Kodak camera?

Create a Post
Framar

Framar

WOW Framer
Joined
Jul 24, 2001
Posts
26,420
Loc
Buffalo, New York, USA/Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada
I live 50 miles from Rochester - I like to support Kodak.

My first digital camera was a Kodak - still going strong, but it was a CX6230 with a teensy LCD screen and only 2.0 mega pixels. I thought I would be only using it for web work.

However, allofasuddden I seem to to captivated by trees and sky and clouds and deer in my backyard and local musicians and I realize I need a camera with more oomph. And all of my old SLR film cameras have bit the dust (RIP!).

Any of all y'all have a Kodak camera to recommend??? I have been browsing their website and getting confused.

I probably won't ever print anything larger than 8x10 and I really like a camera that takes AA batteries (since I have 2 re-chargers and lots of NiMHs!) - just looking for cameras you like and why.

I also like a camera with a bit of heft to it - those little red pocket size ones are awfully cute, but one cannot photograph bands with them!
 
Mar, my uncle used to work for Kodak as a chemist! Our family always used Kodaks but I broke the mold and use Canon's (but I still have my original Kodak Brownie that my uncle gave me for a birthday). I would go for the highest pixels (mega) you can afford, although 8 or 10 would be more than enough for what you need. Even 6 would be great and you can probably get a good price on that.

When I was shopping, I found that by getting one series older than the latest and greatest meant quite a savings.
 
Just out of curiosity, Mar, does Kodak return the courtesy and support your business as well?

I do believe they make some fine digitals, but I've had no personal experience with them. I have two digital Canon Rebels and, two film Rebels.
 
I also switched from Kodak to Canon.

All of our digital cameras take AA rechargeables.
 
Actually, in the digital camera world, Kodak is near the bottom of the pile for quality or anything else. Kodak didn't get on the bandwagon seriously until it was too late. Their foray into high end digital cameras... I think it was a 14N or something... was a miserable failure due to lousy software to clean up the image for noise reduction.

There are alot of good used Canon digital cameras out there. A used Canon D60 which gives you 6.3 mp file would go for around $400 or so. I have printed shots from this camera up to 18x24 with a little dancing in PS and came out with really nice prints.

Forget Kodak, I'm sure they have forgotten you.
 
I still find it a little disconcerting that Framar and Framah both use license plates for avatars.

It's like dueling license plates.
 
Yeah, Ron - people keep getting us mixed up all the time!!!

I only have about $200 to spend on this new camera (and truth be told I shouldn't be blowing money when my current Kodak camera is perfectly fine for most applications) (and I haven't seen any customers all week!)- I have just gotten this bug to buy one.

And if I end up going to a real store (which I far prefer) then I have little or no sales resistance to not actually buy on the spot. So I thought I would at least arm myself with some info before I sally forth.

Paul's link was interesting but about as helpful as the Kodak site - and I loved the dueling battery life arguments.

*sigh*

BTW - is something wrong with Warped - last I looked no one had posted in like, 12 hours!!! That has got to be some sort of record!!!
 
OK... I have had my fun with the license plates.:party: :party:

I will try to come up with something else for my avatar. No idea what yet.

Maybe a picture of a grumpy old man.:faintthud:
 
Framah - you don't have to get rid of your license plate - really!!! I just find it very odd that framers, who are such visual folk, would not be able to distinguish between a litle red-framed Ontario plate with blue letters on white and yours which is a different shape (the Avatar - not the plate!), color, state, country etc!!!
 
Your avatars don't confuse me. The colors are completely different!


Paul N's avatar confuses me. I keep thinking he's a girl!
 
Framar said:
BTW - is something wrong with Warped - last I looked no one had posted in like, 12 hours!!! That has got to be some sort of record!!!
Click to expand...

Warped traffic has been diverted to the techi forum - specifically, this thread.

I didn't say couldn't distinguish the two avatars. I find the similarity of the avatars, coupled with that of the screen names, disconcerting. If framer starts using a license plate, I may kill myself, but don't anybody go changing anything on my 'count.
 
Yeah, it is a little odd that two people picked such similar names and avatars.

Are you sure you're not a talking tape measure, Ron?
 
framah said:
OK... I have had my fun with the license plates.:party: :party:

I will try to come up with something else for my avatar. No idea what yet.

Maybe a picture of a grumpy old man.:faintthud:
Click to expand...

How bout a puffin or hahbah seal?

Better yet if you and Mar really want to mess with our minds, switch avatars! And screen names.

When I see JohnR's lion avatar I think of Erin, then remember she changed to her pic of her son. I miss her, maybe I should call my neighbor... :)
 
The pet peeve I have about the digitals I have used so far (a small Nikon here at work and a Kodak -my wife's- at home) is shutter lag time (or more correctly, processing lag time). I'm told the digital SLRs are much better on this count, but the point-and-shoot models are unpredictable as far as what you'll get when you try to catch action due to their slow reaction time. For this reason, i consider them better for photographing things than people. Therefore I would consider comparing this factor important in choosing a new camera.
:kaffeetrinker_2: Rick
 
Nice try!

Cute, Rick. Trying to get this thread back on topic. :thumbsup: You're right about the shutter lag, though. My newer Rebel can squeeze off ten shots before my little Fugi digital gets the first one off. I used to get a lot of pictures of the spot where something interesting was happening a short time ago. It was like shooting sports with a view camera.

Bob Doyle said:
Better yet if you and Mar really want to mess with our minds, switch avatars! And screen names.
Click to expand...

I urge you not to try that at home.

Years ago, I became Ron Lowry and Charles became Charles Eggers.

It was really cute until we tried to switch back. Then it turned into a bad Disney movie.
 
I was thinking of a "metric" tape measure. How's that??

Kodak... Canon... just to keep it on topic.
 
I have a Kodak digital C743 and 6 of my family members have Kodak digitals. We are all pleased with them and they are simple to use. You all probably have higher expectations than I do.
 
Aha - Rick - you nailed it --------------- LAG TIME!!! I was noticing that the other evening whilst I was trying to photograph a vocalist who was smack behing a mic - I had to try to anticipate his side to side movements to get all of his face instead of mic-in-the-middle syndrome. Got one good (really good!) shot amongst dozens of rejects.

Of course I used to think that if I could get one or two good shots on a roll of 36 I was doing terrific (rock bands are really hard to photograph!!!).

What I haven't been able to figure out from any website is when various Kodak digitals were put on the market - my number is way higher than the ones I see for sale now - are they going backwards??? What happens after the C001??? ;)

Ron if I were to meet you face to face I would kinda somehow almost expect to see a talking tape measure......
 
BACK ON TOPIC -
Lose the Kodak loyalty = their stuff REALLY doesn't compete with the newer stuff.
For around $200 look for a Fuji F20 or F30 (great lowlight performance, YES you could shoot bands)
SONY W-series (there's a 70, 90, 200 and probably some I don't remember) are also good - short lag time and good performance. Might run a bit more (think $250 or so) but you'll add anti-shake and rechargeble NiMh (I know you want AAs. but we're talking alernatives here.

Whatever you do, don't get sucked in to Casio/Samsung/Pentax - you'll probably be destined for disappointment.
Also look here for terrific info: www.dpreview.com - check user forums and tests.
Tony
 
Tony, I am looking at going from my Canon S2IS (which I love, but it doesn't support RAW) to a DSLR. Any suggestions?
I need to stay under 1k. I have been watching for a good REAL ( as opposed to the internet bate & switch deals) on a canon XTI.
What else should I be considering.

Thanks
 
Dave,

I know that the Canons and Nikons receive most of the glory regarding the DSLRs, but the IEEE had a very promising report/review a few months ago of the Sony DSLR which is based upon Minolta/Konica hardware. The review was along the lines of comparable in all ways to the Canons and Nikons but tempered to being a difficult task to take away marketshare because of Canon/Nikon followings. I know a few people who have purchased the Sony because of the hardware bundles being more attactively priced or receiving more bang for their buck and under the $1k point.
 
Go to a shop and get them in your hand, comfort makes for better photos than farting around talking about pixels nowadays. Heck talk about bit-depth if you want to get fancy and sound like you know something, pixels are over-rated and generally just babble.

Most "lag" now is either associated with tricky focus situations or pooh media cards, trying to recreate focusing situation you commonly encounter when looking at the models is a good idea. Saving money on media cards? Sell plastic frames then...
 
Ron Eggers said:
Years ago, I became Ron Lowry and Charles became Charles Eggers.It was really cute until we tried to switch back. Then it turned into a bad Disney movie.
Click to expand...

That sounds like the plot line for a sequel film: Face/Off II :eek:

Ron Eggers said:
I used to get a lot of pictures of the spot where something interesting was happening a short time ago.
Click to expand...

That's like the local TV news, where they have reporters delivering live feeds standing out in the cold in front of a scene where something happened earlier in the day but where nothing of interest is currently happening. You've got to justify the expense for all that live remote broadcast equipment.

:icon11: Rick

(Based on the 3 big local stations, I would guess that the seminars at the last broadcasters convention advised everyone to use the words "breaking news" as often as humanly possible :smileyshot22: )
 
I would think that when comparing models that are essentially similar, the deal-clincher might be which one has the better lens.
:kaffeetrinker_2: Rick
 
Alrighty, after reviewing this thread and a dozen previous similar topics, I am heading hopefully into a real store or two tomorrow to actually see and touch and hold a few cameras.

My list now includes lag time, viewfinder, large LCD, AA batteries (2 or better yet, 4!) and I am not going to worry about digital zoom carp - or pixel carp. Most of the cameras (of all brands) that I have seen lately are 5mp or higher and at least 3X optical zoom (although I have seen as high as 12x). I have also decided that if there is a choice between larger and smaller I will aim for (!) larger - teensy cameras are vewwy hard to hold! Digitals are all such lightweights compared to the twin lens reflex I started out with and the SLRs with the bags full of lenses!

My first stop will be the hometown camera store where half of the photogs I know have worked at one time or another.

Wish me luck!!!
 
OHMYGAWD, I hope I'm not too late!!

Look for one with a separate optical viewfinder. The LCD screen is just about useless in sunlight.
 
FrameMakers said:
Tony, I am looking at going from my Canon S2IS (which I love, but it doesn't support RAW) to a DSLR. Any suggestions?
I need to stay under 1k. I have been watching for a good REAL ( as opposed to the internet bate & switch deals) on a canon XTI.
What else should I be considering.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I recently decided it was time to re-upgrade to an SLR (having switched to a P&S digital some years ago from a film SLR). I ended up with a Nikon D40x and have been extremely happy with it. $540 with a decent 18-55 (27-82 33mm equivilent) lens. The biggest potential disadvantage of the D40x is that it can only autofocus with lenses that have the focusing motor in the lens, so there are less available and they tend to be more expensive. It's "only" 6mp, but as has already been mentioned, there are many more factors than pixels nowadays. The bit depth and fact that you can capture in RAW are a huge advantage over most P&S cameras. Add to that the ability to put some really good glass on the front and the difference is almost unbelievable.

Get to a good camera store where you can pick up and USE several that you are considering. And check out http://www.steves-digicams.com/ for reviews and other info.
 
Thanks Dave, The Nikon D80 is also on my short list.

I was hoping that Tony would check in as he also works in a camera store.
 
No Ron - you are NOT TOO LATE! Somehow, cameras without optical viewfinders look like blind mutants - and maybe I'm just too old - but taking pictures from the view screen at arm's length just looks silly to me! And it eats up battery life.
 
Sorry I've missed this thread - OK you want my advice. Bang for the buck the D40 is unbeatable (BTW David if you've got the 6M one you've got a 40, not 40x) Less than $600 for an outstanding camera that needs very little post-processing and is capable of making BIG prints - I've printed up to a 3x5 (FEET) from Digital Custom from the old D70 version of this chip. $800 gets you a second lens and in our store (Wolf/Ritz) you get a bag, videos, and classes to help learning it. Downside among "old school" Nikon shooters is that it only works with the newest AF-S lenses, not older legacy glass. It's no big deal since most newer lens designs will probably incorporate AF-S in their design.

The D80 gets you better build, built-in focus motor to work with legacy glass an step up to 10M resolution. Cool stuff like wireless flash, more user "tweaks" and enhanced focus/meter system.

VALUE: get the D40. ABILITIES you won't outgrow: D80
BTW check your local indy shop if there is one - most will be offering the D40 kit at or around the same price that we do - service, etc from the 'net retailers will be non-existent (remember OUR industry's mantra bout small l& ocal vs big guys...)
Hope that helps
 
Paul it's funny - I know the camera makers spend $$$ on consumer research before they develop a new line: too small, no viewfinder, mediocre battery life (since the battery is so small), MP3 player (no kidding), and poor low light performance seem to be the order of the day. My "research" in the store shows people care about good quality, easy to use, and shutter lag. Face detection, anti-shake, hi ISO mean NOTHING to most users. Most second-camera buyers shy AWAY from big finders and are looking for optical finders, good battery life, and no lag.

There are very few of the newest model PS cameras from ANY manufacturer that I really am impressed with - Fuji F30 and Canon SD1000 are about the only 2 I'm comfortable with.

Tony
 
AWG said:
(BTW David if you've got the 6M one you've got a 40, not 40x)
Click to expand...

...and at that price.

Yes, you're right. I'd only had one cup of coffee at that point. I did look at the D40x but decided that if I was going to spend the extra money I'd spend not too much more and get the D80.
 
Wow. I went to the local indy camera store and found, in my price range, only optical viewfinder-lesscameras, mainly the Nikon Coolpix L12, the Fuji A800 and the Pentax Optico E30. Blind mutants. Clerk said I should try Best Buy.

So I ventured across the street to the nearby Office Max.

There I fondled the following:

Kodak C743 @ $160.

Kodak Z710 @ $200. (sale price)

Kodak Z650 at $200.

Canon A560 @ $200 with free 1 gb card.

Canon A550 @ $180.

Canon A540 @ $153 (clearance sale price)

Olympus SP320 @ $180

And last but not least another Olympus for $150 with image stabilization (forgot to note the model number).

So these are all the ones that all had optical viewfinders, 6-7 mega pixels, 3-4-10x optical zooms (10x in the Kodak Z series) and 2-2.5 LCD screens. And nice "heft."

Now it is time for more homework to find out about batteries and lag times.

*sigh*

Another thought: when I looked in the local fone book (which weighs in at around 5 pounds and 4" thick, there was only one store listed under "Cameras."

Is that because every Tom, Dick and Harry sells cameras nowadays?

In 10 years will there only be one framer listed under "Picture Framing?"
 
No, it's because, in most markets, they will be listed on Photographic Equipment and Supplies or something similar.

You did the equivalent of looking for your shop under Frames. It's one reason I HATE the yellow pages, both as an advertiser and as and end user.
 
Here are some other deals today:

newegg has the Olympus FE-240 7MP 5X Digital Camera with image stabilization for a low $198.99. $6.94 Three Day Shipping. Tax in CA, NJ, PR, TN.
FREE Fuji 512MB xD-Picture Card with purchase
4.1oz; 7.1 megapixels; 5X optical zoom; 2.5" LCD; xD-Picture Card

BestBuy.com has the HP (Hewlett-Packard) Photosmart M537 6MP 3X Digital Camera, featuring image stabilization and in-camera red-eye fix, for a low $129.99 Free Shipping. Tax in most states.
FREE $30 Gift Card with purchase (+ printer purchase)

B&H Photo has it for a low $114.95. $4.45 Shipping. Tax in NY. 4.5oz; 6.2 megapixels; 3X optical zoom; 2.5" LCD; MMC/SD card

BestBuy.com has the Samsung L700 7MP 3X Digital Camera (BLACK), featuring image stabilization and SDHC support, for a low $152.99 Free Shipping. Tax in most states.

Buy.com has the SILVER version for a low $154.99 Free Shipping. Tax in CA, MA, MD, TN. 4.6oz; 7 megapixels; 3X optical zoom; 2.5" LCD; MMC/SD/SDHC card

DELL had the Canons for 15% off yesterday. I'm not sure if the sale has expired or not yet. EX: The CANON S3 IS was $299

Best regards and happy searching!
Mike
 
Mar:
Unfortunately viewfinders ARE disappearing - the camera people think you don't want them. The only ones currently being produced (many of what you listed are not current models - doesn't really matter, but old stuff generally = long lag time and poor battery life) are the Canon A series and select Fuji (Fuji makes great stuff - just doesn't market as well as others) FWIW I like the Fujis -a bit more intuitive and easier to use. That said, we use a Canon A5xx in the shop for IF and the A550 for about $180 is a great camera for the price.

Kodak isn't MAKING anything with their name anymore - they do some design work, but that's about it. Samsung - not yet - they've got cool features but poor image quality. Many of the new Olympus cameras have image quality issues as well.

If you want to read WAY too much about new cameras, high ISO and image quality (it'll change many pre-conceived notions about high megapixel counts, anti-shake and high ISO settings) read this: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0705/07052001highiso.asp


I'm sorry for what you found regarding indy shops in town -- at least you tried. But WHY an office supply place for a camera? An online purchase for something like this is REALLY a poor choice - feel, layout, menus, etc would make the difference in your choice, and you can't tell that from an online listing. If you don't know there's a Ritz Camera at Walden Galleria (?) that should be able to help you (and PLEEEZE don't tell me those were the guys who sent you to Best Buy)

Tony
 
Sheesh - you would think they could at least put "For cameras see Photographic Ekwipment and Supplies" or something like that (I have seen little notes like that in certain categories of YP lisiting) - but I have long hated the YP and the fact that a market like Buffalo has TWO competing and essentially useless behemoths - all they are good for is killing trees!

Back to cameras: I have eliminated a few because although they do have viewfinders as well as LCD screens, they are not optical viewfinders.

OY!
 
Well, now that I know what to look under in the YP I will let my fingers do the walking - but please don't make me go to the Galleria! I haven't been to a Mall in at least 15 years - hate them worse than I hate the YP!!!

I went across the street to Office Max because 1. they were there and 2. I knew they featured cameras and I wanted to check out this viewfinder thing in person.

Aaarrrggghhh!!!
 
Remember your twin lens reflex?

If you really need an optical viewfinder, you might want to bite the bullet and step up to the already mentioned Nikon D40.

Optical viewfinders on small cameras all suffer from some degree of parallax, i.e., the viewfinder and the lens are looking from two different places, just as in your old twin lens reflex where you looked through the top lens and the photo was taken through the bottom one.

On some of the P&S models, the parallax is really bad, and the viewfinder also doesn't show the true view that the lens sees. For example, it might be showing you an "8x10" piece of an "11x14."

Even the DSLRs don't usually show 100% of the frame, but at least they are pointed in the same direction. The electronic viewfinders are awful to look through, but depending on design they may give a more accurate indication of the picture you are taking.

Another advantage to the D40 is that you can put other lenses on it and use it for specialized things like, say, digitizing corner samples into a visualization system.

And when it comes to the ergonomics of a camera that feels, fits and functions well in your hands, it is hard to top the Nikon.
 
At least I've helped someone else make a buying decision - I find it somewhat disappointing that on a forum where WE constantly preach local/independent/specialty you guys apparently

1) fish for information (from a professional camera sales person)
and
2) Make an on-line purchase

Glad to help

Tony
 
Tony and everyone else - now I have fished for information online (here and at Canon, Kodak, Nikon, etc websites plus the newegg type places)- now I have a pretty good idea what I am hunting for and I am going to try the oldest surviving Independent camera store in Buffalo - and it is in a strip mall - I can deal with a strip mall!

Saw the Canon A630 this evening at Office depot (whilst buying ink!) and it is on sale for #207!!! I like the vari-angle LCD screen - only possible trouble with this camera is it is the exact same one my brother just bought and it might get confusing at family gatherings. Too many little silver Canons could result in hilarity!

One of my original reasons for seeking a Kodak camera again was because of the software in which I have over 2000 photos all very carefully sorted into albums. I spent a whole weekend a while back uninstalling all of the updates and upgrades to this software (which had gotten increasingly annoying to work with each upgrade) and reinstalling the original 1.0 (whatever) software which came with the camera 3 years ago.

Will the new Canon software be on speaking terms with the Kodak software or will I have to keep the two separate??? I still plan to use the Kodak camera for webwork.

I am very thankful of the thoughtful information all y'all have imparted in this and previous threads.
 
:faintthud: I have just spent the last 3 hours reading a bunch of the reviews for a whole whack of Canons - "I love it!" "I hate it!" * "Really wonderful color!" "Totally terrible color!" * "Really fast!" "Really slow!" :icon45: "Really well made!" "Really shoddy construction!"

Still looking at the A630.......

(Funny, on that one website I was able to find a review of my little old Kodak and it scored as high as all of the Canons!!!)
 
Mar, I too spent hours researching this topic right before Christmas. It's enough to make your head spin.

I decided on the Canon A630 and have been very pleased with it. Shutter speed is fast (no delay), the pictures are Crisp and the construction is sturdy. It has nearly as many options as my Canon Rebel XT.

The only thing I was a bit disappointed in is the zoom is not as precise as the Rebel XT, but then it cost much less so when I need something zoomed in exactly to the enth degree, I use the Rebel XT.
 
Create a Post
Back
Top