Home / Cameras / Camera / Canon IXUS 310 / Feature Table

Canon IXUS 310 - Feature Table

By Gavin Stoker



Our Score:


User Score:


March 24, 2011, 4:01 pm

Thanks for improving the iso test subject :)

Brian ONeill

March 24, 2011, 6:45 pm

I got the new Canon IXUS 220 HS. I must admit I love the ultra compact ixus models, they rock.


March 24, 2011, 6:53 pm

@joose - +1 :)

Mike 39

March 24, 2011, 11:36 pm

Unless I have missed something in your review, there appears to be no mention of battery life on this camera? How many pictures will it take before requiring a recharge on flash and non flash use? Otherwise Canon at last seem to have produced a compact camera that I will probably go for!


March 25, 2011, 1:10 am

@ Gavin: Yeah, the Photo test is better;
but I would prefer to see less white and more darker color sections,
this way, we can judge the level of image noise for ourselves.
and the reviews are getting better.


March 25, 2011, 2:04 am

I don't think this point can be laboured - the improvements to this site come from your feedback. Keep letting us know what you want and we'll aim to please.


March 25, 2011, 10:08 pm

I don't understand how this can been seen as such great value compared to the other canon compacts. The 220 HS and the 115 HS have pretty much the same specs (full HD video, HS sensor, image stabiliser) and are much cheaper. A quick pricerunner search reveals the 220 HS at £165 delivered! How does a slightly faster lens and larger lcd justify such a hike in price? This model is not nearly as compact as the other two.

Mike 39

March 27, 2011, 2:41 pm

@dantheman,in theory, I take your point, however, having looked at the two other models you mention on paper and at my local store ( albeit only the 220 & 115 ( as the 310 doesn't appear to be stocked) yet, I think it looks heaps better. Personally I actually prefer the slightly larger/chunkier model of the 310 as compared to the other two as I feel it gives a more (pyschological) feeling of a better build and easier to handle!However if memory serves correctly, the 220 does have a slight edge on the 310 with a slightly more pwoerful zoom on it? Anyway, as mentinoed in my last comment posted, I would be very grateful if TR would kindly 'complete' their review of the 310 and indicate what the battery life is like on this model? i.e. how many shots it manages on a full charge with flash used and without flash. The Canon stated spec is about 180 shots, however, always the realist myself, I seldom take much notice of manufacturers claimed performance ( for obvious reasons) and very much rely on independent reviews form bodies like yoursleves to help make my mind up about a product.


March 31, 2011, 4:46 am

ixus 220 compared to the 310;

92x55x19 mm vs 100x55x25 mm

Around 30% smaller
Significantly lighter 141 g vs 185 g

More than 20% lighter
Thinner 0.8" vs 1"

More than 20% thinner
Cheaper £173.99 vs £249.99

I suppose it comes down to the 310 having a touchscreen, a larger, higher res monitor and a slightly faster lens. Personally, a touch screen would put me off buying the more expensive 310. A higher resolution monitor is always nice but for me, its not worth £100 more.
It would be nice if trusted reviews did an in depth review of the 220 hs, i think it will be a massively popular camera.

Mike 39

March 31, 2011, 12:27 pm

@dantheman, I guess it comes down to personal taste! I would prefer the option like Panasonic have done and provided an option to use buttons aswell as a touch screen, but since they haven't...! Still I'll go and look at model at my local shop and go from there!

Mike 39

April 10, 2011, 2:49 pm

Interesting that since emailing TR direct approx 3 weeks ago to mention the lack of review on the battery life on this model, this still is apparently not been done or not shown on here, despite being told that they would contact the reviewer and ask them to include it! I notice that this has been left out for the review for the HS 115 & 220 aswell, is this something that you don't include in your reviews as a matter of course? or has it just been overlooked? As I mentioned previously, surely this is as useful information to be included in your reviews as all the other info? as apart from the manufacturer's stated stats for battery life, what other independent information do we have to go on?


August 17, 2013, 5:25 pm

Lots of pictures of the camera but none of pics taken by the camera. Pity.
I have one by the way, it's great but not as shap as the lumix compact it replaced.

comments powered by Disqus