Nikon S220 vs Samsung SL720

The 2009 Ultracompact Showdown: Nikon Coolpix S220 vs Samsung SL720 – A Deep Dive into Tiny Titans

Stepping back in time to 2009, the ultracompact camera market was buzzing with eager offerings aimed at those who prized portability without sacrificing too much on image quality or everyday usability. Two noteworthy contenders from that era - the Nikon Coolpix S220 and Samsung SL720 - have intrigued me during my recent hands-on tests. On paper, they share a lot: both feature 1/2.3" CCD sensors, fixed zoom lenses, and compact bodies. However, the nuances in their design, image rendition, and performance traits reveal quite different appeals.

In this article, I’ll dissect these two vintage ultracompacts through the lens of a professional with 15+ years of testing experience, weighing their real-world usability across multiple photography types, technical merits, and overall value. Whether you’re a collector, curious about camera evolution, or seeking an affordable secondary compact for simple use, you’ll find my deep dive helpful.

Let’s start with how they feel in your hand - because compact cameras live or die by ergonomics as much as image quality.

A Tale of Two Bodies: Handling and Ergonomics in Pocket-Sized Packages

When it comes to pocketability and handling, small dimensions are a double-edged sword. Both the Nikon S220 and Samsung SL720 are ultracompacts, yet they differ notably in size and weight.

The Nikon S220 measures a lean 90 x 56 x 18mm and weighs only 100g - a featherlight champion among compacts. Its slim profile makes it an effortless carry, even in tighter pockets or when layered with other gear. However, that slimness does sacrifice grip comfort somewhat, especially during extended shooting; the S220 can feel a bit too dainty, lacking any pronounced grip or tactile surface.

The Samsung SL720, meanwhile, is chunkier at 92 x 61 x 23mm and 168g - still pocket-friendly but clearly more substantial. That extra girth translates to a firmer hold, with more surface area for your fingers and thumb. The heft aids steadiness when pressing the shutter, which can be especially helpful for longer zoom shots where camera shake tends to creep in.

Both bodies eschew viewfinders, relying solely on rear LCD screens. Neither offers touchscreen control - which was quite common in 2009 - but both have clearly labeled physical buttons for basic functions and menu navigation.

Moving from the overall feel to the actual accessibility of controls, the top layouts tell us more about their intended user experience.

Top-Down Controls & Design Language: Ease of Use While Shooting

Looking from above, the Nikon S220 has a minimalist setup: a modest power button, a zoom toggle surrounding the shutter button, and a small mode switch. The controls are straightforward but don’t offer a lot of customization or direct manual overrides. For enthusiasts who love tinkering, this might feel limiting, but for everyday quick snaps, it’s efficient.

The Samsung SL720 though adds a couple of additional controls - such as a dedicated playback button and a four-way directional pad with a center confirmation button. This makes menu navigation more fluid and second-shot adjustments quicker. The larger size here works in Samsung’s favor, giving buttons decent spacing and tactile feedback, reducing mis-presses in the field.

These top-level design choices hint at the Nikon’s more point-and-shoot simplicity versus Samsung’s leaning slightly towards user control without jumping into full manual territory.

Now, the beating heart of any digital camera is its sensor, and these models sport surprisingly similar CCDs. But let’s unpack the differences and their implications on image quality.

Under the Hood: Sensor Specifications and Image Quality Insights

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3" CCD sensor measuring 6.08 x 4.56mm, covering about 27.72 mm². CCDs of this size were standard for ultracompacts back then, balancing cost and image quality within compact constraints. However, their resolution differs: the Nikon S220 sports a 10MP sensor (3648x2736 max resolution), while the Samsung SL720 ups that to 12MP (4000x3000 max).

At first glance, the SL720’s higher resolution suggests greater detail potential. Yet pixel count isn’t the whole story. CCD sensors at these sizes can struggle with noise at higher ISOs, and the denser 12MP grid can sometimes lead to increased grain in low light compared to a 10MP sensor.

In practice, I found the Nikon’s images a little cleaner at ISO 200 and above, with slightly better dynamic range retention in shadows, perhaps due to a less crowded pixel layout allowing excess light capture per pixel. Samsung’s SL720 did edge out on resolution when shooting in good light - crisp finer details on textures like foliage or fabric were noticeable, especially when viewed at 100% on a monitor.

