http://www.osnews.com/story/12096/Review_Kodak_CX7530_5_0MP_3x_5x_Zoom_Digital_Camera Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Mon, 09 Nov 2009 06:10:02 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread?40049 http://osnews.com/thread?40049 And my slide scanners produces a whopping 12 Mega pixel! Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40057 http://osnews.com/thread?40057 Heya,

I would like to make use of this opportunity to thanks the people who give tipsn info, ... about digital camera's in the previous article. When I looked up the Finepix(?) 10 for fujifilm, I came accross the new S9500/S9000 and the S5600/S5200. I'm waiting for a review about them and am interested in how well their anti-blur-system, ... works. I'll probably compare them against the minolta A200/Z6.

thanks,

Michel Tue, 04 Oct 2005 19:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40071 http://osnews.com/thread?40071 This is the 2nd Kodak camera mr Queru reviews on here. Not a review comparing it to equal cameras from Sony, Canon, Fuji, Olympus or what have you, but just a "review" where noeffort is made on how it compares to other cameras.

This of course is understandable, there this site is not a digital photography site. What I do not understand though is why Kodak is chosen for this promotion (reviews in this format, without comparison, promote the product reviewed unless the camera is found to be junk. Cameras not reviewed then do not get the same promotion and "airplay").
Kodak is that nice company that sues Sony and wants them to cease selling cameras because Sony alledgedly violates Kodak's "IP" or patents.

No one in camera land sues others because the IP of what all is used in cameras is owned by so many companies, but Kodak wants to strong arm itself into a bigger slice of the pie. Often there are articles posted here that point out this IP and patent misuse, with good grounds.

So, why is this ignored in Kodak's case?

I boycot Kodak because they have more and more become one of that firms that wants to make money out of "IP" after the photo film and photo paper business began a downward slide. Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40077 http://osnews.com/thread?40077 JBQ does not 'promote' Kodak (he is in fact a Canon-head, owning a Canon Elan, a Canon 10D and a brand new $3,300 Canon 5D -- he received it this Saturday). However, Geeks.com happen to have a lot of stock of various Kodak models, and so this is what he chose to test when he was given the opportunity to choose a model out of their catalog for a review. At the time of his selection there was only one (heavy) Fuji model available on the catalog and a lot of Kodak and Vivitar ones (but he doesn't wanna touch Vivitar as they are truly low-end). And so, naturally, he went with another Kodak model again as there was enough selection available. So I suggest you don't create so many conspiracy theories, there is always a good explanation for everything. Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Eugenia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40088 http://osnews.com/thread?40088 So are JBQ's two film scanners (yes, he's got lots of photo gear). However, you have to clean up dust afterwards (if you want the pics printed or published), and you will have to wait at least an additional 1-2 hours to get the film back from the lab. So yeah, you are getting your "whopping" 12MP, but you also get considerable time delay and inconvenience. For point-n-shoot purposes, I advocate that digital is more convenient for most "normal" people (meaning, non-prosumer photographers who can get good results with both film and digital SLRs). Remember, I didn't say "better", I said "more convenient". Tue, 04 Oct 2005 20:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Eugenia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40092 http://osnews.com/thread?40092 I'm planning to buy a digital camera soon - I did consider Kodak at one point, some of their models have recived good reviews, but I think I'm going to go for a Canon A95 (5 megapixel camera). Just about every review I've read has rated the camera highly. It's a point-and-shoot with a handy swivel LCD screen, but it also has fairly extensive manual controls for when you're feeling more adventurous. In other words, it's a good camera for a beginner to pick up, but also one you can advance with as you gain more experience - just the sort of thing for a beginner like me :-) Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40099 http://osnews.com/thread?40099 *IF* you are going with Canon, go for the A610, not the A95. The A95 is the older model which the A610 is based on. But the A610 has better resolution, better quality, bigger screen, SD instead of CF and most importantly, it is using the Digic-2 CPU, which is much faster than the Digic-1 and it has the SAME price as the A95 (at least list price). The A610 was my personal choice a few weeks ago as a good all-around digicam that has the best of all worlds into it (only problem it has is that its lense is not that wide). Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Eugenia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40102 http://osnews.com/thread?40102 a review of last years model camera! Tue, 04 Oct 2005 21:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40117 http://osnews.com/thread?40117 I got it for my Dad this Christmas after about two weeks searching through customer reviews for different cameras on Amazon and various digital camera sites.

As you can see from the pics, it uses old-style camera controls, with a minimal use of on-screen displays, which makes it easy for less technical users to manage. Picture quality is excellent, not just detail, but also colour (which is where digitals tend to fall down). Videos are also great, being in 640x480 and including sound.

As with most small cameras, indoor pics aren't brilliant, but it compares well with standard film-based cameras. Further, the "night-mode" does actually work, though you'll need a stand as it leaves the shutter open for quite a long period (human hands shake too much).

The only thing to be worried out is the Kodak EasyShare software. It's quite a poor piece of software, to put it nicely. What's really annoying is that every time you insert some media into a drive (a CD-ROM say) with images, it will pop up a "Transfer pictures" wizard, which is annoyingly redundant. My advice is just to install the connectivity software (which makes your camera look like a USB drive) and use Picassa to organise and touch-up your photos. If you need to rotate the videos, your options aren't great, you can either install EasyShare and deal with the constant "Transfer Pictures" wizard, or use something like VirtualDub.

Software aside though, it's a great point-and-click camera Tue, 04 Oct 2005 22:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BryanFeeney) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40134 http://osnews.com/thread?40134 Any chance of a 5D review? Tue, 04 Oct 2005 22:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Nicholas Blachford) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40136 http://osnews.com/thread?40136 I have the 4 mega pixel version of this camera. As a easy point and shoot camera its great. If you want a no fuss easy to use camera then go with the Kodak. If you want to adjust settings then go with the cannon. I agree the Kodak software is just crap, but there are many alternatives out there and your not forced to use the Kodak software to get the camera to work. Tue, 04 Oct 2005 23:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40177 http://osnews.com/thread?40177 "In many situations where I can't carry around my Canon 5D, I'll gladly have a CX7530 at my belt, ready to shoot, armed with the knowledge that for common situations it's able to take good pictures."

As a vim user, a photographer and a skeptic, I'd like to say:

:s/common/ideal/ Wed, 05 Oct 2005 00:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40245 http://osnews.com/thread?40245 Re: "And my slide scanners produces a whopping 12 MP!"

For me the proof is in the prints. Pixel count places an upper bound on the quality, but is no actual proof of quality. I can make scans of 4x5 that contain 360 MP, but each pixel in that image holds far less usable information than pixels coming out of a good digital camera. I seem to have no problem printing a 1920x2400 section of a file from the CX7530 or from my 10D on 8x10 paper, but I wouldn't even try to do the same from a max-pixel-count scan of 4x5. OK, I pushed the example a little bit too far, but my point is that pixel count is not a measurement of image quality. Pixels out of my DualIV don't seem to hold as much detail as those out of my 10D or 5D (or, for that matter, out of the CX7530).

Re: "[...] Kodak cameras" [...]

I don't really have any other cameras to do relevant comparisons with. Here's a summary. I think it's better than my old DC265 on pretty much all accounts. The size of the CX7530 is essentially the same as that of the CX7220, the zoom goes further on both ends, and image quality is higher, though for 4x6 prints I'm not convinced that the difference is relevant. Compared to my 5D (with it lenses and accessories), the CX7530 is about 50 times cheaper, much smaller and lighter, far less capable. If I had another comparable camera, I could pit them against one another in trickier situations, e.g. to see which one fares better (or less bad) in low light or indoors.

Re: "Kodak or Canon or..."

The A95 is a nice camera. Its replacement, the A610, has the added advantage of using Canon's second generation of Digic processors, which is much faster (I can definitely see the difference between my 10D and my 5D). That range of Canon cameras offers many controls, and that sometimes clutters the interface a little bit. I did appreciate the ability to shoot the A75 in aperture-priority mode and (for some odd application) in fully manual mode. The swivel LCD is really cool as you can essentially use it as a waist-level finder.

Re: "a review of last years model camera!"

It takes pictures, you can still buy one easily, you don't pay the "latest model" premium. I have a few cameras that aren't quite recent but that do a great job (my Sinar F was designed before I was born, and at this point it still takes better pictures than any other camera I own, but it's heavy, bulky, requires a stiff tripod, takes a long time to setup, and costs a lot per frame).

Re: "Any chance of a 5D review?"

In a nutshell, and compared to the 10D: similar size and weight, much better viewfinder, faster processor, AF seems faster, screen is much larger. The 8-way joystick to select the AF point is very convenient, but it's actually fairly slow to scroll around the picture in review mode. It seems to record significantly more detail, and to perform visibly better in low-light situations. Real wide angles. I've not actually played with it much, since I had promised to write the CX7530 review, and at this point I know that I don't have a printer large enough to really evaluate the final image quality.

Re: "correction"

Well, I live in California, which means that ideal conditions are common ;-) Seriously, most of the pictures on my walls were shot under bright sunlit conditions, and one of my favorites (a series of 3 rock formations from Goblin Valley UT, printed 5x7) could very well have been shot with the CX7530, which would have allowed me to avoid all that dust in my lenses. Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (JBQ) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40253 http://osnews.com/thread?40253 which is better SD or CF ? and why ? i get asked this question alot and i always google and find some links.. can any pro kindly enlighten me more ? tahnk you in advance

i think i will wait for one more model year and buy the current models after they go down in price. today i saw the konica minolta Z6 reduce by 50$ and fly off the shelf right before my eyes...
so ill wait for a few more days, and buy the current line next year:) till then, im happy with the Dimage z10 ;
cheers
ram Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (durbhas) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40256 http://osnews.com/thread?40256 * CF is cheaper, but only for sizes above 512 MB.
* CF can go up to 12GB, SD can go up to 4-6 GB.
* CF is more robust physically, difficult to break by mistake.
* SD is considerably smaller.
* Speed is similar, depends what model you buy.

* For PDAs, having a CF slot is better, because more third party devices exist for CF rather than for SD (e.g. gps, cameras, bt, wifi etc), because there is more space to put electronics in it and so manufacturers prefer it over SD. CF-based devices are considerably cheaper over SD too (e.g. for Wifi/bt cards), because of the size reason. Wed, 05 Oct 2005 04:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Eugenia) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40293 http://osnews.com/thread?40293 The Canon A620 has a newer sensor and therefore better picture quality:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&... Wed, 05 Oct 2005 07:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40483 http://osnews.com/thread?40483 hey eugenia,
thanks for the info.
Looks like CF is the better choice both price and feature wise.. then why do so many models depend on SD cards ?
also i read in reviews that some kodak models are changing from CF to SD ; wonder why tho; may be there are differences in access times etc?
cheers
ram Wed, 05 Oct 2005 15:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (durbhas) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40490 http://osnews.com/thread?40490 A quick look at my favorite retailer (adorama) sems to show that for capacities where both formats are available (512MB to 2GB), prices are pretty much the same.

Benchmarks of similar CF and SD done in cameras that support both show that there's little difference in terms of speed (if any, SD is a bit faster). The overwhelming factor remains the speed of the flash chips themselves, and a fast card of any format trumps a slow card of any format.

The advantage of CF is the availability of higher capacities (up to 8GB). The interface of SD cards seems to better resist abuse, though (I've seen many CF slots with bent pins at various local 1-hour labs).

I think that it makes sense for camera makers to go for SD when size matter, for CF when capacity matters. I'm not really convinced that we'll see cards much smaller than SD become widespread in cameras (it's likely to happen in smaller devices like phones). Wed, 05 Oct 2005 16:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (JBQ) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?40688 http://osnews.com/thread?40688 Thanks for the advice everyone...I will definitely take a look at the Canon A610...so many models on the market today, so many possible choices...decisions, decisions :-) Wed, 05 Oct 2005 21:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?43755 http://osnews.com/thread?43755 I myself am inclined to like Kodak cameras, because it turns out some use Cypress imaging devices (CCDs, whatever they should be called now.) (ObRelevation: Cypress bought some tech from Kodak too.) 13MPixel arrays; w00t!

Speaking to a more general view of the camera; can you do pro foreign press photo stuff like; wrapping the lenswork side of the thing in a towel or newspaper when in a dusty area, to keep dust out of the works? What is its' wavelength sensitivity range (any IR available?) Nearest timing for full-frame shots and 24x (common) SD Flash?

Does it slave to a far-slung flash (LED flash on a wristband, 3ms delay from peak, say) well? How about really washed-out skin tones in pizza-parlor lighting; doesn't do that junk, does it? (Ah, I love the ending theme from Geneshaft! Too bad the series is a drag.)

I mean...I couldn't actually learn decent photography without ending up messed up from this, having previously believed that one could always -infer- the ground and field from the subject, could I? Wed, 12 Oct 2005 04:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments