Hey! You should know that this product has been discontinued. Here are our current recommended cameras in the Point and Shoot Digital Cameras category.
Kodak EasyShare Z612
Editor's Review
The Kodak Z612 is very up front about what makes it an intriguing camera: The Z is for zoom, the 6 is its 6 megapixel CCD, and the 12 is for 12x optical zoom. Did they mention zoom? This is clearly Kodak's answer to Canon's S3IS, with a pretty 2.5 inch LCD screen, aperture and shutter priority and full manual exposure, and yes, a quite large 12x optical zoom. The Z612 also has a live histogram feature, letting users see their photo's exposure before taking a shot, and all the cropping, rotation, and red-eye reduction you need to do can be done right in the camera. The Z612 is a powerful performer and post-production unit.
Editor's Review
The Kodak Z612 is very up front about what makes it an intriguing camera: The Z is for zoom, the 6 is its 6 megapixel CCD, and the 12 is for 12x optical zoom. Did they mention zoom? This is clearly Kodak's answer to Canon's S3IS, with a pretty 2.5 inch LCD screen, aperture and shutter priority and full manual exposure, and yes, a quite large 12x optical zoom. The Z612 also has a live histogram feature, letting users see their photo's exposure before taking a shot, and all the cropping, rotation, and red-eye reduction you need to do can be done right in the camera. The Z612 is a powerful performer and post-production unit.
Specifications
- 6.1 megapixels
- 12x optical zoom / 4.2x optical zoom
- auto focus
- manual exposure
- ISO 80-800
- JPEG file format
- movie mode w/sound
- lithium ion battery
- 2.5 inch LCD
- SD/MMC card storage (32MB internal)
- Part Number: Z612
- UPC: 041771071851
- Release Date: Feb 24, 2006
Shop for Z612 Accessories
Kodak EasyShare Z612 Comments & Questions (write your own!)
Ideally it would be yr/mo/da/hr/min/sec followed by a serial No from 001-999
<a href="penisenlargementworlds.com&... Enlargement</a> and <a href="male-sexual-styles.com"... Enlargement</a>. Try <a href="vigrxplusresult.com"&g... Plus</a> - <a href="comprarvimaxnobrasil.com&qu... Vimax</a>
<a href="penisenlargementworlds.com&... Enlargement</a> and <a href="male-sexual-styles.com"... Enlargement</a>. Try <a href="vigrxplusresult.com"&g... Plus</a> - <a href="comprarvimaxnobrasil.com&qu... Vimax</a>
And with the age, it's probably cheaper to buy a new camera should a repair be needed.
It recently developed a problem where nothing can be seen through the lense. When I take a pic, it comes up black. However, I can still see info and previous photos (so its not a LCD screen issue). Its definitely a shutter issue...
I noticed couple of other comments on forum sayign they faced it too...
Anyone else?
I did read one user who said he fixed with a magnet, and said it was a stuck shutter. You can read his solution at this link, under Solution #2. I have no idea if this actually works, but it's the only 'solution' I've heard thus far:
fixya.com/support/t281905-k...
the camera works fine on other computers, but not on mine, whaat can I do? I've already been told to install SP3, and that didn't help, and I've tried uninstalling and reinstalling easyshare... the point is that I don't want easyshare. Windows XP should detect this camera like it does all other devices. Has anyone heard of this happening before?
What you can do is to use a card reader to download your pictures to the computer.
Card readers are recognizable by XP without any installation of software or drivers, and XP will copy the pictures to the computer without problems.
Re-installation means you need to save all the files in My Document to another drive, re-install the drivers for wireless adapter, if you have one, drivers for sound chip/sound card, drivers for the motherboard, add Firewall, add Antivirus,add Printer driver, ......... the list can be very long if you have lots of software loaded and got wiped off in the process.
If you want to go through with it, this is <a href="pcworld.com/article/129977/... the way </a>
I'd also try another card to see if you can replicate the issue. If you can, then it points to the camera as the culprit. If not, then it may be you just have a bad card.
Lastly, see if Kodak has a firmware update online that you can download and install. And reset the camera. This is a fairly easy procedure which involves either going into your setup menu and choosing "reset" (or intialize), holding down the menu key for 5 seconds, or, removing the batteries for a few minutes. It may be that the firmware loading got corrupted and the camera just needs to be "rebooted," which is something that turning it on/off won't accomplish. But after which, you should have the camera reset to factory default settings.
Have you tried to find a local photo repair shop that would tackle the job for less? Or perhaps an online repair shop other than Kodak (I know that's risky, but you could check them out first).
I know this is a simple question, but when was the last time the batteries were changed? A lithium ion battery can lose its life after a while. Instead of buying a new camera, you can just get a new battery and it should work just fine. Its a lot cheaper than buying a new camera too. You can find them on the Kodak accessory page ( kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier... ) for your camera. Good luck.
Andrew
I'm a big fan of Canon cameras. I currently own three. The Canon A570 IS ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) is a great upgrade. The 7.1MP resolution will allow for great photos, even up to 20x30 poster prints at the finest resolution settings, the image stabilization helps in low light and shakey situations, and the manual exposure settings are a favorite of mine for gaining more control over your photographs. It is also withing your budget. I think this would be a great fit for you.
Andrew
Glad we could help. Please come back with any more questions. Good luck and happy shooting.
Andrew
Another tip is to go to Kodak's website and look for firmware updates. Download and install them.
I am having the same problem that you are having. Sorry I don't have an answer but I tried what James suggested and I don't see a diffrerence when I reset the camera. I also went online and did not find a firmware upgrade for the camera. I have called kodak about the problem. And like you I am out of my warranty. They want over $100 to repair it. So I think I am in the market for a new camera. I am not too happy about that!
Then, contact KODAK about an RMA return for a defective product. Most don't know about the RMA programs electronics have. Tell them what you've told us and request a replacement unit. I woudn't give up simply because some tech gave you the stock spiel out of a handbook.
In the end though, if you're going to invest in a new camera, you may want to consider the Olympus SP560UZ ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) or for an SLR the Canon Digital Rebel XTi.
Kodak has a chat feature on their website, you may get faster replies there.
Funny...the tech i talked to from Kodak also sounded Indian but I think I got most of the info straight! He did tell me about a program whereby I could get a 15% off coupon/code for a new Kodak camera if I mailed them my old camera. Prices look to be better if I just watch for a sale. I'm thinking I don't want another Kodak anyway!
I came across an interesting article today about how more mega pixels is not necessarily a good thing. According to Image Engineering ( 6mpixel.org/en/? ) – a company that does testing of digital cameras for photo magazines in Germany – the quality of digital pictures has steadily decreased since the state of the art was six megapixels back in 2004. And because they don’t have a “dog in this hunt,” they put forth a compelling argument for buying new digital cameras with less mega pixels and not more.
The argument is essentially this: CCD chips on point and shoot cameras a smaller and as such, fitting in more pixels causes them to lose light sensivity. Sure, there’s more data on the chip, but the chip can’t absorb the light data and what it ends up with is a picture that has more noise than image quality. In addition, 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. But since we’re talking portable point and shoots here, those large lenses simply aren’t being made.
Finally, with larger mega pixels comes longer saving time due to their requires huge storage capacity, or more compression if not storing images in RAW format. The result is a noisier image and a dissatisfied camera user who thirsts for high quality and speed.
In the end, relying on a smaller MP that can balance all these needs may indeed be an answer as well.
I haven't heard about anything specific regarding the Z612's LCD, but you can look through our reviews here:
digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... looks like at least one other person had a bad experience with Kodak's customer service.
If you can do it via the dock, so much the better, but the USB cable will do also. You basically will double click on the firmware and follow the step by step.
One key thing is to make sure that you are attached to an AC Adapter when performing a firmware update. If you rely on batteries and they die, you may "brick" your camera. Not too good.
When the firmware is available, there will also be step by step instructions for you to d/l. But it's bascially that simple.
But compact point and shoots, well, they know how to do it, but it makes the camera prices more cost prohibitive. And it's a difficult concept to market, and as such, few companies actually publish delay/lag times for their cameras. (but if you do a google search on digital camera shutter lag times, you can find a site that compares lag times with different models).
The NYT has an interesting article ( nytimes.com/2007/05/10/tech... ) on shutter lag and how to combat it.
Kerend_821@hotmail.com
thanks in advanced.
Thanks
If it takes more than a few minutes, I would say there is a problem with the camera.
Andrew
I'm hesitant to try and format the new one now.
What exactly is the procedure to put a SD card in and format it? Do I even HAVE to format a new SD card? I've never had a camera that had it's own internal storage and SD cards...and IMO the user manual that comes with the Z612 isn't clear on a lot of stuff.
but I'm not sure about the Kodak EasyShare software, from what everyone says, it sounds like using it is a nightmare and trying to removing it from your PC is even worse.
Has anyone heard of the Fuji FinePix software having this kind of problem?
Do I have to use the software that comes with the camera?
To transfer pictures, you can simply plug your SD card into a card reader and drag and drop.
There have been a lot of defective cameras lately, as manufacturers are trying to spit them out fast enough to meet consumer demand.
Hopefully youre Kodak was purchased under 1 year ago like you said and you can get your camera repaired. Call Kodak immediately to get your product flagged before you warranty runs out. They'll be able to diagnose your problem. You're not alone with lens/IS issues.
cheers
revhead227
With that price range, your best bet is to move away from the Kodak line. You might try looking at the Fuji S6000 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) (on Amazon.com for $278.99 ( amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN... )). You can set it up to ISO3200, which makes it better in low light situations, and it boasts a 10.7x optical zoom, so you can zoom closer to the action.
If you need to have a Kodak, try the Kodak Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ). It has more optical zoom at 12x, but the ISO setting only goes up to 800, so it won't let as much light into your photos. I hope this helps.
Andrew
Thanks for the help. I actually have been looking at the Kodak Z612, but haven't made a decision. I will definately check out the Fuji S6000.
Again, thanks for your help!
Kim
HP Pavillion dc4000 comes with a 6-in-1 card reader. It should read your SD card unless over the one year period, one or more pins of the unused SDcard slot has become dirty and data flow is affected.
One way out is to get a new SD card reader which sells at $5-$10 each, and plug it to the USB port, although a few times of inserting and removing the card to the built-in card reader may also solve the problem in some cases.
to take really good astronomy pictures you will need 2 devices- a digital SLR camera and a telescope that allows to use a camera as an attachment. You can still take so-so pictures of the moon if you have a high zoom digital point and shoot camera. To do that you need to put the camera on a tripod. Use maximum zoom and try to focus the lens to the moon. If your camera has manual focus then use this option. Then just take a series of pictures changing the shutter speed, aperture and ISO sensitivity. While pressing the shutter button make sure that the camera does not shake. Therefore it is better to use the timer function instead of just pressing the button. If the point and shoot camera does not have any manual settings like shutter or aperture priority, then you can not take any satisfactory pictures of moon or other astronomy related objects.
thank you for your response.
the Z612 has just a little bit faster continuos drive and higher maximum shutter speed. But these differencies are really pretty minor. Customer reviews give about the same rating to both of the cameras. So by the specifications the Z612 is not any better than p712. About sharpness I don't think that there are differencies either. Sharpness depends more on the way you take a picture, if you use manual settings etc.
Sharpness depends on the way you take pictures.. manual settings..
thanks once again.
Many users of the Z612 (and other Kodak ultrazoom cameras) have complained about this phenomenon. It's apparently simply a design flaw in the Kodak zoom/focusing system. Canon, for instance, has an ultrasonic motor system on their zoom lenses, which allows them to operate silently when in movie mode--Kodak simply chose not to include this sort of technology in their cameras, probably as some sort of cost-cutting measure.
That said, some users have managed to reduce lens noise by going into the camera's setup menu and changing both AF control and Image Stabilization to "Single". This will make the focus and image stabilization activate only when you press the shutter release, instead of constantly attempting to keep focus. I'm not sure if this method will reduce noise in movie mode or just when shooting stills, but it's worth a try.
Good luck!
I am having a difficult time deciding between the Kodak Z612 and Canon A630. (I am getting it as a no-charge replacement under a warranty plan for a Gateway camera.)
I am a novice who basically points & shoots but am interested in exploring features offered. I do need good closeups for uploading online, including hummingbirds and other critters. Probably won't be printing many photos, and definitely not large-size ones. The zoom and video features really appeal to me on the Kodak. Anything I should consider to make the decision either way is appreciated!!
If you like the zoom and the video on the Kodak Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ), I'd say go for it. I think you'll be totally happy. There is nothing major that the A630 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) offers that the Z612 does not. The only things the Canon might have for it over the Kodak are a few extra megapixels (not a huge deal unless you're planning on blowing up very large prints, and even then the difference between 6 and 8 megapixels won't make or break the image quality); and the advantage of AA batteries (I prefer AAs because they are cheaper to replace than the lithium-ions, even if you buy the rechargeables). Compared to the zoom and the movie mode offered by the Kodak, these are minor advantages- in terms of image quality, these cameras are pretty comparable.
If you do have a store near you that carries both of them, you might want to go in and handle them both in person and see if one of them feels better to you- that's often a great way to decide between two similar cameras. Otherwise, I'd choose the Kodak with no qualms. =) Hope that helps.
The jog dial is the wheel on top of the camera. It allows you to switch between the camera's various modes, such as Automatic, Program, Scene, and Manual. You simply rotate the wheel to select the mode you want.
Hope this helps!
4 Doing more with your camera
PASM modes
Settings you change in P, A, S, or M modes apply only to pictures taken in those modes.
For example, if you change the Color Mode to Sepia while in P, A, S, or M mode, you still retain the default setting of Color for Auto and SCN modes.
NOTE: The settings, including Flash, are maintained for P, A, S, and M modes—even when you change modes or turn off the camera. Use Reset Camera (see table on Customizing your camera) to reset P, A, S, or M to its default setting.
spacer spacer spacer spacer
Aperture—also known as f-stop or f-number, controls the size of the lens opening, which determines the depth of field. Smaller f-numbers, for example f/2.8, refer to a bigger lens opening. Larger f-numbers, for example f/8, refer to a smaller lens opening. Larger f-numbers keep the main subject sharp; good for landscapes and well-lit conditions. Smaller f-numbers are good for portraits and low-light conditions. The highest and lowest aperture numbers may be affected by optical zoom.
Shutter Speed—controls how long the shutter stays open. A shaking hand icon warns of slow shutter speeds. (Use a tripod for slow shutter speeds.)
Exposure Compensation—lets you manually adjust the exposure ( 2.0 in 1/3 steps); good for controlling backlit or non-standard scenes. If the picture is too light, decrease the setting; if it's too dark, increase the setting.
Flash Compensation—controls the flash brightness (1.0 in 1/2 steps). You must be within flash range. Unavailable if flash setting is Off.
ISO—controls sensitivity of the camera sensor (80, 100, 200, 400, 800). Higher settings are more sensitive to light, but may produce unwanted "noise" in a picture. You can only use ISO 800 if you are in the 1.1 MP Picture Size setting.
Changing PASM mode settings
The PASM modes control the aperture (f-number), shutter speed, exposure and flash compensations, and ISO. Use the Menu button to control all other settings.
1.
Turn the Mode dial to P, A, S, or M.
The mode settings are displayed.
NOTE: The settings for each mode may be different.
2.
Use the Jog dial:
*
Rotate to move between the available settings.
*
Press to open a setting.
*
Rotate to change the setting.
*
Press to save the setting.
3.
Press the Menu button to change other settings.
4.
Take a picture.
Good luck!
correct me if i'm wrong..
but i also cannot decide between p712 and z 612..
as far as i made my research z 612 can make better landscape all sharp and clear.. and p712 lack in this part..
Many of Kodak's ultrazoom models have optical image stabilization systems. The current models include:
P712 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... )
P850 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... )
Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... )
Hope this helps!
So, if I understand you correctly, you get good results when using auto mode, but when you switch to night portrait mode, you get blurry photos? It seems to me that the best solution, then, is to keep shooting in automatic mode and ignore night portrait except when you're taking pictures of posed (still) groups of people at night. Also, when using night portrait mode, make sure that the flash is on. Night portrait works with a slow sync flash to ensure even exposure between the foreground (people) and the background (scenery).
Hope this helps!
Using night scene mode you will get much slower shutter speeds which explains the blurry pictures. You may notice however they are much brighter pictures and better if it were not for the blur.
For night scene mode you need to use a tripod. Switch image stabilization OFF if using a tripod. Don't have a tripod? Rest the camera on a rock, bean bag, sweater etc and use the self timer mode.
After a burst of 8 photos the camera is unusable until it writes the 8 photos to the memory card. This can be as long as 30-40 seconds. Once agai the high end cameras peform much better.
I love my Z612, but it is NOT the right camera for action shots. No way no how.
The longer I have this camera the more I like it.
My dad worked for kodak for 35 years as an engineer and I am extremely loyal to their products even though he has been gone for 3 years. I did also look at the sony cybershot h2, but I don't know if that is worth the extra money...
For my money, if the picture is blurred due to camera shake, it doesn't really matter how many MPs you have.
I upgraded from a DX6490 to the Z612. I don't see ANY improvement in image quality as a result of the extra 2 megapixels. I DO see improvements in low light image quality.
I give importance to
1. To take pictures fast and easy
2. Reliability and Quality
3. Easy to get accessories
When you say flashing, what do you mean exactly? Does the image have a sort of flare around the geese's necks? What color is it?
Some cameras have issues with a defect called chromatic aberration ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrom... ), which often results in a purple fringe around high-contrast regions of a photo (like, say, the extremely white necks of geese against a darker background). This sort of thing is a defect in the lens itself and there isn't a whole lot that you, as a user can do about it.
If your problem is different, though, it could be something entirely within your control. If you can give me a little more info, I can try to help you further. Thanks!
Also, if you have a camera with manual controls you can stop down a bit- using f/8 or f/11 (and adjusting the shutter accordingly) can help reduce flashing and fringing.
Would a lens help to remove this problem?
Also, how do I award the points for the best answer?
Thanks.
These features work with how much color saturization there is in your shot. The camera is geared to capture the colors as the eye sees them, not just the camera's view. I would recommend taking three exact photos (same angle and lighting) of a few different things to really see the difference between the settings.
Andrew
Thanks.
The low color vs. high color refers to how low (or high) you want the color to be, based on the actual color of the object. So if you are taking a picture of something (no matter how colorful it is) and you want the photo to be very saturated and bright, kick up your color settings. If on the other hand you take a photo of something and it looks too bright and unnatural, set the color settings down a notch or two.
So based on your question, the best way to phrase it is: if you're taking a photo of something very colorful and it's coming out too bright, yes you would set the camera to 'low color' and tone it down. Vice versa for a low-colored object; the camera would be set to higher color settings.
I hope that makes sense. You shouldn't really have to adjust the color settings at all- most cameras are pretty good at handling them automatically. But sometimes certain cameras don't do very well handling color- the best example I can think of, is once I was taking a photo on a rainy day and there was a neon sign in one part of the photo. It looked cool, but it also made everyone's skin look super pink and garish and glowy. I stopped the color settings down to a lower number and took the photo again and it took away some of that over-saturated tone.
I hope that helps!
One last tip- if you print your photos, don't do color adjustments unless you really know you need to. A photo that looks better with the high color turned up on the camera may very well print bright and strange looking.
Good luck!
It looks like your question got cut off, but based on the number of questions I've gotten on this topic, I'm going to guess that the three you were going to mention were the Panasonic FZ7, the Canon S3 IS, and the Sony H5. I suppose the FZ50 might sneak in there, or maybe a wildcard Olympus or Kodak, but these are essentially the big competitors.
And, honestly, they're all very good cameras. Each has its little quirks, and one might have a slight edge over the others in one performance category (the H5 has the highest resolution, for example), but really they're all pretty comparable.
Can you give me a more specific set of criteria for what you're looking for in your camera (and tell me if I'm right or wrong on my guesses--hah)? If you don't have any more exact wants/needs, my best recommendation is to go to your closest retailer (Best Buy is a good bet) and try each model out in your hands. It's usually the best way to figure out for sure which model is right for you. Good luck!
Actually the three i'm looking at are the fuji s5200, kodak z612 and the FZ7. The most important feature is picture quality. Obviously, by my choices, I want an extened zoom.
Ease of use and the ability to take action pics would also be nice. I appeciate any advice or other suggestion for cameras in the same price range.
thanks again
Okay, let's see... this is still difficult. All are extremely well-rated by pro reviewers and users alike. The FZ7 has the most "cred" by far, sharing its bloodline with its much-loved big brothers FZ30 and FZ50. It's even got a perfect 5-star rating over at Amazon after 37 reviews. But the other two have over 4.5 star ratings themselves.
On a tech level, they're all very comparable. The S5200 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) loses the most here as it has the fewest megapixels (by one), the smallest zoom (by 2x), and the smallest LCD (by 0.7"). Perhaps most importantly, it lacks optical image stabilization (which the other two feature), which means that at the long end of the zoom it's going to be very difficult to get clear shots without resorting to a tripod.
My personal instinct is to go with the FZ7, but honestly you should try to get your hands on both it and the Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) before making a purchase. Both cameras will give you great shots and both are easy to use, so ultimately it'll be the way the camera feels in your hand that will seal the deal. I'd also recommend giving the Canon S3 IS ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) and the Sony H5 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) a look. They both stack up well against these two, in terms of both features and price. Good luck!
I will try to get hands all of them.
I'm agonizing over a decision on a digital camera. have been leaning back and forth (based on a number of reviews) between Kodak's Z612 and Canon's S3 IS. I'd classify myself as a "higher-end" amateur who loves taking pictures - but I want clarity, ease of use, and everything else most of us common consumers want. I'd like 12X optical zoom, but could be convinced to settle with 10X if all other specs were great - any help you can provide would be GREAT! Thanks so much!
The Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) is also a good camera, and Kodak has done an outstanding job in general. It's a good option, a little less money, but my gut says you'll be happier with the S3 IS. Well, ok, my gut says I would be happier with the S3 IS :-).
The <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... is yet another entry in a rapidly growing field of SLR-like consumer cameras with extremely long, stabilized zooms. By all accounts it's a fine camera, and most users seem to like it very well.
As to whether 6 megapixels is enough... the answer to that question really depends on what you want out of the camera. Above a certain point (a point somewhere around the 5 megapixel mark), tacking on more megapixels doesn't really matter in terms of how the image looks on your computer. Since most computers have a desktop resolution no higher than 1600x1200 pixels, the images produced by a 5 megapixel camera (2592x1944 pixels) are larger than any consumer monitor can actually display. In other words, they'll always have to be compressed to fit on your monitor. On the other hand, if you want to make large prints of your photographs, megapixels matter very much. The more megapixels, the larger and higher quality the prints you can make. A 6 megapixel camera makes very nice 10x6.5" prints at 300dpi, and you can stretch them another few inches without significant quality loss. This chart ( design215.com/toolbox/megap... ) shows you what print size each megapixel level will achieve at 300dpi.
As I said, there are lots and lots of ultrazoom, image-stabilized cameras these days. You might want to check out similar offerings from Canon (<a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... IS</a> and <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... IS</a>), Panasonic (FZ7), and Sony (<a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... and <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... before you settle on the Kodak. Good luck!
The P712 has a very long, optically stabilized zoom, so it's better for long distance shots like wildlife. The P712's lens is as good as those found on the comparable Canon IS3 and Sony H5, but the P712 is inherently not as sharp as the P880's shorter range zoom lens. that's because the P712 has a very high optical zoom range, which cannot be as well optimized across the entire focal length range. That inherent limitation is even more true for the less expensive z612, which is also well-regarded for optical quality. The z612 also does not have a RAW file option, which can be an issue if you opt for the highest possible quality and want to avoid losses due to JPEG compression. All P series Kodak cameras have a decent RAW file option that is well supported by Adobe products.
I have a business need for a long zoom camera, so I will probably get a P712 as well, but I will carry the P880 most of the time, especially when I am shooting for gallery sales and exhibits. I also have a large sensor 10.3MP Sony R1 and find that I am using the P880 more often. The quality is nearly as good and the P880 is a lot handier to carry around.
To answer your question, the P880 has the advantage over the Z612 with a dedicated flash capability and RAW file format capability.
The Z612 is smaller, lighter and performs very well compared to other Kodak models. The built in flash isn't bad and can illuminate a medium sized room well. It does NOT work well with secondary flash units and has no sync cable outlet. The Z612 comes with Program mode, Aperture priority, Shutter priority and full manual.
If you don't need RAW file format or a dedicated/accesory flash, then the Z612 is just as good IMHO.
P880 and Z612, and the posts have answered a lot of my questions. I am by no means a professional photographer, and some of the technical terms describing both cameras on Kodak's site were rather daunting. I think I'll settle on the P880. The P712 mentioned is a little out my price range and I like the idea of the RAW capability and the 8MP.
They're both selling for $199 at Office Depot.
Which is a better deal? The A620 bundled with a printer or the A540 with a $40 rebate.
You really have to look at what you want to do with them. The big differences between the two cameras are the 7.1 megapixels and more manual settings on the <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... A620</a> vs. 6 MP on the <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... that comes with higher ISO settings for lower light situations. Both cameras use AA size batteries and come with 4x optical zoom. The better deal depends on how much the printer is worth.
Andrew
Doesn't the A 540 also have a better LCD screen?
Also, what do you think of the Kodak Z 612 as an option?
Jim Brown
Doesn't the A 540 also have a better LCD screen?
Also, what do you think of the Kodak Z 612 as an option?
Jim Brown
The LCD screen on the A540 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) is larger at 2.5" vs 2" on the A620 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ).
The Kodak Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) is a 6.1 MP camera with a lot more zoom to it at 12x optical. You will notice the zoom difference greatly over the Canons. It also comes with a lithium ion batter which runs longer than a standard AA, and you don't have to go out and buy rechargeable batteries this way. It also comes with a 2.5" LCD and manual exposure settings. If I was choosing between the 3, I would go with the Kodak ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ). That is my personal choice though.
Andrew
The A540 is smaller and may be more appealing as a 'throw in a coat pocket and bring anywhere' camera. The A640 isn't much bigger but it is also a little heavier (because of it's 4AA batteries vs the A540's 2AA).
Personally I really like the balance and weight of the A540 and it is the camera I bought. It's light enough and has a nice grip such that I can control it easily with one hand.
However if the question is asking which camera has the best image quality, well I would have to say the A620 is the better camera.
I've read several reviews of both cameras, compared pictures where the same scene was taken with each, and I would have to say the A620 wins hands down. It simply seems to have clearer, sharper, and more pleasing pictures in daylight and even more so in low light.
The A540 takes very good daytime pics. If one looks at the A540 pictures taken (at review sites), in low light with long exposures requiring a tripod, they look great on their own. But when pictures of those same scenes taken with the A620 are compared, suddenly the A540 pictures look a bit blurry and dark. Even the fabled Fuji F30 seems to be blurry compared to the A620 at night.
Now if I had only looked at one review site, I might have thought it was merely a bad composition by the photographer using the A540. The A620 has a faster lens at telephoto with an aperture of F4.1 whereas the A540 only opens to F5.5 or so. The A620 purportedly may have the same lens as the G6, a very high end point and shoot. I have also read that my A540's ISO800 is really marketing hype and that it's exposure parameters (aperture & shutter) are closer to the A620's ISO400. This seems to be borne out (true in other words) if one examines the EXIF data.
So there you go, decide what criteria are important to you. I suspect is for many folks, low light long exposures are not important. They weren't to me . I also know that on 4x6 prints, I won't notice a difference. But I still wish I owned an A620 (if I were going to own 2 cameras). It does seem to take great shots.
The A620 maximum ISO is 400 while the A540 maximum ISO is 800
The A620 LCD size is 2.0 in while the A540 LCD size is 2.5 in
The A620 uses 4 AA battaries (longer life) while the A540 uses 2 AA batteries
any way the A620 is better than the A540 for picture quality
You want to take a series of shots that overlap moving from one side of the panorama to the other. There are a few things that can go wrong with automatic cameras that make 'photo-stitching' harder and less effective once you get the photos in your PC.
Here are a few tips.
1. Take a 'test' shot in aperture priority mode with a small aperture. Review the photo and press the i button to get more info on the shot. Using the settings shown for aperture and shutter speed, set those in manual mode. This will ensure all photos get the exact same exposure, stitching will work much better later. No 'banding' in the sky.
2. Set the camera to 'landscape' focus mode. This prevents the camera refocusing every shot. This ensures identical focus and framing.
3. Take the series of shots all in *portrait* format being sure to overlap, that way you will get everything from close objects up to the sky which will add depth to your panorama.
4. Using a tripod can ensure each shot is taken at the same height/perspective.
I have found PanoramaMaker from ArcSoft to do a good job of stitching together photos. There are many other commercial products available to do this. Research each before buying.
Once you have the panaorama stitched together, use photoshop to adjust for exposure/color.
Search online, there are some photo printers that print on long rolls of photo paper so you can actually print the resulting panorama.
Basically the only thing it won't do is speed up shutter lag, since that has nothing to do with memory.
I noticed that your question hasn't been responded to yet. Are you still looking for an answer? If so, I recommend you re-submit it on www.DigitalCamera-HQ.com, so it will have a better chance of being noticed. These days it looks like most questions are being answered within a few days. Good luck!
Optical zoom, my friend. That's what you want to focus on.
So Kandie, you seem (I think), to be interested in a camera that does not require additional lenses and has really good zoom. I think your best bet would be either the Sony H5 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) or the Canon S3 IS ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ). Check them out, I think you'll find them to be superior cameras and exactly what you're looking for.
Kandie
Canon 3s is-more weight, more expense, a smaller LCD and batteries are not included. Users complain of a dark electronic viewfinder and accidentally hitting the dedicated buttons when handling. On the plus side, the canon photos are the usual high quality, the camera has super macro capability and the LCD screen folds in/out (with better protection against breakage) and it pivots, but it is smaller.
The Z612 does not have supermacro, so you can get no closer than 4.7 inches to the object. The LCD screen is very bright and larger. Users repeated compliment the camera as being easy to use, whereas you need to keep the manual handy with the canon.
Based on your use, you do not appear to need a macro focus. If the camera will be used by many different users who need a large, bright LCD screen and bright viewfinder, the Z612 may be the best choice. If there will be rough handling where the LCD screen can easily get broken and you will be taking photos at high/low angles, a protected and pivotal LCD screen could come in handy.
The Canon 3S will cost about $50 more plus batteries.
Panasonic also has a nice long zoom camera with image stabilization.
Additionally, higher ISO settings can allow for faster shutter speeds, but at the sacrifice of more grain and signal noise.
The higher the ISO number, the faster you can take the photo, but more grain (noise) will be introduced. Try and avoid anything over 800 for your ISO. In fact, since you will no doubt be using a tripod, you might be able to get away with an ISO of 400. Your mileage may vary.
If your camera has a noise reduction mode, you may wish to experiment with it to see if it adds or detracts to the grain/noise which comes into low light pictures.
Flash won't really help you, as the effective range of a flash is only about 15 feet max in most cameras. Flashes are designed to illuminate faces in close settings, not for the wide sweeping vistas of a cityscape. So, turning it off will prevent unnecessary noise, waste of batter power, and hotspots on anything that is within it's range.
A few tips on "cheating" when it comes to taking photos of night cityscapes.
Try using self timer mode to eliminate any camera shake caused by pressing the shutter button. And shoot at dusk, or during a full moon. There may be just enough light to make a difference.
Your camera can help you get the settings right. Each shot will require different settings as nightscapes can vary a lot in brightness.
In manual mode you will notice the camera will display the exposure compensation either in red, meaning the exposure is a long way away from ideal, or grey which means you're getting close. Adjust the aperture and shutter speeds until the exposure compensation is as close to 0.0 as possible. In addition set the auto bracketing to +/- 1 stop and then turn on the auto bracket feature. That way you will get three shots for each try with different settings. Review and experiment.
A tripod is essential, image stabilization can't help with exposures beyond 1/4 second or so. When using a tripod be sure to turn image stabilization OFF. Image Stabilization on a tripod will make things worse not better. As James points out using the self timer will eliminate you shaking the camera as you release the shutter.
Can't afford the fancy tripods in the camera stores? WalMart will get you going for $25. You can upgrade to a more expensive tripod once you know what you want after experimenting with a 'throw away' one from WalMart.
Taking pictures at night shortly after a heavy rain will result in a lot of reflections that will enhance the final result.
The Kodak Z612 ( digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... ) should have no problem supporting the 2.0 SD firmware.
Standard SD cards use FAT - which has a 2GB limit.
SDHC cards use FAT32 - which has a limit of 32GB.
The 2GB SD card I have allows for 485 photos on the Z612 in fine mode.
I reformatted on my PC to FAT32. The camera took a long time to read the card and the capacity dropped to 250 photos. It WILL read an SDHC card, but you will only get 1/2 the capacity and the speed and reliability will probably suffer.
Stick with 2GB or smaller standard SD cards.
I have seen no evidence that the z612 supports the SDHC format (it is not mentioned on the technical specs or Kodak site and I'm guessing it would be a good selling point).
I am using a 2GB 150X high-speed Adata card and it works fine. I haven't tried a 4GB yet, but provided it is in the SD format (ie not SDHC) I think there is a good probability that it will be fine.
Amazon was selling a 4GB card they claim is compatible with the z612
amazon.com/Pro-Power-Secure... I would probably prefer the Adata 4GB [Technical note: Adata and Transcend use Samsung SLC NAND chips] it at least implies that the z612 will take a 4GB card.
Disclaimer: I have not tried this yet!
Disclaimer: Other SD manufacturers are available, and may be superior/inferior and/or more expensive/cheaper ;)
So I'll stick with a 2GB Sandisk Extreme III, which gives 1000 pics or one hour of video and is screaming fast.
Note: the topram 4gb card is NOT SDHC, it's just the regular SD card, and i'm using it on my hp ipaq hw6940
Why are you disappointed in Amazon? They didn't create the camera...nor did they create the SD cards.
Sounds to me like you should have done your homework first. If you're going to be disappointed in anyone, look in a mirror.
Thank You.
digitalcamera-hq.com/digita...
This particular camera has been tested with 4GB cards and should have no problem using one.
Try this when it is near dark, dusk, and see what it says. Post back if you get a chance.
You might like to check out the Panasonic TZ1, an ultracompact camera with a 10x optical zoom. Panasonic has a great selection of extended zoom cameras.
digitalcamera-hq.com/digita...
The Kodak Z612 is pretty nice, too, with 12x optical zoom: digitalcamera-hq.com/digita...
Both of these cameras are affordable and very capable.
The budget is around $1000 and the preference is a fixed lens SLR type.
Wow -- excellent specs, James!
The world has changed a lot since those Sony Mavica cameras -- I remember ones that wrote to floppy disks, and then they made ones that write to Cd's. Neat idea, but these days pretty outmoded :-) And the good news is that today you'll probably have to pay only about 1/2 of your $1000 budget to get a good camera.
It sounds to me like you would want something more than a compact model. Almost any of the mid-priced cameras we list on DigitalAdvisor will meet your specifications for detail and color, and almost all will "just work" if you use their USB connection to a computer running Windows XP or recent Mac software.
But I think there's a trade-off between ease of use and the requirement to photograph documents and components. The issue here is lighting: smaller cameras, especially the really small ones tend to have underpowered flashes. Also, having a flash that is a few inches away from the camera lens can help a little, but almost all on-camera flashes result in flat looking photos. You may have noticed that wedding and other pro photographers have flashes mounted off to the side of the camera -- this allow the flash to cast a little shadow which tends to bring out shapes and contours.
The other issue is the close-ups of documents and parts. These need light, and on-camera flashes also tend to be bad in close-up situations because they either over-light and/or light unevenly.
In all these cases, a long zoom lens will help. For the close-up shots, the camera does not have to be so close, which gives the flash a chance to spread out evenly. In these cases, I strongly recommend a tripod which will ensure you get sharp images (and make sure the camera you choose has a tripod mount).
For the lighting issues, a zoom will help a little, as well. But you may find that many problems can be solved by buying an external flash that mount on a "hot shoe" on the camera. Flashes that tilt and swivel can allow you to bounce light off walls, or ceilings, or even a piece of white cardboard to dramatically improve the look of pictures. External flashes are no harder to use than built-in flashes and all cameras have built-in flashes for normal use.
So some suggestions:
<ul>
<li>
<a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... target="_blank">Panasonic DMC FZ30</a> is well regarded, but maybe not so easy to use. I like this choice because it has nice optics, gets good reviews, and has a hot shoe for mounting a flash if you decide to later.
</li>
<li>
<a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... target="_blank">Kodak EasyShare Z612</a> is part of Kodak's very well regarded EasyShare line -- they have done a lot of work to make it easy to get good pictures and to get them onto the computer. This camera does not have a hot shoe, but has a pop-up flash which can help with the lighting issues I mentioned. Also consider the just released update to this, the <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... target="_blank">Kodak EasyShare P712</a> which does have the hot shoe.
</li>
<li>
The <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... target="_blank">Fuji S5200</a> is a little less expensive and has a pop-up flash.
</li>
<li>
And I think I would be remiss to exclude the <a href="digitalcamera-hq.com/digita... target="_blank">Canon S3 IS</a> <i>except that people don't seem to be happy with it at all!</i>. The S2 was one of the first long zooms that had image stabilization and got raves -- the S3 is getting panned!
</li>
</ul>
I hope these ideas get you headed in the right direction!
Tom
Kodak EasyShare Z612 Reviews
Kodak EasyShare Z612 Reviews by Digital Camera-HQ Users
- 2.0 out of 5
We bought 3 Kodak Z612 cameras. One for my family, my brothers family and grandma. We bought three so we would all have the same camera and could help grandma when she had questions. Two of the three cameras have the same problem, white lines through the picture and overexposure problems. Kodak Z612 is not a reliable camera.
- 4.0 out of 5
I really like this camera except for a few problems. 1) sometimes the pics are blurry for no apparent reason, even when subjects are standing still. 2) I bought a 4GB SD Memory card to make sure I had enough memory for some movies of my new Grand-Daughter but the 4GB card will not work in this camera and I did not see any firmware update at Kodak.com. Anybody else have a problem like this? The 4GB card does work in my son's newer Cannon camera.
- 4.0 out of 5
Other than the lack of a hot shoe or a pc plug for flash, what the hell were they thinking, this is a great point and shoot!!!
I am impressed by the quality of the images on every mode and am especially impressed with the video and stereo sound as well as the ability to turn a video frame into a snapshot .jpg file on the camera. This is not for enlarging but will give you a 4 x 6 image that is good for web sites or small prints. The ease and having total control of the settings for depth of field and low light situations is a major advantage. Iforget, because I only use the EVF, that it is not a DSLR. I get very close to what I see because you are looking through the lens rather than a view finder. I have a rare Siriname Red Tail Boa that is stunning and I shoot pictures after every shed because he changes for the better each time and the true colors are amazing. This camera has impressed me every time I have used it. The zoom is great, optical not digital, and ease of the wide to long switch is very nice. I would recommend this camera to any one who doesn't require a lot of flash. I do and still shoot 35mm when it matters. Frim close ups on a tabletop for ads to portraits and fashion as well as capturing my sons Karati tournaments on video and making a lot of snapshots of the frame of video I choose leaves every one wondering how I always have the highest kick shots and the perfect timing of action when fighting. This camera pulls it's weight.
- 4.0 out of 5
I really like the pictures it takes and I learn new things all the time. The draw backs I have had are. 1.If you use the gallery to send photo's to your friends they can't get a good print, but you can send them without using it. 2. You can only use a certain battery and you can only buy it at certain stores. 3. The 55mm lens attachment and adapter is a rip, $200 down the drain you can get the same amount of zoom without it.
- 5.0 out of 5
Outdoor-Indoor-Zooming-Close ups -In dark attics and Crawl spaces- The pictures are great! Easy to use, comfortable to hold, and super great software for up loading. We love everything about the camera and recommend it to everyone!
- 5.0 out of 5
When I bought it in June 06 it was due to a bargain price that was offered to me. Got it for 239€ brand new! After a few shots I was like WOW!!! 12X zoom with IS electronic viewfinder, 240.000 DPI 6.4 inch screen. I am very impressed. Never owned a digital camera before Kodak. I can take crisp clear photos with max digital and optical zoom. Movie is recorded in QuickTime format. No large avi files :)) Supports 2 GB SD cards. I just love it. For me, it is the best money/quality ratio.
- 1.0 out of 5
I only owned the camera for 8 months before it broke. I sent it to be repaired because it was still under warrenty, however even though the problem with the camera was no fault of my own, KODAK would not fix it. The company that Kodak had me send my camera too stated that "the reason my camera broke was due to corrosion, and nothing that i could have done would of prevented it from happening, nore did i cause it to happen." Corrosion is not covered by the warrenty. So even though all the information that i read from Kodak about them replacing your camera if something would happen to it within a year was void. Even though this was not my fault or that i could of prevented, I sit here camera-less. Hopefully someone reads this and its saves them from all the trouble that i went though with this camera company.
- 4.0 out of 5
this is my second camera and im very happy for the price its really easy to learn how to use and is a great camera for portraits and artistic photos alike
- 5.0 out of 5
I love this camera. It takes wonderful pictures and its nice to hold. Could be a bit better in low light but for the price i cant complain. Also, Dave, you can get one at circuit city or on ebay pretty cheap. I got a refurb and it works great.
