Fujifilm FinePix S8200 vs Canon PowerShot SX510 HS

Winner
Fujifilm FinePix S8200

54

Canon PowerShot SX510 HS

47

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm FinePix S8200

High speed movies
High-speed framerate
480 fps
High ISO
Light sensitivity
12,800 ISO
Great battery life
Battery life
500 shots
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Digital
 

Reasons to buy the Canon PowerShot SX510 HS

Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look
High-speed framerate
High speed movies
240 fps
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Sensor type
CMOS Sensor
Better in low light

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon PowerShot SX510 HS.
Explore our gallery of 5 sample photos taken by the Fujifilm FinePix S8200.

competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8200 Competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8500

Fujifilm FinePix S8500

Super zoom

$359

Zoom More zoom
Lowest price Cheaper
Fujifilm FinePix S4500

Fujifilm FinePix S4500

Super zoom

Size Smaller
Weight Lighter
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon PowerShot SX520 HS

Canon PowerShot SX520 HS

Super zoom

$222

Size Smaller
Weight Lighter
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Canon PowerShot SX510 HS Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Canon EOS Rebel T6

Entry-level DSLR

$335 - $699 body only

$370 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Battery life Much longer battery life
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon PowerShot SX410 IS

Canon PowerShot SX410 IS

Super zoom

$192

Zoom More zoom
Fastest shutter speed Much faster max shutter speed
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$499 body only

$752 with 18-135mm lens

Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
External mic jack Has an external mic jack
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

discussion

Fujifilm FinePix S8200
FinePix S8200
Fujifilm

Report a correction
Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
PowerShot SX510 HS
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments