Updated (January 2013): Compare the Fujifilm FinePix S8500 vs Nikon Coolpix S9500

Fujifilm FinePix S8500 vs Nikon Coolpix S9500

Winner
Fujifilm FinePix S8500

38

Nikon Coolpix S9500

32

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm FinePix S8500

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/2.9
Great zoom
Zoom
46x
High speed movies
High-speed framerate
480 fps
High ISO
Light sensitivity
12,800 ISO
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix S9500

Size
Really small
Compact (110×60×31 mm)
Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
Focus points
Many focus points
99
Thickness
Thin
1.2"

galleries

Explore our gallery of 1 sample photo taken by the Fujifilm FinePix S8500.
Explore our gallery of 40 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix S9500.

competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8500 Competitors

Fujifilm FinePix S8600

Fujifilm FinePix S8600

Super zoom

$104

Size Significantly smaller
Thickness Significantly thinner
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix L830

Nikon Coolpix L830

Super zoom

$199

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Size Smaller
High-speed framerate Lower speed movies
Nikon Coolpix L840

Nikon Coolpix L840

Super zoom

$206 - $229

Screen resolution Significantly higher resolution screen
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Nikon Coolpix S9500 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix S9900

Nikon Coolpix S9900

Travel zoom

$249

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix S7000

Nikon Coolpix S7000

Travel zoom

$160 - $227

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Fastest shutter speed Much faster max shutter speed
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix S9700

Nikon Coolpix S9700

Travel zoom

$267

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Zoom More zoom
3D Doesn't take 3D photos

discussion

Fujifilm FinePix S8500
FinePix S8500
Fujifilm

Report a correction
Nikon Coolpix S9500
Coolpix S9500
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments