I have a Kodak Z1012 IS that I'd like to compare. However, I've also used Nikon D-SLRS. How does the new Kodak Z980 compar

Does the new Kodak Z980 produce the same quality of 11x14" enlargements as a Nikon D90 at ISO 800, under average exposure conditions? Also, how does the smaller sensor size (and smaller pixels) of the Z980 compare between the two cameras? Is exposure latitude affected?

Is there noticeable barrel distortion or pin-cushioning at focal length extremes with the 24X zoom lens on the Z980?

Perhaps the Kodak Z980 is too new to be compared with existing cameras, such as the Nikon D90. However, I would like to hear from Z980 users regarding the quality of enlargements 11x14 and larger. Also, the smaller sensor size usually means smaller pixels (especially at 12 MP) per sensor and this usually means less exposure latitude than a camera with an APS-C sensor or larger. If anyone has information to the contrary, please let me know. Also, 24X zoom lenses usually exhibit noticeable distortion at the shortest and longest focal lengths. Is this lens different? Thank you.

Thanks James. The so-called "point and shoot" cameras have been improving, along with their built-in zoom lenses. In fact, these are beginning to challenge the output medium being used. As for shutter lag, it's now down to about one-fifth second on the Kodak, so that difference is almost imperceptible. However, cramming the same number of pixels into a smaller chip increases digital noise, especially at higher ISO's. But, in this case, Consumers Report rated the Kodak sensor as very good up to ISO 800, although the Nikon sensor does a superb job of handling noise at even higher ISO's. But, as sensors become better, I feel the limiting factor in the future will be lens resolution and optical errors. As these become "weak links in the chain," I am happy to see recent optical improvements, especially in short and longer focal lengths (i.e., super wide angle and telephoto lenses). That's my opinion, what's yours?

You're pretty close on that. The more megapixels a camera has, the larger the lens it needs to provide the clarity it deserves and prevent diffraction due to a loss of detail with smaller apertures.

Thanks again James. I think we're in basic agreement. Although the photo magazines haven't emphasized it, it seems that newer lenses for digital-only use have improved quality and are de-emphasizing optical problems, along with providing a greater zoom range. The result is that output (print) quality, with the more recent cameras, continues to improve and is now far superior to what film can produce. Also, with increased sensitivity of sensors, the need for electronic flash decreases and the need for large aperture prime telephoto lenses also diminishes, especially in sports and wildlife photography.

How does it compare in burst to the other point and shoot digitals? I have used the z612 and was very pleased withthe clarity of the burst but the Z1012 and Z1015 left a lot to be desired by cutting the number of shots and uping the noise. I shot mainly sports and would love to come back to Kodak so please help me out.

I have the Z1012 and a Canon Rebel XSi - I am very new to photography and was wondering what camera would be best to take on an Alaskan cruise to shoot sea life and scenery from the ship? I have two lenses with the canon - 55-250 and 18-55mm. Not sure how that equates in zoom times - can anyone explain it to me ? Is it as good as this 24x zoom Kodak?