[popo]

Since I've been using both cameras side by side for a while now, I thought I'd throw in come comments on their relative performance.

To recap: I was switching from a Sony HX9V, which is a nice bundle but I feel the responsiveness is a bit annoyingly slow, and the noise reduction on it is too strong and wastes it potential. So I got the Canon SX240. While not a current model, it is newer than the HX9V. It has a longer zoom and via CHDK can provide additional features and DNG output.

Feel / holding: The HX9V wins here easily. It has a decent grip and a place to rest your right thumb. The SX240 is very rounded so there's nothing to grip, apart from a tiny bar on the front, and no space on the back for the thumb except the mode dial.

Zoom: both operate similarly, but the displayed info is different. The HX9V shows the zoom ratio relative to the wide end. I like this. The SX240 doesn't give a value but shows a bar, although to be fair I don't know if there is a custom option to do so somewhere. Instead, it does show you what the focus range is. This is handy, as the minimum focus distance increases significantly with focal length on both cameras.

Macro: On the HX9V, I worked out you get maximum magnification around 2x zoom, so I can easily set it about there and shoot away. I haven't worked out the sweet spot on the SX240, but my feel so far it is not capable of as much magnification.

Image quality: As mentioned before, the HX9V output is very smeared from the strong noise reduction you can't turn off. I would love if you could turn it down a bit in auto mode, so you may get a little nose but also retain more of the resolution potential. The SX240 isn't that different in jpeg mode, but might have a tiny advantage. I haven't yet looked for options to adjust this. Now, the extra zoom range does mean it has a clear advantage if used on the long end. On that note, it is hard to point accurately on max zoom. The built in IS is pretty strong and works ok for initial aiming, but you need to keep absolutely steady when pressing the shutter button, something I haven't mastered on a compact! So that is enough to throw the aim off. Not the same stability as using a SLR OVF.

The DNG output of the DX240 I've get to get to grips with. On the wide end, there is strong barrel distortion and the image doesn't even fill the sensor with black corners. On the long end this isn't a problem. You get the expected noise and even hot pixels, which are reasonably suppressed by modern raw converters. Write speeds for DNG take an eternity, but to be fair I'm not using very fast SD cards at the moment.

Connectivity and charging: The HX9V has a proprietary USB cable which is used to charge the camera, and can also update the GPS quickfix data and usual data transfer. The socket is exposed on the base of the camera and it is easy to connect to. The SX240 has a standard mini USB (not to be confused by micro USB as used on mobile devices) which is only used for data transfer. This is hidden under a flap to help keep dirt out. You can't charge the battery over USB, and have to take out the battery and put it in a dedicated charger. Big negative for travel use.

Semi-manual use: Neither camera is as easy as a DSLR to use in PASM modes. The HX9V only has P and M modes, and the wheel on it doesn't have a good feel since it doubles a button press so you have to delicately use it otherwise different things happen. The SX240 wheel is only a wheel, so you can apply a firm pressure. The HX9V only has two aperture setting steps, whereas the SX240 has a greater number of steps. Realistically, these cameras will be used 99% of the time in full auto or scene modes.

Overall impressions: even these compacts are no single solution for me. I like the feel and macro of the HX9V, but the SX240 does have a clear advantage on the long end of the zoom, if you can point it accurately. I find I keep the HX9V in my pocket when going out more. Its advantages still outweigh the disadvantages compared against the SX240.