Coolpix 4100: 4 Megapixel Entry-level Nikon for Under $200
by Stephen Caston on March 11, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Digital Camera
Color Reproduction
* For all of our color tests, we reset the 4100 to its factory default settings. It was then set to record using the highest image quality option. All images are sRGB.We took a picture of our color chart using each of the following WB settings: Auto, Incandescent, and Manual. Click on a thumbnail below to view the full-size image.
Incandescent
| Auto WB | Incandescent WB | Manual WB |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Reference Chart ("actual colors") |
||
| Auto WB | Incandescent WB | Manual WB |
 |
 |
 |
Under tungsten light, the 4100 shows a slight yellowish-orange color cast with Auto WB. When we set the camera to Incandescent WB, the colors are a bit more accurate, but we still detect a slight yellowish cast. With manual WB, the 4100 reproduces very accurate colors.
Daylight
| Auto WB | Daylight WB | Manual WB |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
| Reference Chart ("actual colors") |
||
| Auto WB | Daylight WB | Manual WB |
 |
 |
 |
Under direct sunlight, the 4100 reproduces very accurate colors with all three WB settings. Interestingly, the Daylight WB setting produced the brightest color chart.
Studio Shot
In this shot, we tested the camera's ability to reproduce colors in our studio shot using different WB settings under tungsten light.| Auto WB | Incandescent WB | Manual WB |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
 Click to enlarge. |
In our more casual studio shot, the Coolpix 4100 does a better job with the Auto WB setting than on our color chart. For some reason, the camera produced a slight yellowish cast with the Incandescent setting, while Manual WB was very accurate.
Built-in Flash
For the flash test, we set the camera to Auto mode w/Auto flash. The picture was taken from 5 feet away.
Click to enlarge.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
16 Comments
View All Comments
lopri - Wednesday, March 19, 2008 - link
[quote]we[/quote]g33k - Monday, July 18, 2005 - link
A very thorough review. Thanks!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.
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.
stephencaston - Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - link
#10: Yep it's real, but I can't remember what country it's from ;-)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!!!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/)
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.
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.
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.