Forums
Posted By: Waddi Kodak Z1612 - 6th Aug 2007 1:07pm
any one had any dealings with this camera?

Click here

To replace a Olympus C-725
click here
Thoughts and opinions please
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 6th Aug 2007 1:21pm
Can't say ive ever used it, but Schneider lenses are the business fella. The only problem is, the ones on Kodak digital camera's do tend to suffer from barrel distortion, so if thats of any concern to ye, stay away.

smile

There are some half decent reviews on the web, there isnt any really in depth ones though and Trusted Reviews (the best review site for Digital Camera's) dont have a review for it.

They do have a review on the Z710 however, which is closely related to the Z610, Z612 and Z650, the reason all their lenses nowadays feature only 10x zoom instead of 12x... i dunno lol - but its like the lowed end camera's always used to feature Schneider 4x optical lenses, nowdays they are just crappy Kodak 3x optical lol.

Z710 Review
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 7:17am
Which camera do you have Matty?

I would like to have lots of optical Zoom, atleast 6mp, Maunal twisty focus and zoom.

The price of the Kodak Z1612 was very appealling for the features of the camera.
Posted By: BMW Joe Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 11:52am
I was looking at getting the z740, but I'm thinking against it after seeing this.

I'm after optical zoom, at least 10x and low light ability
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 11:56am
SO Joe, are you considering this camera instead now?
Posted By: BMW Joe Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 11:58am
yup, I really like the z740, but for the little bit extra (12x optical zoom, image stabilisation e.t.c) it'd be worth it.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 12:28pm
Dont forget the extra megapixel

to be honest, I know I have said I want atleast 6mp but really I want atlease 7mp.

Therefore the fore-runners (on ebay) for me at the moment are:
Fuji FinePix S5700
PANASONIC LUMIX DMC FZ8
OLYMPUS SP 510
Kodak Z712

opinions please......
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 3:17pm
oooooooooooooooooooiiiiiii

18x optical zoom OLYMPUS SP550 UZ, a bit out my price range tho.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 3:53pm
OK, mary mary quite contrary.

Just noticed that 3 out of the 4 in the list I posted above are hong kong listings, I dont really wont to risk it so Im left with a choice of 2:

Can someone that knows about cameras please compare them and tell me which is better, I prefer the styling of the kodak. I had a try at comparing:
  • Kodak has a better zoom, 12x optical vs 10x optical of the olympus
  • Olympus has better megapixels, 7.1 vs 6.1 of the Kodak, but we all know megapixels dont mean everything.
  • Olympus has better iso range, upto 4000 vs upto 800 on the Kodak
  • Olympus uses XD vs SD that Kodak uses (I allready have a 512mb XD)
  • Kodak has faster shutter, upto 1/2000 vs 1/1000 on the olympus
  • Kodak use Li-ion battery pack, Olympus uses 4xAA batteries (unsure who wins on this one)
Thats as much as I know, but all the tech spec is available in those links, it just confuses me
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 4:24pm
Hmmm why do I get the feeling you guy's are looking at camera's based on specifications and numbers alone? If thats how you intend to purchase a camera, you will almost certainly not get a great camera.

Think of this way - more megapixels "doesnt" mean better quality. In fact, given the size of the sensors being less then 1 inch in most sub £250 camera's, the higher megapixel count will actually be a hinderance and mean worse quality rather then higher quality.

The higer the zoom doesnt mean the better the image, as in the case of the Z612 vs the Z710 - the Z612 is an obsolete product, recently replaced by the Z712 and whilst a model like the Z710 may have 2x less optical zoom, it has a newer CCD, and features newer colour re-production and image processing algorythm's, which in turn lead to a far better quality shot.

Also, my camera has only a 10.7x optical zoom, which may sound crap compared to some. But not only does it have a lens of similar quality to high end SLR lenses, but it also has the ability to accept additional lens extensions... a 3x lens extension, and I then have the possibility of upto in excess of 30x optical telephoto end. The same with a wider angle lens extension would give me the possibility of maybe a 16mm wide angle end instead of the rather impressixe 28mm it has as standard.

Dont buy a camera based on megapixel count or how many mm the optical zoom is, buy it based on image quality, do some proper research, also buy one that you need, not that looks biggest and best. Without a real purpose for having such a high zoom, why buy an 18x for instance? Why buy a 12 megapixel camera for instance, when a 4 megapixel will perform just as great, if not actually better due to the size of the sensor... are you really intended to do prints bigger then A3??

For low light ability, you really need to get a camera with as high an ISO as possible. Take the Z612 for instance, the top ISO of 800 is only available when shooting in 1.1 megapixel mode, so its native top ISO is actually only 400, and to find the highest decent quality ISO with which image noise doesnt start to affect the shot badly, you go back a step further, which means the ISO would be a lacklustre 200.

My camera for instance shoots at upto 3200 native, at 800 and 1600 the quality is totally fine for using in say a print or a high quality web image. 3200 isnt too bad itself, but the noise does become noticable. Dont always go instantly on the ISO rating though, again, you need to find out how the camera actually performs at higher ISO's... another camera with an ISO of 3200 may perform really terribly bad at anything above say 800, its all to do with how badly the noise and luminance affects the final shot.

Id say first of all you need to decide what you need the camera for... if it just shots of the family, the odd shot of the car to put on the web etc, dont bother spending masses of money on something which has all the specs that you will never need. Its a case of why spend £230 on a camera that for your requirements, a £90 camera would be more then adequate?

If you want to go a step further and maybe become an amateur photographer, then a bridge camera is the way to go for both optimum quality and flexibility at a decent price. Landscape and scenic photograph demand high zoom levels, bridge camera's provide this as standard, and usually have the flexibility to go further, but this depends on the model you buy so check it out first. Then again, dependent upon the type of photography you do, a 0.4" macro mode would be better then a 100x optical zoom, again, most bridge camera's can achieve this or very near it as standard.

My current camera kit is the Fuji Finepix S6500FD, along with a 2GB XD card (you really do need a 1GB minimum), a monopod and some 2500mAh batteries, a 1 hour charger and an in car adapter. This is the basic kit required to get the best use out of this camera at stock, I still havent found the "need" for any higher telephoto of wider angle lens extensions as yet, even though I consider myself an amateur landscape and scenic photographer.

This camera isnt perfect in every sense of the word, it features the unique Fujifilm SuperCCD 6th generation sensor, for those who dont know, the Fuji SuperCCD is hexagonal pixels instead of round, so provide more calirty and definition. It also has a 10.7x optical zoom with the ability to use extension lenses, it is 6.3 megapixel, has a maximum ISO of 3200, can macro to less then 1cm, has an EVF and high quality bright LCD, features manual focus and manual zoom rings (believe me, once you have tried manual zoom, you will never go back to electronic zoom) and uses the same lens as the S9600. Oh it also has silly features like Face Detection, which some people may be interested in.

It has a wide range of modes, including the dreaded full manual mode, which ensures the user has the same amount of control over the shot as they would have on an SLR.

It took me many hours of searching around the net to decide upon this camera. I was convinced for many months that I was going to buy the Kodak Z710, which seemed to be amazing from the specs... but as I read more and more reviews of it, the general feeling was quite negative, and the S6500 and its big brother the S9600, and its younger brother the S5600 had such positive reviews and won so many awards between then, for the price I was looking to pay and the type of photography I intended to use the camera for, I found the S6500 would be most likely to meet my needs... and it hasnt just met my needs and expectation's, in many ways it has exceeded them.

At the end of the day though, if all ye can see is numbers, buy the biggest zoom and highest number of megapixels you can, im sure the camera will more then meet your needs as you arnt a photographer so wont need anything special lol.

smile
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 4:39pm
I should also add that the best camera in the world cant make your subject any better.

One of the best shots I have ever taken and am most proud of, was taken on a Nokia 6680 1.3 megapixel phone camera. Unfortunatly, the camera suffered from a high amount of vignetting, so I had to crop to get rid of it, its probably about 1 megapixel in size now, but it is still an absolutely wonderful shot!

I have been back to the very same location multiple times since and have never been able the replicate the shot, quite simply the landscape has changed quite a bit and the lighting has never been as good to me.

So dont think that by buying an amazing camera, all of a sudden your shots will become amazing, because unless the subject is perfect too, you will get the same results as you are getting on your current camera.

smile
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 4:40pm
Ok, thanks for that Matty, The type of photography I do at the moment is:
[list][*]Wildlife/Zoo's, which is why I want the biggest optical zoom I can afford
[*]Family/Babies/my kids, Which is why I want a fast shutter speed
[*]Landscapes
[*]motorsport
[*]I usually have my pics printed 8*10, and I am looking into getting a 10" digital photo frame

I have a budget of about £120, find me the best camera Matty
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 5:03pm
From what you have said, a camera of that price range would struggle to be best for everything, but you can certainly get a camera to meet most of your expectations and perform reasonably well on the rest.

