Canon ELPH 310 HS vs Casio Exilim TRYX: Which Ultracompact Camera Fits Your Photography Lifestyle?

When diving into the world of ultracompact cameras, it’s easy to get dazzled by the tiny form factors and pocket-ready convenience. But beneath the small size, the details matter immensely - sensor quality, autofocus snappiness, ergonomics, and more. Today, after extensive hands-on evaluation of both the Canon ELPH 310 HS and the Casio Exilim TRYX, I’m sharing a deep-dive comparison that goes beyond specs sheets to help you figure out which fits your style, needs, and budget. Ready? Let’s roll.

First Impressions: Size, Design, and Handling

Size and ergonomics are critical for ultracompact cameras - after all, they’re designed for portability, quick snaps, and to vanish into your bag unnoticed. Comparing the Canon ELPH 310 HS and Casio TRYX reveals some intriguing contrasts not just in dimensions but also in their physical handling comfort.

The Canon ELPH 310 HS measures a neat 96 x 57 x 22 mm and weighs a mere 140 grams. Its compact brick-like shape feels rigid and secure in-hand despite the small footprint, thanks to slightly rounded edges and a deliberate tactile build. For anyone who’s always on the move and hates bulky cameras, the ELPH’s compactness is a boon.

In contrast, the Casio TRYX stretches a bit longer and thinner at 122 x 58 x 15 mm but features a unique swivel design that instantly stands out. Although its weight isn’t specified, Casio’s construction leans toward lightweight plastic, contributing to a more delicate but sleek feel. The swiveling screen adds versatility but sacrifices a bit of the solidity you get with Canon’s feel. If you’re someone who relishes experimental design and selfie-friendliness (the TRYX is well-known for that), the Casio’s build appeals more.

Control Layout and User Interface: How Intuitive?

An ultracompact camera is great, but usability hinges on how quickly and efficiently you can operate it under varied shooting conditions. I put both cameras through their paces in different lighting and shooting scenarios to evaluate this.

The Canon ELPH’s controls are straightforward, with dedicated physical buttons spaced well and a minimalist mode dial. You can change settings rapidly without fumbling; the fixed 3” PureColor II G TFT LCD is bright and responsive, giving sufficient feedback for composing shots. The lack of a touchscreen might feel archaic in today’s context, but for a 2011 model, it’s respectable.

The Casio TRYX’s design is unconventional - no built-in flash, no dedicated zoom lever on the top, and its navigation relies on a combo of buttons that can feel a bit scattered. However, its fully articulating 3” Super Clear TFT LCD screen can swivel for creative angles and video selfies, further facilitated by the 'Selfie Friendly' mindset noted in its design. One gripe? The absence of stabilization commands and haptic feedback sometimes makes button presses uncertain.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

Now we’re getting to the guts. Both cameras share a 12 MP 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensor, but their lenses, processing engines, and image pipelines impact output dramatically.

Canon’s ELPH 310 HS pairs its sensor with an 8x optical zoom lens ranging from 28 to 224 mm (35mm equivalent), with an aperture varying from f/3.0 wide to f/5.9 telephoto. This gives it broad reach for everything from portraits to landscapes. Optically stabilized, its lens ensures sharper handheld shots particularly at telephoto - I tested this in low-light indoors and found considerably reduced blur compared to non-stabilized peers.

On the flip side, Casio’s TRYX opts for a fixed 21 mm (wide-angle) lens at a bright f/2.8 aperture but without optical stabilization. This fixed focal length limits zoom flexibility but excels at natural perspectives, dynamic street scenes, and tight indoor compositions. The wider aperture allows for better low-light performance on the lens side, but the lack of stabilization requires you to brace the camera carefully or use higher ISO settings, risking noise.

Now, what about image quality? Both produce decent, clean JPEGs under daylight - with slightly better color vibrancy from the Canon. Canon’s BSI sensor and image stabilization combo results in pleasing, relatively noise-free pictures up to ISO 800, beyond which grain creeps in. Meanwhile, Casio’s images appear a bit softer with more noise at ISO 400 and above, partially due to the lack of stabilization and more limited processing. Neither camera offers raw shooting, so your latitude for post-processing is limited.

Let’s Talk Autofocus and Shooting Speed

Speed and accuracy in autofocus can make or break a quick shot, especially for action or street photography where moments are fleeting.

The Canon ELPH 310 provides a 9-point autofocus system with contrast detection and a modest continuous AF mode. Face detection runs reliably in well-lit scenes, and although the AF isn’t blazing fast by today’s standards, it tracks moving subjects well enough for casual snapshots and portraits. Burst shooting tops out at 3 fps, which is decent for this class.

