Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950: Compact Cameras Compared in Depth

As someone who’s tested hundreds of compact cameras over the last decade and a half, I’m often asked: when your budget is tight but you need a pocketable travel companion, which camera truly delivers? Today, I’m diving headfirst into two budget-friendly contenders from the small sensor compact category: Canon’s PowerShot ELPH 330 HS (also known as the IXUS 255 HS in some markets) and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950. These models, while separated by a few years in release dates (Canon from 2013, Sony from 2009), still hold relevance for shooters looking for simple, straightforward point-and-shoots with modest specs. But how well do they stand up after all this time, particularly when you pit Canon’s newer DIGIC 5 processor and bigger zoom range against Sony’s CCD sensor and sensor-shift stabilization tech?

If you’re looking to understand how they perform across different photography styles - portraits, landscapes, macro, and even video - or evaluating their real-world usability and value today, you’ll find this detailed comparison based on hands-on experience and careful technical analysis especially helpful.

First Impression: Size, Build, and Handling

When you pull these cameras out of your bag for an extended walk or a quick snapshot session, size and ergonomics really matter. The Canon ELPH 330 HS is feather-light at just 144 grams, measuring 97 x 56 x 23 mm, while the Sony S950 is a smidge larger and heavier at 167 grams and 93 x 56 x 24 mm. The weight difference may not seem massive on paper but can affect comfortably holding the camera for long periods.

The Canon’s slim, sleek rounded corners and lightweight design make it especially pocketable, ideal for travel and street photography. However, the Sony’s marginally chunkier frame feels subtly more robust in hand, offering slightly better grip despite lacking dedicated textured rubberized surfaces.

If you prize sheer portability above all, I prefer the Canon here, but the Sony still feels solid enough not to be a nuisance.

Design and Control Layout: User Interface in Action

Both models are compact and extremely limited in dials and buttons consistent with their price and category.

Canon’s ELPH 330 HS sports a simple top plate with power, shutter, and zoom toggle, nothing flashy but adequately placed for quick operation. The menu system is straightforward, thanks to the DIGIC 5 processor powering a responsive interface.

Sony’s S950, on the other hand, has a more dated control layout, reflective of its 2009 heritage. The top buttons feel smaller, and the slower processor sometimes translates to a slight hesitation when toggling settings, which I noticed during rapid shooting tests.

Neither camera features a touchscreen or advanced customization, so if you want tactile, quick access to key settings, the Canon’s interface wins for fluidity.

The Heart of the Cameras: Sensor Size and Image Quality Potential

Both cameras sport a tiny 1/2.3-inch sensor measuring 6.17 x 4.55 mm, a common profile among budget compacts. However, the sensor technology differs meaningfully:

• Canon ELPH 330 HS uses a 12MP BSI CMOS sensor
• Sony S950 features a 10MP CCD sensor

From my testing and comparing sensor types over the years, back-illuminated CMOS sensors like Canon’s DIGIC 5 combination tend to deliver superior noise performance and better dynamic range compared to older CCD panels, particularly under low light. This advantage is noticeable in real-world shots, which I’ll show shortly.

With a slightly higher resolution, the Canon also edges out for fine detail capture, although neither model is designed for large prints or intensive cropping due to sensor limitations. The sensor area is identical, so neither gains from sensor size benefits, but Canon’s modern processing shines through here.

Viewing and Framing: Screen and Viewfinder

Neither model features an electronic viewfinder, which is common at this tier, meaning you compose images on the LCD screen alone.

The Canon’s 3-inch PureColor II G screen delivers 461k dots, offering a bright, crisp preview that’s pleasant for outdoor framing. The Sony’s 2.7-inch screen is smaller and less sharp at 230k dots, making image review and manual framing less precise.

For composition accuracy especially in bright sunlight, the Canon is notably easier to use - which matters when speed and convenience count.

Shooting Speed and Autofocus Performance

Autofocus system metrics reveal a significant difference in capability:

Canon’s inclusion of face detection autofocus, combined with a faster processor, speeds up lock-on, especially useful with moving subjects or portraits. Sony’s AF feels slower and less consistent in live tests. The Canon’s continuous AF and tracking also improve usability in slightly dynamic scenes - think kids running or pets.

For wildlife or sports shooters, neither compact delivers the frame rates or tracking sophistication of APS-C or full-frame models, but Canon’s system is noticeably superior within this class.

Lens and Zoom: Reach and Versatility

One of the biggest differences you’ll feel when shooting is the zoom range and lens speed:

Canon clearly dominates with a longer zoom range, from ultra-wide 24mm to substantial 240mm telephoto, allowing more compositional versatility for landscapes, portraits, and even some wildlife if you’re patient. The Sony’s 4x zoom maxes at about 132mm, which feels limiting beyond casual portraits and snapshots.

The Canon’s ability to macro as close as 1 cm is impressive and useful for flower and detail shots, where S950’s 10 cm minimum focusing distance restricts close-up creativity. If you specialize in macro work, Canon’s offering here is a tangible advantage despite being a fixed lens camera.

Image Stabilization and Low-Light Capability

Image stabilization is another crucial area. Both cameras offer optical or sensor-shift stabilization:

• Canon uses optical image stabilization
• Sony employs sensor-shift image stabilization

Optical stabilization, as found on the Canon, generally yields better results through longer focal lengths and video shooting, reducing blur noticeably. Sony’s sensor-shift tech is effective but less consistent across the zoom range, especially towards the telephoto end.

Moreover, Canon’s BSI CMOS sensor combined with DIGIC 5 processor handles high ISO noise better. The ELPH performs admirably at ISO 800 and produces acceptable results up to ISO 1600 in dim light. The Sony’s CCD struggles beyond ISO 400, where noise and softening drastically reduce image quality.

For anyone capturing indoor events or dim landscapes, Canon’s low-light advantage is definitive.

Video Features: Motion Capture in Hand

While both cameras target stills first, video capability can be a deciding factor.

Canon’s Full HD video at 24fps offers decent quality for casual recording, with optical stabilization smoothing handheld clips noticeably. Slow-motion options (up to 240fps in lower resolutions) add creative flexibility.

Sony’s lack of true video mode (only Motion JPEG still motion sequences) means it is effectively a still camera with limited video utility.

If video matters to you in your compact, the Canon easily outclasses the Sony.

Battery Life and Storage

Battery life is reasonable on both sides but leans slightly in Canon’s favor.

• Canon ELPH 330 HS offers approximately 220 shots per charge using the NB-4L battery.
• Sony S950’s battery life is unspecified but typically runs shorter given its age and smaller battery pack.

Storage-wise:

• Canon uses ubiquitous SD/SDHC/SDXC cards.
• Sony relies on Memory Stick Duo / Pro Duo cards plus internal storage.

Canon’s SD card compatibility is more convenient and cost-effective today, while Sony’s proprietary Sony Memory Stick format has become less common and more expensive.

Build Quality and Durability

Both cameras lack professional weather sealing or ruggedness features - no waterproofing, dust proofing, or shock resistance to speak of.

The Canon’s lighter plastic body feels a bit less sturdy, whereas Sony’s slightly heavier chassis provides a minor durability edge, but neither is recommended for harsh conditions. Treat them as delicate tools designed for casual use.

Sample Shots: Real-World Image Quality

I conducted side-by-side shooting tests under similar conditions - portraits under soft daylight, landscapes on cloudy days, close-up macro, and indoor low light.

Canon ELPH 330 HS front Canon ELPH 330 HS screen back Sony S950 front Sony S950 screen back

• Portraits: Canon’s face detection autofocus yields sharper and better exposed skin tones with softer backgrounds thanks to longer zoom and sharper sensor detail. Sony’s portraits appear softer with more noise under indoor conditions.
• Landscapes: Canon’s wider lens and better dynamic range capture finer shadow details, though neither handles bright highlights perfectly. Sony’s images show slight color desaturation.
• Macro: Canon’s 1cm focusing distance translates to dramatic close-ups with impressive texture. Sony’s minimum focus distance left subjects less magnified.
• Low light: Canon’s noise levels were manageable, retaining sharper detail at ISO 800; Sony struggled with grain and focus hunting.

Overall Performance Scores

Putting all these elements together in a weighted scoring system I use internally for compact cameras:

Canon clearly leads with better image quality, autofocus capabilities, zoom versatility, and video features, while Sony is outmatched but remains a decent option if on a very tight budget.

How Each Camera Stacks Up By Photography Genre

Let’s frame recommendations in terms of specific photographic needs:

• Portrait Photography: Canon wins by a fair margin due to eye/face AF, sharper skin tone rendition, and longer lens zoom for flattering compression.
• Landscape Photography: Canon preferred for dynamic range and wider lens; Sony panels display color fades.
• Wildlife Photography: Although neither excel here (fixed lens, slow AF), Canon’s 10x zoom edge is useful.
• Sports Photography: Neither is ideal, but Canon’s continuous AF and modest 2fps continuous shooting is slightly better.
• Street Photography: Canon’s smaller size and wider zoom versatility make it more flexible.
• Macro Photography: Canon has a clear advantage with 1 cm close focusing.
• Night/Astro: Canon handles noise better; Sony lacks high ISO capability.
• Video: Canon supports Full HD video; Sony does not.
• Travel Photography: Canon’s longer zoom, lighter body, and newer interface suit travel well.
• Professional Work: Both cameras are consumer-level - neither suits professional demands directly.

Final Thoughts: Which Tiny Compact Should You Pick?

I’ve walked through performance, design, and usability in detail because these two cameras might seem similar at a glance but reveal meaningful differences once you handle and test them.

• Choose the Canon PowerShot ELPH 330 HS if you want:
  A small, highly pocketable camera with a versatile 10x zoom range, capable autofocus with face detection, superior low-light and video performance, and easier usability overall. Perfect for travel, everyday snapshots, casual portraits, and even macro adventures.

• Pick the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950 if you:
  Need an ultra-basic compact and find a used or discounted unit, prioritize a slightly sturdier build, and don’t mind the limitations of a 4x zoom with dated AF and no video. It’s more a budget snapshot device where price is the main driver.

Tips for Buyers in 2024

At their current market prices (Canon ~ $179; Sony ~ $130), these cameras suit beginners, casual shooters, or those who want something simpler than a smartphone but with easy handling and zoom.

However, for under $200, I would often recommend looking at more recent used mirrorless or superzoom camera models, which can offer dramatically better image quality and flexibility.

Still, if you want a genuinely pocketable “grab and go” camera, Canon ELPH 330 HS remains the practical choice between the two thanks to its modern sensor, superior AF, longer zoom, and video capabilities.

My experience running side-by-side testing - sharpness charts, ISO noise tests, autofocus speed trials, and real-life shooting scenarios - consistently points to Canon’s clear edge in image quality and functionality. Yet the Sony remains a neat little relic for those who just want an ultra-simple shooter for casual snapshots.

Dear Canon, a touchscreen and raw support in the next ELPH generation would be a dream, but that’s for another time. For now, the ELPH 330 HS stands as the better investment for the enthusiast or traveler on a modest budget.

I hope this thorough comparison has helped clarify where each tiny camera shines. Feel free to ask questions or share your experience with these models! Happy shooting!