Steve'sDigicams

pboerger · Oct 12, 2009, 8:46 AM

Anyone care to comment on the Z915. I am considering getting this camera for carry around family vacations, casual shooting, etc. I own a DSLR but do not take it on vacations. Seems the bang for the buck is outstanding. Thanks.

pboerger · Oct 18, 2009, 11:03 PM

Nobody uses this camera?

mtclimber · Oct 19, 2009, 10:33 AM

pboerger-

The Z-950 seems to have a larger following. I have not had a chance to compare the Z-915 side by side to the more expensive Z-950. However, sample photos from the Z-950 look impressive.

Have a great day.

Sarah Joyce

pboerger · Oct 20, 2009, 10:57 AM

Thanks for replying. I have a larger superzoom and and I am looking for a pocket size.

mtclimber · Oct 20, 2009, 11:57 AM

pboerger-

My suggestion on a pocket camera is the Panasonic ZS1 or ZS3 cameras. Those cameras are pocket sized, have a wonderful 25mm wide angle lens that will spoil you, as well as 12X optical zoom.

Those two cameras have a very poor built-in flash unit, the effective flash range is no more than 8 feet, so to compensate for that I use a slave flash and have excellent results.

Perhaps that will work for you. The Kodak Z-1485 is another pocket camera possibility, though it only have 5X optical zoom. Have a great day.

Sarah Joyce

pboerger · Oct 21, 2009, 12:14 PM

mtclimber. I read Z980 instead of Z950, hence my "duh" superzoom remark. I'm checking it out. Thanks for your patience.

mtclimber · Oct 21, 2009, 10:35 PM

Pboerger-

I actually own a Kodak Z-980, as well as my DSLR cameras. However, I rarely if ever use the Z-980 camera. The DSLR cameras seem much truer to the photo scene and the colors.

Sarah Joyce

mtclimber · Nov 1, 2009, 3:37 PM

Pboerger-

In researching the Kodak Z950 today (11/01) it was specially designed with a the size and 10X optical zoom to compete against the Panasonic ZS1/ZS3 and the Canon SX-200 camera. So it must be pretty small in size.

Have a great day.

Sarah Joyce

mtclimber · Nov 1, 2009, 6:59 PM

Like the Kodak Z-950 which was designed to compete, in terms of physical size and image quality with the likes of the Canon SX-200, the Panasonic ZS3, the Panasonic TZ-7, and the Fuji F-70EXR, unfortunately, the lower priced Z-915 fall short in terms of image quality and noise within the recorded images.

So our conclusion is that the Z-950 does very well indeed. However, the lower priced Z-915, designed to appeal to the under $200 digital camera market, leaves a lot to be desired in terms of ultimate image quality.

For just $30 to $40 more the Kodak Z-950 far exceeds the the lower priced Kodak Z-915 camera in terms of image quality, and is worth the cost of the upgrade.

Sarah Joyce

mtclimber · Nov 11, 2009, 3:19 PM

Final Summary

While the Z-950 and Z-915 share the same camera body, their performance are entirely different. The Z-950 is very easy to use with on-screen adjustments for ISO, Flash Compensation, and Exposure Compensation. The aperture and shutter speed the camera is about to use is also displayed in real time.

The Z-915 has no onscreen info at all. The 4 way controller on the Z-950 works smoothly, in contrast, the 4 way controller on the Z-915 is like something we were used to 4 years ago. In short, it is difficult to use.

The image quality on the two cameras is just about equal.

Sarah Joyce

Oct 12, 2009, 8:46 AM	#1
pboerger Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 204	Z915 Quality? Anyone care to comment on the Z915. I am considering getting this camera for carry around family vacations, casual shooting, etc. I own a DSLR but do not take it on vacations. Seems the bang for the buck is outstanding. Thanks.

Oct 20, 2009, 11:57 AM	#5
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	pboerger- My suggestion on a pocket camera is the Panasonic ZS1 or ZS3 cameras. Those cameras are pocket sized, have a wonderful 25mm wide angle lens that will spoil you, as well as 12X optical zoom. Those two cameras have a very poor built-in flash unit, the effective flash range is no more than 8 feet, so to compensate for that I use a slave flash and have excellent results. Perhaps that will work for you. The Kodak Z-1485 is another pocket camera possibility, though it only have 5X optical zoom. Have a great day. Sarah Joyce Last edited by mtclimber; Oct 21, 2009 at 10:33 PM.

Steve'sDigicams

Recent Camera Reviews

Most Active Forums

Most Popular Deals

Latest Feature Articles

Oct 18, 2009, 11:03 PM	#2
pboerger Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 204	Nobody uses this camera?

Oct 19, 2009, 10:33 AM	#3
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	pboerger- The Z-950 seems to have a larger following. I have not had a chance to compare the Z-915 side by side to the more expensive Z-950. However, sample photos from the Z-950 look impressive. Have a great day. Sarah Joyce

Oct 20, 2009, 10:57 AM	#4
pboerger Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 204	Thanks for replying. I have a larger superzoom and and I am looking for a pocket size.

Oct 21, 2009, 12:14 PM	#6
pboerger Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 204	mtclimber. I read Z980 instead of Z950, hence my "duh" superzoom remark. I'm checking it out. Thanks for your patience.

Oct 21, 2009, 10:35 PM	#7
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	Pboerger- I actually own a Kodak Z-980, as well as my DSLR cameras. However, I rarely if ever use the Z-980 camera. The DSLR cameras seem much truer to the photo scene and the colors. Sarah Joyce

Nov 1, 2009, 3:37 PM	#8
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	Pboerger- In researching the Kodak Z950 today (11/01) it was specially designed with a the size and 10X optical zoom to compete against the Panasonic ZS1/ZS3 and the Canon SX-200 camera. So it must be pretty small in size. Have a great day. Sarah Joyce

Nov 1, 2009, 6:59 PM	#9
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	Like the Kodak Z-950 which was designed to compete, in terms of physical size and image quality with the likes of the Canon SX-200, the Panasonic ZS3, the Panasonic TZ-7, and the Fuji F-70EXR, unfortunately, the lower priced Z-915 fall short in terms of image quality and noise within the recorded images. So our conclusion is that the Z-950 does very well indeed. However, the lower priced Z-915, designed to appeal to the under $200 digital camera market, leaves a lot to be desired in terms of ultimate image quality. For just $30 to $40 more the Kodak Z-950 far exceeds the the lower priced Kodak Z-915 camera in terms of image quality, and is worth the cost of the upgrade. Sarah Joyce

Nov 11, 2009, 3:19 PM	#10
mtclimber Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 10,693	Final Summary While the Z-950 and Z-915 share the same camera body, their performance are entirely different. The Z-950 is very easy to use with on-screen adjustments for ISO, Flash Compensation, and Exposure Compensation. The aperture and shutter speed the camera is about to use is also displayed in real time. The Z-915 has no onscreen info at all. The 4 way controller on the Z-950 works smoothly, in contrast, the 4 way controller on the Z-915 is like something we were used to 4 years ago. In short, it is difficult to use. The image quality on the two cameras is just about equal. Sarah Joyce