Specs of Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL)

Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL)

Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL) details, exciting information along with costumer reviews who previously bought and in addition best price with pretty nice discount.

Our company is always told that we need to know more mega pixels in our cameras, these is a great way to get you to buy the latest camera. Manufactures will convince you that your 3 mp camera is not good enough even so the truth is an average professional photographer may only need a minimal of 3 mega pixels to be able to print their 4×6 photos at home. If you want to print larger photos, then you will need more mega pixels but when will you want larger prints. Although by adding a little more cash to get a higher resolution camera, such as which have up to 10 mega pixels, one can save cost since many do not need that much.

This product produced by Canon become one of the great Point and Shot Camera since a lot of customers satisfied after using this item. In addition to its features, the best price also becomes a factor. This article is a description about Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL), an item loved by costumers and have a much of great reviews. We will present to you customer reviews, product features, descriptions, and a variety of other interesting things. Happy reading.

Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL) Details and Reviews

Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS

  • Color: Red
  • Brand: Canon
  • Model: 6195B001
  • Number of items: 1
  • Dimensions: 2.40″ h x 1.30″ w x 4.17″ l, .51 pounds
  • Display size: 3

Estimated Price: Buy or See Best Price

1771 of 1809 people found the following review helpful.
5Another winner from Canon
By Eric T.
I received my SX260 last Wednesday and have taken about 700 shots and a few quick 5 minute video. Without writing a novel, here are the high/low points of this unit. In addition to this unit, I also purchased a couple of aftermarket batteries (and after market A/C adapters for about $5.00 each) for about $5.00 each and the batteries work fine. With the battery (original and aftermarket) I was able to get over 300 shots (50% flash) with zooming and playback and the battery meter still showed about 25% charge remaining.

Pro’s
Zoom – very long for a subcompact camera 20x optical, total 81x combined (yes 81 times!)
Image Stabilizer – Excellent (far superior than the DSC-HX9V); Even at 81x the picture did not come out of focus, but of course not as sharp. I think it’s still acceptable
Scenes – A few scenes; I think the portrait, sepia, B/W works real well (the Portrait+ suppose to blur the picture a bit, but it’s not to my liking) It has a few effects (fish eye, toy, miniature) that’s very effective and can be fun for creative shots.
Auto Mode – was able to pick the correct type of scene almost all the time; it has an easy mode, and smart auto. Not sure why they have an easy mode, but the smart auto works great
Size/Weight – very compact and weigh’s 8.2 oz. I would have prefer if the lens was flushed with the unit, but at 20x it may not have been possible
Uniformity – the unit does not feel cheap, and beautifully curved; no sharp jagged corners
Grip – the right side of the camera has a nice plastic strip for easier grip
Controls – Dial extremely easy to use with one hand. The other buttons, if you’re a previous Canon user, it’s a no brainer; the menu and setup are practically the same across all their models.
Screen – 3 inch TFT LCD screen very beautiful; nuff said
Processor – Didn’t notice that much difference between the DIGIC 4/DIGIC 5, but compared to the DSC-HX9V, this camera is like a Ferrari.
GPS – Camera has it, but I never used it and probably won’t; at least for the time being. Am more interested in a camera that takes excellent picture

Con’s
Video – compared to the Sony DSC-HX9V this Canon comes in a distant second; if you plan on using this primarily as a video recorder, look elsewhere. I think Sony has excellent lens on their camera but their processing technology is clumsy, painfully slow and unacceptable; whereas with taking videos, the Sony does not do any processing (not to mention it captures at 60fps compared to Canon’s 24/25 fps) This is one thing I will miss dearly.
Flash – not sure if there is a good place but I had to change my grip as the flash is on the top left corner. Couple of times, I had my left index finger on the flash and the camera gave some flash error message and had to power off and power on the camera to reset the flash.

If you’re a casual or intermittent photographer (or a professional wanting an everyday point and shoot camera without carrying a luggage everywhere) that is interested in looking for a well refined point and shoot camera, yet has manual controls usually found on higher end DSLR (or higher end point and shoot camera), this is it!

UPDATE 04/14/2012 – I paid $349 and today I noticed it’s selling for $299, a 15% price drop in less than a month! I thought cars depreciate quick …

UPDATE 04/18/2012 – The Live Mode works great! For those hard shots (for example, taking indoor picture with fluorescent lighting and without a flash), you can view the screen and make the adjustment right then and there. You look at what you plan to take, compare it to the SX260 LCD screen and press the shutter button.

