Kodak Z5120 vs Nikon Coolpix P600: A Hands-On Superzoom Showdown for Every Shooter

When budget-friendly superzoom bridge cameras are on your radar, you're usually juggling the lure of a crazy long lens with the inevitable compromises in sensor size, ergonomics, and features. I’ve spent well over a decade putting dozens of bridge cameras through their paces, and today I’m diving deep into two models separated by a couple of years but competing in the same marketplace: the Kodak EasyShare Z5120 and the Nikon Coolpix P600. Both marketed as “small sensor superzooms,” they cater to those craving an all-in-one solution without draining your wallet. But how do they stack up in the trenches - portrait, wildlife, video, and beyond?

Grab a comfy seat and maybe a cup of coffee; this comparison is 2,500 words full of practical, tested insights you won't find in marketing brochures or shallow reviews. I’ll unpack specs, real-world performance, and value for photographers from beginners to enthusiasts - even some pros on a budget.

First Impressions – Size, Feel & Controls

Before pointing lenses skyward, how a camera feels in your hands can make (or break) the shooting experience, especially in long sessions or tricky situations. Both the Kodak Z5120 and Nikon P600 embrace the “bridge” form factor - SLR-like builds with fixed superzoom lenses and lots of control wheels and buttons.

If you compare physical dimensions and weight, the Kodak Z5120 comes in lighter (445g) and slightly more compact than the bulkier Nikon P600 at 565g. Dimensions-wise, the Kodak is stubbier - 124x91x105mm - while the Nikon's a bit sleeker front-to-back but taller lengthwise at 125x85x107mm.

What I noticed immediately during real-world testing:

• Kodak Z5120: Well balanced for daytime handheld shooting. The grip is decent but a bit slippery without a textured surface. The control layout keeps things simple, but you’ll miss an electronic viewfinder, relying solely on the 3-inch fixed LCD. The buttons are straightforward but lack illumination, which makes night shooting fiddly.

• Nikon P600: Heftier but more comfortable for extended shoots, especially with bigger hands. The rubberized grip gives confidence, and the fully articulated 3-inch screen (with 921k dots resolution) is a joy - especially for awkward angles or vlog-style shooting. Plus, the electronic viewfinder (EVF) is a game-changer in bright light where LCDs wash out.

Looking down from the top, the Nikon P600 lays out its dials and buttons like a well-trained orchestra: mode dial, dedicated exposure compensation thumb dial, and a quick zoom toggle make operation intuitive. The Kodak’s top is simpler but perhaps too sparse for faster work. The absence of an EVF or even a pop-up flash on the Kodak rounds out a no-frills experience.

Peering Inside - Sensor, Image Quality & Lens Reach

Superzoom reputations hinge on sensor size, resolution, and the lens’s reach and speed. Both cameras cling to a small 1/2.3" sensor (6.17x4.55 mm) - basically the same sensory real estate shared by most compacts and superzooms. This means noise control and dynamic range are naturally limited compared with APS-C or larger sensors.

But there are salient differences in tech and lenses:

• Kodak Z5120: Equipped with a CCD sensor clocking in at 16MP with a max native ISO of 6400. CCD sensors have advantages in color rendition but tend to generate more noise above ISO 400-800 and have slower readout speeds. Kodak supports RAW capture, which is rare in this price segment and grants more latitude for post-processing.

• Nikon P600: Sports a 16MP BSI-CMOS sensor (back-illuminated, an advancement over CCD) with a native ISO 100–6400 and boosted ISO to 12800. This upside in sensitivity can help in low light and astrophotography. Unfortunately, it lacks RAW support, saddling you with JPEGs - limiting flexibility for enthusiasts wanting more control.

Regarding lenses, the Kodak claims a 26-676mm equivalent (26x zoom, f/2.8–5.6), while the Nikon boasts a more insane 24-1440mm (60x zoom, f/3.3–6.5). The Nikon’s lens extends much further at the telephoto end, which is key for wildlife and birdwatchers, although the max aperture is narrower at longer focal lengths, meaning less light for fast shutter speeds at the extremes.

Getting the Shot - Autofocus and Shooting Speed

Nothing kills a wildlife or sports shoot more than sluggish autofocus (AF) or inconsistent tracking. Both cameras use contrast-detection AF (common among small sensors), but implementation differs:

• Kodak Z5120: AF is single-point or center-weighted, with face detection turned on. AF speed is adequate for stills but concerns arise for moving subjects - tracking isn’t supported, making it tricky to lock focus on erratic wildlife or fast athletes. Continuous AF is absent, so anticipating shots is a must.

• Nikon P600: Adds AF tracking alongside face detection, a valuable step up for action photography. While it doesn’t have phase-detection AF (which would be the gold standard), the contrast AF accompanied by tracking helps nail focus on moving subjects more reliably. Continuous AF mode is still missing, but the system is notably quicker and more responsive.

Shooters who value burst mode speed will appreciate:

The Nikon wins in speed, but neither camera is a true sports-speed powerhouse.

Viewing Your Masterpieces - Screens and Viewfinders

This category often gets overlooked - but is critical for in-field usability.

• Kodak Z5120: Basic 3-inch, fixed LCD with just 230k resolution, which leaves images looking soft and difficult to judge. Worse still: no electronic viewfinder - meaning in bright sunlight, you’re stuck squinting at a low-res screen. Live view autofocus works, but framing is challenging outdoors.

• Nikon P600: A significant upgrade with a 3-inch fully articulated screen sporting 921k dots and anti-reflective coating. This articulating feature is golden for macro, street, and video shooting at odd angles. Plus, a built-in electronic viewfinder provides a solid alternative to the LCD when you need steadier composition or shooting in harsh light.

Investing in an EVF makes a real difference for shooting comfort and accuracy - no question. To be blunt: the Kodak's screen is one of its weaker points.

Real-World Performance Across Photography Styles

Now, let’s break down how these cameras perform across popular genres, considering everything from autofocus speed and image quality to lens capability and handling.

Portrait Photography – Colors, Bokeh & Eye Detection

Portrait work demands pleasing skin tones, accurate autofocus on eyes, and flattering background blur.

• Kodak Z5120: The CCD sensor delivers decent color rendition with a slightly “warmer” tone, which is flattering for skin. Face and eye detection AF helps nail focus on your subject’s eyes when using live view. However, bokeh quality suffers - due to the smaller sensor and slower aperture at longer focal lengths, backgrounds look more cluttered than creamy.

• Nikon P600: Offers face detection but lacks selective eye AF. Color fidelity is solid but leans toward neutral. Its better ability to track faces aids in candid portraiture. Background blur is still shallow due to sensor size and limited aperture, but better reach and lens quality can help separate subjects slightly more at tele end.

If you’re after dreamy portraits with natural skin tones but don’t mind limited bokeh, both work. The Nikon edges out for focus precision.

Landscape Photography – Resolution, Dynamic Range & Weather Resistance

Landscape shooters value sensor resolution, dynamic range, and sturdy builds for outdoors.

• Both cameras sport 16MP with similar sensor sizes, so pixel count is comparable. CCD versus BSI-CMOS impacts noise and dynamic range, with the Nikon’s CMOS chip delivering better details in shadows and highlights.

• Neither features weather sealing or environmental ruggedness; handle with care outdoors in rain or dust.

• Nikon’s longer zoom helps capture distant vistas or compressed perspectives, and more expansive exposure compensation options help in tricky lighting.

Bottom line: The Nikon’s sensor tech and exposure versatility give it a leg up for landscapes if you want to maximize image quality.

Wildlife Photography – Autofocus, Telephoto Reach & Burst Rate

Wildlife calls for fast AF, long reach, image stabilization, and decent burst shooting.

• Kodak’s 26-676mm lens is respectable, but the Nikon’s 24-1440mm range nearly doubles magnification. That extra reach can be critical to getting close without disturbing critters.

• Nikon’s AF tracking dramatically improves focus lock on moving animals, especially smaller birds or mammals.

• Both have optical image stabilization, but the Nikon’s newer system is more effective, especially at long focal lengths where handshake is magnified.

• Burst speeds favor the Nikon slightly (7fps vs 6fps), but neither camera is truly fast enough for high-octane action.

Wildlife photographers will find the Nikon P600 the stronger choice for handling moving subjects and zoom power.

Sports Photography – Tracking Accuracy and Low Light Capability

Sports shooting demands consistent AF, high burst rates, and good high ISO performance under indoor or dusk conditions.

• Kodak Z5120’s single-point AF and 6fps shooting rate limit tracking performance. Coupled with noisier CCD sensor image quality at ISO >800, it’s a tough companion for fast indoor sports.

• Nikon P600’s AF tracking helps a bit, plus 7fps burst rate and boosted ISO up to 12800 give an edge for low-light sports arenas. Noise is still a bother at elevated ISOs but manageable for web uses.

The Nikon’s better overall AF and low-light ability point it as the more viable budget sports shooter.

Street Photography – Discreteness and Portability

Street photography thrives on discretion, portability, and quick handling.

• Kodak Z5120’s smaller size and lighter weight could be an asset, but the lack of an EVF makes bright daylight shooting cumbersome.

• Nikon P600 is larger and heavier but the EVF provides reliable framing without holding LCD up to your face conspicuously - useful when shooting street scenes surreptitiously.

Neither camera is outrageously compact or silent (no silent shutter modes), but for everyday urban stuff, the Nikon’s articulation and viewfinder are blessings.

Macro Photography – Magnification and Focus Precision

Both cameras allow close focusing down to 1 cm; optical image stabilization helps keep macro shots sharp.

• Kodak’s lens aperture range and manual focus option let you finesse focusing, though the slow AF speed gets frustrating.

• Nikon’s articulated screen and better stabilization shine here, aiding composition from tough angles.

Shooters wanting to dabble in macro will find both doable with practice - just temper expectations with the small sensor’s depth of field constraints.

Night and Astro Photography – High ISO and Exposure Control

Astro and night photography place heavier demands on sensor noise control and exposure flexibility.

• Kodak’s CCD sensor can create excessive noise beyond ISO 400, limiting clean night images. Shutter speeds are capped at 16 seconds long exposure, which restricts star trail creativity.

• Nikon shines with 15-second shutter max, higher ISO ceiling, and an anti-reflection-coated LCD for easier low-light framing.

Neither camera supports bulb mode or RAW (Nikon), so manual control is limited compared to dedicated astro cameras. But if you’re an occasional star-gazer, Nikon’s specs make the best of the lot.

Video Capabilities – Resolution, Stabilization & Audio

Both cameras offer HD video recording with optical stabilization but differ considerably:

• Kodak Z5120 maxes out at 720p/30fps with H.264 codec, no microphone input, and basic manual controls. Footage is fine for casual use but lacks sharpness and detail.

• Nikon P600 steps up with full 1080p/60fps video, several frame rates, improved stabilization, but also no external mic port (a bummer for pros). The Nikon’s video is overall smoother and more versatile.

Neither replaces a dedicated camcorder or hybrid mirrorless for serious videography, but Nikon’s fuller feature set better serves casual shooters and vloggers.

Travel Photography – Versatility, Battery Life & Weight

Travel shooters need lightweight, versatile, reliable cameras with good battery stamina.

• Kodak Z5120 uses 4x AA batteries - convenient but bulkier and prone to draining quickly on LCD-heavy use.

• Nikon P600 sports a rechargeable EN-EL23 lithium-ion battery with solid life rated around 330 shots per charge, though extended video drops that number. It weighs more but packs more features for all-in-one travel needs.

Regarding storage, both accept SD cards, but Nikon supports SDXC formats for larger libraries.

Pros and Cons at a Glance

Kodak EasyShare Z5120

Pros:

• Lightweight and compact for a superzoom bridge
• Extended zoom to 676mm with bright max aperture on wide end
• RAW file support (rare in budget bridge cameras)
• Face and eye detection AF
• Optical image stabilization included
• Affordable price (~$200)

Cons:

• No electronic viewfinder, low-res LCD hampers bright-light use
• CCD sensor noise performance below par at ISO >800
• Basic AF system with no continuous AF or tracking
• Limited video resolution and features (720p max)
• No weather sealing or ruggedness
• AA batteries less convenient than rechargeable packs

Nikon Coolpix P600

Pros:

• Massive 60x optical zoom to 1440mm telephoto
• BSI-CMOS sensor with higher max ISO and better low-light capability
• Electronic viewfinder plus articulated high-res LCD screen
• AF tracking and face detection aid capturing moving subjects
• Full HD 1080p video recording at 60fps
• Longer max shutter speed (15 sec) aids night photography
• Rechargeable battery with reasonable life (~330 shots)
• Built-in wireless connectivity for easy sharing
• More thoughtful ergonomics and controls layout

Cons:

• No RAW support; limited post-processing flexibility
• Larger and heavier body (565g)
• Narrower maximum aperture especially at long zoom end (f/6.5)
• No external microphone input for video
• Lack of weather sealing

Kodak Z5120 front Kodak Z5120 screen back Nikon P600 front Nikon P600 screen back

Above you’ll find side-by-side sample images comparing landscape, wildlife, and portrait shots from both cameras under similar conditions. Notice the Nikon’s greater reach and sharper details on telephotos, but also consider the Kodak’s warmer color palette in portraits.

Final Verdict - Which Should You Buy?

I’ve worn the “boots on the ground” user’s hat for both cameras, and here’s the skinny:

• If you're a cheapskate or want something lightweight for family vacations, casual travel, or beginner superzoom experimentation, the Kodak Z5120 punches above its weight for the price. Its RAW support is a real plus for tinkerers willing to put in post-processing sweat equity. But be ready to fight with the LCD and AF for tricky shots.

• If you’re more serious about wildlife, sports, or travel photography and can stretch your budget to around $750, the Nikon P600 delivers significantly better optics, AF tracking, and usability with an EVF plus higher-res screen. Its video capabilities and modern sensor tech make it a solid all-rounder for enthusiasts craving reach and versatility.

• Pros looking for rugged professional gear or stellar image quality should be warned these cameras lag behind mirrorless and DSLRs, but as affordable do-it-all backups or beginner introductions, especially for long reach, they hold value.

The Nikon scores notably higher on autofocus, image quality, and versatility, while Kodak stakes a claim on size and price.

This genre breakdown reinforces Nikon’s lead for moving subjects and video, with Kodak holding ground for portraits and entry users.

A Few Words on Testing Methodology

My hands-on evaluation involved shooting standardized test targets and repeatable real-world scenarios with both cameras on the same tripod and settings, under varied lighting conditions. Dynamic range and noise were measured using RAW + JPEG outputs (Kodak) and best quality JPEGs (Nikon). For AF, I shot staged moving subjects and tracked wild birds to assess lock-on speed and accuracy. Ergonomics tests involved extended handheld sessions and street shooting to simulate real user handling.

Wrapping Up: Your Next Steps

If either camera matches your budget and needs, go hunt for second-hand deals or bargains - the Kodak Z5120 is aging and might be scarce new, while Nikon P600 models can still pop up as discounts as the P610 and newer supersede it.

Consider your priorities: Do you want top-end zoom and shooting versatility (Nikon), or a simple, lightweight shooter with RAW control (Kodak)? Neither replaces an interchangeable-lens camera but for enthusiasts wanting convenience and reach in a single box, they still can shine.

Whichever you pick, remember: mastering light, composition, and storytelling matters more than gear. But having the right tool in hand makes the journey that much sweeter.

If you follow me for gear reviews, you’ll know I appreciate affordable cameras that enable creativity without breaking the bank. Both the Kodak Z5120 and Nikon P600 have something to offer - and now you’ve got the clarity to pick the one that suits your style best.

Happy shooting!