I don t know much about card machines, I would like to ask which is better, Canon a3200 or IXUS 115,

Of course, it's Canon IXUS115,Compare the two cameras,A3200 is a little higher in pixels,14 million,,And Canon115HS12100000,The pixel of the card machine is a chicken rib to a certain extent,After using it, you will find that 1400 and 1200 are no different,12 million pixelsAlthough the pixel is relatively lower than the mainstream,But it uses a back-illuminated COMS image sensor,This light sensitivity performance is better,Improve low-light shooting ability, A3200 uses a CCD image sensor, that is to say, the 115 noise problem is much better than the high pixel of A3200, this camera is very good at the same price, the configuration is completely enough if it is used daily, and the practicality is stronger than that of A3200; A wider time frame, greatly improved camera utility, and the Canon 115 is already stylish.

115hs is better. However, I personally feel that 220hs will be better. Both the 115 and 220 are better at night scenes, but the 220 is a stereo recording with a zoom recording, the 115 is not, and the 220 is just a little smaller.

Not to mention anything else, I just bought the IXUS 1000HS not long ago, the above two styles have been seen, if I have to choose one of the two should know that it is 115, don't believe it, you go to the real store to try the machine yourself.

You can go to the official website of canon to compare,Decide according to your preferences,These two are good in terms of cost performance,I think 115 is good,It's just that the pixels are lower than 3300,But 12 million pixels are enough。

The Canon A-series was initially positioned as a professional and practical model. There are a lot of good machines, such as the Canon A75, A520, A530 a590.

All with the manual functions of a full set of professional cameras. It was once a crazy pursuit of photography enthusiasts, and of course I was one of them, having purchased A75, A590The Ixus was initially positioned as a sleek and compact form factor.

All fools, but sought after by girls.

Of course, this is only a thing of the past. Now Canon's A-series has been very marginalized. Two aspects can be seen:

The first machines are all fools, and the configuration is conservative. The progress is very small. The imaging is still going backwards, especially the A3300 you mentioned, my wife bought it, and the imaging is much worse than my antique A75.

There is an improvement in processing speed, and the stability is better than my A75, because the current machine uses optical image stabilization, but the imaging configuration and lens are not, and the pixels are too large, the interference between the pixels is great, and the photos are dismal and the sharpness is extremely poor. You can go to the forum to see the sample, it's miserable. Canon has put all its energy into the IXUS series, first using Canon's latest technology, the HS high-sensitivity system, and the image sensor has also been replaced with the most popular back-illuminated CMOS, which has improved the indoor and night scene capabilities to a new level.

The A800, A3100, A3200, and A3300 of the A series are completely different from the same grade. Canon itself is also full of confidence in ixus, and the advertisements are now all ixus. The A-series can now only rely on the fame and high pixels of the past to fool people.

But for those of us who have come all the way, it's still very clear. Of course, there is some regret about the decline of the A series. As for what you said, the IXUS220HS, although it is also a point-and-shoot machine, uses a lot of the latest technological achievements, and is also equipped with a 24mm ultra-wide angle.

The A3300 is completely incomparable. If you have some interest in photography, then 220 is not enough, because you are still a fool. Consider the IXUS300, a semi-manual one.

Although it is not professional enough, after all, there are only 1700, and there is a certain playability. In short, the A series is completely unconsiderable. Feel free to ask!

The Canon A series focuses on practicality, with high cost performance and average workmanship.

The Canon IXUS series focuses on workmanship and portability, and the A-series configuration is much higher than that of the IXUS series for cameras in the same price range.

Canon A series belongs to ordinary household card machines, with average performance, average workmanship, average quality, and of course, average shape! IXUS is a fashionable card camera with many advantages over the A series Stable performance, excellent workmanship, fashionable shape, sturdy and durable IXUS has a characteristic: the ** color that shines out is soft and not exaggerated, especially the photo is particularly good-looking and comfortable, these are a series can not be compared... A3300 and IXUS220 are incomparable, IXUS220 is back-illuminated imaging, and the aperture is also very large, and the advantage is very large when the light is dark...

The A-series is a bit more powerful than the IXUS series.

However, in appearance, the ixus is smaller and more portable.

It's up to you.

Oh my God, I'm struggling with these two cameras... I don't know which one to choose...

Canon ixus and Powershot series of cameras are very good, personally more inclined to ixus115, just out of the new product, there are many functions, whether it is from a high or low angle shooting or with multiple people to watch**It is very convenient. **Around 1500, it is very cost-effective, and it is recommended to buy.

Series A is for household use, pay attention to practicality, the appearance is average, ** generally the cheapest; The ixus series is stylish, pays attention to appearance and configuration, and is the most cost-effective machine that has been on the market for more than 1 year.

It's really better to enter the LX5, the Leica lens is not covered. Think about it.

Hello, it's so fateful! I'm using A3300is right now, and I'm quite satisfied. But I'll help you analyze it objectively:

Pixels: 3300 is larger, of course, the pixels have nothing to do with the imaging effect, it has to do with the size, so the two sides are tied in this regard.

Practicality: 210 is a touch screen, and the screen is large, the touch screen is more fashionable, but not practical, although more intuitive, but the reflection speed is very slow, if you want to capture when traveling, you will find that your camera simply can't keep up. And always press the wrong one.

Another big screen is more power-intensive, and you'll find out when you're out and about. So the 3300 is more practical.

Both sides are on the same level when it comes to imaging.

Some other tricks, both sides are similar.

Here's a night scene I took with the A3300. Refer to it.

At what price point do you want? Around 2000, it is recommended to buy Panasonic ZS7· It is more suitable for shooting architectural landscapes·· There is manual operation of long zoom.

The Canon A3300 IS is inferior to the IXUS210 in all respects, except that the effective pixel count of 16 million is higher than that of the IXUS210 of 14.1 million. The ixus210 is more cost-effective.