- 4.0 out of 5
Pros: Picture quality is fantastic. I first took it to Clearwater Beach, FL, and the pictures turned out AWESOME. Beach and night mode are very beautiful; however, I don't think the image stability is in use for those modes, especially the night mode. I just recently used this camera during 4th of July and I swear this camera made me look like a model. The pictures looked like it was taken by a professional photography camera...whatever those are called. =D
Cons: Zooms really far; however, the farther you zoom the less image stability it has. On video mode, when you zoom out and in, you can hear the camera zooming out and in and the audio gets a little disrupted at the same time.
Overall: GREAT PICTURE QUALITY AND MODES. SUCKY IMAGE STABILITY ON VIDEO AND WHEN ZOOMING FURTHER OUT AND WEAK BATTERY.
- 5.0 out of 5
I couldn't believe the quality of photo. After reading some other reviews about objects having to be still to take picture. I have some excellent photos of people skiing behind a boat and they are focus and close up too. It wasn't me focusing the camera it was the camera auto-focus. I was extremely happy with this camera and was disappointed when someone else decided they needed it more than me and stoled it. I am trying to locate another z612 which appears to be discontiued and replaced with the z712 which seems to not have the same quality.
- 5.0 out of 5
Moving up from a HP318 I am beyond words in satisfaction with this camer. I have taken indoor photos; fireworks at night; closeup of photos of photos (copying) and youth baseball ames. Have yet to be disapointed. While I am still learning all the features I really am happy with this camera. Whether ato settings or setting a special type of picture taking I have et to be unhappy with its performance. I also am in retail sales of cameras. The feedback from customers is also excellent. Again I am very happy with my camera.
- 5.0 out of 5
I bought the Z612 in Oct '06 and have loved it for what I paid for it. The pics were great. It is rough in a few ways but the photo quality was unreal for the price. I upgraded in June '07 to a Nikon 40D w/ 28-135mm and 75-200mm lenses and paid $1100. I then compared the two cameras directly. The Nikon was much fast and sweet to operate BUT the small less refined Kadak CRUSHED the Nikon in all but close up photo quality. The Nikon will need maybe as much as a 400mm lens to beat this little Kadak at its own game. I wonder what this will cost. Some reviews have comment on the lack of refinement and some auto-focus noise. So what !! this thing is a zoom camera and for its price and even double it absolutely excels at taking zoom pics.
- 5.0 out of 5
I have owned the z650, z610, z612 and now the z712. I have used the 612 the longest and in its class, find it to be an excellent camera. Some of the great features; the viewfinder is sharp, large and bright, situational shooting is very good, controls are easy to learn and easy to reach, the zoom is of course very nice, the video capture is clear and stable (not choppy) and the zoom can be adjusted (unlike earlier models),and great battery life. Some drawbacks are lack of static memory. So that if you don't change to a new battery quickly you lose your settings each time, the camera has a penchant for using the flash even in well lit conditions, a quirk that makes you press the flash selection button 3 times to turn it off, and proprietary replacement batteries are pricey! Overall I consider the drawbacks quirks that are easily overcome and lose meaning with regular use. I also find all the "ya but ifs" the same for all other cameras (ya but if you didn't bring extra batteries your camera won't work either...). I take about 100 photos and 45 minutes of video a week. The only camera I love more than this is my new z712... can we say panoramic stitching?
- 5.0 out of 5
This is the first digital camera that I have ever owned. I have a pentax asahi k1000 35mm
and a canon sureshot 85 platinum 35mm which have
both been very good cameras but they can"t touch
the quality of the Z612. The pictures that I have
taken with this camera are sharp crystal clear
images.I Love the 12x Zoom.and the Macro photos
are unsurpassed. This is the best of both worlds.
The one drawback with this camera is the noise
when shooting video it"s because of the auto focus. But I didn't buy this camera for shooting video I have a camcorder for that. This is a great camera. I read a lot of reviews and shopped
around alot before making the decision to buy this and am thrilled with with the Z612.
- 3.0 out of 5
I purchased this camera after much research. I had previously owned a Kodak and was very happy with the results. This camera has me a little perplexed though. When I get a good picture it is fantastic, but I have many blurred pics. Seems that unless your subject and you are frozen the pic is unfocused and blurry. I bought this camera for my child's grad/prom and to be truthfull not quite happy with the lack of good pics I have been able to obtain.
- 2.0 out of 5
I am very disappointed with this camera. I guess you get what you pay for. I have a Pentax 3 megapixal camera that takes much better pictures and captures action shots with ease. Aside from the poor picture quality there are many other issues to deal with. First of all, the auto focus system is terrible. Don't even think about catching action shots and if you do prepare for them to be blurry and usually out of the frame. The fit and finish of the camera is cheap. The pop up flash usually will not go back into place once it is up. The plastic body looks and feels cheap and poorly constructed. I could go on and on but my real advise is buy a more expensive camera that will last and give you the quality you want.
- 5.0 out of 5
My first digital camera and I love it so far.
- 2.0 out of 5
I bought a Z612 for my father-in-law for Christmas and soon after bought one for myself. It takes great still shots but the amount of noise generated by the auto-focus is horrible...and loud enough to be picked up by the built-in microphone when taking video's. So if you want to actually record the live audio of whatever you're taking a video of...forget it! Unless you're taking a video of a frog pond the constant "croaking" will ruin any audio you record. I too returned the first Z612 I purchased, thinking the problem was unique to my camera. Unfortunately, my second Z612 "croaked" right out of the box. And setting the focus on "one time" instead of "continuous" didn't remedy the problem. This is not my first Kodak camera but it may well be my last.
- 4.0 out of 5
I had been using a KODAK C340 prior to buying my KODAK Z612 two weeks ago. That was a great point and shoot camera. Was small and portable...took decent pics. Then I had to have a 12X Zoom camera. I did extensive research online. I am just your everyday average user. Holidays..kids programs etc. Love to take pics of scenery etc. The KODAK Z612 seemed to be everything I wanted for a decent price.
First impression right out of the box is how 'cheap' it actually looked. I think KODAK would have been better off using heavier metal and adding some 'black' contrating material such as on the grip. Pure asthetics though. The 12X Zoom is great and there are so many different options for pics that I haven't had the chance to work with it all yet. The lithium ion battery is great! Seems to last a long time and I've been able to take quite a few pics on a single charge (and counting).
I wanted to get a 'back-up battery' just in case so I'm always porepared. Was a bit miffed that I couldn't find one at several stores one would assume would carry them. So, I ended up making a purchase straight from KODAK at a pretty steep price. So far, I'd give the camera a 4 out of 10. I think I was more thrilled about getting it, until I actually got it. I'm already eyeballing the 'Olympus SP 550UZ' that comes out at the end of March 2007!
- 1.0 out of 5
I have written three emails and one letter to Kodak who to date have not replied! Buyer beware, you will own a camera by a company that treat their customersa appallingly. This, by the way, is the second Kodak digital camera I have owner this year that broke shortly after buying it. My next camera will be a Fuji.
