Industrial Deals HPC Magazine Deals Holiday Dress Guide nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc For a limited time. 3 months for $0.99. Amazon Music Unlimited. New subscribers only. Terms and conditions apply. Electronics Gift Guide Limited time offer Handmade Last Minute Gifts Holiday Home Gift Guide Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon life life life  All-new Echo Save $30 on All-New Fire HD 8. Limited-time offer. $20 off Kindle Paperwhite Shop now HTL17_gno

Showing 1-10 of 64 reviews(2 star). See all 1,247 reviews
on September 2, 2011
I really don't understand why people seem to rave about this camera. I bought this and returned it a couple weeks later; I found the image quality to not be very good, images (even taken outside in good light) were noisy, washed out looking, bad colors, not sharp. It would really be great to be able to buy a compact, pocketable camera that takes good photos; you can't expect dSLR quality, but hopefully decent, acceptable quality. Unfortunately, I don't think this is possible. Basically, from my investigations, the key ingredient to getting good photo quality is to have a large sensor (e.g. read here: [...]). And in considering previous cameras I have owned and liked the photo quality of (e.g. Kodak V1073, Kodak C875, HP PhotoSmart 945), they all had larger than average sensors (not dSLR sized, but bigger than the 1/2"3 that is used on this camera and many other compact cameras and it made a noticeable difference in quality to me). Anyway, I still don't really want to have to buy a huge dSLR and have to lug it around. There are some intermediate level cameras that have large sensors but aren't so big as dSLRS (but bigger than compacts like this one). For example, the Sony NEX line looks promising. Also, the Samsung NX100 looks good too (and seems very reasonably priced). You can easily find the image sensor size of cameras at the web site dpreview.

Another, separate gripe I had about this camera is that, while you can take panoramic photos (i.e. take multiple snapshots and have them stitched together into a larger panorama photo), the stitching is NOT done in the camera --- you have to upload the separate photos to your computer and use an external piece of software to do the stitching. What a hassle! Digicams have been doing in-camera stitching of panoramas for years, why can't this camera?

Also note that while you can take full HD video with this, it is only 24 frames per second and you are limited to about a max of 10 minutes per clip. By contrast the Sony DSC-WX9 (which I also was considering) can take 60 frames per second full HD video and there is no time limit. If you must have a pocketable camera like this, I would recommend the Sony DSC-WX9 over this one.
22 comments| 8 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on December 29, 2011
I had high expectations for this camera. There was a high volume of overwhelmingly positive reviews, and my previous camera was a 6-year-old Canon Powershot A620. Any new camera would be an improvement, right? While the low-light photos definitely came out better than with my A620 (not great, but better), I felt that, on a whole, my old camera took photos that were much more clear and crisp. While I loved that the ELPH 300's size and weight made it easy for me to tote around, and I found the camera itself easy to use and navigate, I was very disappointed in the quality of the photos. I tested the camera out in multiple environments and on multiple settings, but around 90% of the photos were unsatisfactory. The photos looked great on the screen, but as soon as I uploaded them to the computer I saw that none of them were actually crisp. To be fair, many of my photos were taken in low-light settings and without flash which already makes for less crisp photos. However, for a camera that boasted being able to take better photos in low-light settings, I don't feel like it delivered. I did play around with many of the settings: changing the iso, utilizing the tungsten or fluorescent light setting, etc. and while on the camera screen the photos appeared great, again, as soon as I uploaded the photos to the computer I saw that I was mislead. FYI, my camera/card was set to the largest size and highest quality photos so that wasn't the issue.

I am unsure as to why I couldn't get more than a few good (not great) photos with this camera, since there are so many positive reviews (not to mention great photos uploaded by users) for this camera. I might have received a lemon, or it might be error on my part; but seeing as how I have already spent a great deal of time and effort trying to get the best out of this camera (which is supposed to already take good photos without ANY effort), I think there is a problem here.

I originally intended to purchase the ELPH 100, but opted for the 300 instead because so many more people had [positively] reviewed it, and because even though I was paying more, I was saving more off of the original price. However, $150 for a camera that I do not love is more than I am willing to pay. While I would love to only pay $100 for a camera, it doesn't seem like there is a great option in that price range (if the ELPH 300 failed me, I am assuming the ELPH 100 will as well). I would rather pay more for a camera I love. After almost 4 weeks of trying to work with this camera, I have decided to return it. I have since ordered the Canon Powershot sx230 (as high as I'm willing to pay for a point-and-shoot at this time, otherwise I would have gone for the Canon Powershot sd90 which seems like a safe bet) and after only a few hours of toying around with it, I am already much more impressed. Even with the 14x zoom (which is a definite perk), the photos have been coming out more crisp than the ones I took with the ELPH 300. I find it most helpful to read reviews for comparable items left by the same person, so once I decide for sure whether or not I am happy with the sx230, I will leave a review for it, as well as modify my review here.

*update 1/5/12
I still have only had the Canon sx230 for a few weeks, but I will absolutely not be returning it!! It has lived up to, and exceeded my expectations. I see that the most recent reviews for the elph300 are positive so I'm not sure where the disconnect is between their experiences and mine. If you bought the elph300 and are happy with it, great; but if not, I highly recommend the sx230!
33 comments| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on June 9, 2012
I bought this camera as a replacement for a SD600 6 megapixel canon elph that was 6 years old. Taking photos outdoors and in good natural light were comparable to the old camera. photos taken indoors when the sun was beaming through the windows were yellow in color and not nearly as vibrant as the old camera. I tried experimenting with the settings for a little while then gave up because the "automatic" setting should work without having to read the manual (just like the old camera). In my opinion canon missed the mark with this camera. I've already returned it.
11 comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on October 2, 2012
I previously had a canon sd 1100 8 mega pixels and it was great. When it broke from me dropping it one time in the sand I decided to get another canon since that one was so good. This one I've had since May and I can't seem to take any good pictures with it. No matter what setting I use portrait, night, nature, auto... they all don't come out in good quality. The color is odd and slightly off. People tend to look more orange than they should. the pictures when I upload them when u zoom in our very pixelated like a crappier version camera. I've tried changing the sizes of the pictures but they're still bad. I just think that this is way to much work when my last camera was awesome just pointing and shooting now real adjustment. Maybe its just me but I don't like this camera at all. It frustrates me that no pictures come out good. It seems it take better pictures without the flash and more landscapes. Pictures of people close up come out bad. Ugh very frustrated... I wish my old camera still worked.
33 comments| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on September 9, 2016
Thought it was great until I realized there was clicking every time I tried to record. Disappointed but returning it was a breeze.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on August 9, 2011
I bought this camera for "AUTO" mode only. I am great fan of Canon and have several Digital camera/ Video cameras. I have used this camera over 3 months.

When I take pictures in bright sun light in "AUTO" mode, the pictures are so bright, they look bad. I am not an expert but it seems that either it has over-exposure or higher ISO problem. I wouldn't recommend this camera.

One odd thing to note is although pictures are not good but video quality is excellent in this camera which is surprising as it should have better picture quality than video!!

My five year old cameras give better pictures than this. Don't buy this camera.
11 comment| 5 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
After wasting $ on some other point N shoots, this one seems to be a good one. I haven't put it through the ringer yet, and it remains to be seen how long it lasts (dirt often gets in these sliding in-and-out lenses when you turn them on and off), but the quality is great and the high 12.1 MP shots are almost like shooting in RAW. well, not quite, but the colors pop.

OK, I'm back after a couple of months and sadly, I've downgraded this (formerly) great camera to two stars. I've handled this camera carefully, never dropped it, haven't used it hard... and as one might expect, the lens has started to stick - i.e. not focus if I try to zoom in (probably because of a tiny grain of sand in the layers of lens that comes out when you turn it on), and the lens cover/shutter that pops open and shut when you turn it on and off has started sticking open.

That's the main problem with these 'external' lenses and lens cover/shutter designs. Some cameras have all the workings on the inside, which will give the camera a longer life, because dirt can't get in there. I now sometimes can't zoom in to take a picture (the camera says "error - turn back off and on" or some such), and I now have to pry the lens cover shut when I turn it off. It's only a matter of time where I will have to try to pry the lens open completely to take pictures.

Don't buy it - with the 'external' lens design, you'll eventually get dirt in it no matter how careful you are, and it'll break.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on July 6, 2012
I've owned 2 Canon digital cameras and loved both of them and after reading all the great reviews on the Canon PowerShot ELPH 300 i thought for sure it was the camera i was looking for. I was looking for a compact camera that i could keep in my pocket. We go to Disney World a lot and i wanted a camera i could easily keep in my pocket and whip out whenever a good photo opportunity presented itself. i took the camera to the Star Spangled Sailabration at the Baltimore Inner Harbor. Most of the shots were outside. The photos were "ok". The shots that were taken inside were embarrassingly horrible. They looked like the pics i used to take w my cell phone 10 years ago. I tried different settings and nothing seemed to help. I did Google more reviews and there were other's w similar problems. There is a chance I got a defective ELPH 300, that is why i didn't give it 1 star. I ended up returning it and getting the Sony Cybershot WX-150 and i'm happy w that. it's not as good as i'd hoped it would be but i guess you sacrifice a little when you go w a compact camera. i would not recommend the Canon PowerShot ELPH 300 unfortunately.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on November 16, 2014
Elongates heads and other elements in all the pictures I take. Guess I got a bad unit.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse
on December 4, 2014
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you? Report abuse