Kodak Slice Competitors

As well as being compared against other compacts, the Kodak Slice is also often compared to travel zooms, waterproofs, ultra compacts, entry-level DSLRs and super zooms. The Kodak Slice's top rivals come from Nikon (such as the Coolpix S80 and the D40X) and Sony (such as the Cyber-shot DSC-WX300 and the Cyber-shot DSC-TX200V)

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to other compact competitors include: it has a significantly larger screen (3.5" vs 3.0"), has a touch screen and is thinner (0.7" vs 1").

However, on average it has a much narrower aperture (f/4.8 vs f/2.8), records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 24fps), has a significantly narrower wide angle lens (35 mm vs 24 mm), doesn't record movies in 24p and has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Nikon Coolpix S80 8 months newer $129 - $199	Significant advantages of the S80 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.6 vs f/4.8 Supports 24p Has an OLED screen: OLED vs LCD Significant disadvantages of the S80 (vs the Slice) None found common strengths of the S80 and Slice Very large screens: 3.5" vs 3.5" Fairly small: Super compact 99x63x17 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Nikon Coolpix S80 vs the Kodak Slice
Canon PowerShot A3300 IS 1 year newer $149	Significant advantages of the A3300 IS (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Much better macro capability: 3 cm vs 10 cm Significant disadvantages of the A3300 IS (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen Thicker: 1" vs 0.7" common strengths of the A3300 IS and Slice Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Canon PowerShot A3300 IS vs the Kodak Slice
Canon ELPH 300 HS 1 year newer $145	Significant advantages of the 300 HS (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/2.7 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 24fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the 300 HS (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the 300 HS and Slice Fairly small: Super compact 92x55x19 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens Thin: 0.8" vs 0.7"
	Compare the Canon ELPH 300 HS vs the Kodak Slice
Nikon Coolpix P310 2 years newer $268	Significant advantages of the P310 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/1.8 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the P310 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Significantly larger: Compact 103x58x32 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No touch screen common strengths of the P310 and Slice Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Nikon Coolpix P310 vs the Kodak Slice
Fujifilm FinePix Z90 1 year newer	Significant advantages of the Z90 (vs the Slice) Significantly wider aperture: f/3.9 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Significant disadvantages of the Z90 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Worse image stabilization: Digital vs Lens common strengths of the Z90 and Slice Fairly small: Super compact 95x56x20 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Have touch screens Thin: 0.8" vs 0.7"
	Compare the Fujifilm FinePix Z90 vs the Kodak Slice
Canon ELPH 100 HS 1 year newer $180	Significant advantages of the 100 HS (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/2.8 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 24fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the 100 HS (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the 100 HS and Slice Fairly small: Super compact 93x55x19 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens Thin: 0.8" vs 0.7"
	Compare the Canon ELPH 100 HS vs the Kodak Slice

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to travel zoom competitors include: it has a much larger screen (3.5" vs 3.0") and has a touch screen.

However, on average it has a significantly narrower wide angle lens (35 mm vs 25 mm), has a much narrower aperture (f/4.8 vs f/3.0), doesn't have a built-in GPS, records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 30fps) and doesn't record high-speed movies (none vs 220 fps).

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX300 3 years newer $248	Significant advantages of the DSC-WX300 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the DSC-WX300 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the DSC-WX300 and Slice None found
	Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX300 vs the Kodak Slice
Kodak EasyShare M580 similar age	Significant advantages of the M580 (vs the Slice) Significantly better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Significant disadvantages of the M580 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the M580 and Slice None found
	Compare the EasyShare M580 vs the Slice
Olympus SZ-31MR 2 years newer $176	Significant advantages of the SZ-31MR (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.0 vs f/4.8 Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the SZ-31MR (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" common strengths of the SZ-31MR and Slice Have touch screens
	Compare the Olympus SZ-31MR iHS vs the Kodak Slice
Canon PowerShot SX270 HS 3 years newer $193	Significant advantages of the SX270 HS (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Significantly better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the SX270 HS (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the SX270 HS and Slice None found
	Compare the Canon PowerShot SX270 HS vs the Kodak Slice
Canon ELPH 310 HS 1 year newer $295	Significant advantages of the 310 HS (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.0 vs f/4.8 Significantly better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Supports 24p Significant disadvantages of the 310 HS (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the 310 HS and Slice None found
	Compare the Canon ELPH 310 HS vs the Kodak Slice
Panasonic Lumix ZS20 2 years newer $200 - $399	Significant advantages of the ZS20 (vs the Slice) Has a GPS Much wider aperture: f/3.3 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Significant disadvantages of the ZS20 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" common strengths of the ZS20 and Slice Have touch screens
	Compare the Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 vs the Kodak Slice

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to waterproof competitors include: it has a significantly larger screen (3.5" vs 3.0").

However, on average it has a much narrower aperture (f/4.8 vs f/3.5), records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 60fps), has a much narrower wide angle lens (35 mm vs 25 mm), significantly lower maximum light sensitivity (3,200 ISO vs 12,800 ISO) and doesn't shoot as fast continuously (3 fps vs 10 fps).

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX200V 2 years newer $216	Significant advantages of the DSC-TX200V (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 26 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the DSC-TX200V (vs the Slice) None found common strengths of the DSC-TX200V and Slice Each has a built-in flash Larger than average screens: 3.3" vs 3.5" Fairly small: Ultra compact 96x58x16 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm
	Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX200V vs the Kodak Slice
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX20 2 years newer $191 - $348	Significant advantages of the DSC-TX20 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the DSC-TX20 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" common strengths of the DSC-TX20 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Fairly small: Ultra compact 96x56x18 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX20 vs the Kodak Slice

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to ultra compact competitors include: it has a much larger screen (3.5" vs 2.7") and has a touch screen.

However, on average it has a much narrower aperture (f/4.8 vs f/3.3), records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 60fps), has a significantly narrower wide angle lens (35 mm vs 28 mm), has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS) and lacks a built in HDR feature.

Kodak Easyshare M5370 1 year newer $179	Significant advantages of the M5370 (vs the Slice) Significantly wider aperture: f/3.9 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 28 mm vs 35 mm Can create panoramas in-camera Significant disadvantages of the M5370 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Worse image stabilization: Digital vs Lens common strengths of the M5370 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Larger than average screens: 3.0" vs 3.5" Have touch screens
	Compare the Easyshare M5370 vs the Slice
Sony Cybershot T110 1 year newer $249	Significant advantages of the T110 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Much better macro capability: 1 cm vs 10 cm Significant disadvantages of the T110 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" common strengths of the T110 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Larger than average screens: 3.0" vs 3.5" Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Sony Cybershot DSC-T110 vs the Kodak Slice
Samsung ST95 1 year newer	Significant advantages of the ST95 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.3 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 26 mm vs 35 mm Significantly better macro capability: 5 cm vs 10 cm Significant disadvantages of the ST95 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Worse image stabilization: Digital vs Lens common strengths of the ST95 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Larger than average screens: 3.0" vs 3.5" Have touch screens
	Compare the Samsung ST95 vs the Kodak Slice
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1 5 months older	Significant advantages of the DSC-TX1 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.5 vs f/4.8 Much better macro capability: 1 cm vs 10 cm Can create panoramas in-camera Significant disadvantages of the DSC-TX1 (vs the Slice) Significantly smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" common strengths of the DSC-TX1 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Larger than average screens: 3.0" vs 3.5" Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX1 vs the Kodak Slice
Kodak EasyShare M590 7 months newer	Significant advantages of the M590 (vs the Slice) None found Significant disadvantages of the M590 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the M590 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the EasyShare M590 vs the Slice
Sony Cyber-shot WX50 2 years newer $270 - $299	Significant advantages of the WX50 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/2.6 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 25 mm vs 35 mm Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 60fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Significant disadvantages of the WX50 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 2.7" vs 3.5" No touch screen common strengths of the WX50 and Slice Each has a built-in flash Good image stabilization: Lens vs Lens
	Compare the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-WX50 vs the Kodak Slice

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to entry-level DSLR competitors include: it has a much larger screen (3.5" vs 2.5"), has image stabilization (lens vs none), has a touch screen, is much smaller (super compact 104x60x17 mm vs professional size 133x99x78 mm) and is thinner (0.7" vs 3.1").

However, on average it records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 30fps), takes significantly lower resolution photos (9.7 MP vs 17.9 MP), doesn't record movies in 24p, doesn't have a screen which flips out and has a much smaller sensor (1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm vs APS-C 23.7x15.6mm).

