Nikon Coolpix 4200

3.9 megapixels | 1.5" screen | 38 – 114 mm (3×)

User reviews

Average rating: 4.16
5 stars
(7)
4 stars
(5)
3 stars
(4)
2 stars
(0)
1 stars
(0)
Sort by
12
Butch001
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Butch001 posted on Sep 16, 2006 UTC

Opinion: A superb little compact!
I got mine to take on holiday so I didn't need to cart my D70 around.

Produces nice photos - Highly recommended.

Problems: AF settings sometimes seem to ignore your input and do as it pleases.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
rentagoodbook
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: rentagoodbook posted on Sep 25, 2005 UTC

Opinion: The Nikon 4200 is my first digital camera--I've had it for about a year now. It replaced my (film) Canon SLR EOS Rebel, whose pictures I love, but whose bulk made it inefficient to cart around.
I like the size of the 4200--small, yet not so small and flat that you have nothing to grab onto when taking pics. I've liked most of the pictures I've taken with it--the only fuzzy pics I've had were low light without flash or tripod.

Problems: main complaint is that what you see thru the viewfinder is not the sum total of the picture. What's on the screen is, but the pic is sharper (less chance of blurriness) I've found if I look thru the viewfinder when taking the shot (probably because holding the camera to my face is more stable than just holding it out w/2 hands). Other than that, it's a nice little camera.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Nelson Ganchas
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Nelson Ganchas posted on Feb 1, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I used this small Camera in complement of my D70, and after owned a Casio Z4 and Pentax Optio S, compare with the two last these camera offer a more reactive focus and picrures more sharp.
A good camera for many situations.

Problems: Focus is quiet longer in low light
No manual setting

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
gail captain
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: gail captain posted on Jan 8, 2005 UTC

Opinion: Nikon 5200 is my 2nd digital, Kodak dx4330 was my 1st. Wanted better video, fast fire up, LOW lighting, macro, more features & over all size. It is all of that, I just spent a long New Years weekend down in Chicago and used the camera a lot. I've learned that I need to know what mode I am in, many of the pic's were blurry. I learned that Auto is the best one. I also experienced that the battery life is not the greatest. It charges fast but I would like a bit longer charge when using it.
What I really like was taking video in very low lighting while the animals were playing in the living room. Could never do that with the first camera.
Video sound is poor, I know about using the zoom feature to hear better. What can I do about the static once I down load it. With all the good features why did Nikon chinch on the camera speaker / Microphone? That's the fun part of playing it back to the party.
Again why is there white sound (static) on the video.
I have taken over 3000 pictures in the 2 yrs I have owned the Kodak dx4330 I know I will surpass this with the Nikon 5200. I purchased a High Speed 1g and you will need it for the video portion which I truly use a lot. Pictures are good and video just adds the special touch with out having to carry another contraption.

Problems: Poor sound when in Video play back mode.
Static or white noise on downloaded play back.
I know about keeping in AF single mode too.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
rick
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: rick posted on Dec 17, 2004 UTC

Opinion: Excellent construction, excellent layout, fast, easy to use,small, good focus ( better then many) pretty decent value but the color had green tint. Compared to other makers I was not that impressed with photo colors and clarity outside. It wasn't bad and I realize its a tiny camera but I just think the colors need upgrading for me to compare to competition. Nikon needs to keep the good things here for sure because construction and layout and ease of use is best in class.

Problems: colors not that impressed about, software not windows 98 compatible ( needs second edition or better)

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Keaka
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Keaka posted on Nov 2, 2004 UTC

Opinion: A great camera to carry around with, takes great, sharp pictures. I think the majority of complaints about softness are just due to the fact that you had the camera settings wrong when you took the picture. With the high jpeg compression it does affect larger print sizes though.

The macro mode is the best and sharpest among everything I've seen thus far.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
DimkaLi
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: DimkaLi posted on Oct 12, 2004 UTC

Opinion: I own 5200, but there is no site for review.
Good quality images, natural colors.
Excellent red eye reduction.
Indoors and outdoors shooting is good.

Problems: Images bit softer compare to Sony and Canon, but that is not picture postcard. In fact problem can be fixed in set up menu easily.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
aleks2000
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: aleks2000 posted on Oct 6, 2004 UTC

Opinion: I own Nikon 5200 but it's not possible to add review for this camera so I will add it here.

It was the most expensive camera in PS category with extra money needed to buy SD card (hey, it's Nikon - right). I could buy much higher model for that money but I needed something small for travel with good pic quality (Nikon?).

Nice PS camera to take anywhere with useful features as BSS mode but terribly SOFT/FUZZY/NOISY pictures even in lowest ISO!!!

Compression is too strong (all files are well under 2 MB in size, should be 2-2.5 MB for 5 Megapixels camera).

The post processing is needed for every single picture to get something out of it (remove noise, sharpening, contrast...).

I did try and tweak all the settings in the camera to try and get better results - it doesn't work.

Make sure you compare pictures produced with this camera with other much cheaper models before you decide what to buy (there are plenty of reviews on the net with sample pictures).

There is no good review of this camera except on this site (not good if you read it carefully). Also, pictures are compared with Samsung Digimax V50 which is bad in my opinion (why not with Canon s500 for example???).
Even 2 mp camera can do better...

The FW upgrade is needed at least - but Nikon is too busy with upgrades for D70 and other higher end models.

The PictureProject software supplied with this camera is not worth mentioning.

My recommendation - stay away of Nikon!!!

Problems: as already stated above:

Terribly SOFT/FUZZY/NOISY pictures even in lowest ISO!!!

Compression is too strong (all files are well under 2 MB in size, should be 2-2.5 MB for 5 mp camera in finest mode).

The post processing is needed for every single picture to get something out of it (remove noise, sharpening, contrast...).

The PictureProject software supplied with this camera is not worth mentioning.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
debmoss
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: debmoss posted on Aug 24, 2004 UTC

Opinion: I purchased the 5200 about a week ago from Profeel. I have taken over 100
pictures, had 20 printed and recorded 4 movie clips (indoors and out). I am
very happy with it over all. I have not had any problems with skin tones. I
took several very sharp pictures of my four year old running with the camera
in the sports mode. In one she wasn't even touching the ground. I have
never had a camera that could do that. You can't beat it's size and ease of
use. I had it with me on a walk and was able to take a movie of something I
wasn't expecting to see. Shutter lags has not been as much of a problem as
I was expecting.

Problems: These were both primarily user issues. The first picture I took were in single
auto focus mode and were a little blurry. This proble resolved when I started
using continuous auto focus. This also seems to have reduced the shutter lag.
It is definitely a good idea to read the manual. Speaking of the manual. Itl
did not do a very good job of explaining how to down load movies to the
computer. For my imac I can't fiure out a way to down load movies with the
USB set to PTP. It only seems to work with the USB set to MASS.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
12