Comparison between HP R927 & Canon SD700 IS

[rzozaya1969]

Ok, this is a very short pre-review of my new Canon, and some opinions on how it compare to my previous HP Photosmart R927. Unfortunately, I haven't really had good time with the Canon, just got it, and got the flu, so I couldn't take any serious pics... bummer...

This is just an early preview, and I just put things the way I see them, they might or might not be important to other readers.

Both cameras bodies are metal, but I think that the HP has stainless steel, where the Canon is aluminium. Anyway, both look pretty good.

The HP camera is a little bigger, has a 3" LCD screen, while the Canon has a 2" screen. But the canon has a viewfinder, so it might compensate here, depending on how you take pics.

The HP is 8 Megapixels, while the Canon is 6, but for me it's not an important issue. On the HP you select the quality and resolution on the same settings (they have 5 settings, and go from VGA to full resolution, and the compression also varies). On the Canon, resolution and JPEG compression are different, so you can choose a low resolution, but without compression. Canon has a point here.

HP buttons are bigger (well, the camera is bigger), this is a plus since I usually were gloves when taking pics (I'm a mountain biker). I somehow feel that Canon has the functions more easily accesible with the menus, though...

Where I prefer the HP is on the computer integration. It came with a craddle, so the only thing I need to do to synchronize the pics and charge the battery is put the camera on the cradle, and, voila, it's just question of the software to do it's work. On the other hand, if you're traveling, you need to take the whole craddle to synchronize, or if not, use the SD card reader on the laptop.

On the Canon you have to remove a flimsy cover to access the cable connector, which I don't like

On both cameras you need to use a special battery, none take AA or AAA. This might be an issue if you're on vacation and can't access your charger.

Two features where i I really like the Canon are: 1) Image stabilizer, 2)1 second delay. This is because my pulse is NOT the steadiest one out there. What I like is that you can set one second delay, and have the camera take 4 pics, so that the pics are neat. HP only has a fixed 10 second delay.

I think that both cameras are fast (compared to my previous cameras), somehow I feel that Canon has a little edge here


In image quality, I need to take more pics to this important area, but I feel that the colors are a little better on Canon.

It's so soon to reach a decision, but so far, I really like the Canon SD....

[rzozaya1969]

Since this was a double post (honestly, I didn't want to do 2 post, hahaha), I'm going to use this for other opinions.

Focusing time.. Canon beats the HP here, no doubt. So this mean less time before you can snap a pic. It's not that the HP is slow, but the Canon is just very fast here. Very important for me

Transfering files to the computer -
Software - Regarding software, I can't really say since I just used the HP as a memory card and copied everything manually to a folder. The Canon is pretty good.
Speed - Again, the Canon was way faster transfering files from the camera to the computer. To be honest, maybe it was because they're 6Mp, while the HP is 8Mp.

[rzozaya1969]

Ok, I have the flu, so I can't get out to take some nice pics!

Anyway, I took some pics of both cameras side by side. I took them with full auto everything, so there's room for improvement on both cameras, but I just wanted to test them 'standard'.

On the bike pics, the HP had better lightning, but the Canon had better detail. On the house pics, I felt Cannon was better overall.

Another thing about the camera's, HP only has 5 areas to focus, and all 5 are horizontal, while Canon has 9, all over the pic, so I think Canon also has a point here ....

[rzozaya1969]

After looking at my pics, Canon's color were far more acurate, while the HP portrayed the walls very brightly, whitish.

Another thing on the comparison: Manual adjustment of F and the exposure (the thing with 1/150.. etc.), you can adjust them on the HP, while the Canon is just a point and shoot in that aspect. So, maybe for more experienced photographers, they can adjust more the HP than the Canon.

Now that I've played a little on this adjustments, I finally got out of the 'processing' error screen, and got similar results, on my test object....

[rzozaya1969]

Another thing that comes to play is the user manual. HP is very, very small. Just a list of which buttons have x function, but they don't explain much what is what. Canon is better in that respect.

[mchristina83]

Hi there,

I see you finally decided to get the Canon SD700 (i followed your previous thread), congrats I am also interested to buy this camera. But I still cant make up my mind between SD700, A710, or A570 ;)

I've seen A570 random sample photos, and not very impressed by it. The pictures were like.. lacking some colours.

I read somewhere (at amazon product review if I'm not mistaken), that the SD700 can't take good night photos without a tripod, is that true? Because I intend to take a lot of night photos with my new camera...

Thanks