Best Books of the Month Shop Men's Shoes Learn more nav_sap_SWP_6M_fly_beacon Janet Jackson All-New Amazon Fire TV Subscribe & Save Amazon Gift Card Offer blacklist blacklist blacklist  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 Kindle Voyage Shop Now Learn more

Your rating(Clear)Rate this item

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

596 of 625 people found the following review helpful
on September 27, 2013
Technology marches on. I am an avid amateur photographer with 50+ years of experience with every film and focal plane technology ever created. This camera is my latest "pocket camera" to have with me 24/7, it's for those unique unplanned shots that always pop up when you least expect them and when your DSLR is just not an option to lug around with you all day.

Some have criticized the change from AA sized batteries to a Canon propriety battery pack. Hogwash. Technology is going to move forward and the use of a battery pack simply does not mean this camera is any less useful. When you travel into the great whatever with an older camera you thought ahead and took extra batteries with you. Now you think ahead and make sure your battery is charged and yes if you will be away from an outlet you take as many extra battery packs as you need. I am guilty of not thinking ahead plenty of times with the AA technology with no means of stopping into a store to buy more, this camera is no different.

The feel and user friendliness of this camera is outstanding. The controls are simple, the instructions (PDF on-line only) are clear and easy to follow, and the image quality is great. You are not going to shoot that perfect close-up shot of a running back diving across the goal line with this camera, but for every day snapshots it offers a nice, cost effective solution to carry in your pocket every day.

It's not a DLSR. If you want a full featured high performance camera you'll need to spend a lot more money!

9/30/2013 addition- the more I use thus camera the more I like it. The autofocus feature is very fast, and images shot at max optical zoom are beyond my expectations, far superior to earlier Canon point and shoot products.
review image
1616 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
109 of 122 people found the following review helpful
on December 6, 2013
I was sketical about buying this camera. It should be stated that I am not an owner of a DSLR or Nikon, although I've used those before so I know how some who may own those and buy a camera like this may be disappointed or find it less than great. I don't really think it's fair to rate this compared to those kinds of cameras so I am comparing it to my previous "point and shoot" camera.

We had some traveling coming up and wanted a new camera since my current camera looks in really bad quality at night time or dim lighting (like concerts). So I opted for this camera with the Black Friday sale. I've taken multiple shots with this camera and my old one to see what the difference really is and I will say that this camera shoots way better. My old camera in natural light in my home would be dark, this one is naturally very bright. If I took a photo of a carrot peel with my old camera it would just look like some orange thing, whereas with this camera the carrot peel looks way brighter, the image is sharper, you can see the details such as texture or drops of water on the carrot unlike the old camera. I did go outside and try to take photos and while this does shoot better at night than my other camera, there isn't even a night time option so I'm still having that issue of the photo comes out with the bright lights looking hazy, but it's an improvement from the other camera we owned.

Overall, if you just need to update your "point and shoot" then I recommend this camera. My old camera only had a 10x zoom and it was 8 MP so this was a really nice upgrade. I take photos of animals, food, and landscapes and have been really pleased with the outcome. If you own a fancy camera, you probably won't be impressed with this camera.
22 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
435 of 549 people found the following review helpful
on September 7, 2013
As some of you know, the Canon SX100 series are my favorite cameras. I always carry the latest model with me in a video-camera-shoulder-bag (i.e. - "purse" for dudes,) everyday, wherever I go. I have owned and used all of them from the SX100 to the SX160. I have long-considered the Canon SX100 line of cameras to be "The Best 2-AA-Battery All-Purpose Travel and Field Cameras Ever Made." I have posted 5-star reviews of both the SX150 and SX160 here on Amazon during the last two years, and I have made it abundantly clear why I feel so strongly favorable of them.

Accordingly, I bought a new Canon SX170. I tested it out to compare it. For sentimental reasons, I intend to keep it. But for the most obvious of reasons, which I just indicated in the above statement, I'm not pleased with it. To the contrary, I am deeply saddened about what has now been completely lost to all consumers, worldwide - The day the last full-featured, full-manual-control, compact, 2-AA battery, travel & field camera left on the entire worldwide market - Died.

Here is a summary of my comparative conclusions.


The Canon SX160 runs on 2-AA rechargeable batteries.
The Canon SX170 runs on a Canon NB-6LH proprietary battery.

Other than the battery, the two cameras are virtually identical.

I will start with the conclusion first - There is no serious reason even to consider buying the new Canon SX170 instead of the previous model Canon SX160 ... unless you absolutely HATE using 2-AA rechargeable batteries in a camera.

Both cameras have exactly the same features, the same functions, and the same specs - except for the batteries. Cosmetically they are virtually identical cameras in almost all respects except for a small change in the shape of the grip on the right side of the SX170 camera. Functionally they both work exactly the same, and they both produce identical quality pictures. No changes were made to either the sensor or to the DIGIC 4 image processor to bring any improvement to the final images produced.

The initial Amazon release price of the SX170 is $179. (Sept. 2013)
The current Amazon price for the SX160 is $144, about $35 less. (Sept. 2013)

Literally, you have to HATE using 2-AA rechargeable batteries in a camera to want to pay $35 more for the same camera with a mini-sized proprietary battery that will only take about half as many shots with each charge, when the quality of the pictures you get will be absolutely identical with both cameras.

SPARE BATTERIES. Amazon is currently selling official Canon brand NB-6LH spare batteries for about $38 apiece. (Remember, people, your camera warranty is now VOID if you use a "cheap Hong Kong knockoff" proprietary battery in it. You do so at your own risk.) A spare pair of top-quality Sanyo [now Panasonic] brand "eneloop" rechargeable AA batteries can be bought on Amazon for about $4, but even "cheap" AA batteries won't void your warranty for the SX160.


That is the bottom line.


The SX170 is the seventh model of the Canon SX100 line of cameras. This series began with the SX100 in the year 2007. From the beginning these cameras have always run on 2-AA rechargeable batteries. That has always been their strongest selling point - the fact that they use 2-AA batteries. If you happened to run out of rechargeable AA batteries, you could always buy spare AA batteries for them to keep taking pictures.

That is the main feature which made them ideal travel & field use cameras literally anywhere in the world.

The cameras of this SX100 series were all full-featured, with full manual control, and a good megazoom. They were also very affordable. Spare batteries for them could be purchased easily and economically. So these cameras were also inexpensive to use, too. And if you bought a new camera, you just transferred the rechargeable AA batteries to the new camera. You never had to buy any new (and much more expensive) proprietary batteries each time you bought a new camera. So in the long term, the AA battery cameras were always much less expensive for people to own and operate.

The new model SX170 no longer uses AA batteries. Instead it uses a mini-sized NB-6LH proprietary battery. These batteries are not readily available except by mail order unless you happen to live near a very large city. If you are traveling, the situation gets much worse. In many places the NB-6LH batteries will not be locally available at all. So the usefulness of the SX170 as a travel & field camera worldwide has been negated. If you are stuck in the middle of nowhere with dead batteries, then you are just stuck with no more pictures!

During the last couple of years, these Canon SX100 series cameras were the only full-featured, 2-AA battery, travel & field cameras still left on the world market. The SX160 was the last one. Now the consumer can no longer buy a full-featured 2-AA battery camera at ANY price, except for a few leftover models from previous years. And soon enough they will be gone too.

Some of you may realize the gravity of this loss, others may not. Most people don't miss things until they suddenly realize they can no longer buy them, because "they" don't make them anymore. And that is exactly what has just happened here. The day the SX170 was introduced was the day the last full-featured, full-manual-control, compact, 2-AA battery, travel & field camera left on the entire worldwide market - Died.


There is a "not-so-new" larger grip on the right side of the SX170 camera. Canon claims it has "introduced" a design change with a larger grip on the right side of the camera for better one-handed shooting. Ergonomically. This will indeed be a fine feature for many people. I agree. But Canon's P.R. department says this was only made possible by using the new smaller proprietary battery. No. That is not true.

The original camera of this line, the SX100, had that same style, larger right hand grip on it, and it used 2-AA batteries. Canon removed that feature from the next model, the SX110, and made the overall camera flatter. Some of us would have preferred that Canon not make that design change, but that was Canon's decision.

Now Canon is "reintroducing" that larger right hand grip feature with the SX170, but it has nothing to do with having to drop the 2-AA batteries. I measured the two cameras with a set of calipers. The dimensions of the larger grip on the right side are very similar on both cameras - the grip on the original SX100 (using 2-AA batteries) and the grip on the new SX170 (using the new proprietary battery.) Canon could have "reintroduced" this same design change all along on any of the other SX100 series cameras, and still kept the 2-AA batteries in the camera just fine. So the justification Canon is giving for being able to make this design change is completely bogus.


I'm giving the new Canon SX170 IS a 3-star rating only for sentimental reasons - it's still a Canon. It is still an excellent camera in many ways. It still has all of the same excellent features. ... But I won't recommend the SX170 to anyone.

Since it now runs on a proprietary battery, then it has to be compared to all of the other similar cameras today that run on proprietary batteries. And in that comparison, it does not measure up very well.


The Canon SX170 is not a fast-action camera, and it never will be. It still has all the same problems of the previous models. It has a noticeable shutter lag, a slower focus, a slow image processor, a slow maximum shooting speed of 0.8 fps (less than one picture per second,) a very slow flash recovery time, it doesn't work very well indoors or in low light, and it does not shoot full 1920x1080 HD video, either, only the older 1280x720 quasi-HD video.

The SX170 is not a good camera for taking pictures of fast-moving children or pets, fast-action sports moments, or fast-focus views of flying birds. The SX170 simply won't work for that kind of photography.

There are literally dozens of other more modern proprietary battery cameras out there today that can run circles around the slow-performing, antiquated design and performance of the older-design SX170. So if you really want a modern, fast-action camera that works well in low light and that also shoots full 1920x1080 HD video, then why would you even consider buying the SX170?

Canon designed the original electronics for the SX100 line of cameras way back in 2007.* These cameras were originally designed as, "Stand here while I take your picture" cameras. And basically that is what they still do best. Changing the battery isn't going to change the primary use for which these cameras were originally intended. No more than injecting "energy steroids" into an old dog is going to teach it to do new tricks.

If you want a modern, fast-action, full-HD video camera, then the SX170 will simply not work for you.**

* Actually it was released in 2007. Design precedes release by about 2 to 3 years, so essentially these cameras were designed almost ten years ago. Remember what that world was like? Digital cameras were low quality and high priced. Most people did not have PCs, and fewer still knew how to use Photoshop. Computer hard drives were 30 gigabytes - smaller than a standard 32 GB SDHC camera memory card of today. Photo paper for printers was terrible and would begin to fade out within months, gone altogether in a few years. .... Most people were using 35 mm film cameras with 36 shots for each roll of film, paying $27 or more at 75 cents per print each time for all the photos, both good and bad. (There was no "preview" feature before they were developed and printed. Besides, you could not "preview" photos very well by squinting at a tiny, color-reversed film negative.) ... Most people could not AFFORD to take more than a few pictures each month. Taking pictures was expensive! Every single picture had to count, so yes - literally - using a camera back in those days meant, "Stand here while I take your picture!" It didn't MATTER if they were slow. Getting your "36 prints" back from the developers at Long's Drug Store took two to three days anyway. That is the world in which the electronic circuitry for these SX100 series cameras was originally designed.

** (If you do want that however, which obviously many people do, then for a short list of modern, fast-action, full-HD-video cameras in a similar price range of the SX170, please see my post of suggestions in the Comments Section, page 1. For a comparative list of (almost all) current Canon point-and-shoot and bridge cameras, please see my post in the Comments Section, at the bottom of page 4.)


If, on the other hand, you do like the classic Canon SX100 series camera line - as I do very much - you have to like it for what it is. It is an older style, classic design, point-and-shoot camera. As such you simply have to accept the fact that it has some very real limitations. And those limitations are not going to be "fixed" simply by putting a different battery inside the same camera.

It makes no sense to buy a camera first, expecting it to meet your wants and needs, and then end up being disappointed when it doesn't. It works the other way around. You find the camera that actually does fit your personal wants and needs first, and then you buy that camera for yourself and enjoy it.

If you do prefer the convenience of owning a classic design, 2-AA battery, travel & field compact camera, then I suggest you consider buying the Canon SX160, on sale now, while the supplies still last. That is what I chose to do. I bought two more SX160 cameras, and tucked them away safely in a storage box for my future use and enjoyment for the time when my current SX160 either wears out or breaks down. If you are interested in the SX160, please see my own previous Amazon review of it - 5 stars and more, if I could.

The Canon SX160 is still my number one favorite camera I have ever owned, and I still plan to keep right on using it for many pleasant years yet to come.

Sincerely, and with best wishes to everyone, John AKA SLOphoto1


Energy independence. That is one of the main reasons why some people - like me - have been fighting so hard for so long trying to keep the last remaining full-featured AA cameras on the market - If you can choose your own AA batteries in a competitive market, then you have total control over your own power source. And there is no future time limit for being able to still use your camera, either. ("They" don't make that battery any more.)

I still have my original digital camera, an Epson PhotoPC 600, from 1997. It runs on 4-AA batteries. It still works well, and it still takes some interesting pictures. They are particularly interesting because the pictures have an "older" look to them, because of the older camera technology. I don't have to fake this "older" look with special effects in a modern camera or with Photoshop manipulation. They genuinely look older because they really are "older," due to the older technology actually producing them inside the original camera right now.

Imagine trying to locate a proprietary battery for a fifteen to twenty year old camera? The only reason I can even still use that camera at all is precisely due to the fact that the camera was originally designed to run on 4-AA standardized batteries. The same thing will be true of the SX160 cameras of today. Fifteen or twenty years from now, they will still work just fine, because they were designed to run on AA batteries.

AA batteries were standardized way back in 1954. Almost 60 years later, in 2013, they are still the most widely used standardized battery in the world. And especially now that they make rechargeable AA batteries (as in "green" - reusable and even "renewable" if you use a solar-powered AA battery recharger,) there is virtually no doubt they will still continue to be very popular for at least another 60 years into the future, too. They are and will continue to be a very reliable source of power - for millions of different items. This will still be true long after the proprietary - and non-standardized - batteries of today will only vaguely be remembered as a passing fad (and expensive folly) of the early 21st century.

Non-standardized products have no long-term future in an increasingly globalized world.

That's my personal opinion about it, but speaking as a retired history teacher I am also asserting that based on actual and repeated long-term historical patterns and precedents.

Again, best wishes to everyone - John AKA SLOphoto1



I've been asked to comment on battery usage. How many pictures should a person expect to take with each charge? Here is some data on that. This includes an actual field test I did myself of the earlier model SX150.

The proprietary battery in the SX170 - the Canon brand NB-6LH - is rated at about a 1060 mAh (milliamp hours) charge. The preferred, high-quality Sanyo [now Panasonic] brand "eneloop" rechargeable AA batteries are rated at about a 2000 mAh change (or about twice as much.) There is no great mystery to it. 2000 mAh of power will take about twice as many pictures as will 1060 mAh of power.

The SX160 and SX170 each require about 2.1 to 3.7 volts to operate the cameras. That requires either one NB-6LH proprietary battery (at about 3.7 volts) or two "eneloop" AA batteries at 1.5 volts each, (two for a total of about 3.0 volts.) The NB-6LH costs about $38 on Amazon. A pair of "eneloop" AA batteries costs about $4. Either system requires less than one cent of electricity to recharge each time. However, the NB-6LH will probably recharge only about 700 times, based on typical lithium-ion battery life spans, which have a pretty high burn out rate, whereas the "eneloop" brand AA batteries are advertised as being able to take at least 1500 recharges.

I haven't tested the SX160 and SX170 cameras yet for the number of shots they will take per charge in actual field use (where you are actually using the camera under field use conditions,) but I did do just such a test earlier for the SX150, and here are the results. (Reprinted from my earlier review of the SX150.)

"On a recent field trip to the local mountains near Monterey, CA, I set out with a fully-charged pair of eneloop AA batteries in the SX150, and I carried a backup pair of eneloop AAs just in case. I did a full day of shooting with 425 full-sized JPEGs and 8 minutes of HD video, and I used a lot of zoom and frequently turned the camera off and on too. That is a LOT of battery use for one set of AA batteries. The batteries finally ran out early the next day as I was testing some of the features on the camera."

Based on previous experience, when I actually get around to doing an actual, full-day field test of the SX170, I anticipate the results to be about half the amount of the results I obtained for the SX150 (or would similarly expect with the SX160, since the electronic circuitry is basically unchanged in all these SX100 series cameras.)

&&&&&&&& PLEASE NOTE: These cameras all show a "low battery" indicator based on a sensor which looks for a voltage drop. In the SX160 and in previous models, these cameras were designed to use regular Alkaline AA batteries which start out at about 1.5 volts (3.0 volts for two of them.) When they begin to drop too low, the low battery indicator appears on the LCD screen. Rechargeable AA batteries like the Sanyo [now Panasonic] brand "eneloop" type only recharge to about 1.2 or 1.3 volts (or 2.4 to 2.6 volts for two of them.) The internal sensor will "think" that they are running "low" long before they actually run out, once they begin to drop below the "warning point" for the internal sensor in terms of "low" voltage. They are not actually anywhere near "out." My advice is just to keep right on using them until the LCD on the camera finally tells you to "change the batteries," as it shuts down on you.

I hope that gives everyone a fairly good idea of what to anticipate with both the SX160 and the SX170 cameras in general terms of the number of pictures to expect per charge.

Again, best wishes to everyone, John AKA SLOphoto1


Recently while testing the Canon SX170 camera in the field I discovered a serious design flaw. This flaw became apparent entirely by accident through normal use of the camera. It seems that the camera suddenly and unexpectedly turns on or off simply while handling it in a routine manner. This is especially true when trying to pull the camera out of a coat pocket, purse or camera carry bag.

Apparently in one of the few design changes, Canon has now relocated the On/Off power button almost to the very end of the right-rear-top of the SX170 camera (literally, only about 1/4" from the right rear corner of the top of the camera.) This is the side where the new larger right-hand grip is also located. It is the natural hand position to reach into your coat pocket or carry bag and grab the camera by the main grip in order to pull it out. When you do, if your thumb happens to be on the top of the camera, you can very easily activate the camera and possibly jam or even break the lens-extension mechanism.

When the lens pushes out against a resistance (like still being confined partially inside a coat pocket,) then the lens stops and retracts, and there is a series of several quick "beeps," similar to those of the time-delay shutter release. The more serious aspect of this is that each time this happens it puts stress on the delicate gears inside the lens-extension mechanism. Eventually this type of stress can cause the lens-extension mechanism to fail, and the camera will no longer work. (You see them on eBay, "Lens won't extend outward.")

Back in 2008, Canon faced a similar problem - and a number of lawsuits - over this very same problem with one if its "G" series cameras. If the extending lens hit an obstacle, the extending lens would sometimes jam and the camera would become altogether inoperable until it was factory repaired. (And the warranty only lasts one year.)

The SX160 did not have this design flaw, nor did any of the other previous SX100 series cameras before it. All six of the previous models of the SX100 series cameras had the On/Off power button located safely inward toward the center of the camera by at least 3/4" to 7/8" from the right end of the camera.

I've taken a total of 58 shots with the SX170 camera so far, and this "accident" has already happened to me three times. This same easy activation has also suddenly turned the camera off twice while I was simply standing there holding it. This design flaw is an accident waiting to happen.

I don't know how much of this type of stress the lens-extension mechanism on the SX170 can take. I have never encountered this problem before with any of the other six models of the SX100 series that I have owned and used previously. They all had the On/Off power button located well inward at a safe distance from the right end of the camera. So I have never previously encountered this sort of "activation by accident" with the SX160 or any of the other previous cameras of this line. But this flaw does have the very real potential to cause serious damage to the camera, and even render it completely inoperable, just by the ease with which the SX170 can be so readily activated just by complete accident.

Earlier I said that I would not recommend the SX170 over the SX160 to anyone. Now I must say that I specifically recommend against it.

Once again, best wishes to everyone, John AKA SLOphoto1

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& FIN.


As Amazon customers can plainly see, the Canon SX170 is now officially a DISCONTINUED, failed product. It is a dead dinosaur. The new lithium battery killed it. Without the 2-AA batteries, this camera was not competitive with other, more modern, more fast-action cameras.

As Amazon customers can also plainly see, the previous model, the Canon SX160 - which still used 2-AA batteries - is NOT a "discontinued, failed product." It is still very much alive and doing well. There will still be plenty of them around for a long time. The SX160 is still an excellent camera, and since it still runs on 2-AA rechargeable batteries, an inexpensive and reliable power source will always be available for it.

I still consider the Canon SX160, to be "The Best 2-AA-Battery All-Purpose Travel and Field Camera Ever Made." I always carry my Canon SX160 with me wherever I go, and I plan to do so for many years to come. As I previously said, I bought two extras for when the first one finally wears out. (Please see my 5-star Amazon review of the SX160 for details.)

As always, best wishes to everyone, John AKA SLOphoto1

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& End of Story.
140140 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
11 of 12 people found the following review helpful
on May 10, 2014
I love this camera very much! The picture quality is great and it is very easy to use. The only reason I gave it 3 stars is the fact that it breaks VERY easily! I dropped mine from 2 feet onto a carpeted area and got a "lens error." To get this fixed, it costs about $130, so be careful with this camera!
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful
on July 19, 2014
For the money & the fact this is a 16.0 MP camera and a Canon product, you can't beat this deal. Canon has always made excellent camera equipment & this is another example of their fine quality & craftsmanship. It's the closest thing to an SLR camera without the high price-tag. It's small enough to carry easily on your person & technology-wise is good enough to be used even by a professional photographer. My only issue with this particular camera is that it doesn't have a view finder, which most "Point-n-Shoot" cameras don't offer today. It does have a nice 3" screen for viewing images before taking your photographs. As with most cameras without a view finder, I strongly recommend that you purchase a Delkin shade cover made specifically for the Canon 3" screen in order to see images well in bright daylight. This is a great camera for the beginner or the pro who is looking for a great pocket camera & I recommend it highly. As a professional photographer myself since the late 60's, Canon is the best camera on the market IMHO.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
15 of 19 people found the following review helpful
on January 8, 2014
I purchased this as a gift for my wife, who wanted something better than her cellphone. She is a birdwatcher but not a fanatic, and wanted something with high resolution and good optical zoom while being small, light and simple to use. This seemed to fit the bill. Unfortunately, when it arrived there was a distinct set of flaws in the images produced, with small but visible blotches on the images. We contacted Canon about this, and were extremely impressed with their response. Within a few minutes we were through their voice response system and speaking to a real service person. She clearly knew the camera. After less than 10 minutes with her trying various fixes, she agreed the camera was defective. Canon emailed me a pre-paid return label with full insurance, saying they'd have the camera repaired and back to us in 15 working days. The actual turnaround was 8 days, and this at the height of the Christmas rush. We received a new rather than refurbished device, along with an extra battery and additional strap for our trouble. The new camera works perfectly, with my wife having some gorgeous shots of cardinals at the bird feeder during a snow storm. She is happy with the device, and we're both very happy with Canon service.
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful
on December 16, 2013
i started out with the first canon sure shot , have owned one ever since, its the best camera to me ever made. i have had 3 or 4 of them and they have been in my pocket or purse every single day since my first purchase , they have been to europe and were still going strong to hawaii and then to norway , my canon will be with me always, it captures the best pictures, would not buy another brand but canon for me , for someone else no, but mine will be canon
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful
on November 22, 2014
I bought this camera because I wanted something I could fit in my pocket, and still have (1) a good optical zoom, (2) quality optical image stabilization, and (3) ready access to the sorts of exposure controls I normally do on my DSLR (for example, underexposing an image to capture a good sunset). This camera did not disappoint. Adjustments are easy with two quick dials rather than a ton of on-screen menus, and the picture quality is everything I hoped for in a pocket camera. The only thing I could have wished for that it doesn't have, is the ability to capture images in Camera Raw rather than JPG format to increase dynamic range. Decent auto-focus, no worse shutter lag than most point-and-shoot cameras, and good 720p video capture as well. Battery seemed to last me for about 100-150 images, more or less. Definitely worth the money and more.
review image
22 commentsWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
on December 30, 2013
The SX170 is actually the first camera I've ever owned. I was a bit skeptical at first. because I wasn't sure I wanted this to be my first camera, but I knew I wasn't ready for a DSLR. I'm not that into photography or anything, I just want to be able to take nice, clear, crisp images whenever I can and want. After about a week contemplating, I came down to the SX170 and the Nikon L820. A lot of reviews I read deemed the L820 the clear winner, and there were a lot of negative reviews for the SX170 (partially due to the lithium battery). Both of them have super cheap deals going on, but the Nikon L820 was about $70 more, and a bit more advanced, and bigger than I would like my first camera to be. Plus you needed 4 AA batteries to operate it, and I'm a firm believer in Lithium rechargeable batteries. I decided to go with the SX170, and I haven't regretted it since. I got an amazing deal, the camera, plus a free 16 GB for just $99. I am so happy I bought this camera.

I'm still playing around with the functions of the camera, and trying to learn everything and get the the most out of this camera. This is an amazing beginner camera. I have so many people asking me if I took the photos on a DSLR! The quality really is that amazing.

The only thing I would have to say is that I still haven't gotten a hold of the focus too well, the camera gets very shaky, when its on full zoom on Manual mode (without a tripod) but I think its something that I remedy quickly once I get a hang of it and maybe purchase a tripod. Overall, this is an amazing little camera, with incredible bang for you buck!
review image
0CommentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
49 of 67 people found the following review helpful
on October 24, 2013
While most of the cameras have migrated to cheaper CMOS sensors, this camera still uses CCD and produces really smooth images.

It is funny why people are paying more attention to batteries than the sensor.

However, it is also funny that some people think that AA batteries are used only in third world countries. Maybe, but then they are the ones who need decent cameras that cost under $200.

Bottom line - if you feel inferior using AA batteries, go with this camera. For the rest of the folks, just get the SX160. Both use CCD sensors which is what many old timers like myself really miss these days.
11 commentWas this review helpful to you?YesNoSending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse

Questions? Get fast answers from reviewers

Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
See all 207 answered questions

Send us feedback

How can we make Amazon Customer Reviews better for you?
Let us know here.