As well as being compared against other compacts, the Canon PowerShot ELPH 320 HS is also often compared to travel zooms, digicams and super zooms. The Canon PowerShot ELPH 320 HS's top rivals come from Panasonic (such as the Lumix DC-TS7 (Lumix DC-FT7) and the Lumix DMC-SZ1) and Canon (such as the PowerShot ELPH 360 HS and the PowerShot SX620 HS)

compared toCompact competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon 320 HS compared to other compact competitors include: it has a much wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 38 mm), has a much larger screen (3.2" vs 2.5"), is much smaller (super compact (94×57×21 mm) vs compact (99×64×25 mm)), has better image stabilization (lens vs none) and has a touch screen.

However, on average it doesn't have an OLED screen (LCD vs OLED), has a significantly shorter battery life (170 shots vs 300 shots), doesn't have a built-in GPS, is not waterproof and doesn't support an external flash.

Olympus TG-1 iHS

Olympus TG-1 iHS
similar age

Significant advantages of the TG-1 iHS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Has an OLED screen: OLED vs LCD
  • Much longer battery life: 300 shots vs 170 shots
  • Has a GPS

Significant disadvantages of the TG-1 iHS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much larger: Compact (99×64×25 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Significantly smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the TG-1 iHS and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2 vs f/2.7
  • Very small: Compact (99×64×25 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Very thin: 1" vs 0.8"

Canon PowerShot ELPH 110 HS

Canon PowerShot ELPH 110 HS
similar age
$299

Significant advantages of the ELPH 110 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the ELPH 110 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the ELPH 110 HS and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2.7 vs f/2.7
  • Good wide angle: 24 mm vs 24 mm
  • Very small: Super compact (93×57×20 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)

Agfa DC-600uw

AgfaPhoto DC-600uw
2 years older

Significant advantages of the DC-600uw (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the DC-600uw (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much larger: Compact (101×61×32 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Much smaller screen: 2.4" vs 3.2"
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens

common strengths of the DC-600uw and 320 HS

  • Very small: Compact (101×61×32 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Very light: 161 g vs 145 g

Olympus SP-350

Placeholder
6 years older

Significant advantages of the SP-350 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Supports an external flash
  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None

Significant disadvantages of the SP-350 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much larger: Compact (100×65×35 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Much worse wide angle: 38 mm vs 24 mm
  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.2"

common strengths of the SP-350 and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2.8 vs f/2.7

Samsung Digimax A55W

Placeholder
6 years older

Significant advantages of the A55W (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the A55W (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.2"
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens
  • Much larger: Compact (106×56×27 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)

common strengths of the A55W and 320 HS

  • Very small: Compact (106×56×27 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Thin: 1.1" vs 0.8"
  • Light weight: 185 g vs 145 g

Canon ELPH 100 HS

Canon ELPH 100 HS
1 year older

Significant advantages of the 100 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the 100 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the 100 HS and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2.8 vs f/2.7
  • Very small: Super compact (93×56×20 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon 320 HS compared to travel zoom competitors include: it has a slightly wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 28 mm), has a slightly wider aperture (f/2.7 vs f/3.3), has a much larger screen (3.2" vs 2.7") and has a touch screen.

However, on average it doesn't have a built-in GPS, has a slightly lower resolution screen (461k dots vs 922k dots), doesn't shoot as fast continuously (2 fps vs 6.2 fps), lacks and external mic jack and has a significantly shorter battery life (170 shots vs 295 shots).

Canon PowerShot ELPH 360 HS

Canon PowerShot ELPH 360 HS
3 years newer
$180 - $189

Significant advantages of the PowerShot ELPH 360 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the PowerShot ELPH 360 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly narrower aperture: f/3.6 vs f/2.7
  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the PowerShot ELPH 360 HS and 320 HS

  • Inexpensive: $179.99 vs $298.92

Canon PowerShot SX620 HS

Canon PowerShot SX620 HS
4 years newer
$179 - $249

Significant advantages of the PowerShot SX620 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly higher resolution screen: 922k dots vs 461k dots
  • Much longer battery life: 295 shots vs 170 shots

Significant disadvantages of the PowerShot SX620 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • Narrower aperture: f/3.2 vs f/2.7
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the PowerShot SX620 HS and 320 HS

  • Inexpensive: $179.49 vs $298.92

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS
1 year older
$399

Significant advantages of the SX230 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Has a GPS
  • Significantly faster max shutter speed: 1/3200 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the SX230 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the SX230 HS and 320 HS

  • Inexpensive: $399.00 vs $298.92

Canon PowerShot SX700 HS

Canon PowerShot SX700 HS
2 years newer
$429

Significant advantages of the SX700 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly higher resolution screen: 922k dots vs 461k dots
  • Much longer battery life: 360 shots vs 170 shots
  • Has an external mic jack

Significant disadvantages of the SX700 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • Narrower aperture: f/3.2 vs f/2.7
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the SX700 HS and 320 HS

  • Inexpensive: $429.33 vs $298.92

Canon IXUS 255 HS

Canon IXUS 255 HS
1 year newer
$397

Significant advantages of the IXUS 255 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • None found

Significant disadvantages of the IXUS 255 HS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the IXUS 255 HS and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/3 vs f/2.7
  • Light weight: 144 g vs 145 g
  • Inexpensive: $397.37 vs $298.92

Sony DSC WX100

Sony DSC WX100
4 months newer

Significant advantages of the WX100 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Shoots significantly faster: 10 fps vs 2 fps
  • Significantly longer battery life: 240 shots vs 170 shots

Significant disadvantages of the WX100 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.2"
  • Significantly narrower aperture: f/3.3 vs f/2.7
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the WX100 and 320 HS

  • Light weight: 124 g vs 145 g

compared toDigicam competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon 320 HS compared to digicam competitors include: it has a slightly wider aperture (f/2.7 vs f/3.3), has a much wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 39 mm), has a much larger screen (3.2" vs 2.2"), has better image stabilization (lens vs none) and has a touch screen.

However, on average it has a slightly lower resolution screen (461k dots vs 1,040k dots), doesn't shoot as fast continuously (2 fps vs 10 fps), doesn't have a screen which flips out, has a much shorter battery life (170 shots vs 300 shots) and doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital).

Panasonic Lumix DC-TS7 (Lumix DC-FT7)

Placeholder
6 years newer

Significant advantages of the Lumix DC-TS7 (Lumix DC-FT7) (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much higher resolution screen: 1,040k dots vs 461k dots
  • Much longer battery life: 300 shots vs 170 shots
  • Has a flip-out screen

Significant disadvantages of the Lumix DC-TS7 (Lumix DC-FT7) (vs the 320 HS)

  • Significantly worse wide angle: 28 mm vs 24 mm
  • Significantly narrower aperture: f/3.3 vs f/2.7
  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"

common strengths of the Lumix DC-TS7 (Lumix DC-FT7) and 320 HS

  • Good image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs
    1. Lens
  • Thin: 1.5" vs 0.8"

Kodak EasyShare Z760

Placeholder
6 years older

Significant advantages of the Z760 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Has a viewfinder: Tunnel vs None
  • Much longer exposures: 64 seconds vs 15 seconds

Significant disadvantages of the Z760 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.2" vs 3.2"
  • Much worse wide angle: 39 mm vs 24 mm
  • No image stabilization: None vs
    1. Lens

common strengths of the Z760 and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2.8 vs f/2.7

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Canon 320 HS compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a much wider wide angle lens (24 mm vs 36 mm), has a much larger screen (3.2" vs 2.5"), has a slightly higher resolution screen (461k dots vs 207k dots), is slightly smaller (super compact (94×57×21 mm) vs prosumer size (117×80×78 mm)) and has better image stabilization (lens vs sensor shift).

However, on average it doesn't have a screen which flips out, has a much shorter battery life (170 shots vs 420 shots), doesn't have a viewfinder (none vs digital), doesn't support an external flash and has a slower max shutter speed (1/2000 of a second vs 1/4000 of a second).

Nikon Coolpix L310

Nikon Coolpix L310
similar age
$270

Significant advantages of the L310 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much longer battery life: 420 shots vs 170 shots
  • Significantly faster max shutter speed: 1/4000 of a second vs 1/2000 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the L310 (vs the 320 HS)

  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS
  • Much smaller screen: 3" vs 3.2"
  • No touch screen

common strengths of the L310 and 320 HS

  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (110×77×78 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Light weight: 435 g vs 145 g
  • Thin: 3.1" vs 0.8"

Canon PowerShot S5 IS

Canon PowerShot S5 IS
4 years older
$281

Significant advantages of the S5 IS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Has a flip-out screen
  • Supports an external flash
  • Has a viewfinder: Digital vs None

Significant disadvantages of the S5 IS (vs the 320 HS)

  • Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.2"
  • Much worse wide angle: 36 mm vs 24 mm
  • Has a CCD-family sensor: CCD vs CMOS

common strengths of the S5 IS and 320 HS

  • Wide aperture: f/2.7 vs f/2.7
  • Fairly small: Prosumer size (117×80×78 mm) vs Super compact (94×57×21 mm)
  • Thin: 3.1" vs 0.8"