Casio Exilim EX-S3

Add to: 
User reviews (17)
4.13
3.1 megapixels | 2" screen | 35 mm
Average rating: 4.13
5 stars
(4)
4 stars
(11)
3 stars
(1)
2 stars
(1)
1 stars
(0)

Most helpful user reviews

The list below shows the five most helpful user reviews. See all 17 reviews...
Noj
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Noj posted on Apr 1, 2003 UTC

Opinion: I got this camera for £250 in the UK. It's small!! The size of my Amex card, and its weight isn't even noticeable.

It fits into any clothing, which is cool for going out. The flash is pretty powerful.

The image quality (so far) hasn't been as good as I expected. I had a 2.1MP Fuji (before my girlfriend dropped it..) and I think the quality is comparable. I've only used it for a few days though.

It has tons of features, with the ability to chance white balance, ISO etc. It also has gimmicky (but fun) features like the coupling and pre-shot.

It's certainly conversation-piece, all my friends want one now! I'm glad I bought it, it's incredibly good value for £250 and is packed with a surprising number of options and features.

I reccomend it.

Problems: It seems prone to being dropped, probably related to way you have to hold it.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Skillz
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Skillz posted on Apr 6, 2003 UTC

Opinion: Well, I bought this little gem yesterday and the first thing I noticed was the incredible BIG 2" screen on this little Exilim.

I've also had the EX-M1, EX-M2 and by far this is the best creditcard-sized Exilim yet (The Ex-Z3 isn't the same type of camera in my opinion)

The pictures I've taken so far seem to be a little bit "grainy", but not as bad as the older exilim camera's.

There is one thing I am a bit scared of and that is getting
scratches on that 2" screen.

Problems: - "grainy" pictures, but i think that's a sacrifice you have to take for having such a small camera and it's NOT that bad.

- I think the screen will easily scratch. If you see the camera you'll know why.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
pastb
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: pastb posted on Apr 28, 2003 UTC

Opinion: THE PICTURE QUALITY SUCKS!!! STAY AWAY IS MY OPINION!!! The size IS outstanding. BUT the image quality compared to my 3.2 meg pixel Sony DSC-P5 and now p10 is not even comparable. The ZOOM absolutely sucks. This camera is advertised as a 3.2 megapixel but that does not mean the image quality is equivalent to other 3.2 meg cameras. In fact it is the worse I have ever experienced and I would not recommend this camera to anyone. Try Sony instead.

Problems: Yes - image quality is piss poor. I am out $450 and am pissed!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
riverman
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: riverman posted on May 6, 2003 UTC

Opinion: I bought this camera for the times that I do not want to lug a larger camera. It serves the purpose and its pocket size is very convenient.

The point & click image (fine setting) is pretty good. Zoom pictures are poor. Controls are easy. Uploading of images is simple.

I have a Viking 256meg card, which gives me hundreds of pictures (fine) and quick saving times.

I find that I now take this camera with me, when I normally would not have any camera on me...

Problems: Image quality on zoom is poor. If you want to upload picture and crop/resize zoomed shots ...forget it.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report