Kodak v570/v610 VS Panasonic TZ1 ((studying abroad..need help))

[Raining Upwards]

Hello! I'm a college student who will be leaving in two weeks to study abroad in London this summer. Next summer, I will be studying abroad in Thailand and Vietnam. Hence, i'll be doing a bit of traveling in the next two years. Because i'll be on my feet often, I want a camera which lacks bulkiness and that I can carry around the entire day with ease. I want an ultracompact digital camera that will best suffice my needs. I also would like photography to become a hobby of mine in the near future.

I first became interested in the Kodak V570 and the Kodak V610 because of their panoramic options. However my reservation with these are their "average" picture quality which I am coming across in reviews.

In other reviews,it seems that cameras such as the Panasonic TZ1 have better picture quality but lack the panoramic options and seem bulkier.

In sum, I want a camera around $400 dollars that can be easilly carried around on a daily basis, have great picture quality, and etc.

Are the panoramic Kodak models really that inferior to the bulkier TZ1-like cameras?

Please give me some additional insight as I want to purchase the best camera for my money and needs.

Thanks!
-Todd A

[ryanbrancel]

The TZ1 is considered a "compact" camera. It's not in that "sub-compact" class like the canon elph, sony "t" series, casio exilim, etc. i like this site because each review has comparative camera measurements (dimensions, weight).

if you can do w/o the zoom, you may want to consider a camera like the Fuji F30 which will be released shortly.

[bascom]

The V570 only has 5x zoom and got a mixed review here. The V610 has 10x zoom but IS for video only. The TZ1 has 10x zoom with IS. It's not bulky compared to most zoom cameras and it costs less than the Kodaks.

The TZ1 sounds best to me but I can't comment on photo quality among your options. The TZ1 review here is due by the end of May and the V610 review is #4 on the June list. It sounds like you can wait until at least the TZ1 review to decide.

[Telecorder]

You may want to check out John Reed's site of photos taken with the Pany TZ1 (Tizzy)...

http://john-reed.smugmug.com/gallery/1357189/2/64362467


http://john-reed.smugmug.com/gallery/1357189/1

There has been a thread at DPR w/many Tizzy owners posting their TZ1 photos at:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1033&message=18541351

A good post w/recent TZ1 landscape photos are at:
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19926

[bluevellet]

Hello! I'm a college student who will be leaving in two weeks to study abroad in London this summer. Next summer, I will be studying abroad in Thailand and Vietnam. Hence, i'll be doing a bit of traveling in the next two years. Because i'll be on my feet often, I want a camera which lacks bulkiness and that I can carry around the entire day with ease. I want an ultracompact digital camera that will best suffice my needs. I also would like photography to become a hobby of mine in the near future.

I first became interested in the Kodak V570 and the Kodak V610 because of their panoramic options. However my reservation with these are their "average" picture quality which I am coming across in reviews.

In other reviews,it seems that cameras such as the Panasonic TZ1 have better picture quality but lack the panoramic options and seem bulkier.

In sum, I want a camera around $400 dollars that can be easilly carried around on a daily basis, have great picture quality, and etc.

Are the panoramic Kodak models really that inferior to the bulkier TZ1-like cameras?

Please give me some additional insight as I want to purchase the best camera for my money and needs.

Thanks!
-Todd A

Everyone wants the best camera for their money, that's a given, but it seems to me you have very vague needs and you may buying into specs, into marketing and wanting something that is likely overkill.

Like me give you an example you say you want good image quality. Yeah, sure, an obvious quality for taking pictures. But what will do with your photos? Crop them on your computer and zoom in to get tiny little details? Spend big money to print out posters and large photos?
I doubt it.

Most likely, you want pics to dump on your computer, photos you will look at zoomed out most of the time on your computer and photos printed out in 4x6 format. The truth of the matter is 95% of cameras from all major manufacturers can deliver this and you won't be able to tell the difference. So in other words, I am telling you to forget about image quality.

I am not exactly sure why you set on your sights on these 3 individual cameras, but it seems to me you want something relatively small. Ok, so, what really sets these camera apart and most importantly, why would it matter for an amateur photographer with little experience.

OIS really matters the more zoom you have. Obviously, this is more of an issue with the TZ1 and V610. So between both cameras, it's a trade-off. Do you want a small, high zoom camera you can carry everywhere or are you willing to have something a bit bigger and heavier with OIS to compensate for shaky hands and a lack of a tripod that the TZ1 offers. If you are leaning on the latter, you also have to ask yourself why you couldn't get a more normal size camera with the same kind of zoom and OIS.

As for the V570, the attraction is really the wide angle lens versus the other cameras you listed. Why would a wide angle lens be useful to you? Well, you can cram more stuff in pictures. That is particularly useful when taking photos indoors, where you can't always walk backwards to get the right framing. It can also help in city settings, photographing buildings outside in a cramped, urban environment. The V610 has the same panoramic feature, but the wide angle lens of the V570 can create larger panos, at almost 180 degrees. If you like taking pictures of landscape, this is definitely a plus.

[ryanbrancel]

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_kodak_easyshare_v610.php
http://reviews.digitaltrends.com/review3544.html
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1963866,00.asp
http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Kodak-EasyShare-V610-Digital-Camera-Review-.htm

[carlhsu]

I have used all three mentioned cameras. I converted from NIKON Film SLRs to Digital SLRs and now hate carrying all the bulk - seldom use the big guns now. The quality of these three point and shoots are good enough - I sometimes make 3X5 FOOT blowups on my HP poster printer - I probably would have better image quality if I had used my Fuji S2 but I may have missed the shot by carrying that monster around. The Panasonic TZ1 is pocketable but not so compact - I am impressed by the OIS at full zoom indoors. It definitely is much better than the Nikon s4 10X and the Olympus C730 regarding the antishake abilities and "compact-ness". At full indoor 10X the OIS of the TZ1 offers slight advantage over the Kodak v610 but not by much.... (I can not handhold the Nikon s4 under the same lighting conditions. I am able to finally get a comparable shot after multiple tries with the Olympus C730).

And then I bought the Kodak v570. The Kodak V570 and V610 are the only cameras to come on vacation with me - Macro abilities with a super wide to 10X!

The batteries of the V570 and v610 and SD memory are interchangeable. Batteries are charged in- camera. During outdoor shooting I carried both in a fanny bag only slightly more bulky than the Panasonic TZ1 by itself. Night time or indoors, I carried the Kodak v570 and left the V610 to charge the extra batteries at the AC plug. For the first time ever, my wife got a kick out of carrying one of the Kodaks in the small inner pocket of her purse. The in-camera panoramic stitching is terrific and a snap to use.

Bottom line: If I had to choose only one camera to carry on a trip -I would take the Kodak V610 with the fantastic 10X zoom. I could still do the panoramas by using the V610 at its widest focal length and stitch the images together.

My dream camera- a Kodak 3 lens: Wide angle with the V610 10X zoom

[bascom]

But how effective is the 10x of the V610 without Image Stabilization? I would expect a lot of blur.

[bluevellet]

Bottom line: If I had to choose only one camera to carry on a trip -I would take the Kodak V610 with the fantastic 10X zoom. I could still do the panoramas by using the V610 at its widest focal length and stitch the images together.

My dream camera- a Kodak 3 lens: Wide angle with the V610 10X zoom

From my experience, a big zoom is particularly useful for taking pictures of wildlife and getting those objects you can't get close to.

But in an urban setting, big zoom is most often overkill unless you're a stalker. :)

But how effective is the 10x of the V610 without Image Stabilization? I would expect a lot of blur.

It's effective as any other big zoom camera with IS.

IS can be useful in many situations but it can also be a band-aid solution for lazy photographers who are not using the right settings or try to have a firm grip on the camera/tripod.

[Duwenbasden]

10x without IS? I got a camcorder, and the footage is shaky without IS.

[bluevellet]

10x without IS? I got a camcorder, and the footage is shaky without IS.

The V610 has IS for video. :)

Taking a sharp photo without IS is is easier than video.

[Duwenbasden]

IS will help in shutter from 1/2 to ~2 seconds, any less IS is useless (too fast to notice the difference), anymore IS is also useless (too long for no movement). Take your pick.

[carlhsu]

From my experience, a big zoom is particularly useful for taking pictures of wildlife and getting those objects you can't get close to.

But in an urban setting, big zoom is most often overkill unless you're a stalker. :)



It's effective as any other big zoom camera with IS.

IS can be useful in many situations but it can also be a band-aid solution for lazy photographers who are not using the right settings or try to have a firm grip on the camera/tripod.


How does one measure "effective of 10X without IS?” In my simple at home test before going on vacation. I wanted to choose between the Panasonic TZ1 Vs the Kodak v610. I shot 10 handheld pictures of the exact same dimly lighted room with both cameras. The Panasonic TZ1 at maximum zoom scored 2/10 that were blurry. The Kodak v610 at maximum zoom scored 3/10 blurry pictures of the exact same scene. Both performed impressively. I did not compare the cameras at any lower or higher level of light or any other focal length or shooting condition. Furthermore with this simple test, the differences in the results are probably within experimental error- that is if I had repeated the test, might the results be equal or perhaps reversed?
It came down to being comfortable with the trade-offs. I chose to take the Kodak v610 on the vacation because of size and that I could use it in conjunction with the Kodak V570 and that it had comparable results with the Panasonic with OIS. When I am on vacation, I AM A LAZY photographer so I also chose the smallest and the lightest. If this was work, I would have lugged the Fuji S2 with every possible Nikon lens that I might need. (I would still have the Kodak in my fanny bag for the Off-hours fun)

[bluevellet]

IS is of little use use with poor lighting because of the need for long exposure times. Some people get too used to IS during daylight and forget how to take photos in more challenging conditions where IS is useless.

[bascom]

Similar discussion here: http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19752

[seluvsvols1]

Everyone wants the best camera for their money, that's a given, but it seems to me you have very vague needs and you may buying into specs, into marketing and wanting something that is likely overkill.

Like me give you an example you say you want good image quality. Yeah, sure, an obvious quality for taking pictures. But what will do with your photos? Crop them on your computer and zoom in to get tiny little details? Spend big money to print out posters and large photos?
I doubt it.

Most likely, you want pics to dump on your computer, photos you will look at zoomed out most of the time on your computer and photos printed out in 4x6 format. The truth of the matter is 95% of cameras from all major manufacturers can deliver this and you won't be able to tell the difference. So in other words, I am telling you to forget about image quality.

I am not exactly sure why you set on your sights on these 3 individual cameras, but it seems to me you want something relatively small. Ok, so, what really sets these camera apart and most importantly, why would it matter for an amateur photographer with little experience.

OIS really matters the more zoom you have. Obviously, this is more of an issue with the TZ1 and V610. So between both cameras, it's a trade-off. Do you want a small, high zoom camera you can carry everywhere or are you willing to have something a bit bigger and heavier with OIS to compensate for shaky hands and a lack of a tripod that the TZ1 offers. If you are leaning on the latter, you also have to ask yourself why you couldn't get a more normal size camera with the same kind of zoom and OIS.

As for the V570, the attraction is really the wide angle lens versus the other cameras you listed. Why would a wide angle lens be useful to you? Well, you can cram more stuff in pictures. That is particularly useful when taking photos indoors, where you can't always walk backwards to get the right framing. It can also help in city settings, photographing buildings outside in a cramped, urban environment. The V610 has the same panoramic feature, but the wide angle lens of the V570 can create larger panos, at almost 180 degrees. If you like taking pictures of landscape, this is definitely a plus.



After looking at the "Tizzy" link here WOW!!
But I think i may be suffering from the same issue you said the former person was:)
I have thread something like "looking to buy dig cam... going to Disey World..."
if you could please take a look

Mainly i think a smaller cam is a better option for me, we were looking at the sony H2, but with kids and travellling i would like one to keep handy with ease, plus I really want a zoom too though.

I was concerned about 'image quality' read online probably in reviews way to technical for my needs, but I want to have great photos, and my husband knows more than I so we want manual options for sure as I want to learn more.
My concerns about the v160 was no ISO and the TZ1 was a weak flash...
i really like aa batteries and do not like absense of optical viewfinder but I can let those go easily for better quality if it is needed- that is what has brought me to these 3 choices if you have any feedback- anyone:)
I listed mauch more detail about what I want and didn't like about what I've seen at my thread

THANKS!!!

[ryanbrancel]

IS will help in shutter from 1/2 to ~2 seconds, any less IS is useless (too fast to notice the difference), anymore IS is also useless (too long for no movement). Take your pick.

IS is of little use use with poor lighting because of the need for long exposure times. Some people get too used to IS during daylight and forget how to take photos in more challenging conditions where IS is useless.

Really?!? I hope no one reads these threads and thinks your logic is valid. Are you talking about timed exposures of several seconds on a tripod. Because only in the latter example does it make sense to turn off Image Stabilization. The benefit of O.I.S. is to mimize the effects of movement during all shutter speeds, esp. slower shutter speeds which typically occur in "poor lighting" [sic].

[John_Reed]

IS will help in shutter from 1/2 to ~2 seconds, any less IS is useless (too fast to notice the difference), anymore IS is also useless (too long for no movement). Take your pick.
IS is useful at ANY shutterspeed where there is otherwise a chance that camera shake may blur the photo. A couple of years ago, Jeff Keller of this site was testing a Minolta camera that didn't have IS, and it showed blur at 1/500 of a second, at a long zoom. After that, I think he started using tripods to remove the hand shake factor. IS is beneficial in the 1/100, 1/50, 1/25, blah blah blah ranges, wherever the shutterspeed is slower than 1/focal length, which happens especially at longer zooms, but also at short zoom as well. Here's a full-zoom shot from my FZ30, taken at 1/13 second at full zoom, of an Egret. Tell ME that IS is useless?
http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/39690918-L.jpg

[Duwenbasden]

IS is useful at ANY shutterspeed where there is otherwise a chance that camera shake may blur the photo. A couple of years ago, Jeff Keller of this site was testing a Minolta camera that didn't have IS, and it showed blur at 1/500 of a second, at a long zoom. After that, I think he started using tripods to remove the hand shake factor. IS is beneficial in the 1/100, 1/50, 1/25, blah blah blah ranges, wherever the shutterspeed is slower than 1/focal length, which happens especially at longer zooms, but also at short zoom as well. Here's a full-zoom shot from my FZ30, taken at 1/13 second at full zoom, of an Egret. Tell ME that IS is useless?

Full zoom = 12x. All shots more than 10x slower than 1/1000 REQUIRES IS. 3x is where that range will be useful.

[John_Reed]

Full zoom = 12x. All shots more than 10x slower than 1/1000 REQUIRES IS. 3x is where that range will be useful.I guess you should inform Panasonic of your knowledge. They seem to think it applies all the way down to 1X; it's a feature of every camera they make, including the 28mm - 112mm LX1, and all other "low zoom" cameras. Other camera makers are starting to introduce IS in their low-zoom models too. Maybe they all know something? I know for me, an old guy with nominally shaky hands, I welcome the benefits of IS at ANY focal length and shutterspeed.

[bluevellet]

IS is useful at ANY shutterspeed where there is otherwise a chance that camera shake may blur the photo. A couple of years ago, Jeff Keller of this site was testing a Minolta camera that didn't have IS, and it showed blur at 1/500 of a second, at a long zoom. After that, I think he started using tripods to remove the hand shake factor. IS is beneficial in the 1/100, 1/50, 1/25, blah blah blah ranges, wherever the shutterspeed is slower than 1/focal length, which happens especially at longer zooms, but also at short zoom as well. Here's a full-zoom shot from my FZ30, taken at 1/13 second at full zoom, of an Egret. Tell ME that IS is useless?
http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/39690918-L.jpg

Wow, one shot. I can also take a bunch of full zoom shots, with only holding the camera with only one hand, and one picture is bound to be sharp enough. Hey, why not post it here and I can claim IS is useless in any condition? Selective, anecdotal evidence is cool like that.

What I am saying is when lighting gets pretty dim, you got those faraway objects where your flash can not reach and you have to zoom in, augmenting the shake potential factor. I'm sorry but long exposures will be needed and I'm not talking about a fraction of a second. You can always argue IS will help in some fashion, however minute, but you definitely need a tripod in those conditions if you want consistent results. But feel free to trumpet the few shots you manage to get without a tripod while ignoring all those that weren't so great.

[ryanbrancel]

Wow, one shot. I can also take a bunch of full zoom shots, with only holding the camera with only one hand, and one picture is bound to be sharp enough. Hey, why not post it here and I can claim IS is useless in any condition? Selective, anecdotal evidence is cool like that.

What I am saying is when lighting gets pretty dim, you got those faraway objects where your flash can not reach and you have to zoom in, augmenting the shake potential factor. I'm sorry but long exposures will be needed and I'm not talking about a fraction of a second. You can always argue IS will help in some fashion, however minute, but you definitely need a tripod in those conditions if you want consistent results. But feel free to trumpet the few shots you manage to get without a tripod while ignoring all those that weren't so great.

I'm not sure where this is going or if it's worth my time to respond. Although, I think I understand your intended point, that photographers should not rely on IS as an "end all, be all" to compensate for extreme lighting situations. Although, are your opinions based on personal experiences, or just speculations? When I can take consistent, focused handheld shots down to 1/8 even at full zoom on the TZ-1, where other cameras would simply fail in those situations (0/100 shots)... If I really need to get the shot I'll use a tripod or prop the camera. However, it's not like we all take studio shots and got a tripod in our back pocket. This isn't to say that we all took bad shots before O.I.S. was introduced, it just made some situations more difficult. I've been shooting digital since '99 and have had six models. Before that I shot full manual SLR and I was able to take good shots without AF and program modes. So, it's not like we should automatically disqualify a camera if it does not have this feature.

[John_Reed]

You're wrong. I actually shot two shots of that Egret that evening. I didn't think you'd find the 2nd one believeable, so didn't post it. Here it is:
http://John-Reed.smugmug.com/photos/39690793-L.jpg
This shot was taken at 1/5 of a second, with a 1.7X TCON-17 screwed on. There's a little motion blur in the subject, after all, it's a working Egret! There you have it, two "anecdotal" images.

If your point is that IS isn't perfect, you're right. But as Ryan says, it raises the probability of getting sharp shots when no others might be possible.

[Benjamin_Allen]

All,

I'm looking for the following:
10X optical zoom
Optical viewfinder
Compact - pocket size
Integrated lens cap
Optical image stabilization

I've considered the Kodak V610, the Panasonic TZ1, and thanks to this forum, looking at the Rioch R4.

Now, I know all the above is not available currently, but the question is, how soon will it be? I need to decide in the next week or so whether to give a friend my old Kodak DX3900 and buy a new camera in the fall, or buy the friend a new entry-level camera and hang on to the Kodak for a couple of years.

For those that ask - I take pictures of landscapes and wildlife, and am immensely tired of "see that brown dot? that's a hippopotamus! Really!"

[ryanbrancel]

All,

I'm looking for the following:
10X optical zoom
Optical viewfinder
Compact - pocket size
Integrated lens cap
Optical image stabilization



The optical viewfinder and integrated lens cap are features you usually have to sacrifice on ultrazoom cameras. An electronic viewfinder is a possibility since an optical viewfinder to match the zoom lens is impossible to implement. It also adds to the size of the camera. Lack of an integrated lens cap on the TZ1 has not been a problem for me -- it's small, slim and easy to remove. It's also nice to be able to leave the cap on while adjusting settings or previewing images. I've read of a user (in the DPreview Ricoh forum) that had a damaged lens cap on the Ricoh R4 because a strand of hair got stuck in the mechanism. He tried to fix it however couldn't get the mechanism put back together. Not that it happens often, however those mechanical lens caps represent another level that could fail.

[bascom]

The V610 review is here now and it says the TZ1 is better and cost a $100 less. I agree.