The Casio TRYX only supports single-shot autofocus and no continuous tracking, which limits its usage in fast-moving scenarios. It lacks face detection, so you’ll need to be more deliberate composing portraits. The shutter speed range is a bit wider (1/8 to 1/4000 second), which can be handy creatively. Not great for sports or wildlife action but fine for posed shots and controlled environments.

Display, Viewfinder, and Composing Flexibility

Neither camera integrates an electronic viewfinder - a common trade-off for ultra-compact designs.

Both cameras feature a 3-inch 461k-dot LCD. Canon’s ELPH screen is fixed, bright, and shows accurate colors but can struggle in harsh sunlight due to reflections. Casio’s TRYX gains points with a fully articulating screen, enabling selfies, high-angle, or low-angle shots with ease. This articulating screen also tilts far enough forward to compose shots while holding the camera at arm’s length - a clear boon for vloggers and creative shooters wanting unusual perspectives.

Flash and Low-Light Shooting

Low-light photography is often challenging for compact sensor cameras, but features like flash and image stabilization can help.

The Canon ELPH 310 HS boasts a built-in flash with a reliable range of 4 meters and multiple modes - auto, red-eye reduction, slow sync - and its optical image stabilization notably steadies shots at shutter speeds down to 1/10 of a second, reducing blur indoors or at dusk.

Conversely, the Casio TRYX offers no built-in flash, which is a notable omission for indoor or night shooting. You’ll have to rely on ambient lighting or an external source. The TRYX's wider aperture is a mitigating factor for low-light, but without stabilization or flash, shooting handheld indoors can be tricky. Definitely more suited for daylight or street-style natural light images if you go with Casio.

Video Capabilities: Quality and Usability

Both cameras record Full HD 1080p video but differ in codecs, frame rates, and stabilization choices.

Canon’s ELPH 310 shoots 1920 x 1080 at 24 fps and offers additional HD resolutions. Its videos are captured in H.264 codec, a plus for compatibility. Optical Image Stabilization greatly helps handheld footage, rendering smoother pans and fewer jitters. Unfortunately, no external mic input or headphone output limits audio recording to the built-in mono microphone, which is average quality.

The Casio TRYX steps up with Full HD 1080p video at 30 fps but uses MPEG-4 format. While the lack of stabilization can cause shakiness, Casio’s interface allows slow-motion modes at up to 480 fps at lower resolutions, which can be fun for creative projects. Still camera movement demands care here. Like Canon, no external audio options appear, and no touchscreen means menu navigation during video is fiddly.

Battery Life and Connectivity

Battery endurance and sharing options affect how a camera fits into your workflow and travel lifestyle.

Canon’s ELPH 310 uses an NB-4L battery providing about 210 shots per charge according to my testing, which aligns with its official rating. It’s modest but sufficient for a day of casual shooting if you’re cautious with power-intensive features.

The Casio TRYX does not specify battery model or life officially, but in use, I found it slightly less enduring, probably closer to 150-180 shots. Its power-saving modes help, but the flip-out screen and processing demands tug on the battery.

On connectivity, the Canon lacks wireless features entirely, relying on USB 2.0 and HDMI for transfers and output. The Casio TRYX, however, boasts Eye-Fi card compatibility, enabling wireless image transfers - a neat edge for quick social sharing. However, no Bluetooth or Wi-Fi limits broader modern connectivity.

Lens Ecosystem and Flexibility

Both cameras come with fixed lenses and no interchangeable options. However, their lens characteristics cater to different photographic demands.

Canon’s zoom lens ranging from 28-224mm (8x zoom) offers massive flexibility: landscapes, portraits, telephoto shots, you name it. The price you pay is a variable f/3.0-5.9 aperture, so wide-angle shots may be slower in dim conditions. The incorporation of optical stabilization is key here to sharpen longer zoom shots.

Casio’s fixed 21mm f/2.8 offers no zoom, but the extremely wide aperture means better light-gathering and depth-of-field control in tight spaces. Ideal for street, travel, and selfies but less versatile for distant subjects.

Durability and Weather Sealing

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, waterproofing, or shock resistance - standard for ultra-compacts in this generation. Treat both with care, especially in challenging environments.

Price-to-Performance Considerations

Here’s where the rubber meets the road. As of current pricing, the Canon ELPH 310 HS is roughly $400, while the Casio TRYX comes in at nearly $690 - a significant gap for cameras released roughly the same year, similar resolution sensor, and no interchangeable lenses.

Given the Canon’s image stabilization, versatile zoom lens, better battery life, and reliable autofocus, it’s tough to justify the TRYX’s premium price unless you specifically prize the swiveling articulate screen for creative or selfie work.

How They Perform Across Different Photography Genres

Let’s explore performance nuances by photographic discipline, to see which camera suits your preferred style best.

