Updated (January 2013): Compare the Nikon Coolpix P520 vs Nikon Coolpix S9500

Nikon Coolpix P520 vs Nikon Coolpix S9500

Winner
Nikon Coolpix P520

48

Nikon Coolpix S9500

41

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix P520

Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Digital
Fast shutter speed
Fastest shutter speed
1/4000 of a second
CMOS Sensor
Sensor type
Better in low light
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix S9500

Size
Really small
Compact (110×60×31 mm)
High-speed framerate
High speed movies
240 fps
Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid
Focus points
Many focus points
99

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix P520.
Explore our gallery of 40 sample photos taken by the Nikon Coolpix S9500.

competitors

Nikon Coolpix P520 Competitors

Samsung Galaxy Camera

Samsung Galaxy Camera

Travel zoom

$450

Screen size Much larger screen
Size Significantly smaller
Zoom Significantly less zoom
Nikon Coolpix L840

Nikon Coolpix L840

Super zoom

$319

Battery life Much longer battery life
Wide angle Better wide angle
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix B500

Nikon Coolpix B500

Super zoom

$199 - $257

Battery life Much longer battery life
Wide angle Better wide angle
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

Nikon Coolpix S9500 Competitors

Nikon Coolpix S9700

Nikon Coolpix S9700

Travel zoom

$470

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Zoom More zoom
Aperture Narrower aperture
Canon PowerShot SX280 HS

Canon PowerShot SX280 HS

Travel zoom

$233

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Fastest shutter speed Significantly faster max shutter speed
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen
Nikon Coolpix S8200

Nikon Coolpix S8200

Travel zoom

Screen resolution Higher resolution screen
Aperture Slightly wider aperture
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies

discussion

Nikon Coolpix P520
Coolpix P520
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon Coolpix S9500
Coolpix S9500
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments