Canon PowerShot ELPH 170 IS vs ELPH 340 HS: A Hands-On Ultracompact Showdown

When it comes to pocket-sized cameras, Canon’s PowerShot ELPH series has carved a reputation for being reliable, easy-to-use, and bang-for-your-buck compact shooters. Today, I'll be digging into two popular models from the mid-2010s: the Canon PowerShot ELPH 170 IS and the ELPH 340 HS. I’ve tested both extensively in everyday shooting scenarios, and between their specs and real-world performance, there’s a surprising amount to unpack, especially for folks shopping on a budget but who still want solid image quality and user-friendly features.

Let’s examine these two champions of the ultra-compact category to see which camera is the smarter buy for your photography style - whether you’re a casual snapper, travel aficionado, or budding content creator.

Size, Handling, and Ergonomics: Tiny Cameras, Big Differences

At first glance, both the ELPH 170 IS and ELPH 340 HS look like typical Canon pocket cameras - small, lightweight, and designed for grabbing quick shots without fuss. But spending a day in my hands with both revealed subtle differences you’d only appreciate if, like me, you prefer a distinct feel when shooting.

The ELPH 170 IS weighs a featherlight 141 grams with a physical dimension of 100 x 58 x 23 mm. Its grip is minimal, which makes it super pocketable - great for slipping into a jacket or jeans pocket when you don’t want to carry bags. However, that slim profile also means the controls are tightly packed, and for someone with larger hands or bulky gloves, it could feel a bit fiddly.

The ELPH 340 HS adds a marginal 6 grams and trims the thickness by a millimeter, but it packs a slightly better-rounded grip and marginally improved button spacing. It’s still tiny but provides a more confident hold, especially if you plan to shoot longer than a few minutes.

Both cameras lack pronounced clubs for thumbs or front grips, so they’re definitely designed for casual, grab-and-go usage rather than extended shooting sessions.

A Closer Look from the Top: Controls and Layout

When working with ultra-compacts, I always appreciate responsive, intuitive controls - after all, you want to keep your eyes on the scene, not hunting through menus.

The ELPH 170 IS opts for a straightforward, minimalistic approach - you get the power button, shutter release, and a zoom rocker on top. The mode dial or dedicated function buttons are absent, making the camera very user-friendly for beginners but limiting for enthusiasts who like faster control over settings.

Conversely, the ELPH 340 HS presents a similar setup but includes manual focus capability (a rare feature in this category), which adds a welcome layer of control for macro or creative shooters. While neither camera supports manual aperture or shutter priority modes, the 340 HS’s inclusion of manual focus can be a game-changer for precision where autofocus struggles.

From a usability perspective, I found the 340 HS slightly more versatile for creative shooting without overwhelming users new to photography.

Under the Hood: Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Now, the heart of any camera is its sensor - after all, that’s what captures the image. It’s here the two diverge notably.

The ELPH 170 IS uses a 1/2.3” CCD sensor delivering a 20-megapixel resolution, while the ELPH 340 HS employs a 1/2.3” CMOS sensor at 16 megapixels. At face value, more megapixels sound better, but in compact cameras, the sensor type and pixel size matter more for image quality than sheer numbers.

Here’s the scoop from my lab tests and field shooting:

• Dynamic Range: The 340 HS’s CMOS sensor outperforms the 170 IS’s CCD, rendering better details in shadows and highlights, making it more forgiving in contrasty environments like sunny landscapes or indoors with bright windows.

• Noise Performance: Thanks to its CMOS design and newer DIGIC 4+ processor, the 340 HS can handle ISO up to 3200, whereas the 170 IS maxes out at ISO 1600 and shows higher noise levels above ISO 400. This makes the 340 HS better suited to low-light environments.

• Color Fidelity: Both cameras replicate Canon's signature color palette well, especially skin tones. However, the 340 HS benefits from white balance bracketing, allowing more nuance in tricky lighting.

• Resolution vs. Practical Use: Despite the 170 IS having more pixels, I found little difference in detail resolving power in real-world shootouts - higher pixel counts can sometimes be a marketing stat rather than a photographic boon in small sensors.

For detailed pixel-peeping, the 340 HS is the wiser choice for better usable image quality, especially if you often find yourself shooting indoors or at dusk.

On the Back: Screen Quality and User Interface

The rear LCD is your window for composing and reviewing shots, so usability here directly affects your shooting confidence.

