Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Kodak (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak-24/)
-   -   Yow... Steve's P712 review... (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/kodak/100254-yow-steves-p712-review.html)

En121 Sep 5, 2006 11:43 PM

He complains about image quality outdoors. (Soft, and the noise... not so much the noise, but, the corner softness and just the softness.) Not a very positive review. He reccomends the Z612 for less money, and better image quality. (I think.)

I was thinking about this camera... It loks real great. MPEG-4 movie, excellent image quality, good reviews, etc. If dpreview.com gives a bad review... I don't know if I'll get it... the Z612 is also cheaper.. But, lacks RAW and TIFF. Err... the P712 seems so noisy in the skies... and shadows. I might not be able to stand that. But yes, a negative review from dpreview, and, I'll have to look into a different camera. o.o

En121 Sep 6, 2006 12:25 AM

Steve also mentioned that TIFF files aren't that much better than fine JPEGs... -.- So, that's another mark. They're also much much larger. He also mentioned that the difference between standard JPEGs and fine JPEGs wasn't that much. Despite the bigger file size.

So yes, the Z612 looks like a winner. :D Much cheaper, and great features. I don't need a hotshoe, I don't need tiff, and, I don't need 7mp. I want low noise, at low ISO. And great image quality, and a big zoom. and IS. :D If I want to do RAW, my parents might get a Nikon D50, so, I might use that for raw. The Z612 seems like it has what I want/need.

4mp more than our current camera, nice big zoom, great image quality, and a nice burst... but, very long buffer flush. XD

But yes, it has a nice big LCD, EVF, and the features I need. And the MPEG-4 video is a big plus for me.

For the price, (probably around 350$ by christmas...) I don't think I can justify the image quality off the P712, softness, noise, etc. Hey, I'll still get a Kodak, just maybe a different one...

Does anyone actually care which I get? XD

Atindra Sep 6, 2006 7:25 AM

En121 wrote:
Quote:

He complains about image quality outdoors. (Soft, and the noise... not so much the noise, but, the corner softness and just the softness.) Not a very positive review. He reccomends the Z612 for less money, and better image quality. (I think.)

I was thinking about this camera... It loks real great. MPEG-4 movie, excellent image quality, good reviews, etc. If dpreview.com gives a bad review... I don't know if I'll get it... the Z612 is also cheaper.. But, lacks RAW and TIFF. Err... the P712 seems so noisy in the skies... and shadows. I might not be able to stand that. But yes, a negative review from dpreview, and, I'll have to look into a different camera. o.o
Dpreview never gives positive review for any Kodak camera. So dont wait for it. Image quality of Z612 seems better to me a littlebit (sharpness and Noise) but still I would go for P712 for hotshoe, RAW and control over JPEG compressions.

Atindra

En121 Sep 6, 2006 10:13 AM

Heh, the Z612 has control over JPEG compression.... I'm not gonna use a hotshoe... and, I don't think I'll need raw most of the time. Even if it could be fun. This is gonna be my own digital camera, my first one. I want the image quality. :3

Flying Fossil Sep 6, 2006 10:56 AM

Sounds like the Z612 is your baby.

I however have zero complaints thus far using the new P712. I am a long way from being a photographer but the image quailty I am getting in my eye is sensational.
The colors are good, seem to be very natural, the images are clear and sharp corner to corner, The burst mode is marvelous and the features it offers are perfect for me.
I love the 12x tele and the "noise" issues I have heard about have not materialized.
I no nothing about RAW or TIFF and will probably never use those features but they are there if I want to experiment.

No regrets.


bigdawg Sep 6, 2006 11:04 AM

Always remember that most of these reviewers are DSLR users and have a different standard they go by. I also agree that DP review has a bias against Kodak and never gives a good review! I have seen some very nasty reviews of some models of Kodak cameras that in the real world deliver consistantly good photos! Don't believe everything you read. Kinda like the evening news...They slant everything to the position they wish every one else would take. A camera is a very personal choice and until you get YOUR hands on one and use it you'll not know if it is the one for YOU!!!

Dawg

Atindra Sep 6, 2006 1:22 PM

bigdawg wrote:
Quote:

Always remember that most of these reviewers are DSLR users and have a different standard they go by. I also agree that DP review has a bias against Kodak and never gives a good review! I have seen some very nasty reviews of some models of Kodak cameras that in the real world deliver consistantly good photos! Don't believe everything you read. Kinda like the evening news...They slant everything to the position they wish every one else would take. A camera is a very personal choice and until you get YOUR hands on one and use it you'll not know if it is the one for YOU!!!

Dawg
I agree whole heartedly with you. I wonder why reviewers even review compact cameras with dslrs in mind? DPreview posted horrible review of V610, however posted great sample images contradicting their own review. Reviewers want great ISO controls, image stabilization everything in pocket cams but I wonder consumers also want all these? I mean there are certain limitations of physics for sensor and optics and electronics too.

Atindra

bigdawg Sep 6, 2006 1:53 PM

Quite right Atindra. My wife is very familiar with most things on a digi cam but would just as soon have it take all shots in auto! And again you really don't need to purchase a camera with every bell and whistle out there if you;v no wish to ever use them. Sometimes I think folks buy the most expensive camera just to say they have one. Not ever intending to use all it's features!

Dawg

Atindra Sep 6, 2006 2:16 PM

bigdawg wrote:
Quote:

Quite right Atindra. My wife is very familiar with most things on a digi cam but would just as soon have it take all shots in auto! And again you really don't need to purchase a camera with every bell and whistle out there if you;v no wish to ever use them. Sometimes I think folks buy the most expensive camera just to say they have one. Not ever intending to use all it's features!

Dawg
So true!!!, one of my friend bought FZ30 (panasonic) and he didnt even know about fireworks scene mode (I showed him it on his camera on July 4th). He doesnt know what macro is, he shoots closeup of flowers with just normal auto mode. He shoots his babies and he is happy with the pictures. I showed him some of the shots I took with DX6490 some macros, some sunsets, some nightshots etc he was amazed and was asking why this 300$ camera performs sometimes better than my 600$ camera? I told him if you dont know how to use your camera, it is as good as camera equipped with cellphones.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Atindra

Atindra Sep 6, 2006 2:19 PM

En121 wrote:
Quote:

Heh, the Z612 has control over JPEG compression.... I'm not gonna use a hotshoe... and, I don't think I'll need raw most of the time. Even if it could be fun. This is gonna be my own digital camera, my first one. I want the image quality. :3
I didnt see on the spec list that it has fine-std and low jpeg settings, if it has that is great. But I remember once Mike from Kodak on another forum told it doesnt have. I had my first digicam DX6490 and now I want to go more advance with RAW, Hotshoe, live histogram etc. Hotshoe with P20 flash is amazing feature puts you equivalent to dslrs in some cases.

Z612 also seems to be a great camera and you wont be disappointed for sure.

Atindra


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2