Resolving Fine Lines

For our resolution test, we reset the camera to its default settings and then used the highest resolution and quality setting. The camera was then set to +1.3 E.V. For more information, refer to our Testing Procedures page. When reading this chart, the numbers represent lines per picture height (LPH). For example, the number 16 would represent 1,600 LPH. Click on the thumbnails below to download the full resolution chart.

Nikon 4100 Canon SD300 Olympus Verve

+1.3 EV

+1.0 EV

+1.0 EV
Click on images to download.

Nikon Coolpix 4100 VS. Canon PowerShot SD300

Roll your mouse over the 200% crops below to see the difference between the Nikon Coolpix 4100 and the Canon PowerShot SD300 resolution charts.


Hold mouse over image.


Hold mouse over image.


Nikon Coolpix 4100 VS. Olympus Stylus Verve

Roll your mouse over the 200% crops below to see the difference between the Nikon Coolpix 4100 and the Olympus Stylus Verve resolution charts.


Hold mouse over image.


Hold mouse over image.

In our resolution chart, the Nikon 4100 puts in respectable performance compared to similar cameras that we have tested. In the horizontal crop, it is able to resolve lines out to 1,150 LPH, which is just a bit less than the Canon SD300 and the same as the Stylus Verve. In the vertical crop, the 4100 resolves lines to 1,200 LPH, nearly matching the Canon SD300 performance. All three cameras show some moiré near their resolution limits. The 4100 shows some very subtle JPEG artifacts along edges in the test. Overall, we are very impressed with the results. The Nikon Coolpix 4100 puts in a slightly better-than-average resolution performance for a 4 megapixel camera.

The Timing Tests Color Reproduction
POST A COMMENT

16 Comments

View All Comments

  • lopri - Wednesday, March 19, 2008 - link

    [quote]we[/quote]

    quote:

    we
    Reply
  • g33k - Monday, July 18, 2005 - link

    A very thorough review. Thanks! Reply
  • cholm - Monday, April 18, 2005 - link

    Pardons for continuing the OT thread...

    "Barf" is Farsi for "snow", and a popular brand of laundry detergent and shampoo available at any corner store in Iran. In the same vein, a "barfi" is the guy who shovels the snow off of your roof.
    Reply
  • MrCoyote - Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - link

    I was looking at Nikon, but bought a Kodak DX7440 instead. This gives you a good lens which has very little barrel distortion compared to all Nikon point and shoot. Plus manual settings for EVERYTHING and near instant shutter response, that Nikon's line lacks.

    The only bad thing about P&S cameras, are the 4:3 ratio of the pictures. I'd rather 35mm film ratio of 3:2, like all SLR cameras got.
    Reply
  • stephencaston - Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - link

    #10: Yep it's real, but I can't remember what country it's from ;-) Reply
  • Jigga - Monday, March 14, 2005 - link

    BARF detergent powder? Where do you get that--please tell me its a novelty gag and not an actual brand!!! Reply
  • skrivis - Monday, March 14, 2005 - link

    Camera reviews...

    Epinions is worthwhile sometimes, and as someone else mentioned, dcresource is good. Another one I found valuable is Steve's Digicams (http://www.steves-digicams.com/)
    Reply
  • skrivis - Monday, March 14, 2005 - link

    The Canon A75/A510 and A85/A520 were models I had considered, and I was all set to purchase an A85 after the 520 was released and the prices on the A85 dropped significantly.

    However, the Nikon Coolpix 5400 was just too good a deal to pass up. :-)

    Magnesium case, 5.1 MP, ED lens, flash hotshoe, LCD screen that swivels, diopter adjustment for the viewfinder... it's a level above any of the Canon 75/85/95 etc. models.

    There are only two drawbacks to the 5400 (and some other Nikons).

    One is that it takes a Li-ion battery pack. You can also use a standard Lithium disposable battery in an emergency. The good thing is that other companies make replacement packs that are cheaper than Nikon's. I was against this type of pack and wanted a camera that takes AA cells. I decided I can bend a little since the 5400 has so much else to offer.

    The other drawback is the lack of an auto-focus helper light for low-light conditions. It hasn't proved to be a problem yet, and I plan to get a cheap LED pointer and use that if needed.

    Reply
  • AtaStrumf - Saturday, March 12, 2005 - link

    hoppa here is one review of Canon A510/520 I have been able to dig up:

    http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_...

    I seems that A520 is a total waste of money since quality is not improved and due to larger files it is a bit slower and it even has more noise, so it's A510 all the way. I bought one and I am very happy with it. LOVE the all manual controls and it's very snappy.

    Even movies are much better than I expected from 320x240@15 FPS up to 3 mins. Perfectly OK for goofying around, since this is primarily a still and not a movie camera. Even so it still puts this Nikon to shame.

    Lens is a bit soft in corners at wider apertures, so I use Aperture Value at 5.5 to 7.1 and the quality is great.

    Overall I think it is _the_ best camera for the money, I'm just having some strange problems when the camera refuses to shoot with flash and then tells me to change the batteries and turns off even though the batteries are far from depleted and even new fresh from the charger don't help. It happened twice in two weeks since I have it and is very annoying, since it comes out of the blue and disappears as mysteriously as it appears. Thankfully I bought it at a local camera shop so RMAing it will be easy.
    Reply
  • hoppa - Saturday, March 12, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the review. You guys should really review the new Canon A510/520. From what I've seen they (at least the 510) blow everything else in the price range away. Compared to the entry-level Nikons, they offer full manual controls, longer lenses and much sharper pictures. Certainly seems like a better choice to me. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now