1676 of 1719 people found the following review helpful.
5This Could Be the One
By K. S. Bowen
I am an experienced amateur photographer and I’ve owned many cameras over the past 40 years. I’ve had some photos published but photography has always been strictly a hobby, though a serious one. I shoot with a Canon 7D, Rebel backup, various ‘L’ lenses, and I also use an Olympus E-P1 occasionally as well as a Canon S90 and Powershot 1100S (kept in my glovebox for ’emergencies’). I enjoy taking pictures.

I also enjoy traveling and have traveled around the states as well as visited many foreign countries. I’m sure I echo the frustrations of every photographer out there when I say that choosing which photo equipment to take on a vacation is the most agonizing process in planning a trip.

Let me share two experiences–one pleasant, another frustrating. In 2003, I visited New Zealand and took one of Canon’s first digital Powershots. It was very small, fit in my pocket, and I could easily whip it out for quick photos. Even though the pictures were not pristine SLR quality, it was easy and fun using that camera and I still enjoy viewing those photos today. I had a pleasant and memorable trip. Second experience: a 10-day tour of China in 2007. I took a DSLR and 3 lenses as well as an HD camcorder, all in the same shoulder bag. It turned out to be total frustration. Instead of being able to enjoy the moment of seeing all that glorious ancient history and the people of China, I was overly concerned with ‘getting the shot’ — all the time. Also, HD video was new in those days and I thought I could record the ‘trip of a lifetime’ with the latest technology. But switching between video and still photography simply added to my frustration. Although I got quite a few good pictures and videos, I did not enjoy that trip as much as I should have because I let my photo-taking desires get in the way of my vacation needs and cultural immersion. As a matter of fact, my wife used a point-and-shoot to get some great candid photos of people and children that totally outshone my efforts.

OK, fast forward to 2012. Like so many other photographers out there, when traveling I need a camera that’s pocketable but can do everything. Impossible. It doesn’t exist. But I remember the lessons learned from the experiences described above. Concessions must be made. With experience, I’ve learned what is a necessity, and what ‘would be nice to have’ when traveling. I have concluded that for me, a camera that takes ‘very good’ pictures, that is small and lightweight, is a NECESSITY. Anything else would be ‘nice to have’ but is not worth the enormous hassle.

I’ve had the Powershot SX260 HS for about a week now and I think I may have found the camera that will adequately meet my travel needs. I’ve shot a couple hundred photos and I’m surprised at the results. They are sharp, contrasty, colorful, noiseless, and good enough to use as desktop pictures on my 24-inch monitor without editing. The 20x lens is coupled to a shake-free technology that is very, very good. It’s pocketable and has easy to use buttons that are logically placed. Canon has done their homework in finding the right balance between sharpness and noise, as far as I am concerned. Although it doesn’t shoot RAW (that’s a debate for another time), I am very happy with the JPEGs and I use the included highlight-taming technology built in to the camera and it works very well.

What I like:
1) Pocketable. Pocketable. Did I say pocketable?
2) Turns on quickly to get the shot.
3) 20x lens — 25mm to 500mm. The 25mm shots are corrected internally for distortion and the 500mm shots are sharp thanks to the IS technology.
4) Very good noise control — I haven’t tested it at 1600 or 3200 but several other review sites reveal surprising, low noise photos at those ISO levels.
5) My copy is very sharp — no need to sharpen the photos it produces.
6) Color accuracy is on par with my Olympus E-P1, which I consider to be the paragon of color accuracy.
7) Full manual when desired.
8) Takes very good HD video — though that doesn’t interest me so much these days. IS corrects for camera shake in video mode and zooming works well.

What I don’t like:
Nothing yet, though I will update this review if anything comes up.

Does this camera take pictures comparable to my 7D? No. My E-P1? Very close. My S90? Superior to the S90 in my view.
The 20x zooming feature of this camera can’t be overstated — it’s wonderful.

So many reviewers nitpick about technical matters. Sure, I could do that with any camera, including this one. But the point is–what need does the camera serve? All I know is this: If this camera had existed at the time, the SX260 would be the camera I would have taken to China.

Highly recommended.

[UPDATE: Many people have asked me about the so-called ‘squeal’ in video mode. When ambient sounds are low, the condenser mic (as in all cameras) boosts the gain. Most cameras will then pick up the internal motor/electronic sounds. This camera is no exception. The noise I’ve noticed is a very subtle high pitched ring similar to tinnitus. Am I surprised? No. It’s the same sound I’ve heard in every video unit I’ve owned in the past 25 years. Medium to loud sounds will cause the mic to adjust and the tinnitus disappears. Folks, if video is important, buy a dedicated video camera. This is a PHOTO camera that has video capability, which is what I wanted.]

2035 of 2100 people found the following review helpful.
320x Zoom Comparison – Sony HX20; Canon SX260; Panasonic ZS19
By Artemaria
I couldn’t decide between these three cameras (and their variants, the Sony HX30 and the Panasonic ZX20) because many of the reviews of each made the cameras sound very similar. So, I went out and bought (from merchants who accepted returns) one of each of these three cameras (I didn’t need WI-FI or GPS, so that’s how I settled on these less expensive variants). And then I took photos and videos in various conditions. I am not a professional photographer, and I didn’t do Imatest or any other specific tests on the images (you can read C/net for that), but this is an experience of a regular person who was taking pictures and videos with these three cameras side by side, which is a comparison that you do not often see.

The bottom line is that these three cameras are very similar with a few minor differences, but those differences set them apart and may make you decide that you like one more than the other.

Generally speaking, NONE of these cameras is a DSLR replacement. Whomever writes that the pictures are as good as a DSLR is not speaking accurately. Also, none of the cameras is a replacement for a high end camcorder.

OUTSIDE PICTURES

If you are taking pictures outside on a sunny day all of these cameras will take very nice pictures for small to medium enlargements (no bigger than 8 x 10). The cameras all produce nice fairly sharp images that would be well suited for that purpose. And, like most people, I don’t remember ever enlarging a picture more than 8 x 10, so it is not a common problem.

What might be an issue is if you are zoomed in all the way and wanted to crop a photo (which sometimes happens), the differences in the way the cameras’ photos look when you “pixel peep” might make a difference. In good light outside, the cameras were close, but the best photos were from the CANON with the SONY and the PANASONIC a close second.

INSIDE PICTURES – GOOD LIGHT

If you are inside and you are taking pictures in low light, you will see a different story. Again, at smaller sized prints 4×6, 5×7, most people will see almost no difference between the pictures of the three cameras other than the PANASONIC’s colors are a little less vibrant than those in the CANON and the SONY. I am not sure whether those colors are less accurate, they are just a little less vivid.

If you pixel peep at these pictures, the CANON’s photos are clearly the best with the PANASONIC’s being second. The CANON’s remain very sharp through a good amount of enlargement while the PANASONIC’s, although close, get softer a little faster. The SONY’s pictures inside with good light became soft rather quickly and, I’m not sure if this is because the SONY has 18MP on a small chip (as some of the tech reviewers write), but there is a “watercolor” effect where after you enlarge it a little bit, it looks like a Claude Manet painting.

INSIDE PICTURES – LOW LIGHT

In poor light, the hierarchy between the cameras remains the same, but there is less of a gap between the CANON and the PANASONIC. It seems as if the CANON takes somewhat worse pictures in low light, and the PANASONIC just doesn’t get that much worse. As a result, the gap between these two becomes somewhat closer. The SONY’s pictures remain the poorest of the three in low light.

VIDEO – OUTSIDE GOOD LIGHT

All three cameras take very nice video outside in good light. If you are editing or nitpicky, you will note that the SONY and the PANASONIC take 60 frames per second, which is somewhat easier to edit, than the 24 frames per second that the CANON records. While you have to look for it, the CANON’s outside video does have a couple of instances where it seems to be a tad jerky compared to the SONY and PANASONIC’s video. But you really have to look for it and most people won’t notice if you don’t have another video outside for comparison.

While all the outdoor video is close, I would give the edge to the SONY in video, with the PANASONIC second and the CANON third. But they are close for outside video.

VIDEO – INSIDE

Taking video inside is a different story. Inside, the SONY shines and clearly has the best video. The video from this camera is actually good. It is not professional level by any stretch, but it is good solid quite viewable video from a camera that takes still pictures.

There is a noticeable difference on indoor video between the SONY and the PANASONIC. This difference was perhaps most noticeable to me because I had both videos from both cameras and watched them over and over again looking for differences. While the difference is noticeable, it is not a tremendous difference. The SONY video is super smooth and seems to get as much out of the light as it can. The PANASONIC video also is smooth and gets a good contrast tone and color out of the available light, but is slightly less smooth than the SONY. The PANASONIC video is still very viewable and looks good, but not as good as the SONY.

The CANON will take decent indoor video in good light, but in poor light, it just seems to struggle. The CANON’s video had many shadows and dark areas that simply were not present in the SONY and PANASONIC videos. I did not notice any hissing in the CANON video as some of the other reviewers have mentioned. This may be an issue that varies from camera to camera.

HANDLING AND SPEED

This was a fairly subjective comparison between the three cameras as to how they felt in the hand and how quickly the camera did what I wanted it to do because if the camera doesn’t take the shot when you want to, it doesn’t really matter how sharp the picture or video might be.

Based on my experience, the PANASONIC had the best handling of the three. While the PANASONIC and the SONY were both quick to take a picture, for some reason the SONY that I had would take a much longer time (seconds) to record the picture onto the card. This was despite the fact that both cameras had comparable cards with comparable write speeds. Both the SONY and the PANASONIC had rather quick autofocus which also made them seem to react faster. The PANASONIC is noticeably thinner and lighter than the SONY while maintaining a similar full raised rubber grip on the front which made the camera easier to handle. While both the SONY and the PANASONIC were quick, the blazingly fast (by comparison) write speeds on the PANASONIC compared with its almost non-existent shutter lag made this the best handling camera of the three by far.

Even though it consistently took the best pictures, the CANON was the worst handling camera. The autofocus often had issues focusing and there was a constant shutter lag while it was searching for its focus. We did miss some shots because the CANON was so slow to react. Also, the CANON is somewhere in weight between the SONY and the PANASONIC, but has the worst grip of the three. That little rubber strip on the front is not as effective a grip as the fuller grip that appears on the SONY and the PANASONIC.

With respect to handling, I’ve read many reviews and each of them seems to state different things about each of the cameras. Many of these reviews seem to indicate that the SONY is a very fast camera, and that might be the case, but the write speed of the 18 MP pictures (which are 50% larger than the CANON’s photos and almost the same for the PANASONIC) was so slow, it was distracting and detracted from the experience of using the camera.

VERDICT AND CONCLUSIONS

None of these cameras is the best at everything. The CANON has the best pictures, but is slow to focus, somewhat awkward to handle and has the worst video of the three. The SONY handles okay but is heavy and has noticeably slow write speeds, its picture quality varies greatly with the light (and will deteriorate rapidly with any significant cropping) but the SONY has the best video, and it is noticeable.

In the end I decided to go with the PANASONIC. While it only was the best in handling, to me that was a significant portion of the photographic experience. It is not DSLR fast (instantaneous), but it is a zippy camera for a superzoom, is light in weight and has a good grip which makes it easier to hold. Also, it does not have a pop-up flash which I found always seemed to come up under my fingers where I was holding the left side camera. As noted above, the PANASONIC’s videos were good, perhaps not as good as the SONY, but the PANASONIC was certainly capable of capturing some nice video, even in low light. The photos also were not as good as the CANON’s, but they were close and very close in low light. With respect to the vibrancy of the colors, if you set the photo vibrancy on the PANASONIC to “happy” (which I guess is their “vivid”) it is less of a noticeable difference. The photos look very nice and certainly are competitive in quality for this type of camera.

Hopefully this comparison and these observations will help you decide between these three similar cameras so you can choose the best one for your needs. Good luck.

Features of this product

  • 12MP CMOS sensor
  • 25-500 mm equivalent F3.5 – 6.8 lens
  • ISO 100-3200
  • 1080p -24FPS HD video
  • 3″ LCD with 461,000 dots
  • Digic 5 Processor
  • Built-in GPS
  • 12.1 MP High-Sensitivity CMOS sensor, DIGIC 5 Image Processor
  • 20x Optical Zoom, 25mm Wide-Angle lens, and Optical Image Stabilization
  • 1080 Full HD video in stereo sound with a dedicated movie button
  • Smart AUTO with 58 predefined shooting situations with new FACE ID, High-Speed Burst HQ for continuous capture at a maximum of 10 frames
  • GPS tracker to record image locations on a map via Canon’s software

Compact cameras are specially designed for amateur and holiday professional photographers who want to capture incredible pictures, but may want to get into the technical details. With a compact size, easy-to-use software and incredible performance, these digital camera models perfectly fit the bill. Point-and-shoot cameras are available in both basic and advanced modes. The basic ones are almost completely automated, so all you have to do is just point and shoot. On the other hand, advanced ones have a few controls such as shutter speed, ISO and aperture that you can simply adjust.

That’s what you should know about Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL). We present you with whatever we know and practically that’s the unbiased fact you can use to determine whether this product worthy of your money of not. Using this information, you won’t make any bad decision. It is better not to ever concerning much regarding the price when you know it values more. We’re also recommending other reviews on similar products to offer you fair comparison before making the big decision. Exactly what a great thing to talk about this along with you. Possess a good day!

Related Post "Specs of Canon PowerShot SX260 HS 12.1 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 20x Image Stabilized Zoom 25mm Wide-Angle Optical Lens and 1080p HD Video (Red) (OLD MODEL)"