Updated (January 2013): Compare the Fujifilm FinePix S8300 vs Nikon Coolpix L820

Fujifilm FinePix S8300 vs Nikon Coolpix L820

Winner
Fujifilm FinePix S8300

109

Nikon Coolpix L820

100

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm FinePix S8300

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 Nikon Coolpix L820

Screen resolution
High resolution screen
921k dots
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 4 sample photos taken by the Fujifilm FinePix S8300.
Explore our gallery of 30 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix L820.

competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8300 Competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8600

Fujifilm FinePix S8600

Super zoom

$295

Size Smaller
Thickness Significantly thinner
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$402 body only

$299 with 18-55mm lens

External mic jack Has an external mic jack
Autofocus Faster autofocus
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon Rebel T3

Canon Rebel T3

Entry-level DSLR

$634 body only

$487 with 18-55mm lens

Autofocus Faster autofocus
Battery life Much longer battery life
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Nikon Coolpix L820 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix L340

Nikon Coolpix L340

Super zoom

$229

Wide angle Much better wide angle
Weight Slightly lighter
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Canon PowerShot SX400 IS

Canon PowerShot SX400 IS

Super zoom

$212

Size Slightly smaller
Weight Lighter
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix L810

Nikon Coolpix L810

Super zoom

$296

Weight Slightly lighter
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

discussion

Fujifilm FinePix S8300
FinePix S8300
Fujifilm

Report a correction
Nikon Coolpix L820
Coolpix L820
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments