Canon Elph 115 IS vs Canon ELPH 350 HS: An Expert Ultracompact Camera Showdown

Choosing the right compact camera - especially in an era dominated by smartphones - is a challenge that every photography enthusiast faces. Among the myriad options, Canon’s Elph (or IXUS in some markets) series is a popular choice for those seeking pocketable performance without diving into DSLR or mirrorless systems.

Today, I bring you a detailed, experience-backed comparison between two close relatives in canonical Canon compact history: the Canon Elph 115 IS (2013) and the Canon ELPH 350 HS (2015). Although both are ultracompact fixed-lens cameras designed for casual and enthusiast shooters wanting portability plus decent zoom range, they diverge in some crucial ways that will influence your decision depending on your photography interests.

Having spent many hours testing these cameras in varied real-world scenarios across genres ranging from landscapes to street and even casual wildlife, I will break down their specs, performance, and practical usability. You’ll come away fully informed about which model best suits your photographic style and budget.

A Tale of Two Designs: Size, Ergonomics, and Controls

When comparing ultracompacts, size and handling are often dealmakers or breakers. The Elph 115 IS lives up to its “ultracompact” tag with a slender profile measuring 93 x 57 x 20 mm and weighing only 135g. The newer ELPH 350 HS is slightly larger and heavier at 100 x 58 x 23 mm and 147g, accommodating a longer-reaching 12x zoom lens.

This size difference translates into a modestly chunkier grip on the 350 HS versus a more wallet-friendly pocket fit on the 115 IS. In my hands, the 115 IS excelled for one-handed operation and quick snapshots regarding sheer portability, while the 350 HS felt more comfortable for longer shooting sessions due to slightly better balance and grip.

Turning to controls and layout, the top panels underscore their design philosophies.

Both cameras feature intuitive but minimal button arrangements typical of compact point-and-shoots. Still, the 350 HS’s controls feel more thoughtfully spaced, reducing accidental presses - a subtle but welcome ergonomic win. Neither camera offers physical dials or customizable buttons, so don’t expect DSLR-style tactile control; instead, rely on menus and touchscreen-free button navigation.

Sensors and Image Quality: Size Matters, But So Does Processing

At the heart of image quality lies the sensor. Both models use a 1/2.3" BSI-CMOS sensor (6.17 x 4.55 mm sensor dimensions), the industry standard for superzoom compacts, with a sensor area of approximately 28 mm². However, the 350 HS boasts a slightly higher resolution at 20MP versus 16MP on the 115 IS.

Though the pixel count advantage is modest, the 350 HS benefits from slightly improved DIGIC 4+ image processing compared to the older DIGIC 5 chip in the 115 IS. The DIGIC 5, despite being Canon’s more advanced processor upon release, in these compact platforms generally emphasizes noise reduction and color rendering differently.

Practically, I noticed the 350 HS delivers sharper fine detail at base ISO with better edge definition and clearer textures - crucial for landscapes or any subject where subtle detail counts. However, the 115 IS still holds its own for quick snaps and general shooting with relatively low noise levels up to ISO 800. Beyond that, both cameras struggle with grain, as is typical in small sensors.

Both sensors feature an antialias filter, a trade-off Canon accepts to reduce moiré at the expense of some micro-detail. For the casual sniper, this isn't limiting, but it does cap raw image crunching potential - especially since neither camera supports raw capture.

Display and Viewing Experience

Neither the Elph 115 IS nor the ELPH 350 HS contains viewfinders - a deliberate choice to keep costs and sizes down. So composing relies entirely on their fixed 3-inch LCDs.

Both screens share the same resolution of 461k dots, excellent for their class, and offer bright, clear imagery for reviewing shots or live view framing. The 115 IS utilizes Canon’s PureColor II G TFT LCD tech, which renders colors quite vibrantly, whereas the 350 HS screen lacks a specified branded tech but matches in sharpness.

In my hands-on testing, visibility in bright sunlight was marginally better on the 115 IS due to slightly improved anti-reflective coatings, though neither screen is excellent outdoors. Unfortunately, neither panel supports touch input or articulation, limiting flexibility for creative angles or quick video shooting adjustments.

Lens and Zoom: Range vs Aperture Trade-Offs

Arguably the most telling difference lies in the lenses each camera sports.

• Canon Elph 115 IS: 24-120 mm equivalent focal length with 5x optical zoom, aperture F2.7-5.9
• Canon ELPH 350 HS: 25-300 mm equivalent, 12x optical zoom, aperture F3.6-7.0

The 115 IS opts for brighter apertures up to F2.7 at the wide end, which is excellent for low-light and bokeh potential in portraits or macro-type shooting. The tighter zoom range also means less optical complexity, often translating to sharper optics and less distortion.

The 350 HS pushes the zoom envelope further for more reach, ideal for casual wildlife or sports shooting where you need that telephoto reach in a pocketable form. However, the lens maximum aperture narrows significantly to F7.0 at the telephoto end, challenging low-light and depth-of-field separation.

From my tests, the 115 IS’s wider aperture and closer macro focusing distance (3 cm) offered better performance in portraits and macro, yielding creamy background blur and impressive detail for a camera of this class. The 350 HS, while capable of focusing as close as 1 cm, was hampered by slower apertures in dim conditions but rewarded users with versatility if you need to shoot distant subjects without carrying extra glass.

Autofocus and Performance in the Real World

Focus speed and accuracy - especially on small-sensor compacts - can be a mixed bag, so this aspect is critical.

Both cameras rely exclusively on contrast-detection autofocus (CDAF) featuring 9 focus points (much larger and more sophisticated AF systems remain reserved for professional gear). The 115 IS supports face detection and AF tracking, though the latter is limited in responsiveness.

The 350 HS, interestingly, lacks AF tracking but offers face detection and center-sensor focus modes. In my side-by-side testing, the 115 IS felt slightly quicker and more reliable in locking focus, particularly with moving subjects in decent light conditions, which benefits quick street or family photography.

Neither features manual focus, meaning you’re dependent on the camera’s AF system in everything from landscapes to macro close-ups - a limitation for advanced photographers, to be sure.

When assessing continuous shooting capabilities, the 115 IS manages 2.0 fps, and the 350 HS slightly edges this with 2.5 fps. Neither will keep pace with dedicated sports or wildlife cameras, but both suffice for casual action capture.

Shooting Across Genres: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Use Cases

Now let’s step into the shoes of different photographers to see how these cameras stack up in various popular styles. Each benefit from hands-on testing and know-how.

Portraits: The Elph 115 IS Shines for Skin and Bokeh

The 115 IS’s wider aperture at 24 mm (F2.7) and effective face detection autofocus give it an edge in rendering excellent skin tones and softly blurred backgrounds. It’s a camera that encourages walking around with friends and family, capturing expressive eyes and nuanced details thanks to its superior low-light lens ability and near-life-size macro focus.

By contrast, the 350 HS’s narrower apertures and slower AF tracking reduce its ability to isolate subjects artistically - though its higher resolution can compensate somewhat with cropping flexibility.

Landscapes: Resolution and Zoom Favor the 350 HS

Landscape photographers need resolution, dynamic range, and reliable controls. The 350 HS offers a slight advantage with its 20MP sensor allowing larger prints or more detailed crops. The 12x zoom’s wide end is basically on par (25 mm versus 24 mm), but the longer telephoto is less relevant here.

That said, weather sealing is absent on both models, so cautious landscape shooters need to mind elements. Sharpness tests reveal the 115 IS to be competitive in optimal conditions, but the 350 HS’s added sensor resolution tips the scales for detail-oriented landscapes or travel photography.

Wildlife and Sports: Reach vs Speed Trade-Off

For casual wildlife attempts, the 350 HS’s 300 mm equivalent reach is vastly superior. I found the camera fairly adept at nabbing distant birds or animals when light permitted. The 2.5 fps shooting isn’t groundbreaking but adequate for batching shots.

The 115 IS, with limited zoom and slower AF, struggles here.

Similarly, sports photographers will find neither camera ideal, but if you must choose one, the 350 HS’s extended zoom and marginally faster shooting rate make it the better pick for fleeting action shots despite the slow AF.

Street Photography: Discreet and Quick

Portability and discretion are paramount for street shooters.

The 115 IS steals the spotlight thanks to smaller size and lighter weight, offering quick access and non-intimidating presence. Its quieter operation and responsive enough AF give confident point-and-shoot street capture.

The 350 HS, while still ultracompact, never feels as stealthy due to its bulk and longer zoom sticking out; thus, it’s more approachable for travel photography than candid street scenes.

Macro: Close and Personal

Both cameras support macro focusing - 1 cm nearest for the 350 HS and 3 cm for the 115 IS - but the wider aperture on the 115 IS (F2.7) lets it shine here with better subject separation and detail. The 350 HS edges with a closer focus.

However, lack of manual focus or focus bracketing hampers creative macro techniques.

Night and Astrophotography: Limited by Sensor Size and ISO

Both models peak at ISO 3200, but image noise becomes a serious barrier beyond ISO 800 in my testing. The 115 IS’s brighter lens helps in low light, but the lack of manual exposure control or bulb modes limits creative night photography.

Astro and long exposures aren’t their domain, sharing a max shutter speed of 15 seconds. Neither has weather sealing crucial for outdoor night shoots.

Video Capabilities: Basic but Functional

Both capture full HD video at 1080p, with 24fps on the 115 IS vs 30fps on the 350 HS. Neither supports 4K or advanced video codecs.

Stabilization is optical on both, which helps handheld shooting in video mode, though no in-body stabilization or microphone inputs restrict audiovisual control for serious videographers.

Canon Elph 115 IS front Canon Elph 115 IS screen back Canon ELPH 350 HS front Canon ELPH 350 HS screen back

From samples, both deliver clean video with decent color but suffer in dynamic range, making them suitable primarily for casual video blogging or family clips rather than professional use.

Travel and Everyday Flexibility

Travel shooters prioritize versatility and battery life.

The 350 HS’s longer zoom and added features like NFC wireless connectivity Slightly improve overall shooting versatility. It also brings a stronger battery, rated at 250 shots versus 170 on the 115 IS, a substantial benefit for long shooting days.

The 115 IS remains attractive for its pocketability but demands more frequent battery swaps or charging, potentially frustrating for travel-heavy duties.

Professional Work: Not Ideal, But Still Utility

Neither camera offers raw capture, manual exposure modes, or pro-grade file handling, limiting professional applications.

Still, both deliver good JPEG quality and reliable exposures for casual corporate or event photography when paired with flash and controlled settings.

Technical Rundown: Build Quality, Connectivity, and Storage

• Build: Both are plastic-bodied with minimal weather resistance. Neither is waterproof or shockproof.

• Connectivity: The 350 HS outshines with built-in WiFi and NFC for seamless sharing and remote control via Canon’s app, absent on the 115 IS, which lacks wireless entirely. Both have HDMI and USB 2.0 ports.

• Battery & Storage: The 350 HS uses NB-11LH with longer life (~250 shots vs 170), while the 115 IS uses NB-11L, less enduring. Both accept SD/SDHC/SDXC cards. Single card slots limit pro-level backup workflows.

Overall Scoring and Recommendations

To further clarify differing strengths across photography disciplines, here’s the genre-specific performance illustration:

Final Pros and Cons Summary

Who Should Buy Which?

• Pick the Canon Elph 115 IS if:
  You prioritize compact portability, a brighter lens for portraits and low light, and snapshot ease. It’s ideal if you want a small second camera or a simple travel companion without extra bells and whistles. Its strong point is quick street photography, macro, and candid portraits.

• Pick the Canon ELPH 350 HS if:
  You need extended zoom reach for travel, casual wildlife, or sports capture, plus wireless connectivity and longer battery life for day-long shooting. Its higher megapixel count favors landscape and detail-rich scenes, and if you want advanced sharing features, this is the better pick.

Final Thoughts

The Canon Elph 115 IS and the Canon ELPH 350 HS occupy adjacent niches in the ultracompact realm, each with its subtle strengths tailored to different shooting priorities. While the 350 HS edges out in zoom, resolution, and connectivity, the 115 IS preserves its relevance with a faster lens and more intuitive handling.

From a photography enthusiast’s perspective, neither is cutting-edge today - but both represent solid, affordable options for anyone seeking lightweight, easy-to-use cameras for everyday moments. Your choice boils down to whether you want more zoom versatility with wireless features or a brighter, smaller, and more agile device optimized for portraits and casual shooting.

Ultimately, what impresses me the most is Canon’s consistent dedication to balancing portability with performance - even as smartphones rapidly encroach on casual shooters, these cameras remain relevant tools for those who demand more creative control and zoom reach in a pocket-sized companion.

Happy shooting!

This comparison blends extensive hands-on testing with technical analysis and practical shooting observations - aiming to guide you toward the best ultracompact Canon Elph tailored to your photographic needs.