Both models include an anti-aliasing filter to curb moire patterns but at the cost of some fine detail loss. Neither supports RAW capture (a big limitation for pros), so JPEG in-camera processing decides the final look.

The Nikon sensor’s max native ISO of 2000 contrasts with the Samsung’s ISO ceiling at 1600, but above ISO 400 noise kicks in heavily in both, so for low-light work you’d want to stick to the base ranges.

Stepping out of stills, their screen technology impacts user experience significantly.

Backscreen & Live View Usability: How Easy Is It to Frame Your Shots?

Both cameras use fixed 2.5-2.7 inch LCD screens without touch capabilities. The Nikon S220’s 2.5" screen feels a bit cramped, with a pixel count of 230k dots, rendering images sharp enough for casual review but lacking detail when confirming focus or exposure.

Samsung slightly lifts that with a 2.7" display, same resolution, but the slightly larger size helps. Color reproduction on the SL720’s screen appeared more vibrant and viewing angles better, making it easier to compose in bright ambient light.

Neither camera includes an electronic viewfinder, which is a stepping stone for any serious enthusiast or pro - but this was typical for ultracompacts at the time.

Live view autofocus systems on both rely on contrast detection, which while accurate, can be sluggish in dim or low-contrast scenes. Neither supports face or eye detection autofocus, limiting portrait precision. Speaking of portraits, let’s tackle how these cameras fare on skin tones and bokeh.

Shooting Portraits: Skin Tone Accuracy, Bokeh Quality, and Autofocus Precision

In portraiture, nuanced color reproduction and facial focus accuracy are critical. With fixed lens ultracompacts, there are inherent limits, but let’s see how these two hold up.

The Nikon S220’s lens zooms from 35-105mm equivalent (3x zoom), offering a mid-telephoto reach, but starting at a somewhat tight wide end. Its maximum aperture of f/3.1–5.9 is average, restricting optical bokeh quality at longer focal lengths. Skin tones on the Nikon rendered slightly warm and smooth - pleasantly natural in daylight, with minimal oversaturation. Focus was reliable when using center-area single autofocus but sometimes hunted a bit in lower contrast scenes, given the contrast-detector reliance.

Samsung’s SL720 delivers a slightly wider zoom from 28-102mm, giving more framing flexibility, especially for group portraits or environmental shots. Its max aperture is brighter at f/2.8–5.7 on the wide-end, which gives it a subtle advantage for shallow depth-of-field effects and low-light face shots. The SL720’s color science leans cooler; skin can appear a bit pale or washed out in certain lighting but with decent post-processing this is fixable.

Importantly, neither camera supports advanced eye detection autofocus, a feature that modern cameras excel at. You’ll have to manually aim and use the AF center point for best results.

When it comes to bokeh, both lenses suffer from typical ultracompact limitations - small sensor size plus slow apertures mean backgrounds rarely blur deeply. Still, Samsung’s bit wider and faster lens edges it out marginally in producing attractive subject isolation.

Moving to landscapes, where sensors and optics often find their true test - who wins here?

Landscape Photography Performance: Dynamic Range, Resolution, and Durability

Landscape photography rewards high resolution, dynamic range to capture shadow/highlight detail, and sturdy bodies that tolerate the elements.

Both cameras have no weather sealing or ruggedness claims - they’re basic compacts meant for casual use, so expect to be cautious about moisture and dust in the field.

In resolution terms, Samsung’s 12MP sensor again shines, delivering more detailed landscapes when shooting still, well-lit sceneries. However, dynamic range on both cameras is limited by sensor tech at that time; highlights blew out easily in harsh daylight, requiring underexposure or careful framing. Shadows crushed a bit, reducing texture in dark areas like forests or rocks.

Both include multi-segment metering with center-weighted preference, which does a fair job balancing scenes but lacks the sophistication of modern evaluative metering.

The Nikon’s 35mm minimum focal length does restrict its ability to capture ultra-wide vistas compared to more modern standards. Samsung’s 28mm start offers slightly better wide-angle coverage, a notable advantage for landscape framing.

Neither camera features optical image stabilization - ironically a big omission for landscape handheld shooting in lower light where tripod isn't an option.

For landscape photographers, image quality will be serviceable for casual prints and web use but falls short of pro standards due to limited sensor latitude and resolution.

Wildlife on the Go: Autofocus Speed, Telephoto Reach, and Burst Performance

Wildlife photographers demand fast autofocus, long zooms, and high burst rates to catch decisive moments. Can either ultracompact handle such challenges?

Samsung’s 28-102mm (3.6x zoom) translates roughly to a 28-102mm lens in full-frame terms but factoring the crop factor 5.9x multiplier, actually multiplies field of view by that, so the actual “35mm equivalent” figures quoted are already considering this. For wildlife, neither lens can compete with super-telephoto optics standard for dedicated wildlife shooters.

Nikon’s 35-105mm (3x zoom) is a little shorter in reach, limiting subject magnification compared to Samsung’s 28-102mm range.

In terms of autofocus speed, both rely on contrast detection only, with no phase detection or advanced tracking. I observed moderate AF lag and hunting, especially in low light or with moving subjects, making either camera unsuitable for fast-moving wildlife.

Burst modes differ: Nikon claims an 11fps continuous shooting mode, which sounds promising. However, in practice, buffer sizes and image processing bottlenecks reduce this speed after a few frames, and the image resolution drops. Samsung’s burst speed is not specified, but realistically it performs slower.

Overall, neither camera is built for serious wildlife photography. They’re better suited for casual animal snaps than deliberate wildlife sessions.

Sports Photography: Tracking Accuracy, Frame Rates, and Low Light Usability

Sports photography demands rapid, continuous autofocus tracking, high frame rates, and robust low-light ISO performance.

Neither the Nikon S220 nor Samsung SL720 feature subject tracking autofocus modes or high FPS burst shooting that modern APS-C or full-frame interchangeable lens cameras offer. Contrast detection AF is simply too slow and inconsistent for rapid sports sequences.

Nikon’s theoretical 11fps burst mode is tempting, but as mentioned, only holds for a brief window before slowing drastically.

Low light performance is handicapped by their small sensors and CCD tech. Max ISO on Nikon pushes up to 2000, Samsung tops at 1600, but noise at ISO 800-1600 is quite pronounced and image quality degrades seriously. This makes indoor sports or dim lighting challenging.

Flash units on board provide basic fill lighting but their limited range and recycled flash speeds aren’t up to fast-action work.

For street shooters, however, the story might be more favorable.

Street Photography & Everyday Use: Discretion, Size, and Responsiveness

The essential qualities for street photography include discrete appearance, speedy responsiveness, decent low-light handling, and portability.

The Nikon S220’s ultra-slim body and low weight make it exceptionally discreet; it practically disappears in your palm. The quick start-up and shutter lag are moderate - not instantaneous but acceptable for snapshot street moments if you time the shot well.

Samsung SL720’s larger form factor is more noticeable but still compact enough for casual carry. Button layout and slightly faster autofocus give it a borderline edge in street shooting usability.

Neither camera’s loud zoom motor is ideal for candid silent shooting, but that was a typical compromise for compacts then.

Both cameras struggle in low light due to noise and slower shutter speeds, limiting creative options during night streetscapes without flash.

Macro Photography: Close Focusing, Magnification, and Stabilization Considerations

Macro shooting benefits from close focusing capabilities and either optical or sensor-based stabilization.

Nikon S220 focuses as close as 10cm, while Samsung SL720 beats it with a 5cm minimum focus distance. That proximity advantage lets SL720 capture tighter close-ups and finer detail.

Both cameras lack optical image stabilization - a big drawback given the tighter framing and need for sharp focus in macro. This also means you’ll need either strong lighting or stable hands/tripod to avoid blur.

Lens aperture maxima at f/3.1-2.8 wide end do help with subject isolation, but small sensor size limits creamy bokeh.

Night and Astro Photography: ISO Performance and Exposure Modes

When it comes to night shots and astrophotography, the limitations of these cameras become pronounced.

Maximum native ISO ratings (2000 for Nikon, 1600 for Samsung) sound promising but CCD sensor noise and limited dynamic range severely limit usable ISO in the field.

Neither camera supports bulb mode or long exposure beyond 8 seconds shutter speed, which caps star trail or astrophotography potential.

Moreover, neither has dedicated night modes or intervalometer functions, ruling out timelapse astrophotography.

In essence, these cameras serve casual nighttime snaps with flash, but are not astrophotography tools.

Video Capabilities: Resolution, Frame Rates, and Audio Inputs

Both cameras record video in Motion JPEG format limited to VGA (640x480) quality, at 30fps maximum for Nikon and slightly lower resolutions/frame rates for Samsung.

No HD or 4K recording here, unsurprisingly given the 2009 release timeframe. This makes for grainy, low-res clips that are largely nostalgic rather than practical.

Neither camera offers external microphone input or headphone monitoring, reducing audio quality options further.

The limited video specs restrict usage mostly to brief family or casual clips rather than creative filmmaking.

Travel Photography: Versatility, Battery Life, and Portability

For travel photographers seeking everyday versatility, compact size, reliable battery life, and sufficient zoom range are key.

Both cameras have fixed lenses with modest zooms suitable for casual sightseeing shots, portraits, and landscapes.

Samsung’s slightly broader zoom and closer macro focus may edge out Nikon in compositional flexibility.

Battery life details are vague for both but given their small batteries (Nikon’s EN-EL10, Samsung’s SLB-10A), expect around 150-200 shots per charge under average use - typical for ultracompacts of this time. Carrying spares is advisable.

Both offer SDHC card support, so storage expansion is straightforward.

Build quality is plastic, with no weather sealing so extra care is required in harsh travel environments.

Professional Use and Workflow Integration: Reliability and Formats

Neither camera targets professional usage. The lack of RAW capture severely hinders post-processing latitude and color grading. File formats are standard JPEG and Motion JPEG video.

Workflow integration is rudimentary, with USB 2.0 connections for file transfer. No wireless, HDMI, or tethering capabilities exist.

Build materials and absence of weather sealing also discourage professional field use.

Still, for quick social snapshots or supplemental travel cameras, both function adequately.

Final Evaluation: Which Old-school Ultracompact Deserves Your Attention?

Nikon S220 front Nikon S220 screen back Samsung SL720 front Samsung SL720 screen back

So how do they stack up side-by-side on practical photography metrics?

The Nikon Coolpix S220 offers extreme portability, acceptable color rendition, and the fastest burst mode in the pair. It is better suited to those favoring pocketability and simple snapping.

The Samsung SL720 impresses with a bit higher resolution, wider and faster zoom, better macro abilities, and a more usable user interface. It’s preferable if you want more compositional options and decent image quality without drastically upsizing your pocket camera.

Quantitatively, my performance scoring rates Samsung marginally higher for image quality and user control, with Nikon excelling in size and speed.

When broken down by photography type, neither is suited for demanding sports, wildlife, or professional work, but they serve well casual street, travel, and portrait photography in daylight conditions.

My recommendations:

• If you prioritize ultra-light, compact, and quick snaps for casual use, the Nikon S220 is a neat little package and often found at bargain prices.
• If you want wider zoom flexibility, better macro photos, or a slightly more feature-rich UI - plus you don’t mind the extra size and weight - Samsung SL720 is the smarter pick.
• Neither camera is recommended for video projects, low light photography, or specialized needs like nightlife or professional shoots.
• Both lack modern connectivity, stabilization, and RAW support, which significantly limit creative post-processing or high-end workflows.

Reflecting on these cameras now, nearly 15 years later, offers a useful glimpse into how far compact digital cameras have evolved. Modern ultracompacts incorporate vastly improved sensor technologies, autofocus, image stabilization, video specs, and touchscreen interfaces.

Still, for collectors, budget buyers, or those curious about digital photography roots, the Nikon S220 and Samsung SL720 remain charming, capable mini-cameras - each with distinct strengths reflecting their manufacturer’s design philosophies.

Thank you for joining me on this detailed comparison. Should you consider acquiring either model, I hope this analysis helps clarify what to expect and how to best use these vintage ultracompacts.

Happy shooting!