Canon PowerShot SD870 gets reviewed

Canon's PowerShot SD870 (also known as the IXUS 860 IS in some parts of the world) isn't exactly the sort of camera that offers a lot of surprises, but the folks at PhotographyBLOG decided to check it out nonetheless, and they apparently found quite a bit to like about it. Calling it the "best IXUS model that we've reviewed," they found the camera delivered consistently solid images, although as is often the case, they recommend staying away form the highest ISO settings. They were also especially impressed by the cameras small size and larger than usual 3-inch LCD, as well as its 28mm wide-angle lens. On the downside, that small size and big screen comes at the expense of an optical viewfinder, and they found that the camera dragged a bit in the continuous shooting mode. Those factors seem to have been far from deal-breakers, however, with PhotographyBLOG bestowing an impressive 4.5 out of 5 rating on the camera.

[Rick @ Sep 27th 2007 1:27PM]

Please stop calling the lack of an optical viewfinder a negative. I don't know anyone 24 years or younger that actually uses a viewfinder on a point and shoot. It's idiotic that cameras are losing points for this. At worst, have a separate designation after rating the camera in all other areas. You can put "NO VF" or just "VF" to say whether it doesn't or does have a viewfinder. Among peers, I've never ran into anyone that would trade a beautiful 3-inch lcd for a smaller screen with a viewfinder. If that's what people really need, they most likely have a camera that is more powerful and clunkier.

[tracy @ Sep 27th 2007 1:35PM]

The viewfinder is critical for using the camera in the cold, ie: mountaineering or skiing.

The battery efficient when cold is so bad that the LCD/backlight almost instantly drains it.

[DigitalForensicGradStudent @ Sep 27th 2007 3:48PM]

Dear Rick,

Also have fun staring at a screen in the bright sun and not being able to see the picture.

Any 24 year old or younger who takes pictures for reasons besides documenting their Friday night so they can remember it on Saturday morning would know that viewfinders are extremely useful.

[Mario @ Sep 27th 2007 6:38PM]

Actually, most cameras have screens where you can see them in direct sunlight now. Canon's newer SD series (sd1000, and a few other models) have a "purecolor" lcd which improves outdoor visability.
I have an older sony T5, and I can see it perfectly in direct sunlight.
It doesn't have a viewfinder, but I haven't run into any situation where I need one.

If you really want a viewfinder that badly, get the SD800. It's a slightly older version of this, but it does have a viewfinder and a 2.5" LCD.

[Godsmurf @ Sep 28th 2007 8:32AM]

I'm over 24, I have a viewfinder on my cam, and I never ever use it even during my recent journey in Africa (lots of sun :) ). The viewfinders on these cams are crap anyway and they don't accurately reflect the edges of your picture.

[MNA @ Sep 27th 2007 2:12PM]

hahaha I just got my first sign online :) I bought that camera 2 hours ago! like someone trying to tell me I made a good choice hehe.. gotto add that the LCD is not only large but very crisp and bright HOWEVER I would not say no to a VF, how small and uncomfortable it may be still good to have on lo batt.

[dan @ Sep 27th 2007 2:39PM]

Cost? @Rick I agree. GE will lunch a lowcost camera with the same specs of this model.

[patator @ Sep 27th 2007 4:13PM]

I like the "nothing really feeling flimsy or ill-thought out" comment in the review and then 2 sentences later: "The plastic A/V Out / Digital port cover on the right side of the camera feels a little flimsy"

[Scott @ Sep 27th 2007 4:22PM]

Bring back the DIGIC II, I really don't like the blotchy, aggressive NR that the DIGIC III forces upon the images.

[Amin Sabet @ Sep 27th 2007 4:38PM]

Rick, any reason why you only care about the 24 and younger group? I'm 33 years old and consider a built in viewfinder to be a real plus. My current compact (Ricoh GX100) lacks one, so I bought a Voigtlander Mini Finder at no small cost and attached it to the hot shoe.

[Greg @ Sep 27th 2007 4:49PM]

I bought one last week. It's a great camera. The big LCD is really bright. Even in direct sunlight I don't find myself wanting a viewfinder. The picture quality is superb.

To all those who want a viewfinder... my $0.02... Rememeber that this is a point and shoot camera, if I want a viewfinder and if I want to take more/faster/better pictures... I take out the D200.

Don't hold expectations for a product that it doesn't have. One should always use the right equipment for the job. I mean... one wouldn't use a fork to eat soup, right?

