Note: this camera was first sold in
Jan 2008.
There may be newer versions available.
Nikon Coolpix S600
HQ Grade: B-
| A | is outstanding and exceptional, rated in the top 10% of digital cameras. |
| B | means they are good, with some standout features. |
| C | means they are mediocre, and probably more trouble than they are worth. |
| D & F | mean they are absolutely awful or old. Avoid at all costs. |
This camera is ranked
- 82nd of 175 in Ultra Compact
- 81st of 102 in 9 and 10 Megapixels
- 33rd of 74 in Nikon
- 48th of 88 in $350 - $600
| Compare 2 store ratings and prices... | ||
| Shop for Nikon S600 accessories. | ||
| UnbeatableSale, Inc | $466.78 |
|
| 47digital | $316.08 |
|
Ask
Have a question about the S600?
Enter it here:
(You can enter more details in the next step)
Answered!
March 16, 2008 8:00 AM
Report Abuse
Did you find this question
helpful or
not helpful?
helpful or
not helpful?
This question has been answered!
March 17, 2008 1:01 AM
8
0
0
Report Abuse
Did you find this answer
helpful or
not helpful?
helpful or
not helpful?
james Ratchford
85 pts
May 21, 2008 11:19 PM
12
1
1
I own the S600 and researched them pretty intensely.
The Nikon outperforms the Canon in terms of shooting speed and low light.
Performance:
Nikon has the advantage in a few ways. Shooting speed, which influences whether you get the shot you were trying to get. As a photographer, I find this more important than almost any other factor in this category.
Low light, which is many of the situations you'd use this kind of camera, such as social and family events and anything indoors. With an ISO of up to 3200 (1600 with minimal noise), the Nikon is a full "stop" ahead of the Canon, which translates to the difference between a portrait-friendly 1/15 of a second and a blurred mess 1/8 of a second (most people don't hold still quite that long) in a lot of situations.
The Canon has a slight advantage in high light, but this is an area where the performance of both is so good that it's really nitpicky to find the difference.
Picture quality: Megapixels. I don't believe the MP myth, but if you'll be enlarging or cropping, they come in handy, and the Nikon has more by a factor of 25%. In terms of glass.. you can't go wrong. Nikon and Canon have both been making top grade glass for 50 years, and it only gets marginally better from here. They both have optical image stabilization, which means those low light pics won't be ruined by your unsteady hand, though they'll still be ruined by a cough, sneeze, or sudden move (on the subject's part.)
The Nikon has the advantage again in terms of price and size/weight, but I'd say the Canon feels like a more solid camera and has a more intuitive (to a photographer) user interface. But I just recently made this very decision myself, and I would recommend that you go with the Nikon. I got mine for $249 at a major retailer, so I would suggest that you not pay more than that.
The Nikon outperforms the Canon in terms of shooting speed and low light.
Performance:
Nikon has the advantage in a few ways. Shooting speed, which influences whether you get the shot you were trying to get. As a photographer, I find this more important than almost any other factor in this category.
Low light, which is many of the situations you'd use this kind of camera, such as social and family events and anything indoors. With an ISO of up to 3200 (1600 with minimal noise), the Nikon is a full "stop" ahead of the Canon, which translates to the difference between a portrait-friendly 1/15 of a second and a blurred mess 1/8 of a second (most people don't hold still quite that long) in a lot of situations.
The Canon has a slight advantage in high light, but this is an area where the performance of both is so good that it's really nitpicky to find the difference.
Picture quality: Megapixels. I don't believe the MP myth, but if you'll be enlarging or cropping, they come in handy, and the Nikon has more by a factor of 25%. In terms of glass.. you can't go wrong. Nikon and Canon have both been making top grade glass for 50 years, and it only gets marginally better from here. They both have optical image stabilization, which means those low light pics won't be ruined by your unsteady hand, though they'll still be ruined by a cough, sneeze, or sudden move (on the subject's part.)
The Nikon has the advantage again in terms of price and size/weight, but I'd say the Canon feels like a more solid camera and has a more intuitive (to a photographer) user interface. But I just recently made this very decision myself, and I would recommend that you go with the Nikon. I got mine for $249 at a major retailer, so I would suggest that you not pay more than that.
Report Abuse
Did you find this answer
helpful or
not helpful?
helpful or
not helpful?