Nikon D40X 2 years older	Significant advantages of the D40X (vs the Slice) Much larger sensor: APS-C 23.7x15.6mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm Has a viewfinder: Pentamirror vs None Shoots RAW Significant disadvantages of the D40X (vs the Slice) Does not take movies: None vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Much smaller screen: 2.5" vs 3.5" No image stabilization: None vs Lens common strengths of the D40X and Slice Very small: Prosumer size 124x94x64 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Very thin: 2.5" vs 0.7" Light weight: 522 g vs 158 g
	Compare the Nikon D40X vs the Kodak Slice
Canon Rebel T3i 1 year newer $490 - $500 (body only) $549 - $616 18-55mm lens	Significant advantages of the T3i (vs the Slice) Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Much larger sensor: APS-C 22.3x14.9mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm Has a viewfinder: Pentamirror vs None Significant disadvantages of the T3i (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Much larger: Professional size 133x99x79 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No image stabilization: None vs Lens common strengths of the T3i and Slice None found
	Compare the Canon Rebel T3i vs the Kodak Slice
Canon Rebel T4i 2 years newer $629 - $749 (body only) $700 - $829 18-55mm lens	Significant advantages of the T4i (vs the Slice) Higher resolution movies: 1080p @ 30fps vs 848 x 480 @ 30fps Much larger sensor: APS-C 22.3x14.9mm vs 1/2.3" 6.2x4.6mm Has a viewfinder: Pentamirror vs None Significant disadvantages of the T4i (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Much larger: Professional size 133x99x78 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No image stabilization: None vs Lens common strengths of the T4i and Slice Have touch screens
	Compare the Canon Rebel T4i vs the Kodak Slice

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak Slice compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a significantly larger screen (3.5" vs 3.0"), is significantly smaller (super compact 104x60x17 mm vs professional size 125x84x102 mm), has a touch screen, is thinner (0.7" vs 3.3") and is significantly lighter (158 g vs 550 g).

However, on average it has a much narrower aperture (f/4.8 vs f/3.1), has much less zoom (5x vs 36x), records lower quality movies (848 x 480 @ 30fps vs 1080p @ 60fps), has a much narrower wide angle lens (35 mm vs 23 mm) and doesn't have a screen which flips out.

Kodak PixPro AZ361 3 years newer	Significant advantages of the AZ361 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/2.9 vs f/4.8 Much more zoom: 36x vs 5x Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Significant disadvantages of the AZ361 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Significantly larger: Prosumer size 112x81x76 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No touch screen common strengths of the AZ361 and Slice Fairly small: Prosumer size 112x81x76 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Thin: 3" vs 0.7" Light weight: 416 g vs 158 g
	Compare the PixPro AZ361 vs the Slice
Nikon Coolpix P520 3 years newer $250 - $362	Significant advantages of the P520 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.0 vs f/4.8 Much more zoom: 41.7x vs 5x Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Significant disadvantages of the P520 (vs the Slice) Much larger: Professional size 125x84x102 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No touch screen Significantly smaller screen: 3.2" vs 3.5" common strengths of the P520 and Slice Larger than average screens: 3.2" vs 3.5"
	Compare the Nikon Coolpix P520 vs the Kodak Slice
Nikon Coolpix L810 2 years newer $179 - $280	Significant advantages of the L810 (vs the Slice) Much wider aperture: f/3.1 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 23 mm vs 35 mm Much better macro capability: 1 cm vs 10 cm Significant disadvantages of the L810 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" Significantly larger: Prosumer size 111x76x83 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm No touch screen common strengths of the L810 and Slice Fairly small: Prosumer size 111x76x83 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Light weight: 430 g vs 158 g
	Compare the Nikon Coolpix L810 vs the Kodak Slice
Kodak PixPro AZ251 3 years newer $150	Significant advantages of the AZ251 (vs the Slice) Significantly wider aperture: f/3.7 vs f/4.8 Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 35 mm Much better macro capability: 3 cm vs 10 cm Significant disadvantages of the AZ251 (vs the Slice) Much smaller screen: 3.0" vs 3.5" No touch screen Significantly larger: Standard size 115x74x69 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm common strengths of the AZ251 and Slice Fairly small: Standard size 115x74x69 mm vs Super compact 104x60x17 mm Thin: 2.7" vs 0.7" Light weight: 354 g vs 158 g
	Compare the PixPro AZ251 vs the Slice