Support me by shopping at B&H!
Nikon COOLPIX L820 Ken McMahon, October 2013
 
 

Nikon COOLPIX L820 vs Canon SX510 HS Quality

Support me by
shopping below


 

To compare real-life performance I shot this scene with the Nikon COOLPIX L820 and the Canon Powershot SX510 HS, within a few moments of each other using their best quality JPEG settings.

Though both models have a 30x optical zoom, the COOLPIX L820's lens starts at a slightly wider 22.5mm wide-angle equivalent, so I zoomed it in a tad to match the 24mm maximum wide angle on the PowerShot SX510 HS. Further down the page you can see results at around 250mm and the maximum zoom - 675mm on the COOLPIX L820 and 720mm for the SX510 HS.

For this test both cameras were set to Program auto and all camera settings were left on the defaults.

  Nikon COOLPIX L820 results
1 Nikon COOLPIX L820 Quality
2 Nikon COOLPIX L820Noise
3 Nikon COOLPIX L820 images

The image above was taken with the Nikon COOLPIX L820. Although the SX510 HS has PASM exposure modes, the Nikon COOLPIX L820 doesn't, so for a fair comparison both cameras were set to Program auto mode. The COOLPIX L820 metered 1/400 at f6.1 at its base 125 ISO sensitivity and the SX510 HS metered an exposure of 1/640 at f4 with the ISO sensitivity set to 80 ISO. Image stabilisation was turned off for this tripdod mounted test.

The first crop from the COOLPIX L820 looks a little clumpy on the finer detail. There's no visible noise, but where you might expect to see some detail in the chapel stonework and in the grass and rocks in the foreground there isn't any. And the door and windows in the chapel aren't as clean-edged as they could be.

In the second crop you can't see the lighthouse particularly well, but that could a consequence of the atmospheric haze. In the foreground of this crop the windows are reasonably sharp, but again, there's a frustrating lack of finer detail in the roof tiles. The third crop from close to the edge of the frame is no softer than elsewhere, it looks like the lens is performing consistently, but the sensor isn't recording all the detail that it's capable of delivering.

In the fourth crop from close to the centre of the frame everything looks that little bit sharper, but there's still very little of the finer detail in the tile and brickwork of the buildings being resolved.

Compared with the 16 Megapixel Nikon COOLPIX L820 the crops from the 12 Megapixel sensor in the SX510 HS show a slightly larger area with smaller detail. But I think that, without exception, they show more detail and its sharper than in the COOLPIX L820 crops. I initially thought L820 hadn't done itself any favours by selecting a small aperture when its Auto program could have opted to open it up a little and choose a faster shutter speed, avoiding any diffraction issues. However, it turns out that the aperture on the COOLPIX L820 is an electronically controlled ND filter, rather than a physical diaphragm, so diffraction is unlikley to be a concern. The COOLPIX L820's lens doesn't suffer from chromatic aberration to the same degree as the PowerShot SX510 HS and the final crops from the middle of the frame are closer in quality terms, though the Canon is still sharper and more detailed. Now check out my Nikon L820 noise results or scroll down to see how they compare at longer focal lengths.

 

Nikon COOLPIX L820
 
Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
f6.1, 125 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f6.1, 125 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f6.1, 125 ISO
f4, 80 ISO
f6.1, 125 ISO
f4, 80 ISO



Nikon COOLPIX L820 vs Canon SX510 HS Quality at 250mm

 
 

For this next test I zoomed both cameras in to an equivalent focal length of around 250mm. Stil in Program auto mode at the base 80 ISO setting, the PowerShot SX510 HS selected 1/500 at f5.6. The COOLPIX L820 chose an exposure of 1/1000 at f5.6 at 125 ISO. As usual, the crops are taken from the areas marked by the red rectangles.

At this focal length, about a third of the way into the zoom range, the first three crops are taken from close to the edge of the frame. The most noticeable difference between these and the wide angle crops is that the lens doesn't have nearly as much of a problem with chromatic aberration when zoomed in. There's no evidence of colour fringing and even the detail in crops one and three from the very corners of the frame is reasonably sharp. The final crop from closer to the middle of the frame is a tiny bit sharper, but overall the 24-720mm lens produces very consistent reaults at this focal length

By comparison, the crops from the Nikon COOLPIX L820 look a little soft and the detail looks clumpy. Possibly the 16 Megapixel sensor in the COOLPIX L820 is producing a little more noise, or possibly it's to do with compression, whatever the reason, you can see more detail in all of the PowerShot SX510 HS crops.

Nikon COOLPIX L820
 
Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
f5.6, 125 ISO
f5.6, 80 ISO
f5.6, 125 ISO
f5.6, 80 ISO
f5.6, 125 ISO
f5.6, 80 ISO
f5.6, 125 ISO
f5.6, 80 ISO



Nikon COOLPIX L820 vs Canon SX510 HS Quality at maximum zoom

 
 

For this final test I zoomed both cameras in to their maximum focal length. Again, the exposure was left in Program auto mode with both models using the maximum available aperture of f5.8. As usual, the crops are taken from the areas marked by the red rectangles.

What's interesting here is that the chromatic aberration is back with a vengeance on the PowerShot SX510 HS at the 720mm maximum telephoto focal length. With the exception of the second crop, there's colour fringing everywhere, though it's worse on the two crops from closer to the frame edge. That aside, the lens peforms very well and here, as in the crops at the other focal lengths the fine detail is well resolved and the edges are nice and sharp. Overall, I'd say this is a great result for the SX510 HS, particularly the sensor, slightly let down by the chromatic aberration at the extremes of the zoom range.

The Nikon COOLPIX L820 has a maximum telephoto focal length that, at 675mm is slightly shorter then the PowerShot SX510 HS. That compensates for the higher resolution of the sensor, so in these comparisons the crop area is roughly the same. The COOLPIX L820's lens is a little better behaved than the PowerShot SX510 HS's and there's no evidence of chromatic aberration. But the sensor performance isn't going to change with the focal length of the lens and there's the same clumpiness to the pixels which is obscuring the finer detail.

Now see how these models compare at higher sensitivities in my Nikon L820 Noise results.

Nikon COOLPIX L820
 
Canon PowerShot SX510 HS
f5.8, 125 ISO
f5.8, 80 ISO
f5.8, 125 ISO
f5.8, 80 ISO
f5.8, 125 ISO
f5.8, 80 ISO
f5.8, 125 ISO
f5.8, 80 ISO


Nikon COOLPIX L820
results : Quality / Noise


If you found this review useful, please support me by shopping below!
 
Living Landscapes eBook
By Todd and Sarah Sisson
Price: $29.99 USD (PDF download)
More details!

Todd and Sarah Sisson are two of my favourite landscape photographers and in this superb ebook, they'll reveal the secrets behind their wonderful photos. Over 130 pages, it combines tutorials, field guides and technical advice, using the beautiful scenery of New Zealand as a backdrop. An informative and attractive ebook that's highly recommended for anyone wanting to improve their landscape photography! Well worth the price.
     
All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2014 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.

/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs