A good compromise Too expensive but otherwise for me

My wishlists camera should meet the following criteria (approximately in the following order): you should make small (pocket), razor-sharp images, work in low light (who has ever photographed his children by candlelight, knows what I mean), Full HD Video have a good image + sound, convenient and easy to handle (particularly fast access to functions such as exposure compensation, ISO setting and also good battery life and faster expansion battery / SD card etc) and not be so expensive.

Ever ahead: crisp images (for my taste), there is obviously not in a compact camera. At least not when you're spoiled with SLR cameras. But: The S110 does its job quite well here. In addition, one laboratory, although able to measure the dissolved line pairs, in practice, but then the picture but blurred, because the camera is not good in the hand in triggering or autofocus will not be able to focus exactly where you want it, for example, directly into the eyes of a person. As I said, I'm here with the S110 but quite satisfied.

Furthermore I have (Tripod) sharpness, resolution and color fringing looked at ISO 100, 400, 1600 and 3200 (and 6400, 12800 if any) and at max. Wide (zoom, I use only about 10% or less) and jpg quality (since I do not always want to convert raws -> easy to use!) At the Canon S100, S110, SX20 and the Nikon Coolpix P310. Compared to Canon D20 and D5 as a reference. It was amazing to me that the image quality of the half as expensive Nikon was comparable here and enough (for my taste). The S100 has, in contrast to strong block artifacts (jpg coding) that I could not turn off (something like a hidden setting ??), so that a comparison was difficult. The S100 blurred edges much stronger than the S110. A knock-out criterion for me for the S100. Farsäume were everywhere (except for the SX20) under and ok.

The noise for high ISO speeds is high in all cameras. But the S110 is also reflected here quite well, I think, with a lot of vision seems to be behind. In particular, the Nikon records very soft (to). By contrast, the S110 has a kind of 'Waben' structure in the pixel region. Toll are the extremely high ISO numbers in the S110. Despite extreme noise I'm sure there will be cases where I'll be glad about it. Better than having no noise. The Nikon is similarly well here. But many other cheaper cameras often go only to ISO 1600. And often in poor aperture lenses. For me too little, because I think that this value always should again into quarters for reasonable values.

The video feature in the S110 works quite well, the image quality deteriorates in low light but quickly. Sound is ok (at the Nikon better, the SX20 much better). Video and audio are exactly synchronous (that was in the Nikon and a problem for me ko-criterion). The handling of the S100 and S110 are excellent. The exposure I have put my custom function to the ring on the lens. The camera is very comfortable to hold and is - I have to say here once - almost a small Handschmeichler - as opposed to eg the Nikon. Previously tested battery life only in the S100. Is ok, on day trips it holds out to the end, even with many photos or films. That's enough for me. The S100, S110 really fits in your pocket (well, if you should be careful because some - crumbs etc), here I doubt something many other (FAST) of the same size cameras. The flash is a disaster at S100, S110. Almost always I grad finger on it there, if he wants to go out. But the flash is turned off anyway with me in 99%. A ko in the S110 is the price for me. Unnecessary touch screens, WiFi or GPS (in S100) could help here to reduce this. Unfortunately, I have found nothing better and so I bite the bullet ...

Maybe at the end: Although it is not the most important thing, but the S100 and S110 are just fun. They fit comfortably in your hand and feel around and high quality. Compared to me, the Nikon was edgy and too much 'Felt' plastic. So all in all, the S110 for me a good compromise, albeit much too expensive! Still 5 points.