The ELPH 170 IS comes with a modest 2.7-inch screen with just 230k dots - basic, serviceable, and fine outdoors on bright days if you’re squinting. However, its fixed position limits shooting angles, and color reproduction is average.

Meanwhile, the 340 HS sports a larger 3.0-inch display with more than twice the resolution (461k dots). The difference is immediately noticeable: images appear crisper, colors are more vivid, and reviewing photos is a happier experience. The screen technology is TFT LCD on the 340 HS, which renders better contrast and viewing angles than the generic screen on the 170 IS.

Neither offers touchscreens, which is fine for their market segment, but the superior screen on the 340 HS adds to a feeling of more modern usability.

Autofocus, Burst Shooting and Usability in the Field

For point-and-shooters, autofocus snappiness and shooting speed can be a dealbreaker, especially for families or street shooters capturing fleeting moments.

I ran both cameras through real-world practical tests capturing moving subjects (kids running, dogs chasing balls). The 170 IS struggles with autofocus speed - it hunts quite a bit and can be slow to lock focus (classic CCD lag). Meanwhile, the 340 HS is more responsive and offers faster continuous shooting at 4 fps, allowing a higher chance of nailing that perfect split-second action shot.

However, the 340 HS lacks continuous AF tracking during burst, so moving subjects still pose challenges.

Manual focus on the 340 HS, despite being basic, is handy for macro work where autofocus wobbles.

In this regard, the 340 HS feels like the more reliable everyday camera for fast-paced shooting, while the 170 IS is better suited for static subjects and casual point-and-shoot moments.

Zoom, Macro, and Image Stabilization: Versatility in Focus

Both cameras feature identical 12x optical zoom lenses with focal lengths ranging from 25 to 300mm (35mm equivalent), and maximum apertures of f/3.6-7.0. This gives them super versatile framing options - wide-angle for landscapes (or cramped interiors) and moderate telephoto for portraits.

Both also offer macro focusing down to 1cm, which is excellent for flower and close-up shots, though you really need steady hands for sharp results at these distances.

Optical Image Stabilization (OIS) is included in both models, a crucial feature for handholding long zoom shots without blur. Based on in-the-field handheld testing, both cameras stabilize similarly well in good light.

So for zoom and macro users, neither has a big advantage here. Both deliver solid versatility suitable for everything from holiday snaps to casual nature close-ups.

Video Walkthrough: Features and Practicality

In recent years, even budget compacts need to offer video to keep up with social media demands. Here, the 340 HS pulls ahead.

While neither camera offers advanced video features like microphone inputs or 4K capture, the 340 HS’s Full HD 30p video and HDMI output give more utility for casual videographers - especially if you want to review footage on a big screen.

The 170 IS lags with only 720p video capture at 25 fps - perfectly serviceable for family vids but noticeably outdated by today’s standards.

If video capture matters to you, the 340 HS is the hands-down winner here.

Connectivity and Workflow Integration

In the age of instant sharing, connectivity is no small matter. The ELPH 170 IS has no wireless features whatsoever - no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC. This means you have to physically remove the SD card or connect via USB cable (USB 2.0) for offloading images.

The ELPH 340 HS, on the other hand, introduces built-in wireless and NFC capabilities, making pairing with smartphones or tablets a breeze. This significantly improves the workflow for casual shooters wanting to upload pics to social media on the fly or back up photos without detangling cords.

For the tweakers and serious hobbyists who still value SD card archiving, both cameras share a single card slot compatible with SD/SDHC/SDXC cards.

Wireless connectivity in the 340 HS reinforces its role as the more modern, user-friendly camera suitable for the fast-paced digital world.

Battery Life and Storage: How Long Can You Shoot?

Both cameras run on Canon’s NB-11L battery packs, rated around 190-200 shots per charge by CIPA standards. In real-world experience, you can squeeze out about 150-180 shots depending on usage intensity, display time, and whether you rely heavily on zooming and flash.

Neither camera accepts AA batteries or leverages USB charging - you must rely on dedicated chargers, which could be a downside if you travel light.

Storage-wise, both accept standard SD cards, so no surprises here.

If extended shooting is critical, you’ll want to carry a spare battery regardless of your choice.

Physical Design and Build: Durability and Weather Resistance

Neither the ELPH 170 IS nor the 340 HS offers weather sealing or ruggedization. These are classic pocket cameras built for casual everyday use, not for extremes like rain-soaked landscapes or dusty adventures.

That said, their solid plastic shells and compact construction survive typical handling well, but neither is intended for abuse.

Real-World Shooting Across Genres and Use Cases

To give you a practical sense of which camera suits which style, here’s a genre-by-genre quick guide based on my testing:

Portrait Photography

• ELPH 340 HS: Slight edge due to better sensor, noise control, face detection, and manual focus for precise framing.
• ELPH 170 IS: Decent for casual portraits in good light; limited low-light and no manual focus.

Landscape Photography

• ELPH 340 HS: Better dynamic range and color depth, plus bigger LCD for composition.
• ELPH 170 IS: Functional but prone to blown highlights and lower ISO limit.

Wildlife Photography

• Neither is ideal for serious wildlife due to autofocus speed limits and modest telephoto reach.
• 340 HS’s faster burst helps a bit for bird-in-flight shots.

Sports Photography

• Both are too slow for pro sports. 340 HS is better for casual action shots.

Street Photography

• ELPH 170 IS is slightly more pocketable and stealthy due to lower screen resolution and simpler design.
• 340 HS’s larger screen aids in manual focus but might draw slightly more attention.

Macro Photography

• 340 HS’s manual focus useful here; both offer close focusing down to 1cm.

Night and Astro Photography

• Neither excels; 340 HS handles noise better but both are limited by small sensor size and no RAW.

Video Capabilities

• Clear win for 340 HS’s Full HD and wireless transfer ease.

Travel Photography

• 170 IS edges out on battery life and pocketability; 340 HS wins for image quality and connectivity.

Professional Work

• Neither supports RAW or advanced manual modes; best as convenient second cameras or casual shooters.

Sample Image Comparison: Real Shots from Both Cameras

To illustrate, here’s a side-by-side gallery of sample images I captured in identical conditions with each model.

Canon 170 IS front Canon ELPH 340 HS front Canon ELPH 340 HS screen back

From vibrant colors in daylight to low-light interior shots, the ELPH 340 HS’s images generally display higher clarity and reduced noise. The 170 IS manages bright images but loses detail in shadows and struggles with fine detail.

Overall Performance Scores

To sum up the testing metrics including image quality, autofocus, video, and usability, here’s the scoring matrix I devised based on hands-on evaluation and industry standards:

These scores reflect the 340 HS’s more balanced performance across almost all categories, reflecting its status as a more versatile compact.

Performance by Photography Type

Breaking down by genre, here’s a quick reference chart highlighting which camera outperforms the other per photography style:

This reveals the ELPH 340 HS as clearly stronger for portraits, video, low light, and travel, while the 170 IS has only a slight edge in portability and simplicity.

Price-to-Performance: Which Fits Your Budget?

• The Canon PowerShot ELPH 170 IS often goes for around $149 new or less used - a true budget-friendly choice for point-and-shoot simplicity.
• The ELPH 340 HS sits higher at approximately $199 new, reflecting its added features.

For cheapskates or those who want purely simple snapshots, the 170 IS holds value. For anyone willing to spend an extra $50-60 for better image quality, video, and usability features, the 340 HS is worth the investment.

My Final Verdict: Who Should Buy Which?

If you are drawn to ultra-portable cameras for casual family snapshots or travel, don’t want to fiddle with settings, and just need something that works reliably and is easy on the wallet - the Canon PowerShot ELPH 170 IS is a solid, no-frills pick.

But if you want sharper images, more flexible shooting options (manual focus!), better video, and wireless connectivity for faster sharing, plus a slightly better grip and screen, the ELPH 340 HS is the better all-rounder.

Neither camera targets professionals or advanced hobbyists due to their fixed lenses, small sensors, and limited manual controls. However, the 340 HS pushes the envelope of what’s possible in an ultracompact point-and-shoot and will satisfy most casual to enthusiast users who want good photos with minimal fuss.

Summary: Strengths and Weaknesses at a Glance

If you’re leaning toward an ultracompact companion camera, both Canon PowerShots are trustworthy choices. But after personally testing and comparing, my recommendation is clear: for a small price premium, the better sensor, video, and wireless features of the ELPH 340 HS deliver a better experience for most users.

This comparison is a testament to how even within very similar-looking cameras, small technological differences translate to meaningful improvements in your daily shooting - something I always stress when advising photographers. Choose wisely, and happy shooting!