- 5.0 out of 5
Kodak Z712 is awesome. Quality pics,easy to use
simply great.
pride owner of kodak!
- 3.0 out of 5
I am a beginner with digital cameras, so I did a bit of research before making a purchase. From the moment I turned the camera on, I was disappointed. The continuous auto focus grinds and makes the whole camera vibrate. Photos of stationary objects (a boom box 8 feet away) were blurry. The flash was inadequate for almost any situation except close up indoors. Reviews I read raved over the minuscule lag time, bit I missed shot after shot of my son shooting hoops, except when using the multiple photo setting. The sport setting gave me dark pics, almost always blurry... I returned this camera and gave it the benefit of the doubt, that perhaps the auto focus was damaged in shipping. When my replacement arrived, the battery couldn't be inserted due to a bent contact in the battery compartment. I immediately returned this to the store I ordered it from, only to watch the kid at the return counter cram the battery in, smashing the loose contact up to the top of the compartment...I asked to see it one last time, and to my surprise, it did still work. When I set it for continuous auto focus, this one too continually vibrated, groaned, and made grinding sounds. I handed it back to the return counter kid, and began checking other 12x zoom brands... (none of them seem to grind or vibrate!!!) I wouldn't recommend this one to others.
- 1.0 out of 5
I recently purchased this camera and since my purchase I have had nothing but problems. The LCD/EVF button did not work, the red-eye reduction never worked, and today when I went to take a picture of my son an error appeared on the screen and I was unable to take a picture. I even contacted Kodak customer support twice and have yet to hear back from them. I did research on different cameras and the write-ups on this one were good. I previously owned a Sony camera and someone highly recommended Kodak. My experience so far with the Kodak camera has made me frustrated and I will be returning this camera tomorrow and looking for a Canon.
- 5.0 out of 5
Great all round camera with plenty of advanced features
id recommend it 100%
- 5.0 out of 5
Easy to use and lots of storage options.I will never need another camera.
- 5.0 out of 5
As a gadget addict, I have been using digitals since they came out. I have a couple Olympus models and also have a Canon. For my use this Kodak exceeds all expectations. They have a winner here in the Z612. It is by far the best of all I've owned. The others will become hand-me-downs.
I want a digital camera that operates quickly. In the past I have missed so many great shots because the camera's electronics is doing its thing while I wait. This 612 gets up and ready to shoot instantly. When I want to snap a shot, it is there for me. Now when my grandkids are out on the paying field, I'm able to capture the action when it's happening, not half a second too late. When I want to be able to zoom in from the sidelines, the built in stabilizer allows me to take great close up action shots with phenomenal detail.
The Lithium Ion battery life has been great. One inconvenience that I've noticed is that when I take the battery out for a recharge, by the time I'm ready to reinstall, the date and time must be reset. Perhaps with a second backup battery a quick change may keep my settings.
The other normal things that I want a camera to do are perfect. I just want to snap and shoot and get clear pictures. The presets modes that are built in are easy to set and just fine for me. I'm not a professional, but many of my shots look like they may have been taken by one. Kodak lives up to its reputation for great color and clarity.
Finally, I think Kodak has done itself a disservice with its numbering of this Z line of high optical zoom cameras. Some people seem to be confusing the two models because of model numbering, but the differences are major. When you compare the Z650 to the Z612, on the surface it appears that the only difference is the extra zoom capability from 10X to12X, but the differences go far beyond that. The power up time is half that of the 650 and the shutter lag is far less with the 612. The image stabilization that I love with the 612 is not built into the 650. There may be other technical differences as well, but for me these alone make the extra $70 +/- well worth the money.
- 5.0 out of 5
i must say that this cam is the best i have evry bought
- 3.0 out of 5
Great camera except for the proprietary battery. I was more than a little tweaked when I found out I would have to go directly to Kodak to get another one.
- 5.0 out of 5
this little darling is small, very light, and packs a great punch. its very smooth and very quiet.it is very easy to use even one handed. it is packed with so many options i-e pasm or auto and even scn. the large 2.5 rear screen is so useful and has full crop and edit and fave settings. kodak have got it so right in this little package. the pictures are clear and crisp. and the 12x zoom works very well even through glass windows at a safari park. the battery life is better that most too. having just two i can take well over 200 pics on zoom and review. I'm so glad i made the jump from 35mm to this delightful digital camera. in fact I'm kicking myself for not doing it sooner as i have been missing out. my photography has jumped leaps and bounds. thank you kodak for making photography so much fun.
- 5.0 out of 5
I spent weeks researching cameras and finally went with the Z612. I had it two days, flipped through the manual, and headed out on vacation. In all situations, beach, boats, planes, ships, cars, indoors and out, in all weather situations, this camera took outstanding photos. I used many of the scene settings, beach, landscape, night, sports, auto, night landscape, and the picture were great. The zoom is incredible.
I did not experience any of the issues reported by other users, blurry pictures or loose cap for the lens.
I would highly recommend this camera.
- 4.0 out of 5
I had a three year old kodak digital camera that I used extensively and loved. When I read about the z612, I couldn't wait to get it. I was one of the first to purchase it from Kodak.com. My interest is in portrait photography. My first time shooting was action in a swimming pool. I noticed a slow shutter lag, and missed a lot of great expressions from my 5 yr. old subject. I thought maybe it was me. But on my second shoot, I began to feel very disappointed as I realized that the shutter was just too slow for my use. I have sold the camera, and printing dock, and case. I must say that the camera takes true color, and crisp shots. The Kodak printer for this camera really rocks; take it to a party a you'll always be invited back!
- 5.0 out of 5
I bought this for a trip to France this year and am fully satisfied. Easy to use controls, excellent resolution with no discernable distortions. Resolution at 12X is supberb. Everyone comments on the quality of the photos it takes. I have no regrets which is unusual as quickly as the technology advances.
- 5.0 out of 5
I looked around for a long time before buying this camera. I had looked seriously at the Cannon S3 IS and some of the Konica Minolta DiMAGE cameras that I had used at work. I have had no regrets buying this camera and have taken more than 1200 pics with it. The ergonomical design makes it easy to hold steady and all the features are easy to use. The zoom picture quality is amazing! While standing at the Washington Monument in D.C., I can see Lincoln inside his memorial with pics from this camera! It takes amazingly clear nature and landscape pictures. My friends and I have loved the pictures we get from this camera every weekend. I have used the video function at drag races, and it did great, including the sound. This camera is worth another $100-$200.
- 5.0 out of 5
...so far, I've taken some really nice pictures. I also have the Kodak Z740 which I really liked, but the Z612 has all the missing pieces. The 1st morning I used it I was riding my bicycle and when I stopped to take pictures my pulse rate was up, but the image stabilizition gave me sharp pictures even at 12x magnification. In spite of all the bells and whistles, the controls are fairly easy to use and figure out. On a few water shots the blues seemed too enhanced, but this happens with my Z740 sometimes also. All in all this is a great camera.
