Nikon Coolpix L810 vs Canon PowerShot SX150 IS

Winner
Nikon Coolpix L810

33

Canon PowerShot SX150 IS

28

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix L810

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
921k dots
In-camera panoramas
Panorama
Stitches together multiple photos into a panorama
Takes 3D photos
3D
View photos in 3D on 3D televisions
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
 

Reasons to buy the Canon PowerShot SX150 IS

Size
Really small
Mid size (113×73×46 mm)
Thickness
Thin
1.8"
Fastest shutter speed
Fast shutter speed
1/2500 of a second
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
  2. Sensor shift

galleries

Explore our gallery of 48 sample photos taken by the Canon PowerShot SX150 IS.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix L810.

competitors

Nikon Coolpix L810 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix L340

Nikon Coolpix L340

Super zoom

$144

Wide angle Much better wide angle
Battery life Much longer battery life
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Nikon Coolpix L840

Nikon Coolpix L840

Super zoom

$189 - $229

Battery life Much longer battery life
Sensor type Has a CMOS-family sensor
Size Larger
Nikon Coolpix L330

Nikon Coolpix L330

Super zoom

$199

Wide angle Much better wide angle
Battery life Longer battery life
Image stabilization No image stabilization

Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Competitors

Canon PowerShot SX160 IS

Canon PowerShot SX160 IS

Travel zoom

$299

Battery life Much longer battery life
Fastest shutter speed Faster max shutter speed
Aperture Slightly narrower aperture
Canon PowerShot SX170 IS

Canon PowerShot SX170 IS

Travel zoom

$162

Battery life Much longer battery life
Weight Slightly lighter
Aperture Slightly narrower aperture
Canon PowerShot SX610 HS

Canon PowerShot SX610 HS

Travel zoom

$198 - $229

Wide angle Significantly better wide angle
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Aperture Narrower aperture

discussion

Nikon Coolpix L810
Coolpix L810
Nikon

Report a correction
Canon PowerShot SX150 IS
PowerShot SX150 IS
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments