Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2

    Split on Canon A570IS and Kodak M883

    Hello there. I'm in a bit of a debacle here. I have the choice between the new Kodak M883 vs the Canon AD70IS, with a difference of $20 at stake (the A570IS being the more expensive one). The Kodak only came out a couple months ago, and it doesn't look like it's up on Amazon's site. If you guys could help me out asap, I would really appreciate it. Thanks!

    Here's links to how the specs compare:

    Kodak M883: http://www.camera-catalog.com/digita...era/kodak_m883
    Canon A570IS: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonA570IS/

    Thanks again!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Karuto View Post
    Hello there. I'm in a bit of a debacle here. I have the choice between the new Kodak M883 vs the Canon AD70IS, with a difference of $20 at stake (the A570IS being the more expensive one). The Kodak only came out a couple months ago, and it doesn't look like it's up on Amazon's site. If you guys could help me out asap, I would really appreciate it. Thanks!

    Here's links to how the specs compare:

    Kodak M883: http://www.camera-catalog.com/digita...era/kodak_m883
    Canon A570IS: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canonA570IS/

    Thanks again!
    Apples and oranges. You're comparing two cameras that are in entirely different classes. One having little or no manual control (the Kodak) and one offering FULL manual control (the Canon). One has image stabilization (the Canon) and one does not (the Kodak). Seems like you need to decide what kind of camera you want and comparing features before you start comparing brands.

    It's like asking about cars if whether you should get a convertible or an SUV...sure they both have wheels, but they're diffrent kinds of things with different purposes.
    Last edited by JTL; 11-22-2007 at 11:04 AM.
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2
    Well, the thing is, I barely know enough about digital cameras aside from pointing and shooting. I'm really interested in what the better purchase would be. It sounds like the Canon is, but the Kodak offers an HD image. I'm pretty torn, but if the Canon A570IS would be much better suited for someone like me, I would much like that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Karuto View Post
    the Kodak offers an HD image.
    The "image" is not "HD". HD is a technical specification that relates specifically to lines of VIDEO resolution. Any image from any camera can be displayed on an HD monitor.

    Based on the information on Kodak's website, the only thing HD about that camera is the logo they use in the marketing materials. The HD claim for the new M-Series cameras is the single biggest marketing lie I've ever seen in the history of digital cameras.

    Where is the HD?

    There is no HD movie mode (720i, 720p, 1080i or 1080p).

    There is no DVI, HDMI or even analog component video connector for direct output to an HD monitor.

    There is a 16x9 "widescreen" format option, but 16x9 does NOT mean HD.

    I would like someone to show me one thing about the M-Series cameras that's "HD". On the Kodak website, they claim "HD Still Capture". First, there's no such thing. In common usage, HD means something very specific relating to video. Secondly, if we wanted to stretch things a little and attempt to apply the term "HD" to still capture, any 720p equivalent image...at least 1280x720 (less than 1MP) would qualify, which is true for every single camera (including phones) currently on the market.

    Now, they may claim that the "EasyShare Dock" can connect to an HD monitor and that the M883 connects to the dock. But that's a far cry from claiming that the camera is "HD"...unless you like twisting words and logic into a pretzel as their marketing department likes to do. They'd lose a court challenge in about 30-seconds. And, the dock doesn't even use a digital connection. It uses an analog component video connection (but, that's neither here nor there...but its just more cheap crap).

    Someone ought to be contacting the FTC, because it looks like a whole lot of very desperate marketing BS to me. It's a direct attempt to mislead consumers. Pathetic!

    But, the marketing BS must be working because...it sure sucked you in!
    Last edited by JTL; 11-24-2007 at 03:25 PM.
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,129
    Kodak is junk. That's just how it is. Even with disposable cameras (which are dominated by Kodak, Fuji, and Polaroid) Kodak is the worst I see on a daily basis. They simply market the name, since kodak used to be the leader of film, without any effort to actually produce a quality product.

    And as said, HD listing are for still pictures, and a 4 megapixel generic anything will produce the same size image.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    82
    I wouldn't say all of Kodak is junk. Kodak has a few good cameras (Z712 IS, Z812 IS). But in this case, you would definitely be better off with the Canon. The Canon has MUCH better image quality, it has image stabilization, manual control, and is just a much better camera.

    HD is 1920x1080 pixels, which is roughly 1 megapixel. So, pretty much any camera is HD! It is a big marketing scam.

    Any Canon camera is good (pretty much). A few Kodaks are good.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,498
    Quote Originally Posted by photography555 View Post
    HD is 1920x1080 pixels, which is roughly 1 megapixel.
    1920x1069 is 1080p...but 1280x720, which is 720p, is part of the HD spec as well and qualifies as HD. All it means in this case is that Kodak are even bigger scammers than you think!
    Last edited by JTL; 11-23-2007 at 09:13 PM.
    Some Gear: Nikon D700; Nikkor AF-S 50 f/1.4 G; Nikkor AF-S 24-85 3.f/5-4.5 G ED; Tamron 28-300 f/3.5-6.3 VC; Nikon SB-800; Velbon Maxi-F; Canon Pixma Pro 9000; Canon S3IS, Canon SD500; Epson 4990; Epson P5000; Wacom Intuos 3

    Main Software: Capture NX2; Adobe PhotoShop CS2; Corel Paintshop Pro X2 Ultimate

    Sold: Canon XT/350D, EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS, EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, Sigma 18-200 OS; Canon ET EF 25II; Kenko Pro 300 DG, Canon 430EX, Canon BG-E3.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •