Which is better, Fujifilm S4050 or Nikon P500? Which is cost effective?

Dude, I'll tell you! Nikon P500 35mm equivalent: The two super zoom ratios of 36x zoom are good, especially the super telephoto reaches 840mm and 810mm, but it is quite high.

Fujifilm S4050,I feel that this machine is great,Especially 30X zoom,Many attractions are far away and some scenery others can't shoot at all,Mine can shoot very clearly,The function of this machine at home is completely sufficient。

4050's 30X optical change + digital change can reach a maximum of 210X can shoot potholes on the surface of the moon But it is actually very different from HS11 First of all, the image sensor is different, 4050 is still CCD and 11 uses CMOS Secondly, 4050 is automatic zoom and 11 is a fully manual machine The operation mode is similar to a SLR, in fact, half of the 4050 is enough for LZ to play If you want to create something good, you can consider 11 or 22.

And personally recommend the S4050

Kodak Z, you can zoom when shooting, and you can also take a test.

Of course, it's P100 is good, but S4050 is also good, Fuji's telephoto machine is still very trustworthy, more cost-effective, to be honest, the difference between these two cameras is hundreds of dollars, more money must be P100, less money S4050, but I think S4050 is definitely not bad compared to P100, and even better than P100 in many aspects. In fact, if you have a lot of money, you can still look at Fujifilm's HS11 and HS22, as well as Panasonic's FZ40. Nikon's telephoto machine always feels like it's in decline, since the P90.

Yes, DSLR Nikon, forget about the rest.

Nikon P100 is good, Nikon is a big brand in the camera industry!

The P100 has better form factor performance than the Fujifilm S4050

My personal recommendation is still Nikon P100 is better.

Nikon's supporting blame is also many!!

Much stronger than the S2900HD.

S2900HD full manual support suitable for practice night scene cloudy day can not see macro ultra macro comparable to SLR.

hs11 Appearance doesn't have to be said Full manual support If the pixel is higher, I must choose HS11, but it seems to be large and the machine is heavy, if you must choose, consider anti-shake.

Nikon P100 is definitely good but highly recommend Nikon P6000

I didn't want to speak, but I couldn't help but say a few words when I saw this misleading speech upstairs:

Both cameras are products that compete in the basically same ** range under the excellent brand of Japanese cameras, and the performance is very close.

1 CCD, I personally think that there is no difference between 14 million pixels and 16 million pixels, because the lens resolution can't keep up, 2 million more, and the details provided are not more. However, an extra 2 million pixels will bring more noise, which will affect the image quality even more.

I don't know how many streets can the Canon lens throw off Fuji from the conclusion that the upstairs has drawn from **? Fujifilm is also a very good lens factory in Japan, okay. Except for a small number of top-of-the-line lenses, Canon will have some advantages.

At least when it comes to consumer digital cameras, Canon has absolutely no advantages. One price and one goods, the lenses of these two machines will basically be at the same level. Camera manufacturers are not fools, as long as they are enough, they can save it.

The digic 4 processor is a complete joke, I'll give you a literacy, this is a processor from three years ago, at present, Canon's new DC is used with DigiC 6, and the new SLR is basically used with DigiC 5+, is Canon's market policy reversed??? There is no essential difference between the processors used by DSLRs and DCs.

Image processor this thing,The cost is not high,Basically, the cameras sold in the same period,Although the brands are different,Their processor names are different,But their performance is basically similar,DigiC 4 is a processor on sale in three years,These two machines are new machines last year。 The performance of this processor is not determined by the camera manufacturer, but by the processor manufacturer. In short, it can be concluded that the two processors are basically the same, and Fujifilm may have an advantage, but not necessarily, it should be that the model of this processor cannot be found (who called Canon's 12-year-old machine still uses the old processor from 3 years ago, so it seems a bit unkind).

Regarding the question of camera quality, I can clearly say that the workmanship of Canon's entry-level camera is very average, at least the quality of the body is not as kind as Nikon Fuji's family in all aspects, and it feels like a plastic toy, and I am personally a Canon DSLR user. Fujifilm's workmanship is not necessarily bad, and the Fujifilm 645 point-and-shoot machine at home can still measure and focus correctly.

Both of these are digital cameras, and to be honest, the two are not rivals in the same class, and the Canon SX500 is ...... in all aspects

Canon SX500 16 million pixels, Fujifilm S4500 pixels 14 million. The focal length is all the same.

Canon's lens quality also has to throw off Fuji a few streets ......The CCD size of both is also the same.

Another important advantage of Canon is that Canon has used on a large scale in its consumer digital cameras what was previously only available on professional-grade SLRs: the image processor: DigiC 4. It has a very big improvement in image quality.

The Canon SX500 is better, with higher pixels and more durable. The shape is beautiful, too. After all, the canon mouth is also good.