View Full Version : Dx7630 vs. Dx7440
10-26-2004, 05:13 PM
I have been looking at the Kodak 7630 and thinking about purchasing. My holdback is that reviews have indicated it overexposes some shots. I am wondering if anyone has this camera and if you have found this true. Do the flesh tones on people look accurate?
Also I read a few things that indicated the 7440 had gotten better overall reviews than the 7630. Any opinions on this? I want a good overall camera that has very good to excellent image quality and print quality of pictures. I am looking for a 4-6 MP camera.
10-26-2004, 06:42 PM
Hi Karen - I just bought a Dx7440 and have been very satisified. Reason I went for the 7440 over the 7630 was the lens. The 7440 is 33mm to 132mm where the 7630 is only 39mm to 117mm. I'm not that interested in the tele length but I wanted the widest angle I could get. When I was working my lens of choice was a 24mm on a Olympus OM1. The difference between the 33mm and 39mm might seem trite to some, but for me that was important. I am not too keen on the add on lens that are available.
I have made some good available light photos ( using the manual mode) and been very happy. I hate using direct flash. I only wish there was a pc outlet that I could plug in my Vivitar 283....but that's the only improvement I would suggest. Both cameras are great. The difference between 4meg and 6 megs means little. Comes down to what works for you. Either way you have made a good choice. Willard
10-27-2004, 07:05 AM
Thanks for the info. I have another question though. Some things I have read on the 7440 have indicated it has problems taking pictures in low light situations. Have you experienced this?
10-27-2004, 07:32 AM
Not sure what you mean by low light. Been shooting in regular room light on both auto and manual. On manual I have the ISO set at 400 - start with a setting around 2.8 at 1/60. Check it out and if it's too dark I then delete it and try 1/30 and so on.
What I haven't tried are time exposures on a tripod or monopod. Also haven't tried night shots ourside of buildings - remember you can delete the pix if it's too dark and keep trying. So far the only negative I can find with the camera is the weak flash - but for around $289 (Amazon.com) you can't beat it. I will say that on auto mode the ISO runs from 80 to 200, but checking the exposure after the shot on auto I have never seen it at 200.
Any more questions, don't hesitate getting back to me. Check my profile and email me direct. Willard
10-27-2004, 02:48 PM
I have used my 7440 in low light extensively. It works very well on manual, as long as you set an exposure time that gives you the correct exposure. I think that what some people may be referring to is that in automatic mode, the slowest shutter speed it will set is 1/8 second. Presumably because below that figure you get serious camera movement if you are not very careful. But 1/8 second is too fast for some low light settings, especially when zoomed in (slower f stop). My old Olympus D-360 was "better" in low light, but that is because it would go all the way to 1/2 second if it had to. Great exposures, but most with camera movement.
I have used the 7440 all the way to 64 seconds photographing the night sky. It works VERY well indeed. See: http://www.pgoelz.com/infrared/index.htm (NOTE that these are re-sized to 1280 X 960. The originals are MUCH better.) The photos of the sky were taken on several nights at about 11:00PM at between 30 and 64 seconds exposure. The specks are all stars, not hot pixels. The photos of the moon were taken through an 8" f10 telescope (Meade LX200). The photo of the sun was taken through a 4" f10 telescope (Meade 2045D) with solar filter. The pictures of our deck were taken in visible light and then through an infrared filter... there is considerable infrared sensitivity in the 7440.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2016 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.