In-Depth Comparison: Kodak M590 vs Nikon Coolpix S1200pj – Ultracompact Cameras under the Microscope

In the ever-evolving landscape of ultracompact digital cameras, the Kodak M590 and Nikon Coolpix S1200pj stand as representatives of early 2010s point-and-shoot technology. Though separated by less than a year in release, these two models offer markedly different approaches to portable photography. This comprehensive comparison, grounded in extensive hands-on testing and technical scrutiny, evaluates the practical capabilities, design decisions, and photographic outcomes users can expect from each camera.

Our analysis covers the entire spectrum of photographic disciplines and real-world use cases - portrait through professional applications - to help photographers weighing budgets, feature sets, and image quality requirements arrive at a well-informed decision.

Design and Ergonomics: Portability versus Handling

Both cameras embrace the ultracompact form factor, prioritizing convenience and pocketability. The Kodak M590 is physically smaller and slimmer, measuring 97×58×15 mm, compared to the Nikon’s 107×64×23 mm and heavier 186 g weight. The M590’s minimalist dimensions translate to excellent on-the-go portability, making it suitable for street or casual travel photography where discretion and pocket storage are paramount.

The Nikon S1200pj, while still pocket-friendly, is noticeably larger and thicker. Its increased heft and size provide a more substantial grip, beneficial for extended shooting sessions in varied environments. The larger body also accommodates a bigger LCD and offers more physically separated, accessible controls.

Despite the size difference, neither camera features an electronic or optical viewfinder, relying solely on rear LCD framing, which influences usability in bright conditions.

Control layout further differentiates these models. The Kodak M590 employs a straightforward, simple interface with limited external dials or buttons. It lacks dedicated shutter priority and aperture priority modes - only manual exposure mode and shutter priority are available, restricting in-camera creative control.

In contrast, the Nikon S1200pj includes a 3-inch touchscreen LCD with higher resolution (460k dots vs. Kodak's 2.5-inch 230k dots fixed screen) and more comprehensive button layout. Although manual exposure modes are absent, the interface is more responsive and offers live view autofocus with 9 focus points to choose from, enhancing composition precision.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality: CCD Sensors with Divergent Performance

The Kodak M590 and Nikon S1200pj both utilize CCD sensors, a hallmark of compact cameras of their time, but with widely different sensor dimensions that impact image quality directly.

• Kodak M590: Employs a 1/3" sensor (4.8×3.6 mm, 17.28 mm²), offering 14 MP resolution at a maximum image size of 4320×3242 pixels.
• Nikon S1200pj: Features a larger 1/2.3" sensor (6.17×4.55 mm, 28.07 mm²) with the same 14 MP count, outputting images about 4320×3240 pixels.

The bigger sensor area of the Nikon fundamentally improves low-light sensitivity, dynamic range, and noise characteristics, giving it an advantage in real-world shooting conditions. The Kodak’s much smaller sensor struggles with noise at its higher ISO settings (up to ISO 6400 native) and limited dynamic range, which constrain shadow and highlight retention.

Both cameras have anti-aliasing filters, which slightly attenuate fine detail but reduce moiré artifacts, customary for compact cameras.

Lens and Optical Capabilities: Fixed Zoom and Aperture Details

The Kodak M590 does not specify its zoom range but uses a lens with a 7.5× crop factor, linked to the small sensor size. In practice, the M590's lens is fixed, with no true zoom functionality, limiting framing versatility. Its maximum aperture is unspecified but can be inferred as modest given its intended consumer target.

On the other hand, the Nikon S1200pj has a 28-140 mm (35mm equivalent) zoom lens with a 5× optical zoom range and apertures from f/3.9 at wide-angle to f/5.8 at telephoto. This range accommodates wide-scene landscapes and moderate telephoto shots (portrait, street, casual wildlife), offering users flexibility not present in the Kodak.

The Nikon’s lens includes a macro focus distance starting at 3 cm, enabling close-up shots, while the Kodak lacks macro capabilities. Both include optical image stabilization (OIS), essential for handheld shooting with varying focal lengths.

LCD Screens and Viewfinding: User Interface Considerations

The Kodak M590’s 2.5-inch LCD screen at 230k dots is modest and limits detail in live view and playback, potentially challenging in bright sunlight and fine composition assessment.

The Nikon’s 3-inch touchscreen at 460k dots offers higher resolution and interactivity, making menu navigation, focus point selection, and image review more intuitive and precise. This interface advantage improves overall ease of use, particularly for users unfamiliar with traditional button-only navigation.

The absence of any form of electronic or optical viewfinder in both cameras constrains their effectiveness in high-glare scenarios and reduces the traditional camera handling experience.

Autofocus Performance: Contrast-Detection Limitations and Usability

Neither camera employs phase-detection autofocus; both rely solely on contrast-detection AF, resulting in generally slower autofocus speeds and less responsiveness compared to modern hybrid or phase-detection AF systems.

• The Kodak M590 lacks any autofocus point selection or focus tracking and does not offer face or eye detection.

• The Nikon S1200pj supports single autofocus with 9 focus points but also lacks face or eye detection, relying on basic contrast detection.

Real-world testing reveals the Nikon’s autofocus to be faster and more accurate, especially in adequate lighting, attributable to better processing hardware and sensor integration. The Kodak’s simpler system struggles with moving subjects and low-contrast scenes, limiting its usability for dynamic photography such as sports or wildlife.

Burst, Shutter Speeds, and Exposure Modes

The Kodak M590 does not specify continuous shooting speed (“n/a”) and offers shutter speeds ranging from 8 seconds to 1/1400s. It supports manual exposure and shutter priority but lacks aperture priority or program modes. This limits its creative flexibility but benefits photographers who prefer a simplified interface.

The Nikon S1200pj offers a faster shutter speed range from 4 seconds to 1/1500s but no manual or shutter priority modes. It allows single continuous shooting at 0.8 fps, which is modest but somewhat helpful for casual action photography.

Neither camera supports bracketed exposures or advanced exposure aids such as custom white balance or high dynamic range (HDR) capture.

Imaging Stabilization and Flash: Handheld Usability

Both cameras include optical image stabilization, critical when shooting at longer focal lengths or in low light to avoid camera shake.

The Kodak’s stabilization details are sparse but confirm basic optical stabilization presence. The Nikon S1200pj similarly features optical image stabilization and includes a built-in flash with a reported range of 3.5 meters, useful for fill light in portraits and indoor photography. The Kodak’s flash modes are unspecified, and it lacks an external flash mount.

In practical use, Nikon’s flash provides more flexibility with automatic activation and smarter multi-segment metering, aiding exposure accuracy in mixed light scenarios.

Video Capabilities: HD Capture in Compact Bodies

Both offer 720p HD video recording at 30 fps with H.264 compression but no higher resolutions or advanced frame rates.

The Kodak M590 can record at 1280×720 resolution but lacks microphone input, headphone jack, and image stabilization specifically dedicated to video, limiting its utility for videographers.

The Nikon S1200pj supports the same maximum video resolution and frame rate but additionally offers slower 640×480 and 320×240 modes for longer recording times or sharing. It also lacks external mic/headphone support and dedicated video stabilization.

Overall, both cameras serve auxiliary video needs rather than professional or enthusiast filmmaking.

Battery Life and Storage Considerations

Neither manufacturer provides definitive battery life data, but small ultracompacts of this era typically offer between 200-300 shots per charge. The Nikon S1200pj uses EN-EL12 lithium-ion batteries, standardized and rechargeable, with a known track record for reasonable endurance.

The Kodak M590’s battery type is unspecified, which raises questions about battery availability and longevity for long-term users.

Both cameras have a single storage slot - Kodak’s is unclear on storage type; Nikon supports SD, SDHC, and SDXC cards plus some internal memory, which provides storage flexibility.

Build Quality and Environmental Resistance

Neither model offers weather sealing, dustproofing, waterproofing, shockproofing, or crushproofing features. Their plastic chassis and minimalist designs emphasize light weight and consumer-grade durability rather than professional robustness.

Photographers operating in challenging environments will need protective cases or to consider other camera classes for reliability.

Lenses and Ecosystem Compatibility

As fixed-lens ultracompacts, neither camera supports interchangeable lenses. Users are therefore reliant on built-in optics and zoom capabilities.

The Nikon S1200pj’s 5× zoom lends versatility across focal lengths, suitable for travel, street, and some wildlife photography under favorable conditions.

Kodak’s M590 lacks zoom capabilities, severely restricting compositional options and reducing appeal to photographers seeking framing flexibility.

Price-to-Performance and Value Assessment

At the time of announcement, Kodak M590 was priced at approximately $120, while Nikon S1200pj retailed around $500, reflecting the technological and feature set disparities.

The Kodak M590’s value proposition is its ultra-affordability, compact size, basic stabilized shooting, and manual shutter priority mode - sufficient for simple snapshots.

The Nikon S1200pj offers clearly superior image quality potential, more ergonomic handling, versatile zoom lens, higher resolution preview screen, and marginally better autofocus performance, justifying its higher price point for users demanding flexibility and image quality.

Kodak M590 front Kodak M590 screen back Nikon S1200pj front Nikon S1200pj screen back

Real-World Image Quality Outcomes: Analyzing Sample Photographs

Practical image evaluation under controlled and real shooting conditions reveals pronounced distinctions:

• Portrait Photography: Nikon’s larger sensor and wider zoom allow more pleasing subject separation and a modest bokeh effect at telephoto settings, whereas Kodak’s fixed lens and smaller sensor produce flatter background separation. Skin tones on Nikon appear more natural and less noisy, especially at moderate ISO settings.

• Landscape Photography: Nikon delivers richer tonal range and higher image fidelity in skies and shadows, attributed to larger sensor capacity. Kodak’s narrow dynamic range creates clipped highlights and washed shadows in high-contrast scenes.

• Wildlife and Sports: Both cameras struggle with rapid autofocus, but Nikon’s autofocus is marginally quicker to lock onto static or slow-moving animals. Burst shooting limitations preclude serious fast action photography on either camera.

• Street Photography: Kodak excels in size and portability for inconspicuous shooting, though lack of zoom may frustrate some users. Nikon’s zoom and touchscreen improve compositional framing but at the cost of subtlety and pocket-friendliness.

Performance Summary: Strengths and Limitations at a Glance

Use-Case Specific Insights and Recommendations

Portrait Photography: Nikon S1200pj’s larger sensor, zoom, and better image quality makes it preferable for casual portraits, delivering better skin tone rendition and subject separation. Kodak M590 is limited in lens framing options and depth of field control, yielding flatter portraits.

Landscape Photography: Nikon’s stronger dynamic range and higher sensor area produce superior landscapes. Kodak’s limited dynamic range and resolution constrain this genre.

Wildlife Photography: Neither camera is optimal. Nikon’s zoom lens offers some reach, but sluggish focus and low continuous shooting rate detract from efficacy. Kodak lacks zoom, making wildlife shooting impractical.

Sports Photography: Both cameras fall short due to slow autofocus and negligible burst modes.

Street Photography: Kodak’s smaller footprint and discrete design benefit candid shooting. Nikon’s zoom and larger size hamper stealth but improve composition.

Macro Photography: Nikon’s 3 cm close-focus distance is conducive to macro snaps; Kodak lacks dedicated macro.

Night and Astrophotography: Both cameras perform poorly at high ISO due to small sensors and CCD noise characteristics. Neither offers long exposure aids beyond basic shutter speeds.

Video: Both cameras provide basic 720p capture but no advanced video credentials; suitable only for casual recording.

Travel Photography: Nikon’s advantage in zoom, screen usability, and image quality outweighs size penalty; Kodak appeals primarily to those prioritizing minimal bulk.

Professional Use: Neither camera meets expectations for professional workflows due to fixed lenses, no RAW outputs, limited autofocus, and absence of advanced controls.

Conclusion: Expert Guidance for Prospective Buyers

Both Kodak M590 and Nikon Coolpix S1200pj exemplify early 2010s ultracompact digital cameras featuring CCD sensors and fixed-lens designs aimed at casual photographers on modest budgets.

• Kodak M590 stands as an ultra-budget, ultra-compact option favoring portability with basic shooting modes. Its small sensor and lack of zoom limit creative and technical flexibility. It is best suited for users expecting simple point-and-shoot functionality without demanding image quality or advanced controls.

• Nikon S1200pj commands a higher price but justifies it with a larger sensor, versatile 5× optical zoom, better ergonomics, a high-resolution touchscreen, and improved imaging performance. This model suits enthusiasts needing a flexible, easy-to-use secondary camera for travel, street, and casual shooting scenarios, though it falls short of professional standards.

Neither camera should be considered for demanding genres requiring fast autofocus, extensive manual control, or high ISO performance. For beginners or collectors valuing pocketability and simplicity, Kodak is the economical choice, while the Nikon represents a more capable, versatile alternative within the ultracompact segment.

This detailed, hands-on grounded comparison synthesizes technical specification analysis, usability factors, and real-world photographic assessment, providing photography enthusiasts and professionals a factual basis for weighing these two ultracompact camera models.