Summary Nikon S6500

Prices Price
Camera only
$171
Score Snapsort rank
Within its price range
#n/a of 12
Among similar cameras
#n/a of 26
Specifications Key specs
Zoom
Help 12x
Screen size
Help 3"
Aperture
Help f/3.1
Screen resolution
Help 460k dots
Wide angle
Help 25 mm
Movie format
Help 1080p @ 30fps
see all specifications
Nikon Coolpix S6500Nikon Coolpix S6500

Replacement

Nikon has replaced the Coolpix S6500 with the S6600.

Nikon Coolpix S6600
Nikon Coolpix S6600 announced August 2013
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity

Compare the new Nikon S6600 vs the S6500

gallery

Explore our gallery of 2 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix S6500.

Pros

Report a correction

The Nikon S6500 vs other recent compacts

Screen size Above average sized screen Help
3"
Sensor type CMOS Sensor Help
Better in low light
Image stabilization Image stabilization Help
  1. Lens
Lowest price Inexpensive Help
$171.45
Report a correction

The Nikon S6500 vs other recent travel zooms

Size Really small Help
Compact (95×58×26 mm)
Weight Light Help
153 g
Thickness Thin Help
1"

Cons

Report a correction

The Nikon S6500 vs other recent compacts

Screen resolution Low resolution screen Help
460k dots
Sensor size Slightly smaller than average sensor Help
1/2.3" 6.16x4.62mm
Light sensitivity Poor maximum light sensitivity Help
3,200 ISO
Announced Old Help
January 2013
Report a correction

The Nikon S6500 vs other recent travel zooms

Zoom Poor zoom Help
12x
Battery life Very short battery life Help
150 shots
Movie format Full HD Help
1080p @ 30fps
Popularity Not so popular Help
Among snapsort users

Appearance

front photo of the Nikon Coolpix S6500back photo of the Nikon Coolpix S6500angle photo of the Nikon Coolpix S6500

Discussion

Nikon Coolpix S6500
Coolpix S6500
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 1 comments

Avatar for Todd Evans Todd Evans (3:21 PM, June 20, 2013)
The Nikon Coolpix S6500 camera DOES have a built-in flash. Please fix this because it is skewing the results. Also, the photo of the back of the camera is incorrect. Thanks!