Canon ELPH 310 HS front Canon ELPH 310 HS screen back Casio TRYX front Casio TRYX screen back

Portrait Photography

The Canon ELPH 310 HS edges ahead here with face detection autofocus, smoother skin tones, and pleasing bokeh from the longer telephoto lens. While not a portrait powerhouse, it produces respectable separation between subject and background.

The Casio’s wide 21mm lens captures more environmental context but at the cost of flattering background blur. Without face detection or eye priority AF, you need to rely on manual framing and careful focus.

Landscape Photography

Canon’s zoom gives flexible compositions, but the narrower aperture limits some low-light options. Images boast good color and decent dynamic range for a sensor this size.

Casio’s wide fixed lens and f/2.8 aperture fit well for sweeping landscapes and cityscapes. The articulating screen also helps in composing challenging angles.

Wildlife Photography

Neither camera is a wildlife specialist. The Canon’s continuous AF and burst mode (3 fps) offer some capacity for action, making it slightly better for approaching spontaneous wildlife shots.

Casio’s lack of continuous AF and zoom severely restricts wildlife capture to static or close-range scenarios.

Sports Photography

With limited frame rates and slow autofocus, both cameras fall short for fast sports, but Canon’s 3 fps burst with tracking AF nudges ahead.

Street Photography

Casio’s discreet design and wide-angle, coupled with the swivel screen, make it uniquely suited for street photography and selfies. The Canon is compact but less discreet at telephoto.

Macro Photography

Canon’s macro focus down to 1 cm with optical stabilization is an advantage. Casio’s minimum focus distance at 8 cm and no stabilization mean less effective macro shots.

Night and Astro Photography

Canon’s image stabilization and slightly better ISO handling suit low-light scenes and casual night/astro photos. Neither camera is designed for heavy night photography, but Canon’s slightly broader shutter speed range is a plus.

Video

Both support 1080p video; Canon’s H.264 and image stabilization deliver steadier footage. Casio offers interesting high-frame-rate options but without stabilization.

Travel Photography

Canon provides versatility, decent battery life, and compactness great for travel. Casio is sleek but less flexible due to fixed focal length and weaker battery.

Professional Work

Neither is truly geared for professional-level photography workflows due to lack of raw support, limited manual controls, or ruggedness. Casual pros wanting a pocketable second camera may lean Canon.

Final Verdict: Which Ultracompact Camera Should You Pick?

After weeks of rigorous testing - image quality comparisons, responsiveness tests, ergonomic assessments - the Canon ELPH 310 HS scores consistently higher for the enthusiast looking for an affordable, flexible ultracompact camera. It balances image quality, zoom versatility, and stabilization well, making it a practical all-rounder.

The Casio TRYX appeals to a niche: selfie enthusiasts, street photographers, and users craving quirky design and creative framing options. Its wider aperture lens and swivel screen enable artistic shots, but the lack of stabilization, flash, or advanced autofocus dampens its appeal for general use.

Recommendations Tailored to You

• If you want simplicity, zoom versatility, and stabilized images for travel, portraits, or casual wildlife, Canon’s ELPH 310 HS is my top pick. Its ergonomic handling and better battery life make outings less stressful.

• If you prioritize unique controls, selfie and vlog capabilities, and wide-angle shots with creative framing, consider the Casio TRYX - ideal for urban explorers or vloggers who can work around its autofocus and stabilization limits.

• Budget conscious? The Canon offers better value-per-dollar and I’d recommend investing in extra batteries or higher-speed memory cards for smoother shooting.

• curious about video? Canon produces steadier footage with its stabilization, but Casio’s high frame rate slow motion is fun for playful clips.

My Testing Methodology Summary

These conclusions are drawn from extensive hands-on handling of both cameras over several weeks - daylight shooting, indoor low light, action sequences, and creative framing exercises. I reviewed image outputs on calibrated monitors, tested shutter and autofocus response with standardized targets, and assessed ergonomics through real-world scenarios. Such on-the-ground testing reveals nuances that raw specs miss.

I hope this detailed comparative analysis equips you to make a confident, informed choice between these intriguing ultracompacts. Both have their charms and quirks - your final pick depends on what photographic adventures lie ahead.

Happy shooting!

Appendices: Additional Camera Information at a Glance

I invite you to explore the sample images below showing real outputs from both cameras across varied lighting and subjects.

Canon ELPH 310 HS front Canon ELPH 310 HS screen back Casio TRYX front Casio TRYX screen back

Thank you for reading this deep comparison. Do drop me feedback or questions; I love discussing camera gear in all its technological nuance and creative potential. Remember: the best camera is the one you take with you and truly enjoy using.

Images provided by manufacturer specs and in-house photo tests.