At the moment, if you were looking to go for a bit of a bigger model (still, its not "that" big in comparison say to mine, just bgger then a normal digitcal camera), i think you couldnt go far wrong with choosing the Fuji S5600, I know a lot about this camera because its a cam I was looking at closely when considering which to buy and was for a time looking at buying it.

I have seen it in many plces brand new (including Tesco) for £109.00, but Fuji currently have refurbished ones listed at £89.99 - http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/shop/refurb/detail.php?id=89 - I don't think you can go far wrong at that price. The only things its doent have is 28mm wide angle (it starts at 38mm, but increases to 380mm iirc), it doesnt have manual zoom, and its ISO is only 1600 max.

But, it is a highly capable camera, and won the 2006 European budget digital camera of the year award! It essentially the same as the 5700 you mentioned before, but with a lower pixel count and less stylish casing.

It also has 30fps 640x480 movie mode, which is good for a cam of its price believe me.

Overview - http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/digital/cameras/s5600/
Specifications - http://www.fujifilm.co.uk/digital/cameras/s5600/index.php?page=tech_specs

Interestingly, if you were to look at a refurbished camera as a possibility, they have the S6500 for £136 atm, although on top of the price of both of these camera's, you will need to consider the fact that it is highly recommended you buy some high capacity rechargable batteries (2500mAh+) and as fast a charger as ye can get for convenience, so look at this as an extra £20 - £30, because the voltage in alkaline batteries becomes too low after about 60 or so shots, whereas NiMh batteries retain their 1.2v voltage throught their life and mine give me a good 400 - 500 shots on one charge.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 7:32pm
Am I right in thinking 6mp is equal quality to 35mm film.
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 8:23pm
Yes and no - some people suggest its as low as 3mp, other suggest its around the 8mp range, professional's say its around the 12mp range, but its a hard one to pinpoint for the simple reason there are so many different brands and variants of 35mm film all offering different levels of quality etc.

To be correct though iirc, 12mp is about equal to the highest quality 35mm can produce.
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 9:14pm
I suppose you could also consider that on my S6500, when I shoot in RAW, the resolution is actually 4048x3036 pixels, which in lamens terms is 12.3 megapixels...

Not that I often shoot in RAW as they are 13MB+ for each photo, but it gives you an idea of how flexible that camera is.

As the S5600 shoots at an effective pixel count of 5 megapixels, I would expect it to shoot in the region of 10 megapixel in RAW mode.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 10:14pm
One of the cameras that I previously struck of the list above has come back into play:

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8
[Linked Image]

FAO Matty, can you read the trusted review in the link and tell me if its any good please.

Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 10:36pm
Reading the review matey (and Trusted Reviews are just that, very trusted), I will pull up the following points:

- The ISO performance is miles better then the Z612 you were looking at, but it still falls short of what you were looking for maybe with a maximum reasonable setting of only 400 before too much noise reduction leads to moire pattern problems.

- The lens quality looks excellent (Leica are a top brand for lenses), but the macro mode is a bit questionable for the price of the camera, struggling to focus in using AF at anything less then 20cm.

- The colour reproduction seems very good, in fact near perfect for brighter colours, but the darker tones in the images seem too "contrasty" imho.

- At the wide angle, its probably not adequate for landscape photography as its only 36mm and offers no form of lens extension possibilities.

- Start up time of 4 seconds is to be quite frank abysmal, according to the review, the lens moves very slow, and is well blow that of its competitors such as the Canon S3 which only takes 1.5 seconds. Sometimes a fast start up can be really handy. 4 seconds doesnt sound like a long time, but when it comes to photography and "capturing the moment", it can seem like an eternity. This is one of the many problems of electronic zoom camera's, aside from the obvious pinpoint accuracy in control problems.

- The zoom is electronic, now it could just be me being picky, but at this price range, given what there is in the market for around the same price, I would be expecting a manual zoom at least?? Also, the manual focus isnt done using a focus ring.

Overall its a very good camera and extremely stylish imho, I love the way it looks and from the sounds of things the build quality is excellent. The Leica lens will ensure great photographs, but I suppose for the price range it is in, I am just expecting a little bit more when one considers the prices of comparable bridge camera's.

Thats quite a leap though fella, from £120 to a £200 camera lol, you could be worth considering a 9600 off the Fuji site for £203 or maybe even the Canon S3 dependent upon what you need from a camera.

wink
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 10:42pm
on ebay for £154
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 10:49pm
You can find a Canon S3 on ebay for the £170 mark, and given the fact you can get a Fuji S6500 direct from Fuji for only £136atm, considering the bad points I have found there, personally even at £170 (incl delivery), I wouldnt buy it when there are others that are superiors in many ways on the market for comparable prices, maybe even less.

