Canon ELPH 330 HS vs Nikon Coolpix S9100: A Hands-On Comparison for Enthusiasts and Professionals

Choosing the right compact camera can be perplexing with so many models offering overlapping specs yet dramatically different user experiences. Today, I'll dive deep into the Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS and Nikon Coolpix S9100 - both small-sensor compacts from the early 2010s that still catch interest for portability and zoom versatility. With years of extensive camera testing under my belt, I’ll unpack their real-world performance, key strengths and compromises, and ultimately, who should consider which.

Size and Ergonomics: Pocketable Versus Grip-Friendly

At first glance, these two compacts share a pocketable ethos, but handling reveals some important nuances. The Canon ELPH 330 HS is notably lighter and thinner at 144g and 97x56x23mm, while Nikon’s S9100 weighs 214g and measures a chunkier 105x62x35mm. The Canon’s slim, sleek façade fits almost invisibly into a jacket pocket, while the Nikon demands a small pouch or bag due to its thicker body.

This disparity reflects different design priorities. The ELPH favors stealth and convenience, ideal for travel or street use where minimal bulk is desired. Conversely, the S9100’s larger size affords slightly better grip comfort and button placement - important if you tend to shoot handheld for extended periods.

Looking at the top plate, Nikon’s layout feels a touch more intuitive, with a zoom rocker centered around the shutter button and dedicated mode dial for quick access. Canon’s controls are minimalist, lacking manual exposure modes or shutter priority - more on that later - but everything remains accessible with minimal learning curve. I found myself missing tactile dials on the Canon when adjusting settings on-the-go.

Sensor and Image Quality: A Level Playing Field?

Both cameras utilize 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensors - Canon’s paired with the DIGIC 5 processor and Nikon’s with Expeed C2. They sport a 12MP resolution, capturing 4000x3000 pixel images. The sensor area of 28.07mm² is tiny by today’s standards but was typical for enthusiast compacts of their era.

Despite the identical sensor size, their maximum ISO sensitivity varies: Canon maxes at ISO 6400 while Nikon tops out at ISO 3200. But in practice, neither camera is a low-light powerhouse. Noise starts creeping in past ISO 400, and dynamic range is limited by the sensor’s physical constraints. The Canon’s DIGIC 5 processor handles noise reduction somewhat aggressively, leading to less grain but at a cost of slightly softer detail when shooting in dim conditions.

Nikon’s sensor-shift stabilization aids sharpness but doesn't fully compensate for high-ISO noise limitations. Neither supports RAW capture, so your post-processing latitude is limited - something serious photographers should consider.

Lens and Zoom Versatility: Canon’s 10x or Nikon’s 18x Zoom?

The lenses define each camera’s character. Canon equips the ELPH 330 HS with a 24-240mm equivalent (10x zoom) ranging from f/3.0 to f/6.9, while Nikon’s S9100 boasts a massive 25-450mm (18x zoom) at f/3.5-5.9.

This makes Nikon the obvious choice if you want reach - wildlife or sports shooters working at a distance will appreciate the 450mm telephoto end. However, this comes with a trade-off in speed and size. Longer zoom and narrower apertures mean slower lenses and bigger, heavier bodies.

Close focusing is surprising on Canon’s ELPH with a 1cm macro range versus Nikon’s 4cm minimum focus. For macro enthusiasts, that extra reach-in can capture more delicate details. Image stabilization on both is optical or sensor-shift types, effective enough to reduce hand shake blur up to about 2-3 stops.

Handling and User Interface: Minimalist Versus Functional

Both cameras lack electronic viewfinders, relying on their rear LCDs: Canon’s 3” PureColor II G screen at 461k dots versus Nikon’s sharper 3” TFT LCD at 921k dots.

Nikon’s LCD is noticeably clearer, making it easier to check focus and framing outdoors. Neither camera features touchscreen control or eye-level finders - though given their age, that’s expected.

Canon limits you to fully automatic exposure with exposure compensation absent. In contrast, Nikon’s manual focus option adds flexibility for creative control, an advantage for users who like dialing in exact focus. Both have face detection autofocus, but I found Nikon’s AF slightly faster and more reliable in tracking moving subjects.

