Nikon D5100 vs Nikon Coolpix S9700

Winner
Nikon D5100

62

Nikon Coolpix S9700

55

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D5100

24p movies
Supports 24p
For that film look
Flip-out screen
Screen flips out
Great for movies
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon Coolpix S9700

Size
Really small
Compact (110×64×35 mm)
High-speed framerate
High speed movies
240 fps
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Screen type
OLED Screen
Bright and vivid

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D5100.

competitors

Nikon D5100 Competitors

Nikon D5200

Nikon D5200

Entry-level DSLR

$600 body only

$567 with 18-55mm lens

True resolution Higher true resolution
Continuous shooting Shoots slightly faster
Battery life Significantly shorter battery life
Nikon D7200

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$629 - $697 body only

$997 - $1,150 with 18-140mm lens

Viewfinder coverage Much better viewfinder coverage
Built-in focus motor Has a built-in focus motor
Movie continuous focus Doesn't focus continuously recording movies
Canon Rebel T3i

Canon Rebel T3i

Entry-level DSLR

Screen resolution Slightly higher resolution screen
True resolution Slightly higher true resolution
Battery life Significantly shorter battery life

Nikon Coolpix S9700 Competitors

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60

Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ60

Travel zoom

$2,192

Aperture Wider aperture
Wide angle Better wide angle
High-speed framerate Doesn't record high-speed movies
Nikon Coolpix S9500

Nikon Coolpix S9500

Travel zoom

$417

Aperture Wider aperture
Thickness Slightly thinner
Screen resolution Lower resolution screen
Nikon Coolpix P500

Nikon Coolpix P500

Super zoom

$546

Wide angle Better wide angle
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Screen type Doesn't have an OLED screen

discussion

Nikon D5100
D5100
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon Coolpix S9700
Coolpix S9700
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments