The 970 is actually inferior to the previous generation 960, but the 970 is more like a sports car in appearance, curved, the body material is still plastic, and the 960 is titanium. The 960's ** is also cheaper. The 970 boosted the optical zoom to a factor of 5, sacrificing a lot of the performance of the previous generation 960, for example, the aperture became smaller, the 36 wide angle became a 37mm wide angle, and the CCD size became smaller, shrinking from 1 to 1 pixel and from 1200W to 1000W.

As for the cost performance of the 90, it is very low, the imaging is not as good as the 960, and the CCD size is too small ......It's just that the appearance is a little chic......

The recommendation is to go for the Canon 960

Obviously, the IXUS 960 is more cost-effective.

On knowing that there is basically a consensus that Canon's card machine IXUS 960 is the best.

The best for home use is A650, the telephoto is S5 is the best, the semi-professional is G9 is the best, the best cost performance for home use is A720, and the best cost performance for cards is IXUS 80

970 is a 5x focal length as a selling point point, point-and-shoot cameras are not long or short, it is not interesting at all It is better to choose the maximum size CCD of 960 to pursue the clearest picture Not to mention that the lens quality of 960 is also the best in the current Canon card Plus titanium coated metal body It can be said that both inside and outside.

The digital camera I bought during the Chinese New Year this year was a Canon Ixus 960is.

I used to be torn between Sony and Canon.

I asked for the opinions of netizens on the Internet and compared them with myself on the Internet and decided to buy the Canon.

On the day I bought the camera, my cousin Ye was going to buy it, and he bought the Sony T200, which was tested after he bought it. I can tell LZ for sure

Among the cameras in the same class as Canon and Sony, Canon is still better at the moment.

ixus 970!

However, it is not cost-effective, and the IXUS 960 is recommended!

Sony T200 used, very bad to send Dad, so Sony machine is not ready to buy, just bought Canon 40D is not bad, I also want to buy a small camera for easy use, I also want to buy Canon.

I recommend you the Ixus 960

The imaging hardware parameters are more powerful than these three, ** lower (on par with the T300), except that the screen is not large enough, and the other performance surpasses these three machines.

The 12-million-pixel 1 makes it easier for the 960 to shoot sharp**.

All other machines are 1 ccd, and this alone is far from perfect.

Some of Panasonic's parameters are stronger than it, but ** is 500 more expensive cost performance. It is the ratio of performance to **.

The higher the performance, the lower the price-performance ratio - good quality and low price.

I recommend ixus960

P5100 OK.

Card machines and quasi-professional machines are incomparable.

It's better to buy G9 than to go directly to the SLR.

There is basically no big difference in imaging, so choose from the appearance and the manufacturer you like.

G9, it's really not as good as a DSLR.

The factors that affect the image quality are the lens, aperture, shutter speed, CCD scale, etc.

From the lens, Canon's self-produced lenses are well-known, with sharp imaging and good color reproduction, Canon has always rejected periscope lenses and large magnifications of light change, because the imaging effect of periscope lenses is poor, large magnification of light changes, there are more lenses inside the lens, more light refraction, and serious distortion. T300 adopts periscope type, which is naturally weak.

In terms of aperture, the aperture of the 860 is much larger than that of the T300. In terms of image quality, the 860 is much better in low-light conditions.

In terms of shutter speed, at the block end, Canon's is faster; On the slow end, Canon's is slower. In this way, shooting moving objects, (plus the Canon's aperture is larger), the Canon has an advantage; When shooting night scenes, a slower shutter speed, combined with a wide aperture, gives the Canon an advantage.

In terms of CCD size, the Canon is indeed smaller, but the number of pixels it carries is a bit smaller. In fact, for general household use, a 500w pixel camera is very sufficient. 1000w is a waste.

Also, the 860 is a wide-angle lens, and with wide-angle shooting, the 860 has more advantages.

View from the LCD viewfinder. 860 is a polysilicon LCD, 23W pixels, polysilicon should be bright, the viewing angle should be large, and it can be adjusted to save power. The SonyT300 is more power-intensive.

But in terms of macro shooting, Sony claims to be 1cm close-up, and Canon is 3cm, which is actually not much different.

If you buy it is recommended 860

I just bought a Canon Pink 80,1799 pcs to get the battery, card, camera bag and the photo effect is very good! It's true that the anti-shake is good, and the LCD is clearer than the 70 When I bought it, I hesitated for a moment SonyT70 and T300, after all, the design is very good, and the appearance is more vivid, a little unreal, but considering the follow-up costs, it is really scary (Sony's battery, memory stick, etc. must be bought originally, and the original battery alone will cost more than 400, and the household is really unbearable!) Samsung suggested not to buy it, and my friend's just dropped it and hung up, so it wasn't in my consideration at all, it wasn't a professional camera after all

Comparison of the T-series and the IXUS series.

The advantages of the Sony T series are that the body can be made very thin, the function and shape are very stylish, the sense of high-tech is very strong, and the large touch screen.

The disadvantage is that the imaging effect is not good, this is determined by the periscope lens it uses, this lens is small, the light intake is small, although it can minimize the thickness of the fuselage, but the lens quality is very bad, so the imaging effect is very poor.

The Canon IXUS series all use telescopic lenses, the lens aperture is large, the lens quality is relatively high, and the amount of light entering is large, so in the case of the same or similar CCD size, the imaging performance of the camera is much better, and the disadvantage is that the volume of the camera, especially the thickness, is relatively large.

In terms of imaging performance, none of the T series is as good as any of the IXUS series, and this is determined by the lenses used in each one.

In short, in pursuit of form and fashion, you can choose the T series (almost the only advantage), and the pursuit of performance, choose the Ixus series (in fact, it is also very stylish).

Samsung is an MP4 capable of taking pictures

If you don't have an MP4 that can take pictures, go for it.

Memorized the mp4 that can take pictures

Canon is more practical than Sony in terms of camera,Sony's T series is fashionable and convenient,Performance is not bad,I use T100,To be honest, the performance is not worse than Canon at the same price,But in terms of details,In order to facilitate operation,He made sacrifices,In individual photo environments,Sony's effect is not as good as Canon,So it can't be said that Sony is definitely not good,In addition, Sony's large screen is very power-hungry,T300 is a touch screen, so the standby is definitely not as long as Canon,This will be inconvenient。 The T series is a periscope lens, which is very easy to use on a card player, but it is actually not as easy to use as a traditional lens, both machines are good, and if you don't particularly like the shape of the T300, you don't need to buy a Sony.

It's still Canon's good, you can search for it, see their cost performance, and you'll know.

I use the t300. So I suggest you buy a Canon! The camera is used a lot, the worst one! Just two words for garbage!

Of course, the Canon ixus970is is better, and the Canon light lens is much, much better than the Sony! In terms of the shooting effect and other aspects, Canon's camera is definitely better than Sony's

Sony has always relied on its appearance in China, and it is really a good thing, but it is not bought in China

If you want to buy a camera, you can choose a Canon, and if you want to buy a cool toy, you can choose Sony.

Those who buy Canon generally fancy the soft color, those who buy Nikon generally fancy the sharp color, those who buy Binder generally fancy the noble background, those who buy Olympus generally fancy the appearance, those who buy Ricoh generally fancy the old optics, those who buy Laika are generally very rich, those who buy Fujifilm are generally blind to the parameters, those who buy Sony are generally fooled by advertising, those who buy Panasonic are generally ignorant, those who buy Casio are generally extremely ignorant, and those who buy Patriot are generally pro-domestic products. Those who buy BenQ are generally in the brain.

Buying a Samsung is non-mainstream Hahan's.

That's up to you, you're asking too generally, you can't t300 looks better than 970, and the imaging is still Canon 970 No.