Autofocus and Burst Shooting: Tracking the Action

Autofocus systems are contrast-detection only, with nine focus points each. But there are subtle differences: Canon offers continuous autofocus and face tracking, while Nikon lacks continuous AF but supports autofocus tracking on faces.

Continuous AF enables the ELPH to maintain focus on moving subjects, albeit modestly, which is essential for casual sports or wildlife shots. However, Canon’s continuous shoot rate is a slow 2 fps, restricting your ability to capture peak action moments.

Here Nikon shines, with a burst rate of 10 fps - a delightful surprise in a compact. Though autofocus isn’t continuous during bursts, that speed is a significant advantage for sports or wildlife enthusiasts needing more frames per second.

Performance Across Photography Genres

Now, how do these differences translate into real shooting disciplines? Let’s break the cameras down by photographic use case.

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones and Background Blur

Shooting portraits with small sensor compacts is always a challenge due to limited depth of field and modest lens speed. Canon’s wider f/3.0 aperture at 24mm offers slightly better bokeh potential at the wide end than Nikon’s f/3.5.

Both cameras include face detection AF, which helps keep skin and eyes reasonably sharp in well-lit environments. But manual focus on the Nikon allows precise control over focus points - handy when isolating subjects.

Neither camera produces creamy background blur typical of larger sensors, so expect more environmental context around your subject. Color rendition is flattering on both: Canon races slightly ahead for pleasing, warm skin tones, perhaps thanks to Canon’s color science.

Landscape Photography: Resolution and Dynamic Range

From expansive vistas to intricate natural textures, landscape shooters demand high resolution and dynamic range. Both cameras deliver 12MP files, but the lack of RAW means limited editing freedom in shadows and highlights.

Neither camera has weather sealing, so careful protection in harsh conditions is essential. The Canon’s slightly wider 24mm wide-angle is preferable over Nikon’s 25mm, offering a bit more framing flexibility.

Battery life favors the Nikon at 270 shots versus Canon’s 220, which can matter on longer outdoor shoots. Keep spare batteries handy for either model.

Wildlife Photography: Telephoto Reach and Tracking

If extending your reach to shy wildlife is your goal, Nikon’s 18x zoom hits the mark. Canon’s 10x zoom simply can’t compete at 450mm equivalent focal length.

However, Nikon’s single AF mode and absent continuous autofocus could frustrate fast animal movement tracking. Canon’s slower burst rate is also a limiting factor.

In practice, you’ll get better distant framing with Nikon but perhaps sharper focus lock and face tracking with Canon for stationary animals. Both cameras fall short of DSLR or mirrorless enthusiast-grade systems for serious wildlife work.

Sports Photography: Action and Low Light Capabilities

Sports demands fast autofocus and high burst rates. Nikon’s superior 10 fps shooting rate again pulls ahead here for capturing peak moments. Though lack of continuous AF during bursts is a caveat, it still offers more options than Canon’s sluggish 2 fps.

Low light shooting is a challenge for both, given sensor size and lens speeds. Canon’s higher max ISO 6400 is mostly theoretical as usable image quality deteriorates by ISO 800-1600. Nikon caps at ISO 3200 but tends to have slightly cleaner images in my testing.

Street Photography: Discreteness and Portability

Here, the Canon’s slim, light design makes it a natural fit. It’s easy to slip into a jacket pocket and shoot without drawing attention. Nikon’s bulkier form factor is less discreet but offers superior zoom for capturing candid moments from a distance.

Low light shooting on the street again leans slightly toward Nikon for cleaner images, but neither camera excels in dark environments without flash. The Canon’s flash does well for occasional fills without washing out skin tones.

Macro Photography: Magnification and Focusing Precision

Canon’s 1cm macro focus beats Nikon’s 4cm, letting you get ultra-close to flowers, insects, or textures. Both lack focus stacking or bracketing features, so creative focus methods are manual.

Stabilization in both helps handheld macro shots, but slower shutter speeds require steady hands or tripods for best detail. Neither camera offers specialized macro modes, but careful framing and lighting go a long way.

Night and Astro Photography: High ISO and Exposure Control

Shooting stars and night landscapes is difficult on compacts with fixed lenses and small sensors. While Canon’s ISO 6400 max sounds promising, noise is prohibitive beyond ISO 400.

Lack of manual exposure modes inhibits long-exposure photography. Neither camera supports bulb mode or silent shutters for astro use.

You can experiment with timed self-timer on Canon (custom 2 or 10 seconds) or Nikon’s 2 or 10 seconds, but overall, these cameras are not designed for serious night or astro photography.

Video Capabilities: Specs and Usability

Both cameras shoot Full HD 1080p, but Canon’s max frame rate is 24fps whereas Nikon records at 30fps - more pleasing for action video.

Neither model has microphone or headphone jacks, limiting audio quality control. Image stabilization reduces handheld shake in video well enough for casual use.

Canon impresses with slow-motion at 120fps (640x480) and 240fps (320x240), fun for creative clips, which Nikon lacks.

Travel Photography: Versatility and Battery Life

I prefer the Canon ELPH 330 HS for ultra-light travel kits thanks to its minimal size and decent battery life. Nikon offers longer battery life and vastly more zoom reach but at double the weight and size.

Connectivity differs: Canon has built-in wireless for quick phone transfer, a handy feature for sharing travel shots without unloading a laptop. Nikon has no wireless options, an inconvenience by today’s standards.

Professional Work: File Formats and Workflow Integration

Neither camera outputs RAW files, a major shortcoming for professional workflows demanding extensive post-processing. Their limited dynamic range and sensor size restrict image quality compared to APS-C or full-frame cameras.

Tethering and advanced file management are unsupported, so these cameras serve more as casual backup or secondary cameras rather than primary professional tools.

Technical Breakdown: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Price Considerations

Canon ELPH 330 HS front Canon ELPH 330 HS screen back Nikon S9100 front Nikon S9100 screen back

In practice, Canon offers better value for travelers and casual shooters prioritizing portability, Wi-Fi sharing, and reliable autofocus. Nikon is geared toward enthusiasts craving extended reach, faster burst shooting, and better manual focus control.

Photography Type Performance Summary

• Portrait: Canon edges slightly with skin tones and bokeh at wide aperture.
• Landscape: Tie, though Nikon’s longer battery life helps.
• Wildlife: Nikon wins on zoom reach but loses AF flexibility.
• Sports: Nikon dominates burst speeds.
• Street: Canon preferred for compactness.
• Macro: Canon’s closer focus distance preferred.
• Astro: Neither suitable.
• Video: Nikon for standard 1080p at 30fps; Canon for slow motion clips.
• Travel: Canon for portability and wireless.
• Professional: Neither ideal for demanding workflows.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

From my extensive hands-on testing with both cameras, I’d recommend the Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS if your priorities are:

• Ultra-portable camera for travel and street photography
• Quick sharing via built-in Wi-Fi
• Reliable autofocus with continuous mode for casual action
• Occasional macro photography with excellent close focus
• A budget-friendly option around $180

On the other hand, consider the Nikon Coolpix S9100 if you want:

• Impressive 18x zoom for wildlife or distant subjects
• High-speed 10fps burst shooting for action sequences
• Manual focus control for creative or precise focusing
• Brighter, clearer rear screen for composing shots outdoors
• A versatile compact with slightly better battery life, even at a heftier $330 price point

Dear Canon, a small plea: modernize this line with RAW support and more manual controls to keep the ELPH relevant for advanced shooters. Nikon fans will appreciate the zoom and speed but might miss some usability polish.

When choosing, ask yourself: Do you favor stealth and connectivity, or optical reach and burst capabilities? Both cameras excel in different niches yet share fundamental limitations from their sensor size and age.

The Canon ELPH 330 HS and Nikon Coolpix S9100 reflect a different era of compact cameras. Despite the rise of smartphones and mirrorless systems, these models still offer unique options for specific shooters - proving that even “small sensor compacts” have a story to tell.

I hope this detailed comparison, backed by my years testing and shooting with similar gear, guides you toward the best fit for your photography adventures.

Happy shooting!