Nikon Coolpix S6100 vs Samsung WB800F: A Detailed Hands-On Comparison for the Discerning Photographer

Choosing a compact camera can be surprisingly thorny, especially when your options include models like Nikon’s Coolpix S6100 and the Samsung WB800F. Both these cameras straddle the compact segment with zoom-packed lenses and user-friendly features aimed at casual shooters who still want more control than a smartphone. But which one deserves your hard-earned cash? Having spent a good deal of time wrangling both cameras across varied shooting scenarios, I’m here to offer a no-nonsense, thorough comparison based on hands-on testing, sensor analysis, handling impressions, and value for money.

Let’s dive into what sets these two apart, and more importantly, how they perform on real-world photography fronts like portraits, landscapes, wildlife, and video work.

Size, Feel, and Ergonomics: How Do They Handle in Your Hands?

Before you even get to image quality, how a camera feels in your hands and pockets often determines whether you actually enjoy using it regularly. The Nikon S6100 and Samsung WB800F are both pocketable compacts but differ in physical dimensions and design philosophy.

The Nikon S6100 is smaller and lighter (98 x 58 x 27 mm, 175 g) than the Samsung WB800F (111 x 65 x 22 mm, 218 g). On paper, this makes the Nikon more travel-friendly and less fat in your jean pocket - a key plus for street and travel shooters like me who despise lugging large gear for casual days out. Samsung’s WB800F is thicker but a bit less tall, giving it a slightly more substantial grip. While neither camera sports pronounced thumb clubs, the WB800F's subtle rear contours feel a bit more comfortable for longer shooting sessions.

Looking at the top layouts for both offers insight into user interaction tendencies:

Samsung’s design presents a more traditional control layout with a shooting mode dial, enabling access to shutter/aperture priority modes - something the Nikon omits entirely. Nikon’s design, meanwhile, is more minimalist, tailored towards casual users who prefer point-and-shoot simplicity over schlepping through manual mode options.

Takeaway: For beginners or those valuing compactness, Nikon’s smaller and lighter body wins hands down. But if you crave more direct control and a better grip, Samsung’s bigger form factor feels more comfortable and mature.

Inside the Machine: Sensor Technology and Image Quality

Now for the heart of image quality - the sensor. Both cameras pack a 1/2.3” sensor with 16MP resolution, but the sensor types set them apart:

• Nikon S6100: CCD sensor, 16MP, 1/2.3", ISO 80-3200 native, anti-aliasing filter present.
• Samsung WB800F: BSI-CMOS sensor, 16MP, 1/2.3", ISO 100-3200 native, anti-aliasing filter present.

What does this mean in practice? CCD sensors dominated compacts a decade ago, providing good color rendition and lower noise at base ISOs but slowing readout speeds and exhibiting less flexibility at higher ISOs. BSI-CMOS sensors, which Samsung adopted, generally offer improved low-light performance, faster readouts, and better power efficiency - advantages often felt in autofocus speed, burst rate, and video.

Image quality in the field: Both cameras deliver respectable daylight image quality, with Nikon producing slightly warmer skin tones and Samsung leaning towards a more neutral, sometimes cooler palette. The Nikon’s CCD sensor gives a classic look, but noise creeps in at ISO 800 and rapidly degrades image quality by ISO 1600 and beyond. The WB800F's BSI-CMOS sensor handles noise marginally better at higher ISO settings but not dramatically so, largely because both rely on tiny 1/2.3" sensors, which inherently limit dynamic range and low-light performance.

User Interface, Display, and Viewfinder

Neither camera has an electronic or optical viewfinder, so the rear LCD is your window to composition and review. Big, bright, and responsive screens are critical in bright outdoor conditions:

Both models share a 3.0" rear TFT LCD with 460k-dot resolution and touchscreen input, making navigation and focusing reasonably straightforward. Nikon’s screen sports an anti-reflective coating, which provides a slight edge when shooting under strong sunlight - a subtle but appreciated detail in everyday usability.

Samsung's interface is a bit more cluttered with additional manual controls accessible through menus, whereas Nikon maintains a pared-back, clear touchscreen UI aimed at novices. However, Samsung lacks touchscreen AF capabilities, which can be an annoyance for intuitive focusing.

Zoom Lenses: Reach and Aperture Tradeoffs

Let’s talk about what rocks or rolls: the lenses.

• Nikon S6100 sports a 28–196mm equivalent zoom (7x) with an aperture range of f/3.7–5.6.
• Samsung WB800F offers an impressive 23–483mm equivalent zoom (21x) with an aperture of f/2.8–5.9.

The WB800F absolutely obliterates the Nikon on zoom reach, offering more than thrice the telephoto length, a huge advantage for wildlife and sports shooters who want to keep their distance. The wider 23mm focal length also gives Samsung a slight advantage for landscapes and interiors, where wider framing is king.

The Nikon does boast a slightly brighter wide-end aperture (f/3.7 vs f/2.8 on Samsung), favoring low-light capture at shorter focal lengths. However, at the telephoto end, both lenses narrow to f/5.6–5.9 territory, limiting light-gathering ability.

In practical terms, the Samsung allows for more versatile framing options from wide-angle landscapes to distant subjects - though this versatility comes at a cost of some optical compromise at maximum zoom, including reduced sharpness and more chromatic aberrations, especially at the extreme telephoto end.

Autofocus Performance: Speed, Accuracy, and Face Detection

The heart of user experience often boils down to how swiftly and reliably your camera nails focus.

• Nikon S6100 has a 9-point contrast-detection AF system with face detection and AF touch capabilities.
• Samsung WB800F’s system is less clearly specified but includes contrast detection with face and selective AF.

Both cameras support face detection, which works reasonably well indoors for close-ups and portraits, but neither excel in continuous tracking, a common limitation of compact cameras in this class.

During real-world tests, Nikon’s S6100 showed sluggish focus acquisition in low-light and at telephoto lengths. The contrast detection system hunts noticeably, causing missed shots in action or wildlife scenarios.

Samsung’s system feels slightly faster in bright light but faces similar hunting issues indoors or in shady conditions. Neither camera supports phase detection or hybrid AF technologies, nor do they feature eye or animal eye detection, missing out on modern tracking sophistication.

Burst Shooting and Shutter Speed Range

Speed delights sports and wildlife photographers, so it’s worth noting:

• Nikon S6100 offers just a 1 fps continuous shooting rate.
• Samsung WB800F’s continuous shooting rate is unspecified but generally low for compacts of this era.

Shutter speeds range similarly from a slow 4 seconds on Nikon and 16 seconds on Samsung up to 1/2000th of a second max. Samsung allows manual and aperture priority exposure modes, giving more creative freedom toExperienced shooters. Nikon lacks manual exposure modes entirely, limiting it to full auto and scene modes.

Macro Performance and Close-Up Focus

The Nikon S6100 impresses with a 3cm minimum focus distance, allowing surprisingly good macro shots with pleasing blur. Samsung doesn’t specify but tends to have a longer minimum focus distance due to its extensive zoom lens, limiting close-up versatility.

If you love shooting small details like insects or flowers, Nikon is the better choice here.

Video Capabilities: HD and Beyond

Both cameras shoot HD video but differ in specs:

• Nikon S6100 records 1280x720p video at 30fps using MPEG-4 or Motion JPEG formats.
• Samsung WB800F ups the ante with 1920x1080p Full HD at 30fps in H.264 MPEG-4 codec.

The WB800F clearly wins for video resolution. Additionally, Samsung supports Full HD modes with frame rate options and better compression, resulting in higher quality videos that suit casual vlogging and family memories.

Neither model offers external microphone inputs or headphone jacks, so audio options stay limited. Optical stabilization helps steady handheld video slightly.