[Don is Good @ Sep 27th 2007 7:50PM]

I bought this two weeks ago (for backup) but it took me a lot of umm and arhs before I decided on this over the older model IXUS850 in hope the newer model would take better pictures...

Now that I have it, I wish I bought the older model due to lack of viewfinder on the new!!! IMO, viewfinder have the advantage of:
= prolonging battery life
= less hand shake as you have your face for support as well
= you don't have to extend your arm to take photos
= easier to view what you are taking in dark area

Sure, the 3" is sexy but if you are half serious about photography, you'd go for viewfinder...

... and thankfully, I still have my Nikon D80 to take bulk of my pictures...

[TC @ Sep 28th 2007 3:47AM]

Same size sensor, similar processing, same focal range, smaller pixels...slightly larger screen and no viewfinder (try shooting in tight spaces w/o one)...I'm glad I got the IXUS 800 IS when I did and didn't bother waiting for this version.

[KenJr @ Jan 11th 2008 8:22PM]

Hello Don,

You wouldn't believe how many reviews I've read on the SD870 IS. Yours is unique. It's the first that suggested hand shake as a potential issue. Most folks laud Canon's image stabilization as keeping hand shake from being any kind of problem at all with this camera. Virtually all laud the 3" LCD as being as good as LCDs get, even in bright sunlight. It's also mentioned that the 800's view finder (the 870 replaced the 800) was far from perfect. Also, with this camera, even without the viewfinder, apparently the battery lasts a very long time (~270 photos). There are also many comments regarding how good the camera with its AF-assist lamp is for viewing even in low light. Off the subject, just about everybody remarked very positively on the 870's wide angle capability (28mm) with its zoom lens.

Now that you've had this camera for a while are you holding onto your initial views, or have you found yourself joining the rest of the folks who say the lack of a viewfinder is simply not a problem with this camera?

[ken @ Sep 28th 2007 12:10PM]

Interesting that a picture of the SD860is was used with an SD870 headline ...

[Priapus @ Sep 28th 2007 5:01PM]

Canon, can you PLEASE standardise your model names.

Ixus850IS=SD800IS
Ixus900Ti=SD900
Ixus75=SD750
Ixus70=SD1000
Ixus950IS=SD850IS
Ixus860IS=SD870IS

These names may make sense to someone at Canon R&D but to the general public they are extremely confusing.

[Zimmy @ Oct 5th 2007 4:05AM]

For all those who want a viewfinder, there is the new Ixus 960IS (or SD???) but it only has a 2.5" screen, but 12MP if you can stand the noise.

[Jeff @ Nov 18th 2007 2:21PM]

@ TC
The SD870 IS is a worthy upgrade to the SD800. Check out the cropped comparison shots at dpreview of the 870 vs. 800. The SD800 offers far poorer quality shots and are far more blurred, making the SD870 a worthwhile upgrade. And honestly how tight of a space do you take shots in where the only useful method of shooting is through the VF? I have never encountered such a situation.

I have a Canon EOS 350D. In that case I love using the view finder. But let's get real here. P&S cameras have terrible view finders firstly. Secondly it's easier to judge the composition of a shot on the viewfinder. It's impossible to judge the depth of field exposure and aperature settings on the fly on a P&S as everything you need to judge the shot is displayed on the LCD and therefore having a larger LCD should make composition easier. The blinding light syndrome is an issue with older P&S cams but not this one. The LCD is extremely vibrant in all light conditions.

The fact is that having a VF or lack of VF is neither a pro nor con. It is up to the user to judge whether having a viewfinder or a large LCD is important. I could easily say:

PRO: Large LCD rather than CON: No VF because with the history of my P&S cameras even with the tiniest LCD I've used VF about 10% of the time.

@ Don is Good
If you're half serious about photography you'll go for more than just a P&S camera and should be rounded and experienced with more than a P&S, therefore having a VF or not on a P&S really isn't an indicator of a photographer's "seriousness." I bought this camera because I "seriously" wanted to get great shots on the fly where it was inconvenient to take a long time composing a shot or impractical to carry around my DSLR.

[diksie @ Jan 24th 2008 2:11PM]

Oh nooooo..... Too bad; this camera takes beautiful pics, but the (plastic) case is of a horrible, HORRIBLE Quality! Only had it for three months and it fell apart and guess what? They made me pay for repair!!!

Anyone else had these problems?!?!

I take good care of my stuff and this should NOT have happened! It scratches incredibly fast also, and it dents... too bad for the $ I paid for it I'd say... very sad...