For JamesD and Others.

Hi James, the last thing I wanted to see on the other thread was a Panasonic knocking competition, as I said I used Panasonic cameras for two years and was quite happy with them, the way I see it is if was good enough for Panasonic to build the early Leica cameras they were good enough for me.

The reason I came back to Kodak was a bit like a dog returning to its vomit, I am sick of the overpriced cameras from all makers that are full of worthless so called helpful features that mean nothing and turn out to be just a gimmick.

For 35+ years I used to keep it simple by using prime lens and manual SLR bodies, used my brain to compose and work out the best way to take a picture so why would I want a modern camera that is loaded with junk that is out of date before it hits the shop shelves, no way, the reason these manufacturers change models so frequently is to get into peoples wallets.

There was a time when models used to change about every five years not every five months, the camera industry was settled and people knew what they wanted and they would keep it, I have wasted so much money on cameras over the past 7 years and now feel stupid because of it.

The early Kodaks had it all, a decent EVF, adjustable Diopter, threaded lens for accessory lens, a hotshoe with cable outlet for connection and PASM Modes, IMO they left nothing out.

Today you are lucky if you get an eye level viewfinder which for an old buzzard like me is like buying a car without a steering wheel, anyhow back to why a returned to Kodak, partly because when I look at the 6,500 photos on my HDD I see that the most outstanding ones were taken with a Kodak, some sentimental reasons, ease of use and color that has never been surpassed by any other brand, I dont need to look like a pro by showing off with bazooka sized lens fitted to a DSLR all I need is a camera that takes decent pictures and I get that from Kodaks.
--
Regards
Dave
Downunder.

First of all, I'm not intend to comparing cameras here.

I was looking at the Ricoh cameras and came across the CX4 which replaced the CX3.

While looking at the specs, it came very naturally to stack again the Kodak Z915 which is also a 10M 10X camera.

Ricoh CX4

10m, 1/2.3 CMOS, iso 100–3200 28mm 10.7X sensor shift, f3.5-f5.6 8sec 1/2000 sec, -2 - +2 1/3 ev, A and S priority and M ??, continuous drive 5fps, 3 in LCD 920,000 102x59x29mm 4x2.3x1.1in $330 (CX3)

Kodak Z915

10m, 1/2.3 CCD, iso 100-1600 35mm 10x optical IS, f3.5-f4.8, 8-1/1250 and 16-1/1000, -2 - +2 1/3 ev, A,S,M, 2.5 in LCD 230,000, 90x64x39mm 3.5x2.5x1.5in around $100 on sales.

Of course, different people have different priority, but for me, I think the Z915 stacked up quite good against the CX4. Some specs are even better than CX4.

No doubt about it, the Ricoh CX4 build quality and material are better. But after checking on the user gallery in Ricoh site, I'll take the Z915 anytime and save myself hundred of dollar.

--
chiue -
Nikon D5000 / Kodak 880 7590 6440 915
Kodak Digital Cameras Galleries
http://www.wix.com/chiuestar/Kodak-DC

Hi Dave.

The reason I posted those few samples was to simply show that point and shoot cameras can deliver the goods. i also did not want to get into a camera war thing. The truth is, while there was some truth to Mike's observations, what he did not take into consideration is the fact that I'm a lazy duffer. I used Picasa to slightly tweak those images and in general accepted what Picasa had to offer. Had I posted the images as they appeared untouched, I'm certain his views would have been different. BUT... and here's the kicker. I honestly don't care what pleases him or anyone else. I'm not shooting to please Michael. Please don't misunderstand me. While it's important for each of us who post our images to find that they're acceptable and perhaps even pleasing to others, the main reason for my photography and I suppose yours as well, is to make images that please me. And those images please me whether the white balance is all screwed up or they appear over-digitized or the color looks to unnatural or they're too flat. Big deal. They please me and that's really what matters the most to me at this stage of my life. Were it not so, I would not bother making photographs... period.

Anyway... have a good one. I've a feeling it was a mistake for me to return to this forum. I'm left defending my photographs and my choice of cameras and I don't appreciate that. Somehow, this is not the Kodak forum of ten years ago when my wife and I first joined to share our pictures with the rest. Take care, Dave.
--
JamesD
Happy Snappin'

chiue said:

First of all, I'm not intend to comparing cameras here.

I was looking at the Ricoh cameras and came across the CX4 which replaced the CX3.

While looking at the specs, it came very naturally to stack again the Kodak Z915 which is also a 10M 10X camera.

Ricoh CX4

10m, 1/2.3 CMOS, iso 100–3200 28mm 10.7X sensor shift, f3.5-f5.6 8sec 1/2000 sec, -2 - +2 1/3 ev, A and S priority and M ??, continuous drive 5fps, 3 in LCD 920,000 102x59x29mm 4x2.3x1.1in $330 (CX3)

Kodak Z915

10m, 1/2.3 CCD, iso 100-1600 35mm 10x optical IS, f3.5-f4.8, 8-1/1250 and 16-1/1000, -2 - +2 1/3 ev, A,S,M, 2.5 in LCD 230,000, 90x64x39mm 3.5x2.5x1.5in around $100 on sales.

Of course, different people have different priority, but for me, I think the Z915 stacked up quite good against the CX4. Some specs are even better than CX4.

No doubt about it, the Ricoh CX4 build quality and material are better. But after checking on the user gallery in Ricoh site, I'll take the Z915 anytime and save myself hundred of dollar.

Click to expand...

Chiue come on friend, I bought the Z915 for a friend, I had it for an afternoon, ok not a bad camera specially for the price, (if you already have batteries & charger), but you really cant compare it with Ricoh CX4, no way friend its like black vs white…

Really nice the z915 but for a casual user, there is nothing on it for someone experienced…

And BTW what is in the CX4 galleries that you didn’t like, there are all perfect…

--
Just lost my Dpreview account known as mike_mike
*****************************************
Have a look at the totally new http://www.spiridakis.gr

JamesD2 said:

The truth is, while there was some truth to Mike's observations, what he did not take into consideration is the fact that I'm a lazy duffer. I used Picasa to slightly tweak those images and in general accepted what Picasa had to offer.

Click to expand...

I use Picasa heavily too. But that's not the point Mike is making. Each camera JPEG engine has a style signature. That signature can be suppressed by accident or on purpose by handling exposure differently, using different software etc... Mike was simply remarking that he was sensitive to the Panasonic signature since he himself had one. Maybe he is overly sensitive.

One thing you can say about Mike, he is passionate, obsessive and blunt. Many people who are passionate are also blunt. He does not constitute the whole forum though - we are individuals.

Member said:

Had I posted the images as they appeared untouched, I'm certain his views would have been different. BUT... and here's the kicker.

Click to expand...

No, he was remarking about the Panasonic JPEG engine.

Member said:

I honestly don't care what pleases him or anyone else. I'm not shooting to please Michael. Please don't misunderstand me. While it's important for each of us who post our images to find that they're acceptable and perhaps even pleasing to others, the main reason for my photography and I suppose yours as well, is to make images that please me.

Click to expand...

I think that's defensive and you don't have to be. Just because Mike does not like Panasonics does not mean he does not like you. Just because you shoot with a Panasonic and someone else does not like that brand does not mean you have to defend or be an enemy of them.

Member said:

And those images please me whether the white balance is all screwed up or they appear over-digitized or the color looks to unnatural or they're too flat. Big deal.

Click to expand...

They please me and that's really what matters the most to me at this stage of my life.

Think about the social aspects. You displayed Panasonics in the Kodak forum. Of course there will be some diplomats who will say "nice photos" and others who are compulsive who will say "but they are not Kodak signature visuals". And they aren't.

Member said:

Anyway... have a good one. I've a feeling it was a mistake for me to return to this forum. I'm left defending my photographs and my choice of cameras and I don't appreciate that. Somehow, this is not the Kodak forum of ten years ago when my wife and I first joined to share our pictures with the rest. Take care, Dave.

Click to expand...

No, the culture here is different. That old gang was pleasant and there were many people who were friendly and polite. But there was also an inner circle who had this mushy feel of embrace - they prioritised friendship, social familiarity and genteel conversation often nothing to do with photography and not about gear. It was an aberration in this world of the internet where this "private country club" atmosphere is not feasible in a large, open forum with no rules for admittance that preserve that ideals of the inner circle. The Olympus Talk Forum has an inner circle similar to this old Kodak culture but I have not seen other ones on DPR that have that.

I quite like the current Kodak culture - it does discuss photos and scenes and we enjoy some tours around the world without being stiflingly inner circle dominated. In other words, we do respect each other's presence, enjoy each others photos and do welcome seeing family.

--



Ananda
http://anandasim.blogspot.com

'There are a whole range of greys and colours - from
the photographer who shoots everything in iA / green
AUTO to the one who shoots Manual Everything. There
is no right or wrong - there are just instances of
individuality and individual choice.'

Spiridakis Michael said:

Chiue come on friend, I bought the Z915 for a friend, I had it for an afternoon, ok not a bad camera specially for the price, (if you already have batteries & charger), but you really cant compare it with Ricoh CX4, no way friend its like black vs white…

Click to expand...

So which is better Black or White

Dr. Noodle said:

Really nice the z915 but for a casual user, there is nothing on it for someone experienced…

Click to expand...

What is there in the CX4 for experienced user? I was just looking at the general specs and did not look into the details in the menu. May be I'm missing something.

Dr. Noodle said:

And BTW what is in the CX4 galleries that you didn’t like, there are all perfect…

Click to expand...

Here is the site I was looking at. Click on the CX4 Photo Gallery near the top right, select User Gallery and "Ranking".
http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/cx/cx4/sampleimage.html

I'm more interested to look at the user samples than the official samples. In the user samples, the colors look dull and lifeless. Some of the highlights were burned out. WB looks weird. Sorry just not my cup of tea and could not justify the 300 above cost.

--
chiue -
Nikon D5000 / Kodak 880 7590 6440 915
Kodak Digital Cameras Galleries
http://www.wix.com/chiuestar/Kodak-DC

Hi James,

JamesD2 said:

And those images please me whether the white balance is all screwed up or they appear over-digitized or the color looks to unnatural or they're too flat. Big deal. They please me and that's really what matters the most to me at this stage of my life. Were it not so, I would not bother making photographs... period.

Click to expand...

I think by comparing the activity between this forum and pany forum I can conclude that we Kodakians were the ones with troubled eyesight... or maybe Kodakians were just too busy snapping Kodak moments that they don't have time to do PPs and argue over the best camera...

I for one don't really fond of the results from P880 when compared to DX6490/DX7590, I also hate the C875 when used indoor with flash. But I think that just me.
True, it's not a big deal.

Member said:

Anyway... have a good one. I've a feeling it was a mistake for me to return to this forum. I'm left defending my photographs and my choice of cameras and I don't appreciate that. Somehow, this is not the Kodak forum of ten years ago when my wife and I first joined to share our pictures with the rest.

Click to expand...

I'm so sorry you feel this way. I sincerely think that the way we do our discussion here is so much better than on other forums. For example: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&thread=36414623

happy snappin'!

--
regards,
-Jr-
http://rondonuwu.net

jody rondonuwu said:

I for one don't really fond of the results from P880 when compared to DX6490/DX7590, I also hate the C875 when used indoor with flash. But I think that just me.

Click to expand...

Sakit-nya!

That's ok, I'm not always happy with the P880 either. As to the DX series, I never owned one, the main reason I went to the P880 was 24mm at that time was rare and I had a yearning for it. Since then, I have gone to 14mm (i.e. 7mm Oly Four Thirds) and been there.....

--



Ananda
http://anandasim.blogspot.com

'There are a whole range of greys and colours - from
the photographer who shoots everything in iA / green
AUTO to the one who shoots Manual Everything. There
is no right or wrong - there are just instances of
individuality and individual choice.'

JamesD2 said:

Hi Dave.

Click to expand...

Member said:

Anyway... have a good one. I've a feeling it was a mistake for me to return to this forum. I'm left defending my photographs and my choice of cameras and I don't appreciate that. Somehow, this is not the Kodak forum of ten years ago when my wife and I first joined to share our pictures with the rest. Take care, Dave.

Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from James and you are right the forum is not what it used to be.

This forum has not been a dedicated Kodak forum for quite some time, as you know some time ago Kodak had the respect of users and media and were riding on the crest of a wave with just about every camera retailer and variety shops selling Kodak, they had the product and they had the market power.

Advance five or so years, Kodak have lost the plot and IMO the only thing that sells Kodaks is the everlasting IQ, the cameras themselves are bot built as good as they were and as usual there is a variation on a theme type of policy that to me turns out cameras that are all pretty much the same except for their cosmetic appearance.

This has effected the DP Review Kodak Forum because most people that post here have other brand cameras besides or not including Kodak models, back in the old days we used to compare Kodak models as they were released these days there is a whole lot more discussion about other brands, other brands have over time developed more atractive models to purchasers and I have been saying for years that Kodak keep producing the same old same old.

As I said on another thread I don't care what people think about what cameras I use which are a Kodak Z650, DX6340 and Fuji E550, I will keep posting here but will only post pictures taken with either of my Kodaks, I would still buy a new Kodak because Kodaks still do a great job and will do everything I ask from a camera, all I have to do is find one somewhere other than eBay.

James you are an old battler and its nice for an old geezer like me to converse with friends from years ago, by the way I do still post on the other forum from time to time, just have trouble keeping up with everything though, things move fast over there.

--
Regards
Dave
Downunder.

I still use my C875 occasionally, here is a panorama of our street which I took with my C875:





.

But I really am happy with my new Panny LX5, and its full set of manual controls, even on video -- see that, Kodak? -- Manual Video controls? Here is an image I shot a few days ago, the dawn coming up over the Clyde from my hotel room window in Glasgow:
.





.

I still have my Z1012 and my Z1253 and my Z1073, and my C875. But for the last year I have been mainly using a ZS3 with the old Panasonic JPG algorithms, not the silly new ones Now the LX5 with RAW is bringing home the images for me.

Oh - this following video was shot with 1/30 "shutter preferred" mode in a very dark conference room using my new LX5: Audio channel is dubbed from a separate audio recorder, however...

http://www.vimeo.com/15279071
.

Depends on what you are looking for… But I would certainly vote for the CX4 because of the following….
A) 28-300 very classic choice instead of the Kodak’s 35-350.

B) Sports the “new” sony CMOS sensor that I have tried in a friend’s fuji HS-10 and it is really – really good.

C) Because of this CMOS sensor you have in such a small package all the benefits of real HD video and High speed shooting 5 fps its not but at all.

D) Study the macro capabilities of the camera – max telephoto @ 300mm equiv. in 30 cm distance is unique in the market.

E) We are talking for a really small camera, compare the dimensions with canon S90 and see… it is a pocket camera… Kodak is for belt…

F) Sports a focus system like P880, you can move and set the point in the frame, extremely useful for macros, and all the other functions like prefocus etc, etc…

G) Believe me that afternoon that I god the Kodak Z915 for my friend I had my first face to face experience with some RICOH models in that shop, there is not any comparison in quality, the things are made in another planet… Canon is ashamed in frond of them.
H) Do not forget the super high resolution screen, you have to study the specs…

I) The whole interface of the camera is carefully made for serious users when the same time Kodak’s is just easy for novice.

And finally you are right I didn’t like much the user’s gallery, but at the photographer’s gallery the camera shows its value… Do you really believe the the Kodak we are talking about in a photographer’s hand could do many of these… this is a point for me…

--
Just lost my Dpreview account known as mike_mike
*****************************************
Have a look at the totally new http://www.spiridakis.gr

Chiue,

I think you'll find that some of the things which make the Ricoh CX cameras interesting don't show up in the specs.

I bought the CX1 a few months ago because I had seen so many sample photos that looked exceptionally good to me (sort of like the 7590 impressed me back when I bought it). There seems to be a smooth, vivid quality to the colors that make pictures a bit more natural to my eye. I even think it has the same sort of NR that I recognize in the 7590 (people have criticized both cameras for exactly that reason, but I like it).

