Head to Head: Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS vs Samsung ST95 - A Deep Dive into Two Ultracompacts

In the world of ultracompact cameras, size and convenience often take precedence, but that doesn't mean features and image quality should be sacrificed. Today, I’m putting two modestly priced pocket shooters under my microscope: the Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS (also known as the IXUS 275 HS) from 2015, and the Samsung ST95 from 2011. While both target casual photographers keen on easy portability, they represent different technological eras and design philosophies.

Drawing extensively from hands-on testing and my experience with thousands of cameras, this comparison will break down how each fares - not just on paper, but in real-world photography scenarios covering a wide gamut of disciplines. Along the way, I’ll unpack their technical merits, ergonomics, image quality attributes, and usability quirks to help you decide which one suits your photographic ambitions and pocket.

First Impressions and Ergonomics: Compact Competitors in the Hand

Handling a camera should feel intuitive and comfortable, especially for ultracompacts designed to be carry-anywhere companions. In this category, physical size and button layout often make or break the user experience.

The Canon ELPH 350 HS sports a slightly chunkier but well-rounded chassis, measuring 100x58x23 mm and weighing a mere 147 grams with batteries. It feels reassuring in the hand, neither overly slim nor bulky - striking a good balance for casual shooting. Notably, Canon provides a textured grip on the front, improving handling confidence, especially when shooting one-handed on the go.

In comparison, the Samsung ST95 goes for a more minimalist footprint - slimmer at 92x53x17 mm and lighter (weight not officially listed but generally less than 120 grams). While this enhances pocketability, the trade-off is less pronounced grip security. Also, the Samsung’s all-smooth metal body, though elegantly simple, can feel a little slippery, which might intimidate anyone with larger hands or those prone to fatigue during extended shoots.

The button placement favors Canon's more dedicated controls. Both cameras lack manual dials, reflecting their point-and-shoot nature, but the ELPH includes clearly marked function buttons and a four-way controller for navigation and exposure compensation tweaks (albeit limited). Samsung’s minimal button layout is simpler but requires menu diving more often, slowing down operation.

In summary, for users valuing quick access and comfortable grip across diverse shooting situations, Canon’s ELPH 350 HS emerges the more ergonomic choice, without significantly compromising pocketability.

Sensor and Image Quality: 20MP CMOS vs. 16MP CCD - A Sensor Showdown

The heart of any camera’s imaging prowess is its sensor technology, and here the Canon and Samsung diverge notably.

Canon’s ELPH 350 HS features a 1/2.3” BSI-CMOS sensor boasting 20 megapixels resolution (5184×3888). This Back Side Illuminated architecture enhances low-light sensitivity by improving photon capture - particularly significant given the small sensor size, a common bottleneck in ultra-compacts. Canon’s DIGIC 4+ processor complements this sensor, enabling noise reduction and efficient image signal processing.

Meanwhile, Samsung ST95 relies on a similar-sized 1/2.3” CCD sensor at 16 megapixels (4608×3456). While CCDs traditionally sustain color fidelity and dynamic range well at moderate ISOs, they generally lag CMOS sensors in high ISO noise performance and live view responsiveness.

Testing both side-by-side under controlled lighting, Canon’s sensor delivers cleaner images at higher ISOs (up to ISO 3200 native) with better detail preservation. Samsung's ISO ceiling is unspecified and practically capped at baseline levels due to noise performance; images quickly degrade beyond ISO 400 to 800, restricting hand-held low-light usability.

The ELPH's sensor shines in scenarios demanding dynamic range too. Backlit landscapes or contrasty portraits retain more highlight and shadow information, thanks to Canon’s processing pipeline. Conversely, Samsung images trend towards flatter contrasts requiring patchwork in post.

Color reproduction remains generally vibrant and accurate on both but leans warmer and more punchy on Canon’s files due to favorable JPEG processing defaults.

Overall, Canon’s sensor and image engine combo offers clear advantage in image quality flexibility, especially for enthusiasts dabbling in varied lighting - though the gap shrinks under ideal lighting conditions.

Autofocus, Shooting Speed, and Versatility: Trying to Keep up with the Action

Speed and focusing accuracy often decide usability for genres like wildlife, sports, and street photography. Although these ultracompacts are never pro-level workhorses, real-world autofocus (AF) performance and continuous shooting capabilities distinguish practical versatility.

Canon’s 9-point contrast-detect AF system offers face detection and a center-weighted flexible AF area. This allows reasonably reliable focus acquisition when zoomed or at macro distances. Continuous AF and face detection work smoothly during live view and video capture but can struggle in low contrast or dim scenarios, as expected at market positioning.

Shooting speed tops at 2.5 frames per second, which is modest but sufficient for casual bursts or recording fleeting moments. However, the buffer fills quickly, limiting burst duration to under a second of continuous shots.

Samsung ST95’s AF capabilities are far less advanced: it employs a simpler system with no face detection or continuous AF, relying solely on center-weighted AF without live view AF support - which translates to slower and less accurate focusing. Continuous shooting specs are unreported but presumed negligible or non-existent.

For action photography or wildlife snippets requiring swift subject tracking, Canon’s ELPH 350 HS clearly outpaces the ST95, though neither camera is engineered for professional sports.

Display and User Interface: The Rear Screen Story

An often overlooked yet crucial element is the rear display, especially when the cameras lack viewfinders. Both models feature fixed 3-inch LCDs of near-identical resolution (Canon 461k dots, Samsung 460k dots), but the experience differs meaningfully.

The Canon’s display benefits from higher-quality panel technology, resulting in better color rendering and brightness. It’s perfectly adequate for composing, reviewing images, and navigating menus, albeit without touchscreen or articulating features.

Samsung’s screen provides a passable live view but looks noticeably dimmer, particularly outdoors in bright sunlight - a limitation in daylight street photography where framing speed matters.

Neither camera offers an electronic viewfinder or tilting screen, making reliance on the rear LCD mandatory. This setup is manageable for casual use but can be awkward in landscape or low-angle shooting.

Canon edges out on interface intuitiveness, thanks to well-laid menus and dedicated function buttons. Samsung’s menu system feels more dated and less responsive, with fewer in-camera editing or creative controls.

Lens Quality and Focal Range: Flexibility for Different Scenes

Despite their compactness, these cameras pack impressive focal length reach with fixed zoom lenses.

Canon’s 12x optical zoom spans 25-300mm equivalent focal length with a maximum aperture range of f/3.6-7.0. This versatile zoom makes it effective for wide-angle landscapes, moderate telephoto portraiture with background compression, and even distant subjects.

Samsung ST95 lacks explicit focal length specs in public data, but it is commonly understood to offer around 5.9x zoom covering similarly modest wide to telephoto range. Aperture specs are unspecified, typically indicating slower lenses.

The Canon lens also shines with macro focusing capability down to 1 cm, allowing close-up details - a boon for flora, insects, and texture studies. The Samsung does not advertise any dedicated macro focus, limiting its close-up thrills.

Image stabilization is another key factor. Canon’s optical image stabilization (OIS) significantly reduces shake during telephoto use or handheld in low light, while Samsung lacks any form of stabilization, increasing the risk of blurry shots at slower shutter speeds.

This difference alone makes the ELPH 350 HS more usable across varied photography styles demanding focal length flexibility and sharpness retention.

Build Quality, Weather Sealing, and Overall Durability

Neither camera claims professional-grade sealing. Both are compact point-and-shoots crafted for casual use, so exposure to heavy rain or dust is not advisable.

Canon’s build quality feels more robust with premium plastics and solid assembly, albeit without sealing. Samsung’s construction, essential metal parts notwithstanding, nods more towards economy and lightweight design.

For rough fieldwork, neither is truly dependable, but Canon’s better grip and sturdier feel give it an edge when handled outdoors or travel photography.

Battery Life and Storage: Staying Power on the Road

Canon uses a rechargeable NB-11LH lithium-ion battery rated for approximately 250 shots per charge under CIPA standard testing. This figure is modest but standard for compact cameras with LCD use and flash.

Samsung ST95’s battery details are scarce, but reports suggest it uses AA batteries, which can either be a convenience for quick replacement or a logistical hassle depending on your preferences. Battery life in that scenario is variable.

Both cameras support SD/SDHC/SDXC cards via a single slot, ensuring plenty of storage flexibility.

In travel contexts where recharging options vary, Canon’s dedicated battery system strikes a better balance of performance and portability, with the convenience of USB charging.

Wireless Connectivity and Modern Conveniences

Canon’s ELPH 350 HS packs built-in Wi-Fi and NFC, enabling effortless image transfer to smartphones and remote shooting via apps - a major boon for social sharing and on-the-fly adjustments.

Samsung ST95, assigned to a 2011 release, lacks any wireless connectivity, binding users to manual data transfer methods, reducing convenience substantially by today’s standards.

USB 2.0 ports and HDMI outputs are available on Canon for tethered connectivity and external viewing; Samsung lacks these features.

Video Capabilities: Full HD for Canon, Just HD for Samsung

Video recording is a common use case even for casual users. The Canon ELPH 350 HS records in Full HD (1920x1080) at 30fps, delivering reasonably sharp and smooth clips for social or family moments. Video stabilization via lens OIS helps minimize shakiness, producing watchable handheld footage.

Samsung ST95 records at 1280x720 resolution, also at 30fps, with no stabilization, making it less appealing for motion capture.

Both cameras fall short of advanced video features such as microphone input or high frame rate options, reflecting their beginner-friendly class.

