Nikon Coolpix P7000 vs Canon EOS Rebel T5

Winner
Nikon Coolpix P7000

60

Canon EOS Rebel T5

54

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix P7000

Really small
Size
Mid size (114×77×45 mm)
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
  2. Sensor shift
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
Thin
Thickness
1.8"
 

Reasons to buy the Canon EOS Rebel T5

Movie format
Full HD
1080p @ 30fps
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Sensor type
CMOS Sensor
Better in low light
Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look

galleries

Explore our gallery of 9 sample photos taken by the Canon EOS Rebel T5.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix P7000.

competitors

Nikon Coolpix P7000 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix P340

Nikon Coolpix P340

Pro digicam

$328

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Aperture Significantly wider aperture
Supports 24p No 24p support
Nikon Coolpix P6000

Nikon Coolpix P6000

Pro digicam

GPS Has a GPS
Aperture Slightly wider aperture
Supports 24p No 24p support
Olympus SZ-31MR iHS

Olympus SZ-31MR

Travel zoom

$341

High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Wide angle Significantly better wide angle
Supports 24p No 24p support

Canon EOS Rebel T5 Competitors

Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Battery life Shorter battery life
Canon Rebel T5i

Canon Rebel T5i

Entry-level DSLR

$1,095 body only

$539 - $549 with 18-55mm lens

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Battery life Shorter battery life
Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$310 - $549 body only

$393 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity

discussion

Nikon Coolpix P7000
Coolpix P7000
Nikon

Report a correction
Canon EOS Rebel T5
EOS Rebel T5
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments