[Chris Gohlke]

http://www.photographyblog.com/revi...S=fzg9t67m.24yq

"The SX20 IS is virtually identical to its predecessor, with the only major additions being the new HD movie recording and an "upgrade" to 12 megapixels. The former is successful, the latter less so. Being able to shoot high-definition video with stereo sound and the ability to make full use of the 20x zoom is a real attraction and something that not many other cameras currently offer. Unfortunately the story isn't so rosy with regards to still images, with noise and loss of fine detail first appearing at ISO 400 rather than ISO 800 as on the SX10. It seems that the move to more megapixels has compromised the overall image quality at higher ISO speeds, limiting this camera's ability in low-light environments."

The 20x zoom make this a really attractive camera.  I've got an aging S2 IS that this would make a logical upgrade to.  Too bad they just didn't leave it at 10 megapixels though, I think more people will get use from better low light performance than from a few extra megapixels.

 

[Chris Gohlke]

http://www.photographyblog.com/revi...S=fzg9t67m.24yq

"The SX20 IS is virtually identical to its predecessor, with the only major additions being the new HD movie recording and an "upgrade" to 12 megapixels. The former is successful, the latter less so. Being able to shoot high-definition video with stereo sound and the ability to make full use of the 20x zoom is a real attraction and something that not many other cameras currently offer. Unfortunately the story isn't so rosy with regards to still images, with noise and loss of fine detail first appearing at ISO 400 rather than ISO 800 as on the SX10. It seems that the move to more megapixels has compromised the overall image quality at higher ISO speeds, limiting this camera's ability in low-light environments."

The 20x zoom make this a really attractive camera.  I've got an aging S2 IS that this would make a logical upgrade to.  Too bad they just didn't leave it at 10 megapixels though, I think more people will get use from better low light performance than from a few extra megapixels.

 

[Reid Kistler]

Manufacturers keep upping the (mega)pixel count on their cameras, but without increasing the sensor size. The 'high resolution' sounds attractive (10MP! 12MP!!), but reviews show that the results are almost always disappointing.

There is a group - 6mpixel.org (supposedly created through a lab which does camera testing in Germany) - which claims that 6MP (or perhaps even less!) is the "sweet spot" for most compact cameras, and that exceeding that resolution, without significantly increasing sensor size, ALWAYS results in image degradation.

Personal camera is a Canon S3 - which I absolutely "love," even though it has a sensor that is probably Too Small for the 6MP resolution it provides.

Remember being on pins-and-needles prior to purchasing the S3, due to fact that the S5 was about to be released. But I had a deadline by which time a new camera HAD to be on hand & so ended up with the S3. Then when the S5 was released, the reviews were not as favorable as for the earlier model, and that trend has largely continued across other brands as well, with an increase in Features being offset by noisier images (away from ideal circumstances)...