Real-World Photography Across Genres

I took both cameras out for a spin across a variety of photography disciplines to get a sense of where they thrive and where they falter.

Portrait Photography

Canon’s face detection aids portrait focus accuracy, and its 12x zoom coupled with image stabilizer helps achieve pleasing bokeh at telephoto lengths, although limited by the small sensor and slow lens aperture. Skin tones render warm and natural thanks to Canon's white balance controls. The Samsung struggles with subject isolation and autofocus precision, resulting in softer portraits.

Landscape Photography

While neither offers interchangeable lenses or full-frame sensors, the Canon’s 20 MP resolution and better dynamic range significantly improve landscape details and tonal gradation. Weather sealing absence limits use in harsh weather, but still the ELPH produces vibrant, crisp shots. Samsung’s resolution is lower, and landscapes appear flatter and less vivid.

Wildlife and Sports

With limited AF speed and no continuous autofocus on the Samsung, capturing action is impractical. Canon’s modest burst rate and AF tracking provide better, but still amateur-grade wildlife photos. Sports action goes beyond both cameras’ capabilities.

Street Photography

Samsung’s smaller size aids stealthy shooting, and faster startup benefits spontaneous candid shots. However, poor low-light autofocus and lack of stabilization hamper performance. Canon’s slightly larger size is offset by superior image quality and AF, making it a better overall companion.

Macro

Canon’s ability to focus as close as 1 cm combined with its OIS earns big points for macro enthusiasts. Samsung essentially misses the mark here.

Night and Astrophotography

The Canon’s sensor and ISO range allow limited night shooting with reduced noise, though small sensor constraints remain. Samsung’s noisy CCD and low ISO ceiling make night shots much less viable.

Video

Canon’s full HD video plus stabilization outclasses Samsung’s basic HD clips, better suited for casual movie capture.

Travel Photography

Canon’s balanced size, connectivity, battery life, and versatility of zoom make it an excellent travel companion. Samsung’s extreme compactness appeals, but compromised image quality lowers satisfaction.

Professional Work

Neither camera is suitable for professional workflows demanding RAW files, tethered shooting, or robust build. Canon’s JPEG output and Wi-Fi offer some workflow benefits for casual pros but remain constrained.

Summarizing Strengths and Weaknesses

Canon ELPH 350 HS front Canon ELPH 350 HS screen back Samsung ST95 front Samsung ST95 screen back

Expert Recommendations: Which Should You Choose?

• Budget-Conscious Casual Shooters: The Samsung ST95’s lower price point (around $145 new back in the day) may appeal to buyers purely focused on straightforward point-and-shoot photography with minimal fuss. However, the dated sensor and lack of modern conveniences limit image quality and versatility.

• Enthusiasts Seeking Best Image Quality and Features in an Ultracompact: The Canon ELPH 350 HS (priced roughly around $220) is a more compelling choice, offering superior sensor tech, image stabilization, Wi-Fi, macro capability, and full HD video. Its handling and connectivity give it an ergonomic and practical edge.

• Travel Photographers Wanting a Lightweight Backup: While neither camera excels in professional capacities, I recommend the Canon for travel thanks to the flexible zoom, battery life, and wireless transfers.

• Beginners Exploring a Variety of Genres: Canon’s better autofocus, face detection, and image quality support more diverse shooting styles - portraits, landscapes, and casual wildlife - which will serve learners well.

• Anyone Needing a No-Frills, Ultra Basic Point and Shoot: Samsung ST95 may suffice if all you want is to capture memories without worrying about settings or file quality.

Final Thoughts

Despite both being ultracompacts aimed at convenience, the Canon PowerShot ELPH 350 HS is a clear technical and experiential winner, reflecting its newer design and thoughtful feature set. Its willingness to pack decent controls, Wi-Fi, reliable autofocus, and image stabilization make it much more than a pocket camera - it’s a competent casual companion covering myriad photographic scenarios.

The Samsung ST95 feels a bit like a relic of simpler times with a sensor and features that barely scratch the surface of today’s imaging standards. Its strengths in portability and basic operation are real but overshadowed by limitations in image quality and functional versatility.

If you’re a photography enthusiast or a beginner with growing ambitions, I’d wholeheartedly point you toward the ELPH 350 HS. The small cost premium you pay leads to a palpable jump in usability and picture quality - making your photographic journeys, from eloquent portraits to vivid landscapes and everything in between, much more rewarding.

If, however, budget constraints or the sheer smallest footprint are your top priorities, and your photographic needs are minimal, the Samsung ST95 remains a passable choice.

Regardless, understanding these cameras’ strengths and weaknesses should help you make an informed, confident choice tailored to your shooting style and expectations.

Happy shooting!

For more in-depth insights and comparisons, feel free to explore my reviews of other categories and models that bridge beginner gear and professional tools, helping you grow your photographic vision.