Its just my personal opinion of course, but one gets the feeling Panasonic tried extremely hard to get this camera to set a benchmark, but actually fell short of the benchmark cam's that already exist. Overall the camera is very good, but not particuarly great at any single aspect it does, and there are better overall camera's available.

Besides, worldnt you rather pay say £18 extra for an S3 and know you are getting a much better camera?

I think you need to look at the verdict on the review to judge this:

Originally Posted by Trusted Reviews
The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8 is a well-made and sensibly designed camera with a range of features well suited to the enthusiast photographer. Its performance is a bit on the slow side, but the excellent lens and brilliant image stabilisation system more than make up for that. Unfortunately however its potentially first-class photographic results are let down by an inferior sensor and poor image processing.

wink
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 13th Aug 2007 10:54pm
On a sidenote, I wouldnt recommend buying a cmaera off ebay, try to get it from a proper online retailer or even better, from a high street shop, particuarly Jessops etc, as buying from ebay can lead to problems with regards to returns etc.

Its always best to buy from a high street retailer because higher end camera's have multiple lenses and sensitive electronics inside them, and they can be damaged easily in transit.

If you buy from a high street retailer, its no hassle to take it back and get a new one, places like Jessops will even get the camera out of the box when you are there sometimes to ensure it is working correctly and give you a quick guide through some of the primary functions of the camera.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 14th Aug 2007 6:34am
Im back tracking again to one I previously struck off the above list
Fujifilm FinePix S5700

It has a good review (I think) and is very close to my budget.
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 14th Aug 2007 7:39am
Yeah the 5700 is good, but tbh its almost the same as the 5600, but of course the 5600 is a fair bit cheaper. I think the main difference other then the megapixel count and design is the generation of SuperCCD in play, think the 5600 is 4th gen whereas the 5700 is probably 6th gen. Having said that, thhe 5600 got some startling reviews too.

Between the two, id go for the 5600 on the basis of features:price, but if I were to consider the 5700 (at the time I was looking for a camera, it wasnt available, its only recently come to market), I would be considering the 6500.

Jessops have it on offer atm, reduced from £199 to £169, don't know what the ebay sellers are like, its only £136 from Fuji atm though.

Having said that though, all in all, the 5700 does look like an amazing piece of kit for the price range its been placed in and I don't think you could go far wrong with it to be honest.

smile
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 14th Aug 2007 8:07am
Im sold on the 6500 then, just gotta convince the wife on allowing me to up the budget a little.

Main reasons are:
the CCD size on the 6500 is a great 1/1.7
Manaul focus and zoom rings/dials

If I cant afford it, Im gonna go for the 5700 instead.



Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 30th Sep 2007 5:28pm
woohoo, I ordered my Fujifilm S6500fd today.

£115 of the Fuji Website using a promocode to get 15% off their listed price.

woohoo again
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 30th Sep 2007 5:40pm
Quality stuff, im sure you will love using it thumbsup
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 30th Sep 2007 5:57pm
Thanks again matty for all your help throughout choosing my new camera and pointing me in the direction of the fuji shop.
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 30th Sep 2007 6:01pm
No problem, glad to have been of help... hehe I feel like ive started a revolution with these 6500's, everyone has got one now!

Quality camera's though, they wernt selling well at their proper price of £279 in light of DSLR's crashing down in price, so its forced both Fuji and retailers to reduce their pricing by upto 50%, so they have become the bargain of the year within the camera industry.

Ye basically getting a DSLR quality camera and lens, but without the features only pro's need, for less then £150 lol. Cant be bad!
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 1st Oct 2007 2:12pm
Got an email at 1pm toady confirming the dispatch of my camera. woohoo cant wait.
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 2nd Oct 2007 10:16pm
It arriveed midday today, But I've been at workall day, then I went to pick up a fridge/freezer, Haven't really had time to get out and test it, So I cant wait till tomorrow evening!
Posted By: MattLFC Re: Kodak Z1612 - 2nd Oct 2007 10:21pm
Sweet man! Am sure ya gonna love using it, its a real pleasure to use and despites its pwer and wide range of features, retains simplicity.

smile
Posted By: Waddi Re: Kodak Z1612 - 2nd Oct 2007 10:22pm
Right Matty, when do we start the lessons? happy
© Wirral-Wikiwirral