Battery Life and Storage

Battery life is an essential practical aspect, especially on trips:

• Nikon uses the EN-EL12 battery pack good for ~210 shots per charge.
• Samsung’s battery specs are less clear but generally lower endurance (~200-250 shots).

Neither camera allows USB charging, so carrying a spare battery is advisable for long days out.

Both cameras use SD/SDHC/SDXC cards in single slots, keeping storage straightforward.

Connectivity and Wireless Features

Samsung WB800F includes built-in Wi-Fi, allowing image sharing and remote control via smartphones - a nice touch for social media enthusiasts and travellers. Nikon lacks any wireless connectivity, which feels dated even for a 2011 model.

Durability and Weather Resistance

Neither camera offers environmental sealing, water, dust, or shock resistance. Neither is recommended for rugged use beyond casual everyday shooting in fair conditions.

Real-World Photography Tests Across Genres

Here’s where the rubber meets the road, summarizing how these cameras perform in varied shooting scenarios:

Portraits: Skin Tone, Bokeh, Subject Tracking

Both cameras rely on their face detection and contrast AF systems to lock focus on people. Nikon’s warmer color science lends skin tones a pleasing glow without oversaturation, preferred for family portraits. Samsung’s sharper rendering sometimes feels clinical or slightly cooler but delivers better zoom reach for candid portraits from a distance.

The relatively slow apertures and small sensors prevent true creamy bokeh, but Nikon’s 7x zoom and close macro focusing allow for modest background separation.

Landscapes: Dynamic Range, Resolution, and Weather Sealing

Neither camera produces mind-blowing dynamic range, which is typical of tiny compact sensors. Both retain decent resolution at 16MP, but Nikon’s CCD sensor renders slightly more natural tones. Samsung captures wider fields of view, good for sweeping vistas, but both struggle with blown highlights and lost shadows under challenging lighting.

No weather sealing means caution around moisture and dust.

Wildlife: Autofocus Speed, Telephoto Use, and Burst Rates

Samsung’s 21x zoom gives you a fighting chance at distant wildlife, while Nikon’s 7x lens feels cramped. However, both cameras suffer from slow autofocus and lack speedy continuous shooting needed to capture fast action. Neither sports animal eye AF or quick tracking, limiting their appeal for serious wildlife enthusiasts.

Sports: Tracking, Low Light, and Frame Rates

With just 1 fps burst on Nikon and unknown low frame rate on Samsung, neither are shooters for fast-paced sports. Autofocus hunting indoors complicates matters further, though Samsung’s aperture priority mode allows some creative exposure control in bright outdoor sports environments.

Street Photography: Discreteness, Low Light, Portability

Nikon’s smaller body excels here for street shooters who prize stealth and quickness. Its touchscreen AF aids framing on the fly. Samsung is bulkier and louder on zoom but provides zoom versatility if you don’t mind the extra heft.

Neither camera shines in low light due to noise and dim lenses, but Nikon’s warmer colors are generally more flattering under artificial light.

Macro: Magnification, Focusing Precision, Stabilization

Nikon’s 3cm minimum focusing distance and true macro mode let you get close and personal with small subjects. Samsung’s lens lacks macro specs, making Nikon the hands-down winner for bug and detail shooters.

Night and Astro Photography: High ISO and Exposure Modes

Both cameras hit a ceiling at ISO 3200 but noise and detail loss appear from 800 upwards. Nikon’s 4-second max shutter speeds offer limited astro exposure, while Samsung’s 16 seconds max shutter potentially allows more experimentation.

Neither camera permits RAW capture, which limits post-processing latitude crucial for night photography.

Video: Recording Specs and Stabilization

Samsung records true 1080p, great for casual HD footage. Nikon maxes at 720p, which may look soft on widescreens. Both rely on their optical stabilization to reduce shake but lack audio jacks, limiting video production flexibility.

Travel Photography: Versatility, Battery Life, and Size

Nikon’s compactness and lightness make it a cheerful travel companion. Samsung’s longer zoom and better video specs appeal if you want an all-in-one tool with more zoom reach but don’t mind the extra weight.

Limited battery life on both demands spares.

Professional Use: Reliability, Workflow, and File Formats

Neither camera supports RAW shooting or tethered workflow integration, capping their use as casual or backup cameras only. They are not designed for professional-grade output or fast-paced studio work.

Sample Image Gallery: A Peek at Real-World Results

Here’s a side-by-side look at sample images captured with both cameras under similar conditions:

Nikon S6100 front Nikon S6100 screen back Samsung WB800F screen back

Notice Nikon’s softer, warmer portrait tones and Samsung’s sharper but cooler daylight images. Both struggle with noise beyond ISO 800 and lose detail in shadows and highlights.

How Do They Rank? Performance Ratings Overview

After extensive hands-on trials and technical assessments, here’s a comparative rating summary:

Samsung edges out Nikon on zoom range, video quality, and manual exposure modes. Nikon scores higher on portability, macro capability, and beginner-friendly operation.

Performance Across Photography Genres

Breaking it down by genre paints a clearer picture:

• Portraits: Nikon wins due to skin tone rendering.
• Landscapes: Both tied; Samsung’s wide lens vs Nikon’s color tones.
• Wildlife: Samsung leads with 21x zoom.
• Sports: Both lag; slow burst and AF.
• Street: Nikon preferred for compactness.
• Macro: Nikon dominates.
• Night/Astro: Slight edge to Samsung for longer shutter.
• Video: Samsung wins (1080p).
• Travel: Balanced, Nikon for size, Samsung for zoom.
• Professional: Neither recommended.

Final Pros and Cons

Nikon Coolpix S6100

Pros:

• Compact, pocket-friendly design
• Warmer, natural color rendering, especially for skin tones
• Excellent macro focusing capability (down to 3cm)
• User-friendly touchscreen interface
  Cons:
• Limited zoom (7x)
• Slow autofocus and 1fps continuous shooting
• No manual exposure modes
• Only 720p video recording
• No wireless connectivity

Samsung WB800F

Pros:

• Impressive 21x zoom lens (23–483mm)
• Full 1080p HD video recording with H.264 codec
• Exposure modes including manual, aperture, shutter priority
• Built-in Wi-Fi for easy sharing
• Slightly better low-light performance from BSI CMOS sensor
  Cons:
• Larger and heavier body
• Interface less intuitive, no touchscreen AF
• No macro focusing mode
• Autofocus can hunt in tough conditions
• Lower battery life and no USB charging

Who Should Buy Which?

If you’re a beginner or casual traveler who prioritizes a pocketable size, ease of use, and loves shooting close-ups or portraits, the Nikon Coolpix S6100 is ideal. It’s cheaper too, suiting budget-focused buyers who value convenience over zoom reach or video specs.

If you’re an enthusiast seeking zoom versatility, better video quality, and manual exposure control, the Samsung WB800F offers a more versatile toolkit - especially for wildlife hobbyists who want long reach and for vloggers wanting full HD video. Just be ready for extra bulk and a learning curve.

My Hands-On Takeaway

Having tested thousands of cameras, I see the Nikon S6100 as a neat little compact ideal for those who want simple, dependable snapshot performance with decent macro chops. It feels like a good starter camera or backup with a friendly interface for photographers who just want to point and shoot.

The Samsung WB800F packs a larger punch with zoom length, video prowess, and manual controls that can satisfy enthusiasts who want compactness without sacrificing creative options. However, its autofocus and handling quirks remind us it’s an older bridge between casual and serious shooters, best suited for those willing to compromise on size for greater reach.

Neither camera can seriously challenge today’s smartphones or mirrorless models in image quality or autofocus sophistication, but both deliver respectable results within their budget and era. Choose your camera based on what you shoot most and whether you crave portability or zoom power.

Do you already own one of these cameras? How do they stack up against your expectations? Drop your experiences below, and let’s chat!