The CX1 construction is very impressive and the customizable options are wonderful. I have never used a camera that has so many useful adjustments and I'm not one to be interested in things like scene modes, etc.

I don't mean to do a sales pitch, but I am enjoying the camera. You can probably find a number of my threads with sample pictures on the Ricoh forum over the past 4 months.

I mentioned, in another thread on the Kodak forum, that I continue to use my 7590 and I'm always impressed with it too. My DSLRs sit on the shelf a lot these days.

--
Darrell

Spiridakis Michael said:

D) Study the macro capabilities of the camera – max telephoto @ 300mm equiv. in 30 cm distance is unique in the market.

Click to expand...

Canon’s TX1 which was introduced nearly 4 years ago, was smaller than the CX4 and had a 39-390 equiv. zoom which could be used in macro mode at 10-50 cm, or super macro mode at 0 - 10 cm. Very convenient for insects and similar subjects.





--
Cyril

that's got to be one of the nastiest pics I've seen yet

Hear2see said:

that's got to be one of the nastiest pics I've seen yet

Click to expand...

NASTY, Crikey Charlie you had me worried then. must be my guilty conscience.
--
Regards
Dave
Downunder.

Spiridakis Michael said:

Depends on what you are looking for… But I would certainly vote for the CX4 because of the following….
A) 28-300 very classic choice instead of the Kodak’s 35-350.

Click to expand...

Agree, having the 28mm on hand is better.

Dr. Noodle said:

B) Sports the “new” sony CMOS sensor that I have tried in a friend’s fuji HS-10 and it is really – really good.

Click to expand...

CMOS vs CCD (Transistor vs Tube). Mmmmmm.....

Dr. Noodle said:

C) Because of this CMOS sensor you have in such a small package all the benefits of real HD video and High speed shooting 5 fps its not but at all.

Click to expand...

Video....nah, I'm into Stereo HiFi more....ooops the HiFi bug get into my head again. May be if it can record 20Hz to 25Hz it might interested me.
For the last 5 years, I think I've only use continue shooting twice.
But certainly those two features are important to lots of people.

Dr. Noodle said:

D) Study the macro capabilities of the camera – max telephoto @ 300mm equiv. in 30 cm distance is unique in the market.

Click to expand...

That will certainly draw my attention. I like that.

Dr. Noodle said:

E) We are talking for a really small camera, compare the dimensions with canon S90 and see… it is a pocket camera… Kodak is for belt…

Click to expand...

For me, I prefer bigger camera, for I don't put my P&S in the pocket. So size is not a real concern for me.

Dr. Noodle said:

F) Sports a focus system like P880, you can move and set the point in the frame, extremely useful for macros, and all the other functions like prefocus etc, etc…

Click to expand...

Agree, selective focus point is a plus.
Prefocus...do you focus lock?

Dr. Noodle said:

G) Believe me that afternoon that I god the Kodak Z915 for my friend I had my first face to face experience with some RICOH models in that shop, there is not any comparison in quality, the things are made in another planet… Canon is ashamed in frond of them.

Click to expand...

Oh, yes, I believe you. If Kodak has half of that built quality and material used.

Dr. Noodle said:

H) Do not forget the super high resolution screen, you have to study the specs…

Click to expand...

It is nice if it come with 920,000 screen, if not I'm fine with 230,000. I don't use it much to review pictures, but just to take a quick look if the composition is OK etc.

With my Nikon D5000, after I set the settings, I flip the screen to the store position. And I just shoot without border to look at the quick-view.

Yes, you are right, I'll study the specs/menu in details.

Dr. Noodle said:

I) The whole interface of the camera is carefully made for serious users when the same time Kodak’s is just easy for novice.

Click to expand...

For the Kodak C and M series without ASM mode, I still can bare with it. But if Kodak eventually take out the ASM modes in the Z series (who know may be their survey said that the soccer mom don't need it, just like the same reason they take out the hot shoes and diopter), then I'm done with it.

Dr. Noodle said:

And finally you are right I didn’t like much the user’s gallery,

Click to expand...

You see what I mean, the user's gallery does not impress me at all. I know that with experience photographer like yourself, no matter what cameras you use, you'll find a way to take great shots.

The reason I'm particular interest in looking at the user gallery (most of them were taken by a novice I believe) was that my niece was asking an opinion on the Ricoh CX. She is an novice, so I want to see how the CX pictures come out from an novice. You know the X-generation or Y-generation or Z-generation whatever it is, they care more about the looks of the camera rather than the picture quality. She gave me those weird look when I say go get a Kodak.

Dr. Noodle said:

but at the photographer’s gallery the camera shows its value… Do you really believe the the Kodak we are talking about in a photographer’s hand could do many of these… this is a point for me…

Click to expand...

I will try...LOL

Anyway thanks for the extra info and good discussion.

--
chiue -
Nikon D5000 / Kodak 880 7590 6440 915
Kodak Digital Cameras Galleries
http://www.wix.com/chiuestar/Kodak-DC

Darrell Spreen said:

Chiue,

I think you'll find that some of the things which make the Ricoh CX cameras interesting don't show up in the specs.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are definitely correct, as Mike also point that out. I'll go study more about the specs/menu.

Member said:

I bought the CX1 a few months ago because I had seen so many sample photos that looked exceptionally good to me (sort of like the 7590 impressed me back when I bought it). There seems to be a smooth, vivid quality to the colors that make pictures a bit more natural to my eye. I even think it has the same sort of NR that I recognize in the 7590 (people have criticized both cameras for exactly that reason, but I like it).

Click to expand...

I am slowly reviewing your CX post. The colors is quite natural and subtle. Did you change the colors setting to low key? And Darrell, believe me, it is hard to review your CX post, for you had done such a great job with the 7590, every time I look at your CX shots, your old 7590 shots pop up in my mind, that made it very difficult to make an unbiased judgement.

Member said:

The CX1 construction is very impressive and the customizable options are wonderful. I have never used a camera that has so many useful adjustments and I'm not one to be interested in things like scene modes, etc.

Click to expand...

No doubt about the construction and material used.

Member said:

I don't mean to do a sales pitch, but I am enjoying the camera. You can probably find a number of my threads with sample pictures on the Ricoh forum over the past 4 months.

Click to expand...

I can tell you really enjoy it. As I say I'm slowly looking back your thread on the CX.
So far, somehow I think I still prefer your 7590's shots more.

Member said:

I mentioned, in another thread on the Kodak forum, that I continue to use my 7590 and I'm always impressed with it too. My DSLRs sit on the shelf a lot these days.

Click to expand...

Contrary to that, I found myself using more and more of the Nikon D5000, may be it is still new to me and still exploring it.

Thanks for your input.

--
chiue -
Nikon D5000 / Kodak 880 7590 6440 915
Kodak Digital Cameras Galleries
http://www.wix.com/chiuestar/Kodak-DC

AnandaSim said:

jody rondonuwu said:

I for one don't really fond of the results from P880 when compared to DX6490/DX7590, I also hate the C875 when used indoor with flash. But I think that just me.

Click to expand...

Sakit-nya!

That's ok, I'm not always happy with the P880 either. As to the DX series, I never owned one, the main reason I went to the P880 was 24mm at that time was rare and I had a yearning for it. Since then, I have gone to 14mm (i.e. 7mm Oly Four Thirds) and been there.....

Click to expand...

Are you ok, Ananda? Did I hurt you??

When P880 was out it's too pricey for me, and I don't like the bulky BIG body. As for the results, I think they're a bit too warm and yellowish. But I guess I just hate the price back then...

When Mike showed us the Sunset Mist, I thought the color was weird, horizon was tilted and not even straight, and I don't really care how many filters he used and how much PPs on it. I prefer the third photo (taken with a Fuji?) which showed a nice bokeh splash of water and the P880 that's well preserved (it's sooo clean!)

But everyone else seem to love the photo, so I guess that's fine by me... I'm not a real photographer anyway.

--
regards,
-Jr-
http://rondonuwu.net