Nikon Coolpix S3600 vs Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W690: A Compact Camera Face-Off for the Practical Photographer

In the ever-evolving world of digital cameras, compact shooters continue to hold a prized spot for those who crave portability without giving up basic creative control. Today, we dig deep into two modestly priced contenders in the small sensor compact category: the Nikon Coolpix S3600 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W690. Both are classic pocketable companions aimed at casual photographers or enthusiasts seeking a simple, no-fuss camera. But beneath their modest specs and affordable price tags lie subtle distinctions that matter - at least to those who want the best bang for their buck.

Having personally handled both cameras over numerous shoots and test sessions, I’ll take you through their strengths, weaknesses, and quirks. Whether you’re into snapshots for travel, street, or basic family portraits, or just need something better than a smartphone, by the end you’ll know which one fits your style and budget better.

Getting Hands-On: Size, Ergonomics, and Design Feel

First impressions count - and with compacts, size and feel often govern the enjoyment of shooting. The Nikon S3600 and Sony W690 both weigh comfortably under 150 grams and sport modest footprints, but subtle differences matter to real-world users.

The Nikon S3600 measures 97x58x20 mm, while the Sony W690 edges slightly smaller at 94x56x22 mm and weighs about 17 grams heavier (142 g vs. 125 g). On paper, both feel featherweight in your hand, but in practice, the Nikon’s slightly slimmer profile lends itself to more comfortable grip and pocketability. The Sony’s marginally thicker body nudges it toward a firmer hold but might feel chunkier during long hauls.

Without the presence of any heft or advanced manual controls, ergonomics fall to button placement and construction quality. Both cameras opt for plastic chassis without weather sealing or robust build features, typical of entry-level compacts. The Nikon body feels a bit more refined and less plasticky but don’t expect professional-grade sturdiness on either.

In summary: If you prioritize slimness and minimizing bulk, Nikon slightly wins here. But both cameras are designed for casual shooting and light travel - so neither will impress serious pros.

Top Layout and Control Accessibility: Streamlining Simplicity

Entry-level compacts often sacrifice controls for automation, but subtle UI design choices can still affect shooting flow. Checking the top views side-by-side reveals how Nikon and Sony approach their minimal command sets.

Both lack dedicated manual mode dials, aperture or shutter priority, and offer only rudimentary exposure adjustment. The Nikon S3600 houses a slightly more traditional shutter button - responsive and tactile - with a zoom toggle ring that feels snappier and less plasticky than Sony’s zoom rocker.

Sony’s W690 introduces a power button on the top plate, cleverly separated from the shutter, reducing accidental triggers - but the zoom rocker feels mushier under thumb. Neither camera offers a front or rear control wheel for quick settings, keeping the operation delightfully simple but limiting for enthusiasts wanting in-depth tweaks.

So, the practical takeaway? Both cameras are designed for point-and-shoot ease, and usability is a toss-up. Nikon’s slightly better button feel may encourage quicker shooting sequences, but neither will thrill if you like fiddling with settings on the fly.

Sensor and Image Quality: The Heart of the Matter

The real performance differentiator lies in image quality - and despite their small sensor class, subtle differences ripple through the output.

Both cameras rely on 1/2.3" CCD sensors measuring 6.17x4.55 mm (28.07 mm²), which is standard fare for compact shooters but restricts dynamic range and low-light prowess. Nikon ups the resolution stakes at 20 MP versus Sony’s 16 MP, offering more pixels for cropping or moderate enlargement.

How do these specs translate to actual photographs? In well-lit scenarios, the Nikon’s higher megapixel count delivers slightly sharper images with more detail nuance - especially noticeable when cropping or printing in 8x10 inches or higher. However, be aware that high-resolution sensors may amplify noise at native ISOs above 800, which both cameras struggle with.

Sony W690’s slightly lower 16 MP resolution softens this somewhat, rendering images marginally cleaner at ISO 400 and above, but with less fine detail overall. Neither camera supports RAW capture, restricting post-processing flexibility - a critical point for enthusiasts who prefer editing latitude.

Color reproduction on both is decent but with typical compact tendencies: Nikon leans toward warmer, saturated skin tones, while Sony opts for more neutral, cooler rendering. I found Nikon’s colors more pleasing for portraits, with a more natural yet lively palette, while Sony’s palette might appeal better to those seeking true-to-life fidelity.

Low-light is where these small sensors show their true limits: expect grainy ISO 800 images and significant softness by ISO 1600 on both. That said, image stabilization (both optical) helps maintain sharper shots at slower shutter speeds indoors, but there's no substitute for sensor size when shooting night scenes or astro photos.

Overall, the Nikon S3600 slightly edges Sony in resolution and color vibrancy, though both are firmly entry-level for image quality.

Screen and Interface: Your Real-Time Canvas

Viewing and reviewing images benefit from good screen tech, and here we see notable differences - especially in size.

The Nikon S3600 sports a 2.7-inch TFT LCD with anti-reflection coating at 230k dots, while the Sony W690 boasts a physically larger 3-inch ClearPhoto TFT LCD, also 230k dots. Screen resolution being equal, the bigger Sony screen aids composition and playback clarity.

Both LCDs are fixed (non-articulated), with no touch input - limiting usability angles and menu navigation. The anti-reflective coating on Nikon’s screen is a practical boon outdoors, reducing glare considerably, whereas Sony’s screen is prone to reflections under direct sunlight.

Menus are straightforward and responsive for casual users. Nikon’s interface feels slightly faster and better organized, likely due to a newer generation processor, but neither offers advanced touchscreen or gesture controls. Both lack EVFs altogether, which may irritate photographers working in bright outdoor lighting.

In short: Sony W690 pleases with larger screen real estate, but Nikon’s anti-glare coating enhances usability in bright conditions. Neither delights experienced users who favor tactile EVFs and live histograms.

Zoom, Focusing, and Autofocus: Tackling the Distance Game

Let’s talk optics because zoom range directly impacts versatility in day-to-day shooting.

The Nikon Coolpix S3600 offers an 8x zoom spanning 25-200 mm equivalent, f/3.7-6.6 aperture. On the other hand, the Sony W690 extends further to a 10x zoom at 25-250 mm equivalent, f/3.3-5.9 aperture.

The extra 2x zoom reach on Sony provides a notable advantage when squeezing wildlife or distant sports subjects into the frame while maintaining compactness.

Both lenses have their quirks. Nikon’s maximum aperture narrows aggressively towards the tele end (F6.6), which tends to exacerbate image noise in less-than-optimal lighting. Sony’s aperture holds a fraction brighter (F5.9) at the long end, contributing to marginally better low-light telephoto shots.

When it comes to autofocus, both employ contrast-detection systems with face detection - no phase-detection or hybrid technology here. Nikon features 99 focus points, which theoretically offers finer focusing precision and tracking, whereas Sony’s exact count is unspecified but fewer cross-type points.

Autofocus speed feels comparable for standard daylight shots, but I observed Nikon’s continuous autofocus surprisingly more reliable for subjects in soft motion or crowds (think street or family events), thanks to its “tracking” AF mode.

However, continuous AF in Sony is limited - no continuous AF tracking during video or burst. The Nikon S3600 also supports continuous AF during stills burst mode, although at a sluggish 1 fps.

Neither camera is suitable for fast sports or wildlife photography given their slow frame rates and limited AF sophistication, but Nikon’s more numerous AF points and tracking modes give it a slight edge for casual moving subject capture.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speeds: Nailing the Moment?

Both cameras max out at a sluggish 1 frame per second burst shooting, hardly ideal for chasing athletics or wildlife action.

Shutter speed ranges differ: Nikon goes as slow as 4 seconds (helpful for low-light or light painting experiments) up to 1/1500 sec, whereas Sony ranges from 30 seconds (!) to 1/1600 sec, notable for long exposures.

If you fancy dabbling in longer exposures for night or creative effects, Sony’s 30-second shutter opens doors Nikon does not. But with CCD sensors susceptible to noise and blooming, long exposures in these models require patience and post-processing.

Video Capabilities: Modest, But Functional

Video options on these cameras are fairly limited but worth a mention.

Both record HD 720p video at 30 fps max, Nikon offering 1280x720p at 30 fps and 25 fps options, and Sony similarly offering 1280x720p at 30 fps plus VGA at 30 fps. No 1080p or 4K video here - hardly surprising given their vintage and sensor class.

Neither camera offers external mic inputs nor headphone jacks, so audio capture relies on built-in microphones, usually resulting in average sound quality with ambient noise.

Steady video recording benefits from optical image stabilization on both cameras.

Neither support continuous autofocus during video (Nikon supports continuous AF in stills burst only; Sony does not). This can challenge focus tracking for spontaneous video scenes.

If video is a prime need, I'd advise stepping up to mid-range compacts or mirrorless models.

Battery Life and Storage: Enough for a Day Trip?

The Nikon S3600 uses EN-EL19 batteries rated for approximately 230 shots per charge, while the Sony W690 charges NP-BN batteries good for around 220 shots.

Both are typical for compact cameras, translating into about a day’s shoot with moderate shooting habits. Neither supports USB charging - a minor inconvenience nowadays - and both require proprietary chargers.

For storage, each has a single memory card slot. Nikon supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards; Sony additionally supports Sony’s Memory Stick Duo family - a nice nod to legacy users but less relevant today. USB 2.0 ports are standard, without Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC connectivity - meaning no wireless image transfer or remote control features.

This limits quick sharing or tethering workflows sought by advanced amateurs or professionals.

Sample Image Comparisons: Real-World Look and Feel

Seeing is believing. I took both cameras out on repeated test shoots under varied lighting and subjects to compare output quality directly.

Nikon S3600 front Nikon S3600 screen back Sony W690 front Sony W690 screen back

• Portraits: Nikon handles skin tones with more warmth and pleasing saturation. Sony’s colors come off a bit muted and cooler but with less color noise. Depth of field is shallow on both cameras at maximum zoom, but no real bokeh artistry given the small sensors.
• Landscape: Both show typical limited dynamic range given their CCD sensors. Nikon’s 20 MP resolution yields crisper detail at 100% crop, while Sony's 16 MP images look softer but cleaner. Neither resolves fine textures in shadows well.
• Macro: Nikon allowed closer focusing (2 cm) producing intimate detail shots, slightly better than Sony’s 5cm macro limit.
• Low Light: Both struggle above ISO 800 with visible noise and softness. Nikon’s stabilization helps resist blur better.

In summation: Nikon’s images feel more vibrant and detailed, Sony’s appear smoother but less punchy. Neither competes with modern mirrorless or APS-C compacts, but both hold an edge over many phones at similar price levels.

Specialized Photography Disciplines: Suitability Score

Compact point-and-shoot cameras rarely shine across all photography styles, but it’s key to understand where each model fits best.

• Portraits: Nikon leads with better skin tone rendering and sharper results.
• Landscape: Nikon’s higher resolution and better macro capability offer an advantage.
• Wildlife & Sports: Neither camera is truly suited due to slow autofocus and 1fps burst rate, but Sony’s longer zoom range could eke out some advantage.
• Street: Both are discrete and portable; Nikon’s slimmer form slightly ahead for comfort.
• Macro: Nikon’s 2cm focus beats Sony’s 5cm minimum.
• Night/Astro: Sony’s 30s shutter speed opens up long exposure options.
• Video: Both tie at basic 720p 30fps with optical stabilization.
• Travel: Nikon’s lighter weight and slightly better ergonomics tip preference.
• Professional: Neither fits due to lack of RAW, manual controls, or connectivity.

Overall Performance Ratings and Value Assessment

Bringing together all facets of image quality, usability, versatility, and value:

• Nikon Coolpix S3600: Slightly better in image quality, ergonomics, usability for portraits, and travel.
• Sony Cyber-shot W690: Wins marginally in zoom range and long exposure capability but weighs more and provides softer images.

Price is a decisive factor. Nikon S3600 is generally priced about $200, while Sony W690 hovers near $300 (new or refurbished) - putting Nikon squarely in a superior price-to-performance spot, particularly for users focused on casual daily and travel shooting.

So, Which One Should You Buy?

Recommended for:

• Beginners and casual shooters seeking straightforward controls and lightweight design: Nikon S3600 wins on simplicity, better image quality hints, and compact ergonomics.
• Travelers wanting longer zoom reach and occasional low-light creativity: Sony W690 offers 10x zoom and up to 30-second shutter speeds for a bit more versatility.

Not recommended if you need:

• Manual exposure control or RAW support - neither camera provides these.
• Fast action/sports photography - frame rates and AF capabilities are too limited on both.
• Advanced video - limited to 720p and no external mic input.
• Wireless connectivity or touchscreen interface - absent.

Final Thoughts

In the realm of small sensor compacts, the Nikon Coolpix S3600 and Sony Cyber-shot W690 are solid budget-friendly options for casual shooters prioritizing portability over professional-level features.

Through my extensive hands-on testing, the Nikon edges out as the more compelling contender for those valuing image detail, comfortable handling, and practical autofocus. The Sony W690 most appeals to those chasing extra zoom and the rare long exposure for creative experimentation.

Both cameras earn their keep today primarily by outperforming smartphone cameras in zoom reach and optical image stabilization - still meaningful for many users.

If you find yourself torn between these two pocket companions, consider your shooting style first - then check local pricing and handling to seal the deal. And remember: in this price class, patience and lower expectations translate into more satisfaction.

Happy shooting!

Thank you for reading my detailed head-to-head review. If you have questions about either model or want recommendations for similar compacts or mirrorless upgrades, drop me a line!

Appendix: Quick Specs Recap Comparison Table

Nikon S3600 front Nikon S3600 screen back Sony W690 front Sony W690 screen back