Updated (September 2011): Compare the Canon Powershot S100 vs Canon PowerShot G12

Canon Powershot S100 vs Canon PowerShot G12

Winner
Canon Powershot S100

45

Canon PowerShot G12

39

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Canon Powershot S100

Wide angle lens
Wide angle
24 mm
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
240 fps
CMOS Sensor
Sensor type
Better in low light
Built-in GPS
GPS
Great for travel
 

Reasons to buy the Canon PowerShot G12

Screen flips out
Flip-out screen
Great for movies
Battery life
Great battery life
350 shots
Macro focus
Great macro
1.0 cm
Viewfinder
Great viewfinder
Tunnel

galleries

Explore our gallery of 49 sample photos taken by the Canon Powershot S100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon PowerShot G12.

competitors

Canon Powershot S100 Competitors

Canon PowerShot S110

Canon PowerShot S110

Pro digicam

$360

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Dynamic range Less dynamic range
Canon PowerShot S120

Canon PowerShot S120

Pro digicam

$620

Dynamic range More dynamic range
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Supports 24p No 24p support
Canon PowerShot G9 X

Canon PowerShot G9 X

Pro digicam

$429 - $449

Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Dynamic range More dynamic range
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Canon PowerShot G12 Competitors

Canon PowerShot G16

Canon PowerShot G16

Pro digicam

$440

Dynamic range More dynamic range
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Supports 24p No 24p support
Canon PowerShot G1X

Canon PowerShot G1X

Boutique

$390

Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Sensor size Much larger sensor
Dynamic range Less dynamic range
Canon PowerShot G15

Canon PowerShot G15

Pro digicam

$444

Dynamic range More dynamic range
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Screen flips out Screen does not flip out

discussion

Canon Powershot S100
Powershot S100
Canon

Report a correction
Canon PowerShot G12
PowerShot G12
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments