"indeed some might suggest that it’s just a smidgeon light on features, such as ... and more pixels on the CCD"

see here:

http://6mpixel.org/en/

I sort of agree with you.

More pixels in such a tiny area is pointless. I think we hit the highest resolution for a 'digital camera' a year or two ago.

I want my digital cameras to have BIGGER sensors. Yup, I want a 35mm sensor with the correct number of pixels in it (personally, I do not know how many that would be). ideally, a nice Mamiya with 35mm digital back along with a medium format digital back... oh wait.. dont' they have those already...?

Anyway, bring on the not-making-lense-ratios-more-complex digital cameras :o)

Interesting article above, on '6mp is the optimum for compact cameras'.

I spent some time around the middle of last year looking at CC's and ended up getting the Ixus 70. From this review, and a quick comparison on Canon's site against this model, I really can't see any compelling reasons to spend the extra $A100 for the 80 over the 70.

As to full frame (35mm) sensors - there's pros and cons with this. I used to think the same way, but Four-thirds (wikipedia it) looks like a much better option to me now. I'm not invested with either Canon or Nikon high-end gear, so a new standard is a more attractive option than siding with either of those two company's lock-in approach anyway.

Fascinating article about four-thirds ("Full Frame Wars") over at : http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html - he writes especially coherently, doing an excellent history of 35mm and then some analysis of full frame sensors as well as looking at four-thirds.

And where did my earlier comment go then?

A bit of critisism about reviewing a camera at least one generation old and ignoring the plethora of isus models releases since and it gets removed?