PDA

View Full Version : Dx6490



msam
09-04-2004, 07:34 PM
Hi,

I am new here. Am planning on purchasing a digital camera soon. I had some questions about Kodak in general and DX6490 in particular. I see that A/F assist is not available in most Kodak camera's. So, my question is how do they perform in low light situations and night shots. Am very interested in knowing the 6490's capability in this area.

I am thinking about buying 7590 and I think this will give me an idea about how 7590 will perform.

Thanks,

D70FAN
09-04-2004, 08:12 PM
Hi,

I am new here. Am planning on purchasing a digital camera soon. I had some questions about Kodak in general and DX6490 in particular. I see that A/F assist is not available in most Kodak camera's. So, my question is how do they perform in low light situations and night shots. Am very interested in knowing the 6490's capability in this area.

I am thinking about buying 7590 and I think this will give me an idea about how 7590 will perform.

Thanks,

Question: Why would you buy a camera without AF assist when there are so many good cameras in the same price/performance range, and similar ergonaomics. WITH AF assist?

msam
09-04-2004, 08:55 PM
I guess I am talking about the A/F assist lamp. I am not sure whether this means that A/F assist is unavailable. I am pretty sure it must have some sort of assist. That is why I am trying to find out here how well it performs in low light situations.

msam
09-04-2004, 09:09 PM
Question: Why would you buy a camera without AF assist when there are so many good cameras in the same price/performance range, and similar ergonaomics. WITH AF assist?

There seem to be hell of a lot of features that I seem to like in the 6490 and 7590 models than a lot of others out there in the price range that I am interested in. Looking at Jeff's reviews, it seems as though the 6490 is also a recommended one. So, I guess I am justified in considering this possibility.

msam
09-05-2004, 08:06 AM
Acutally, I recently found that Kodak has claimed that they do have a "Low light AF system" in the DX7590. They do not seem to say the same in DX6490.

Anyhow, it will be helpful if anyone could let me know how well DX6490 performed in low-light conditions.

Atindra
09-05-2004, 08:26 AM
In low light many digital cameras fail and 6490 too has some difficulties but experimenting with PASM mode, change in apreture control and/or shutter speed etc gave good results to me. By low-light if you mean tungsten lamp in room than DX 6490 works absolutely fine. Flash is always there to assist under low-light conditions. Autofocus does have some problems in extreme low-lights.
Atindra

msam
09-05-2004, 12:12 PM
Thanks a lot for your reply Atindra. I guess it is good to know that under a tungsten lamp the 6490 performs well.

Little troubled to hear that auto-focus has some trouble under these situations, though.

Atindra
09-06-2004, 12:22 AM
Little trouble is there mainly when you have auto-white balance. if you go to tungsten or fluorescent setting, you dont find problem in auto-focus, the only difference I observed is more blue shed in photos if we use fluorescent white-balance.

msam
09-07-2004, 01:43 PM
Thank you. That gives me more specific information that I need to know.

D70FAN
09-07-2004, 04:46 PM
There seem to be hell of a lot of features that I seem to like in the 6490 and 7590 models than a lot of others out there in the price range that I am interested in. Looking at Jeff's reviews, it seems as though the 6490 is also a recommended one. So, I guess I am justified in considering this possibility.

I wasn't questioning your judgement, just curious as to why you would buy a camera without AF assist lamp.

If you like the Kodak, then that's the camera you should buy. But I don't remember Jeff ever outright recommending a camera, and his "cons" certainly don't enthusiastically endorse the 6490:

Quote:

- Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft, as well.

- Some redeye, purple fringing.

- Too easy to accidentally turn on camera.

- No manual white balance or manual focus.

- Limited image resolution/quality options.

I have had many film and digital cameras, and I can attest to the frustration of having the camera "hunt" for focus when you are trying to shoot indoor pictures. Just trying to save you a little frustration. :)

msam
09-07-2004, 09:44 PM
George,

I was saying that the Kodak 6490 was in the recommended list of camera's in the FAQ page. I understand why you asked that question. I have been asking the question myself.

Actually, Jeff has reviewed the DX7590 model today and it seems as though it is better than the 6490 even though two issues (1 and 4) that you mention still exists. He has also stated

"I recommend the DX7590 for anyone looking for an ultra zoom camera that's got features that enthusiasts demand and ease-of-use for the rest of us. I'd rank it at the top of my best ultra zoom camera, list along with the Olympus C-765/770 and Panasonic DMC-FZ10 (if you're buying go for the new FZ15 or FZ20, I just haven't reviewed them yet)."

Also, about the auto-focus capability for 7590, Jeff has stated

"Directly above the lens is the hybrid autofocus sensor. This assists the camera in focusing, improving both responsiveness and low light focusing."

About DX6490's capabililty, he has the following additional comments

"It doesn't work in the exact way as an AF-assist lamp, but the effect is the same."

In essence, Kodak does seem to have some sort of auto-focus capability, which is good to know. So, my question to you is

Have you tried using this model of Kodak (DX6490 is also fine) and have you had problems with auto-focusing ?

Another question is

Have you used the Panasonic DMC-FZ20 or any of its predecessor's (FZ-15 or 10)? If you have used both, could you give me your view of how they (Kodak and Panasonic) compare?

If anyone else too have answers to these questions, please let me know.

I am actually also concerned about the lack of image stabilization which certainly seems to be a problem at ultra zooms. I tried using the DX6490 at circuit city and with high zooms, I struggled to get even one single clear picture without placing it on a flat top.

Thanks for anyone that can help.

Atindra
09-08-2004, 12:40 AM
DEar Masm,
Yesterday there was a firsthand review on Kodak DX 7590 on DCRP site, you can check that. I am very happy with DX 6490s picture quality. Next weekend I will be comparing it with Minolta Z2. But It is definitely better than its Fuji's equivalent. The concerns about whitebalance and manual focus are genuine if you are hardcore SLR lover.
Atindra

msam
09-08-2004, 04:32 AM
Atindra,

I am not "too worried" about the muddied pictures, because the review says that it will only occur on prints about 8 x 10, which will be very rare for me.

How about image stabilization? What do you feel? As I said in my previous post, I was trying out the 6490 at circuit city and was unable to get one decent picture with max zoom when I had it hand-held. What is your experience in this regard?

Thanks a lot for trying to help me.

yonco
09-08-2004, 05:24 AM
Quote:

- Details in photos can look muddy, overprocessed; photos tend to be soft, as well.
That's true about all Kodak cameras. They seem to lack detail and appear to be very soft. Not exactly "sharp and vibrant" as the Kodak website promises.
Plus, my DX7440 doesn't function well without flash. It is necessary to use flash when shooting indoors. Also, the autofocus doesn't function as well as I wanted it to and it's hard to get the right focus with macro shots.
These are my basic cons over the DX7440. :) Just to let you know. Those things are probably true about the DX6490/DX7590 as well.

Atindra
09-08-2004, 07:35 AM
IS is an issue at ultra-high zoom. I learnt a trick from Sarah Joyce where it was advised to increase shutter speed by 1/400 (1/380) in PASM mode of DX 6490 and then shoot the picture, I tried it and it came out well. I dont agree about soft or muddy look of pictures. They are quite sharp and very vibrant in colors. If you wish you can visit the "Kodak Talk" forum on dpreviews.com, you can compare images posted there with other digital camera and can find the difference your self.
Atindra

Atindra
09-08-2004, 07:38 AM
Dear you posted this msg a while ago, now it seems you are not happy with DX 7440?

Good Luck!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congratulations for buying the Kodak EasyShare DX7440 digital camera. It is an excellent feature-packed camera that produces beautiful and crisp high-quality photos. I hope you enjoy it, and I'm sure you'll be satisfied with it.
I can't wait to see your review and sample pictures. I think it's a camera that allows you to "grow" and learn more about photography. Buying the camera has encouraged me to learn more... It's very interesting.
I also recommend buying an additional battery. I bought the 1700 mAh one, it's a very good battery! Cost me 30 dollars. Buying a 512 MB SecureDigital card was a smart choice

yonco
09-08-2004, 10:28 AM
Dear you posted this msg a while ago, now it seems you are not happy with DX 7440?

Good Luck!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Congratulations for buying the Kodak EasyShare DX7440 digital camera. It is an excellent feature-packed camera that produces beautiful and crisp high-quality photos. I hope you enjoy it, and I'm sure you'll be satisfied with it.
I can't wait to see your review and sample pictures. I think it's a camera that allows you to "grow" and learn more about photography. Buying the camera has encouraged me to learn more... It's very interesting.
I also recommend buying an additional battery. I bought the 1700 mAh one, it's a very good battery! Cost me 30 dollars. Buying a 512 MB SecureDigital card was a smart choice
You're absolutely right. I was kinda contradicting myself.
Don't get me wrong - I'm very happy with the camera! It's a wonderful camera, and you can see that from the reviews I've written about it. It's just that there are a few important cons, that I thought I should mention. Some of the pictures I took turned out awesome - sharp and crisp, simply beautiful - and some just seemed to lack detail and be slightly soft.
Also, my short experience with the camera has tought me that when shooting indoors you have to use the flash, otherwise images turn out quite dark. Plus, I've had a problem with the autofocus and macro mode, but I guess it comes from lack of experience. I've owned it for less than two months, and haven't quite figured it all out. I have a lot more to learn. :)
So just don't get the wrong impression. I love the camera, but I felt the need to point out some specific flaws that are to it.

yonco
09-08-2004, 10:31 AM
IS is an issue at ultra-high zoom. I learnt a trick from Sarah Joyce where it was advised to increase shutter speed by 1/400 (1/380) in PASM mode of DX 6490 and then shoot the picture, I tried it and it came out well. I dont agree about soft or muddy look of pictures. They are quite sharp and very vibrant in colors. If you wish you can visit the "Kodak Talk" forum on dpreviews.com, you can compare images posted there with other digital camera and can find the difference your self.
Atindra
By the way, I have visited this forum a lot, and the pictures that the Kodak cameras produce (mostly shown are DX6490 images) are amazing. Excellent quality. :) So I was just exaggerating earlier.

Atindra
09-08-2004, 01:14 PM
It doesnt matter. But you should be critical to point out details. I think such reviews only help companies like Kodak to address urgently the lapses.

msam
09-08-2004, 02:34 PM
Thanks for your answers. I will experiment a bit more to find out whether Kodak DX 7590 is the way to go.

Nick
09-13-2004, 04:51 PM
I'm happy with the 4530's focusing. Yes, it does hunt around sometimes in lower light, something my Nikon D70 usually doesn't do even with the AF assist lamp off.

I exclusively loved the AF assist on the Sony F717 but found that the bright red light from it + Nikon bothers the subjects often and can throw off the photo itself by being simply distracting.

I don't completely agree with the soft/muddy photos statement either. Sometimes the colours need a bit of contrast adjustment but usually I'm VERY fond of how they come out right out of the box, especially for such a lil cam.