Nikon Coolpix P510 vs Canon Rebel T3

Winner
Nikon Coolpix P510

64

Canon Rebel T3

37

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix P510

High resolution screen
Screen resolution
921k dots
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
120 fps
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Built-in GPS
GPS
Great for travel
 

Reasons to buy the Canon Rebel T3

Startup delay
Almost no delay when powering up
300 ms startup delay
Battery life
Great battery life
700 shots
Badge
Phase detection autofocus
fast and accurate
Live view
Has live view
Preview your photos

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Canon Rebel T3.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix P510.

competitors

Nikon Coolpix P510 Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$325 body only

$350 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Supports 24p Supports 24p
Autofocus Faster autofocus
Image stabilization No image stabilization
Nikon Coolpix B500

Nikon Coolpix B500

Super zoom

$215 - $257

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Wide angle Better wide angle
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix P520

Nikon Coolpix P520

Super zoom

$380

Screen size Significantly larger screen
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Shutter lag More shutter lag

Canon Rebel T3 Competitors

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Canon EOS Rebel T5

Entry-level DSLR

$325 body only

$350 - $399 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Supports 24p Supports 24p
Battery life Shorter battery life
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

$497 body only

$430 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Startup delay Significantly more startup delay
Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi

Canon EOS Digital Rebel XSi

Entry-level DSLR

$650 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Size Smaller
Movie format Does not take movies

discussion

Nikon Coolpix P510
Coolpix P510
Nikon

Report a correction
Canon Rebel T3
Rebel T3
Canon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments