A Low-end Solution For Capturing Daily Moments On Video: The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder!

The Good: It works, It comes with all of the cords and initial batteries.
The Bad: Terrible video quality, Audio is better than the video, No picture card, Battery hog
The Basics: The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder might be a decent digital camcorder to use to get the basics of shooting, but it provides nowhere near the quality serious filmmakers need.


I feel legitimately sorry for my mother-in-law. My mother-in-law and I see one another an average of once a year and it is often accompanied by drama between my wife and her, so we’ve never really gotten to know one another. Even so, my mother-in-law seems very friendly and she tries to find me something for any gift-exchanging holidays we share. I feel sorry for her because I can recognize that I am a hard person to shop for, if you don’t know me or know what I already have. My mother-in-law’s attempt this year was with the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder. The irony here is that my wife, who is a photographer, asked me for a pretty sophisticated high-definition digital camcorder for our anniversary (and I got it for her). So, I’ve now had some experience with both a high-quality and a low-quality digital camcorder.

The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is the latter of the two.

The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is an inexpensive digital camcorder that is ideal for complete novices who are just learning how to use a digital camcorder. I, therefore, am actually the target demographic for this little electronic device. Very light and surprisingly unbreakable for an electronic device with a solid plastic casing, the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is just under 4” from lens to back, 2 1/4" tall and 1 1/2" wide (closed, not counting the nylon and vinyl hand strap – open and with the hand strap, the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is 4 1/2” wide). The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder my mother-in-law gave me is a metallic red, with silver and gray accents (very stylish).

The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder utilizes 3 AAA batteries, which are included. Also included is the camcorder’s mini-USB to USB cord that allows you to connect the device to a computer. What is not included, annoyingly enough, is a video card. Without some form of video storage card (standard 16 pin), the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder will not record anything.

After the batteries and video card are installed, the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is very easy to use. It is so easy to use, in fact, that it does not even come with a lens cover. While the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder does come with a little velvet bag, it is still very vulnerable to getting scratched. The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder features a flip out screen and a microphone on the right side, next to the hand strap. Folding the screen away from the body of the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder provides the user with access to the controls.

The is very easy to use. There is a bright silver button for power and when the unit is active, there is an LED next to it that lights up. On the top of the digital camcorder, near the back, is the “record” button. Pressing it starts the recording, pressing it again pauses it. While the image is being shot, it appears on the screen on the left side of the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder. Below the power button on the left side of the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is a four-key pad that allows the user to easily navigate the command menus on the viewscreen. Most every command it input by hitting the “OK” or “Menu” buttons.

With the 256 MB video card that I was using in the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder, the digital camcorder can make a single 15 minute video or several smaller videos that add up to fifteen full minutes. The resulting video is 2592 x 1944 (5 Megapixel) resolution. The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is a no-frills digital video camera, but it does work. Moreover, it is exceptionally easy to use. The controls on the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder are mostly intuitive; I was able to delete and watch movies I shot without reading the manual on the digital camcorder itself.

Uploading the movies from the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is equally easy. Simply plug the min-USB end of the cord that comes with the camcorder into the port in the back and plug the other end into a USB port on a PC or other USB-driven device. The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is plug-and-play, at least on Windows XP or better systems.

The resulting movies from the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder, however, are generally poor. Ironically, the sound quality is far better than the video quality. The lighting sensor for the Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder must be manually adjusted and for novices, that can be problematic. Virtually all of the movies I made for my wife were both grainy and choppy. When the videos of Myah, our Siberian Husky, were made “full screen” on my computer, they were so grainy as to be almost unrecognizable.

The Cobra Digital DVC910 Digital Camcorder is not bad, but it is not at all for professionals and is barely enough to get a novice started, even if it is a sweet gift!

For other camera device reviews, be sure to visit my reviews of:
Sakar Digital Cam 91372
Nikon Coolpix S60 Digital Camera
Fuji FinePix A200 digital camera

3/10

For other electronics reviews, be sure to visit my Electronics Review Index Page for an organized listing!

© 2012 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Worst Digital Camera Ever? The Sakar Digital Cam 91372 Certainly Gets My Vote!

The Good: Accompanying software is easy to use.
The Bad: Does not take clear pictures, Burns through batteries especially fast, No flash/zoom, Poor picture quality.
The Basics: Despite being incredibly cheap and easy to use, the net result of the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera, are blurry pictures that are not worth uploading.


I pride myself on writing thorough reviews.  I think that an educated customer is the best possible consumer and the more information one has going into any sort of purchase or experience, the better off they will be.  But sometimes, I encounter something with such a crippling flaw as to make any additional information I would write about the subject pointless.  That is exactly where I am on the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera.

A few months ago, my wife and I made a day trip to Albany and while there, we stopped at a Toys R Us.  My wife is very thoughtful and when she saw a digital camera on clearance for $10, she thought it might be ideal for me for my online business; getting products photographed and uploaded quicker.  I've been using my Fuji FinePix (reviewed here!) for the past few years and while that has been working fine for me, I thought it was sweet that she wanted to do something for my business and I was not about to refuse her kindness.  Now, though, I just wish we had our ten dollars back!


The Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera is a very simple, very basic digital camera.  It does not have a flash or a digital screen.  Instead, it has a viewfinder much like the most basic disposable camera and an LCD panel that simply shows what picture number one is on.  The lens is covered by a sliding shield.  When the shield is slid away from the lens, the camera is turned on and all one needs is to do to take pictures is press the button on the top of the camera.


The Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera is powered by two AAA batteries and it is light and simple to use.  It comes with the software needed to upload the images one takes to the computer as well as the USB cable that makes the connection.


That's about all of the patience I have to write about the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera.  The reason for not wanting to detail more about this cheap camera than that is simple.  I took over one hundred pictures with the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera to test it out.  Indoors, outdoors, with artificial light, no matter how I tried to take pictures, the results were universally blurry.  Not one picture out of the hundred came out clear.  When the closest I can get is "remotely clear," it is impossible to recommend anybody buy one.  Given that there is no focus feature on this digital camera, the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera is worthless in that the results are not in focus.


This camera does not produce results that are anywhere near worthwhile.  Those who might be tempted to use a cheap digital camera like this as a party favor or something on the tables at ones wedding to get lots of pictures, it is easy to recommend against.  There is inexpensive and there is cheap and while there are plenty of technical details about the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera that I have omitted, the result is always crappy, blurry pictures that are not worth keeping.


Ultimately, that makes the Sakar Digital Cam 91372 digital camera not worth buying, even for children.


For other digital camera reviews, please check out:
Nikon Coolpix S60 Digital Camera
Nikon P5000 Digital Camera
Nikon L16 Digital Camera

.5/10

For other electronics reviews, please visit my electronics reviews index page here!

© 2011 W.L. Swarts.  May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Why I'm Not Buying The CoolPix S60 Camera!

The Good: Light, Generally good focus, Generally intuitive controls
The Bad: Difficult to get a decent picture, Odd button positions, Not a great number of options.
The Basics: A disappointment for a serious photographer, the Nikon Coolpix S60 camera has a lot of flash, but little functionality to recommend it.


I am not one for taking pictures, but my dad has had a lifelong obsession with photography and my wife often uses our workspace for her photostudio as I type away at my reviews. She has an old camera which has emotional baggage and technical glitches, so more often than not, she uses my Fuji Finepix camera (reviewed here!). As a serious photographer, she needs something better (which is something I'm working on providing her!).

So, today while out looking at cameras, I made a point of checking out the Nikon Coolpix S60 digital camera. After two hours of rigorous testing of the S60, I made a choice that I could have made within five minutes of first picking this camera up; we weren't about to purchase it. It is important to note right from the outset that my partner is a serious photographer and my few forays into photography have left me with a pretty decent grasp of what is required out of a camera and what the results of our photography ought to be. The whole digital revolution with in-home photostudios is not something I rail about, nor do I especially miss film. But there is a powerful difference between serious photography and the Myspace style of instant photography popularized by social networking sites and cameraphones.

The Nikon Coolpix S60 is a glorified cameraphone without the telephone.

First, the basics: the Coolpix S60 is a digital camera and it is a small, light one. In fact, it easily fits in a pocketbook as it is 3 13/16" wide, 2 3/8" tall and only 7/8" thick! This would make it a great camera for tourists if only it were a better camera! The entire back panel of the camera is a touchscreen LCD screen, which makes the analogy to a cameraphone an easy one. The "view details" provides a sufficient level of photogeek information for buyers, so my review shall focus mostly on my experiences with the camera and why it is such an easy "not recommend" for us.

The Coolpix S60 comes in several color options from a metallic raspberry to black to a tan color. This makes it easily a stylish accessory, but no better a product for taking photographs with. With the different color shells, though, it does seem to be trying to squeeze into the same conceptual niche of style whereby new cellphones are released with no significant functional changes, but different color shells. This is supposed to be stylish, slick and fashionable. These are not words great photographers often associate with their cameras. For that, we'd want words like "functional," "durable," and "programmable." With my experiences with the Coolpix S60, the camera failed two of the three of those (I wasn't about to subject it to something where it could get broken and I could not get a refund!).

What Nikon does right with this: the Coolpix S60 comes with everything needed to make the camera work and get ones pictures off the camera. PC users will find the software to upload and manipulate the images one takes on this camera easy-to-use and included in a cd-rom that comes with the camera. The camera also comes with a USB cable to connect the camera to one's computer (there is a USB port on the camera's right side, when holding the camera and looking at the back of it), a strap that loops onto a loop that comes off the camera right below the USB port, there is a lithium-ion battery, a stylus, and battery charger. At its worst, Nikon includes everything needed to actually use this camera right in the box. What it doesn't include is a tripod, which seems to be the most necessary accessory for this particular camera.

Using the camera is fairly easy. There is an on/off button atop the camera that boots up the camera within fifteen seconds of being depressed. Here is the first functional problem with the Coolpix S60; the on/off button is right next to the shutter control (the button one hits to actually take the photograph) and they feel similar, especially when one is moving quickly. Yes, that means that during one's period of adjusting to using this camera there is a better than fair chance that when they attempt to take a photograph, they will instead turn the camera off.

When the camera is on, the back panel lights up as a touchscreen and the pictures may be taken by simply looking at the back of the camera and pressing the button on the top of the camera. Physically pressing the button on top is the only way to take pictures I found - there are no controls on the touchscreen that take pictures so there is no risk while one is programming the camera that it will take unwanted photographs.

Here is the crux of my problem with the Coolpix S60 digital camera: it takes blurry pictures. Granted that there is a period of adjustment while one learns how to use a new camera and that every camera has its quirks, but in the two hours we used the S60, we did not get a single picture - save a series where we used a tripod - where the images were not blurred. This is not only unfortunate, but it is unforgivable for a camera in this price range and a serious design flaw. I attribute it to the camera's lightness and the resistance on the shutter control. My dad trained me to breathe while taking photographs and I had been trained to breathe while firing rifles and pistols, so I understand the principles of breath control while taking pictures. The resistance the shutter control has, at least on new S60s is so significant that when one tries to take a photograph, the image blurs because the camera moves. Even after two hours of pretty constant picture-taking, the S60 did not yield a decent photograph. Ironically, because of the small touchscreen, there were five pictures - in the middle of the photosession, not at the end, which is where one would expect clear pictures if user error were the main contributing factor - where the images appeared clear on the screen, but when the images were uploaded to my computer, my partner and I found the images had enough blur to them that they were unusable.

The fact that the pictures were blurry is somewhat ironic considering that one of the elements of the Coolpix S60 that initially impressed me was the speed of the autofocus and light adjustment. Automatically, the camera will focus with only a few millisecond's delay even when whipping the camera around fairly fast. As soon as I stopped, it seemed like the autofocus was always adjusting and over ninety-five percent of the time, it focused on the object or person I wanted to take the photograph of.

There was a slightly greater lag time when it came to the light adjustment. The camera automatically adjusts to different lighting scenarios, most notably the change between indoor (artificial fluorescent) and outdoor (sun) light. The light adjustment tries to prevent washout and keep colors looking as close to how they do in reality. Herein lies another problem with the Coolpix S60; the touchpad screen was quick to show color adjustment from changes in lighting conditions very quickly, However, when one takes the photograph, I quickly discovered the colors in the final picture seldom matched the colors on the screen before the picture was taken or reality. This was an especially problematic camera for getting whites to render well. In almost all conditions, especially indoors with fluorescent lighting, the camera shifted whites to a more yellow color, so everything looked as if it were nicotine stained. This is a terrible deficiency and not one that was solved by changing the lighting conditions (i.e. flash type) on the camera.

As far as that goes, the controls on the Coolpix S60 are generally intuitive. On the camera, one may zoom in - the zoom is only five times closer, so this is not like a telephoto lens and there is no way to attach a better lens to this camera - and manually adjust the type of flash used. This includes such things as red eye adjustment, a manual use of flash (overriding the camera's sense of proper lighting) or flash off for situations where one does not wish to draw attention to themselves and their photography. All of these controls are easily accessed using menus that pop up when one hits the "Disp" (display) button on the screen with the stylus or one's finger.

But the controls are less intuitive at other moments in problematic ways. When deleting photographs from the Coolpix S60, I did not find a way to wipe the entire memory at once. Instead, I had to go through image by image and delete them. This is time consuming and annoying and while there might be a way to mass execute one's unwanted pictures, it was not intuitive and by the time I wanted to wipe a whole card, I knew I was not going to be keeping this camera. As a result, it seemed foolish for me to check the manual. The point here is that the ease of operation is not always easy.

As for the durability, this seems generally durable, but my testing was not rigorous enough to speak fairly on that. The camera does have a one-year warranty, but I suspect my usage of the camera would have been so low that it would have expired before I ever cashed in on said warranty.

As for programmability, this too was not intuitive. There is a way to program the camera to take photographs on a timer, but the options on the touch screen were, again, not intuitive. When I went through the process, I was able to get the autotimer to run and take a (blurry) picture, but it was a series of steps that did not have options as quick as the flash adjustment to make.

The Coolpix S60 takes .avi movies up to thirty seconds long and those were fair, but not terribly exciting for me.

The Coolpix S60 looks good hanging from tourists' belts, but it doesn't take the ideal photographs, especially under conditions tourists are likely to be in.

For other camera and camera product reviews, please check out my takes on:
Nikon P5000 Digital Camera
Nikon L16 Digital Camera
Canon UL-BPS511 battery

3/10

For other electronics reviews, visit my index page on the subject!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.




| | |

Why She's Getting Rid Of Her Nikon Coolpix P5000 Digital Camera . . .

The Good: Easy to use, Good picture quality, Some decent options, Durability
The Bad: Lack of genuine telephoto options (cannot switch lenses), Energy hog
The Basics: A strong recommend, the Nikon Coolpix P5000 is a wonderful camera to get started on, but has some limitations which prevent it from being an ideal professional camera.


We all have our issues and sometimes, they cloud our reasoning with perfectly good products. In the case of my wife, her issues have taken the physical form of a camera. Her camera is a Nikon Coolpix P5000 that she has had for a few years now and that has some emotional baggage attached to it. Since she told me the story of her Coolpix P5000, I have been looking to replace her camera for her, as she is a serious photographer and she is advancing quickly on the website we met on through the quality of her photography. My search led me to check out the Nikon Coolpix S60 digital camera to keep within the brand, but I quickly jumped ship and wrangled a Canon EOS 10D camera for her. This will allow her to have a quality camera and will give me back my Fuji Finepix camera. I only take photos casually when we are on vacation, so the Finepix is fine for me. But excising the Coolpix P5000 from the house has been a big issue for my wife and it was definitely the right move for us.

But before she got rid of it, I had a few weeks to tinker with and experiment with the Coolpix P5000. Even as an amateur, my use of this camera led me to the conclusion that is an excellent beginner's camera for those who want to take serious, quality pictures. The Coolpix P5000 is a great, highly-automated digital camera which allows budding photographers to get a strong basis in the fundamentals before moving onto a higher end model which affords them the ability to have a wider array of options. For most people, the P5000 will be more than adequate and that made it easy to recommend, even if it has some shortcomings.

The Coolpix P5000 is a digital camera and it serves only the function of being a camera/video camera. This is designed to take quality pictures, so those looking for something simple to take cameraphone quality pictures will find this has far too many options for them. The black base fits easily into one's hand as it is four inches wide, 3 1/8" tall, and a hefty 2 1/2" thick. I actually found I liked the depth as it generally helped protect the lens when I had the cap off; the plastic ring of the lens is the same depth as the hand support on the right side and whenever I carelessly let the camera flop over, the outer ring protected the ring from scratches because of its depth. The Coolpix P5000 comes with a simple strap for around one's neck, which attaches to two brackets on opposite sides of the camera. This model also comes with a lens cap, which is worth mentioning because one needs to remember to remove it to take pictures (this might seem like a "well, duh" thing, but we live in a nation where one of the highest reasons peoples computers aren't working when they call Technical Support is that they have not plugged it in!).

The front of the camera has the lens, which cannot be removed or exchanged with a telephoto lens. It also has the flashbulb and viewfinder, the latter of which seems pointless to me given the bells and whistles this camera possesses. The right side has a forward grip which allows one to wrap their fingers around the front of the camera to hold the camera very stable while taking pictures. The back of the camera contains controls as well as a rotating viewfinder and control panel.

The screen on the back of the camera is an LCD screen, but it does not have touchscreen technology, so manipulating controls is still done with the dials and menu controls to the right of the screen. The viewscreen is only 1 3/4" (diagonal measurements) so it is mostly used to frame shots and a thumbnail view of the pictures one takes. The full flip-out panel is 2 1/2" that the camera details (viewed by clicking the "View Details" button at the top of the review listing) claims to be, but the usable screen area is defined by a LCD screen that is 1 1/2" wide by 1 1/8" tall. The useful thing about the LCD screen is that it flips out, so when the camera is off and in storage, it is protected because the screen is flipped facing the body of the camera. When one is using the Coolpix P5000, they pull the screen to the left on its hinge and the screen may be rotated in the z-axis then to allow one to use it as a viewfinder when one is standing above, in front of or behind the camera! This function is nice when taking shots like family portraits that the photographer wants to be in themselves. They can set the controls, then after the timer function is set, they may leap into frame - confirming their presence by checking out the viewfinder screen while it is facing them.

The Coolpix P5000 succeeds at embodying a camera that is functional, durable and programmable. This camera comes with a rechargeable 7.4V lithium-ion battery and my biggest gripe with the camera is that after two years on the same battery, this recharges to only give the photographer about fifty shots from the Coolpix P5000. The specifications claim that it is good for two hundred-fifty pictures, but in natural lighting, the best I pulled off was seventy-five and with the flash, forty-five before it needed to be recharged again. My partner has a separate battery which allows the user to continue shooting with the camera, but it is not included.

Fortunately, most of what anyone who uses the Coolpix P5000 will need does come in the box. This includes the software to upload and manipulate the images one takes on this camera. There are cd-roms for PC and Mac users which allows one to remove pictures from the card - the standard chip that comes with this camera is a 128 MB chip. The camera also comes with a USB cable to connect the camera to one's computer (there is a USB port on the camera's right side, when holding the camera and looking at the back of it, right next to the alternate power source input), the strap, the lithium-ion battery, and the battery charger. This is nice because Nikon includes everything needed to actually use this camera right in the box.

Using the camera is fairly easy. There is an on/off dial atop the camera that boots up the camera within five seconds of being turned to the "on" position. This causes the lens to extend out from the body of the camera (a valuable thing to know before one does it while pressing the camera to, for example, an aquariums glass side!) and the viewfinder screen to activate. That the camera becomes ready within five seconds makes for a great ability to take photographs that are candid or make use of sudden opportunities when they present themselves. When the camera is turned back to the "off" position, the lens retreats tot he main body of the camera.

In the center of the on/off dial is the shutter control (the button one hits to actually take the photograph). One cannot mix the two up as turning the power on requires a rotating motion and taking a picture is done simply by depressing the button in the center. Taking pictures is often that easy. When the camera is on, the viewscreen lights up and the pictures may be taken by simply looking at the back of the camera and pressing the button on the top of the camera. Physically pressing the button on top is the only way to take pictures I found. It is remarkably easy to take pictures this way because of the automatic controls.

The pictures the camera takes are impressive, though their visibility is minimal on the viewfinder screen after they are taken. The LCD screen keeps the image up for approximately three seconds before it reverts to its viewfinder function and that may be sped up by simply attempting to take another picture by depressing the shudder control. The back of the camera has a simple slide button which allows users to go between picturetaking and reviewing functions.

The Coolpix P5000 comes with the camera set so everything is automatic. As a result, the camera has decent autofocus capacity when one whips around and stops abruptly. In normal daylight circumstances, it provided sharp, beautiful photographs within 1.5 seconds of my movement stopping, sometimes even when I did not think it would. The autofocus is impressive on this model. Similarly, the automatic light adjustment is decent. There was a slightly greater lag time when it came to the light adjustment (though it was never more than three seconds). The camera automatically adjusts to different lighting scenarios, most notably the change between indoor (artificial fluorescent) and outdoor (sun) light. The light adjustment tries to prevent washout and keep colors looking as close to how they do in reality.

One of the most serious problems with the Coolpix P5000 comes in the level of automation. The camera is over-automated for serious photographers. Attempting to take a photograph in lower light became a serious hassle for us - my wife got in on the action and after years of using this camera expressively illustrated why she wanted an upgrade other than her personal issues - because of the camera's lack of manual focus abilities. No amount of troubleshooting or changing of options allowed us to take a photograph where all of the elements were clear in low lighting. The autofocus continued to interfere and picked the wrong depth of field for our intent and this was very frustrating because there was no override. Similarly, if the Coolpix P5000 thinks (based on its light meter) that the image is too dark, it will activate the flash whether one wants it or not. For that, there is a manual override, but because there is no override on the focus, ours continually shot the wrong depth of field. This is seriously problematic for the serious photographer and an annoyance for the casual one.

The controls on the Coolpix P5000 are generally intuitive. Without my wife's help, I was able to figure out how to use the menus within half an hour. As a result, manually altering settings like red-eye reduction, using the autotimer function and turning off the flash are simple using the on-screen controls when the camera is in "review" mode. Similarly, deleting images from the camera's chip was simple enough by manipulating the menu arrows and hitting the "trash" button on the back of the camera. Rather conveniently, this function does not engage when the camera is in picturetaking mode, so there is no real risk of deleting images when one does not wish for them to be deleted. Even in the "review" mode, the camera asks for confirmation before deleting images. This is a very easy camera to learn the basics on!

As well, on the camera, one may zoom in - the zoom is only three and a half times closer, so this is not like a telephoto lens and there is no way to attach a better lens to this camera - and manually adjust the type of flash used. The easy menus allow for easy adjustment on the camera of such things as red eye adjustment, a manual use of flash (overriding the camera's sense of proper lighting) or flash off for situations where one does not wish to draw attention to themselves and their photography with easy to decipher graphics. The controls, however, must be adjusted within a minute of constant use. The Coolpix P5000 has an automatic switch-off function for powersaving, which means that after a minute of non-use (not pushing any buttons, including taking pictures or making setting adjustments) the camera shuts off (though the lens does not retract). This is seriously annoying when one is making significant setting adjustments and figuring out the camera via trial and error because when the camera shuts off, it reverts to the factory defaults and there is no way to disengage the powersave mode or save the adjusted settings!

When deleting photographs from the Coolpix P5000, I did not find a way to wipe the entire memory at once, at least not on camera. Through the hookup to our computer, the chip could be wiped clean, but otherwise, one has to go through image by image and delete them. This is time consuming and annoying.

As for the durability, this is an exceptionally durable camera. My wife was toting this around for years and it looks no worse for wear and she has never had any problems with it. The camera does have a two-year warranty and despite her extensive use, the camera continues to take wonderful photographs and no part of it broke down and required execution of the warranty.

As for programmability, this camera has an autotimer that is easily programmed. Outside that, the programmability is limited to the speed and experience of the photographer and the powersave mode seriously limits the programming options of this camera. Moreover, the lack of a manual focus nullifies some of the benefits of the zoom function.

The Coolpix P5000 takes .avi movies up to thirty seconds long and those were fair, though neither my partner nor I use that function extensively.

Ultimately, the P5000 is an impressive beginner's camera, but serious photographers who need to make adjustments will find too many of the camera's limitations to be a liability. Still, this is an excellent camera to begin on and offers a solid foundation for photographers to learn the basics. Were it not for my partner's baggage with this unit, I'd keep it and upgrade to this from the FinePix! As it is, she's found something better and is much happier with a camera that allows her significantly more control over lighting and telephoto options.

For other camera reviews, please check out my takes on:
Nikon L16 Digital Camera
Fuji FinePix A200 Digital Camera

7/10

For other electronics, please check out my index page on the subject for an organized listing!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.


| | |

Exceptionally Addy, Popular Photography Reads More Like Popular Photography Advertisements!

The Good: Easy-to-read, Generally interesting articles (what there are of them), Decent photography (of course!)
The Bad: Very high in advertisements, Sometimes overly simple
The Basics: A generally decent magazine about photography, photographic equipment and technique is brought down by the repetitive nature and sheer ad volume.


As I continue to read magazines for review and my wife gets more into photography, I feel likeI have been learning quite a bit of late. In the case of the photography, I am learning a lot about techniques and the sheer luck that comes from being the right person in the right place with the right equipment at the right time. As far as magazines go, a good friend clued me in to looking at advertising volume and considering what that means for the overall magazine's quality and bias. So, when I sat down to read Popular Photography, I was entirely prepared for exceptional pictures and detailed accounts of how to achieve them. Instead, I found myself more frequently disappointed by the sheer volume of advertisements.

Popular Photography is a monthly magazine that is glossy, full-sized and boasts being the "World's Largest Imaging Magazine." While my wife has several copied about the house, I used the September 2009 issue for my review. The magazine - which degenerates into a catalog for a distributor over the last six pages - is a one hundred page full color magazine focused on photographic technique. At least, that is what the magazine is supposed to be.

What Popular Photography actually is is a series of small, simple-to-read advertisements squeezed in between advertisements for photographic equipment and events. Out of the one hundred pages of magazine, forty-one are full-page advertisements with an additional three pages (at least) occupied by column or half-page advertisements. This is an obscene amount of press taken up with paid advertisements, especially for a magazine with a $4.99 cover price. Readers are paying for almost half the pages to be filled with advertisements. This is utterly ridiculous and a pain to trudge through with the reading. In fact, early in the magazine Popular Photography includes the same advertisement as I found in American Photo where the ad was formatted to look like an article. Problematically, Popular Photography includes three such advertisements where the ads mimic the content of the magazine.

As far as the substance of the magazine goes - what there is of it - Popular Photography is surprisingly light, though the writers are clearly knowledgeable. The magazine is a very regular collection of articles (columns and how-to bits are very consistent issue to issue). The articles are remarkably simple and are written in a professional manner and the staff of Popular Photography is very consistent and they write with a knack for ease of comprehension. The magazine has three features as well as three groupings of columns: "How-To," "Tests," and regular "Departments."

As the name suggests, "How-To" are a series of regular guides on improving one's photographic technique. Each month, the magazine provides detailed guides on shooting in nature, creating stylish or effective lighting, as well as new columns for helping digital photographers make the most out of their digital photography software. They also deal with similar problems in the "Tips From A Pro," "You Can Do It" and "Photo Doctor" columns. Each of these columns include vibrant color pictures and issues that deal with software also include the screen shots of control panels to help the topic become that much more comprehensible. So, for example, the Digital Toolbox column includes the before and after images of the picture being modified as well as the console shots of the specific controls used to make the changes to the picture. The writing in these columns is very detailed, but assumes some measure of competence and comprehension with photographic and computer techniques. There is also an innate assumption that there is a common sense of taste among photographers, which is an obvious fallacy. So, for example, with the September 2009 Digital Toolbox column, the differences between the "before" and "after" are negligible and seem much more the result of people with finicky tastes as opposed to an initial failure on the part of the photographer. Even so, the writing that accompanies the article is clear with the intent and the process of creating the altered image. Even some of the more vague columns, like "Picture Doctor" are informative and direct in the same way as the more technical columns. As expected, the photography in Popular Photography is stunning.

The "Tests" Columns are a series of reviews, written by professional photographers who know the picayune differences between the various forms of photographic equipment. In addition to the "Hands On" section which simply details how to get the best out of equipment, there are tests of multiple cameras and multiple lenses for different cameras in each issue. So, after the "Hands On" section explores real-world testing of two types of cameras, there are more standard and analytical reviews of two cameras and two additional lenses. These reviews are tightly-written, precise and quite professional. They are not, however, intended for amateurs. As one who is not overly familiar with photographic equipment or jargon, I was fairly well taken aback by the sheer quantity of jargon and the precise language used by the writers of the camera reviews. These are reviews for those who know what all of the specific terms are, not those trying to figure it out. As such, this is an incredible resource for those who are professional-grade photographers or those looking for equipment to match their shooting style.

Then the magazine is populated by the usual Departments. Popular Photography opens with letters from readers, which involve everything from the usual praise of the magazine to readers helping to solve other photographers' problems with specific issues. "The Goods" column is a regular series of recommendations by the editors for photographic equipment (both for taking and displaying photos) which are thumbnail sketches of the products and why they are worth buying. Similarly, the "High 5" are five specific products (like flashes) prioritized from the best down for the month. Famous and staff photographers write about how they managed to get specific memorable photographs and often include alternate shots and why they did not select them for the impact they were looking for. These columns become a bit repetitive (and interchangeable with some of the "How-To" columns when they get into things like "Software Problem Solver," which helps readers correct issues with using alteration software for their digital images.

The departments are not all droll or repetitive, though; each month a reader's work is featured in the "Your Best Shot" and many of those photographs are innovative and different from anything else within the magazine's pages.

Then there are the magazine's feature articles. The articles are a little more in depth (4 - 6 pages each as opposed to a single page each) and feature methods of getting great photographs (themes this month included children and animals) as well as yet another equipment guide. The equipment in the feature section, though, tends to be less of a review and more of a user's guide with more of a bent toward arguing why the specific type of uses of the equipment is best. So, for example, this month's was generally biased toward affordable equipment and why the items were the best of the cheap. So, for example, an aluminum case was recommended for those who travel a lot because of the additional protection metal affords one's equipment. Unlike the other two features, the "Cheap Shots" article was written in digest form with an eye to space and brevity. This is somewhat unfortunate as it blends in with the magazine's many advertisements. The tips in the other two features on how to get the best out of photographing animals and children (someone at the magazine has a sense of humor, I suspect!) are useful and easy to understand, even for non-photographers.

Ultimately, though, I could not get by the magazine's high cover price in relation to the sheer volume of advertisements. Popular Photography is entirely average and compared to other photography magazines offers a lower overall value. Instead, one must mine through the ads to find anything remotely substantial. And while it is present, others in the field are doing it better with fewer advertisements or for less overall cost. That drives this otherwise average magazine down.

For other magazine reviews, please check out my takes on:
American Legion
Madison County Eagle
Country Woman

5/10

For other magazine reviews, please be sure to visit my index page for an organized listing by clicking here!

© 2011, 2009 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.
| | |

Why Not To Buy The Nikon Coolpix L16!

The Good: Easy to use
The Bad: Low quality images, Dismal battery drain, Poor zoom, Unimpressive options.
The Basics: A very disappointing digital camera, the Nikon L16 has far too many issues to be worth the time of a professional or anyone who wants their pictures to appear professional.


I often find myself considering how a good series of objective tests can truly make for a valuable enough evaluation. After all, if a product is lousy to begin with, who cares how durable it is over the years?

As my wife searches for a new camera due to the untimely demise of the one I worked for earlier this year, I have been accompanying her hither and yon to find one that works to meet her needs and that we can afford. We still have our Fuji FinePix camera (reviewed here!), but my wife is a serious photographer and that is not a serious camera. If there is anything that being married to a professional photographer has taught me it is that there are a lot of crap cameras in the world right now. The current trend in photography is more style over substance and the triumph of convenience over picture quality. In other words, if it looks cool, works like either a cameraphone or one of the more advanced MP3 players (like the iPod Touch), then it is “in.” These, however, tend to produce poorer images in-camera and when uploaded from the camera. But then, cameras like the Nikon L16 Digital Camera are not intended for professionals. Ironically, after my partner moved on from this one to look at others, I stuck with it longer and was overjoyed to see a member of the camera’s target demographic – 16 – 24 year-old female – turn up her nose at this.

First, the basics: the Nikon L16 is point-and-shoot digital camera, intended for tourists, family photographers or other non-professional photographers. Even for those users, though, it is fairly inadequate, as my hour of testing the camera proved to me. The L16 is a fairly discrete digital camera which as it is 3 3/4" wide, 2 1/2" tall and 1 1/8" thick! This is also very light (under one pound, even with the batteries in) and the back panel of the camera is an LCD screen. Having now had months of experience with my iPod Touch (reviewed here!), I am getting used to touchscreens and for the first time ever, I found it odd to be working on a little screen that was not a touchscreen. Outside its thickness, this does seem very much like a cameraphone and it is clear that Nikon is trying to go for that demographic with the L16.

The Nikon Coolpix L16 is silver, which is pretty neutral for a color shell and I did not see any other colors for this particular camera. This was the only way I found that Nikon did not seem to be going after the younger non-professional crowd with this Coolpix. Like every other Nikon I have had experience with (so far), the Coolpix L16 comes with everything needed to make the camera work – except the batteries - and get ones pictures off the camera. PC users will find the software to upload and manipulate the images one takes on this camera easy-to-use and included in a cd-rom that comes with the camera. The camera also comes with a USB cable to connect the camera to one's computer (there is a USB port on the camera's right side, when holding the camera and looking at the back of it) and a strap that loops onto a loop that comes off the camera right below the USB port.

The lack of batteries leads me to my first serious beef with the Nikon Coolpix L16 digital camera. This is a huge battery hog. When my partner and I went into test this camera, we turned it on and two pictures later, the power failed. The shop owner gladly broke out some fresh batteries so we could continue testing with it. While the “specs” claim that one gets 180 photographs out of a pair of batteries, I made it ninety-three pictures before the “low battery” light came on and only another twenty before the second pair of batteries failed. Rather unfortunately, the time element here is what concerns me even more. The ninety-three pictures took about an hour to take. Those last twenty took an additional twenty minutes. As the batteries get drained, this camera takes a ridiculous amount of time to reload. As a result, those looking to capture the moment with candid’s will often find this lags far too much to be of any real use.

Using the camera is fairly easy. There is an on/off button atop the camera that boots up the camera within twenty seconds of being depressed (though when the battery is low, it can take almost a minute). Rather annoyingly, the on/off button is right next to the shutter control (the button one hits to actually take the photograph) and they feel similar, especially when one is moving quickly. Several times during my tests, I turned the camera off as opposed to shooting a picture. The L16 was more than a little irksome in that way, though one suspects with more time, this is the sort of thing one adjusts to.

When the camera is on, the back panel lights up as a viewscreen and the pictures may be taken by simply looking at the back of the camera and pressing the button on the top of the camera. Physically pressing the button on top is the only way to take pictures with the Coolpix L16. Beyond the ease-of operations, it was all detractions for me with the Coolpix L16. The pictures I took with the L16 were homogenously blurry (and I’ve taken pictures for years, so it’s not the fundamentals of breathing that was screwing me up this time). Instead, the L16 seemed to be very mobile in my hand, almost too light. As I touched the control on the top of the camera, the camera tended to shake. I figured this might be user error, until I used a tripod for stability and discovered that the images still came out as blurry. In some of the pictures, this was just minor blur around the edges, but all of the pictures were unable to create a perfectly vivid image when we uploaded them to the store’s computer for that test.

In addition to blurry, the Nikon Coolpix L16 took a drastic step down in quality for me with the basic functions of the autofocus and the light adjustment. Other Coolpix models I have tried, most notably the S60, had an incredible speed to the focus and light adjustment, so moving around and moving from inside lighting conditions to outdoor sun brightness were exceptionally easy. The Coolpix L16, on the other hand, was just the opposite. The autofocus seemed determined not to stop looking for a better quality image, which was irksome. On almost every quick point and shoot test I performed, I watched the image become clear and focused, then move past the place it was focused before working its way back to the ideal position. At the beginning, I thought it was quirky and a little annoying to have a 2 – 3 second autofocus lag. Then, it just became troublesome as the batteries wore down.

As for the light adjustment, there was an even greater lag time and there were some conditions the L16 did not adjust sufficiently. The camera automatically adjusts to different lighting scenarios, most notably the change between indoor (artificial fluorescent) and outdoor (sun) light. The light adjustment tries to prevent washout and keep colors looking as close to how they do in reality. After several seconds, the L16 could get the colors in the store OR outdoors correct, but not both. So, for example, one of my most telling test pictures had a photograph into the snow-filled parking lot. The snow outside looks right and real, but the walls inside (bright white, lit be fluorescents), were a light brown (sepia, tan) color. Even some of the images I took either in the store or outside that looked fine on the camera did not look as good on the computer. Frequently, the colors in the final picture seldom matched the colors on the screen before the picture was taken or reality. This was an especially problematic camera for getting whites to render well. In almost all conditions, especially indoors with fluorescent lighting, the camera shifted whites to a more yellow color, so everything looked as if it were nicotine stained. This is a terrible deficiency and not one that was solved by changing the lighting conditions (i.e. flash type) on the camera. As a result, users not especially fluent in post-shooting manipulations will find the L16 unbearable.

Beyond that, the controls on the Nikon Coolpix L16 are generally intuitive, at least for those used to manipulating physical buttons to get results. On the camera, one may zoom in - the zoom is only four times closer, so this is not like a telephoto lens and there is no way to attach a better lens to this camera - and manually adjust the type of flash used. This includes such things as red eye adjustment, a manual use of flash (overriding the camera's sense of proper lighting) or flash off for situations where one does not wish to draw attention to themselves and their photography. All of these controls are easily accessed using menus that pop up when one hits the “Menu” button on the camera’s back (to the right of the viewscreen) with one's finger.

Like some of the other Nikon Coolpix products, other controls are less intuitive from the menu, most notably the delete function. When deleting photographs from the Coolpix L16, I did not find a way to wipe the entire memory at once. Instead, I had to go through image by image and delete them. This is time consuming and annoying and while there might be a way to mass execute one's unwanted pictures, it was not intuitive and by the time I wanted to wipe a whole card, I knew I was not going to be keeping this camera. As a result, it seemed foolish for me to check the manual. The point here is that the ease of operation is not always easy.

As well, the more I have used digital cameras, the more I have been concerned by camera memory and the Coolpix L16 only has 24 MB worth of image capacity, so upgrading the card immediately is pretty much a necessity. Even at the lowest resolution setting, the L16 held less than two hundred images and the quality was terrible. At the highest resolution, the card only holds about a dozen pictures and even those were pretty consistently blurry, so it’s a crapshoot either way.

As for the durability, this seems generally durable, but my testing was not rigorous enough to speak fairly on that. The camera does have a one-year warranty, but I suspect my usage of the camera would have been so low that it would have expired before I ever cashed in on said warranty. The programmability was also not intuitive. There is a way to program the camera to take photographs on a timer, but the options on the viewscreen were not intuitive. When I went through the process, I was able to get the autotimer to run and take a (blurry) picture, but it was a series of steps that did not have options as quick as the flash adjustment to make.

My excessively long preamble at the beginning of this review, as well as this conclusion, are meant to serve a single purpose: as I gain more and more experience with digital cameras, I’ve come to understand what flies and what doesn’t much better than I did when I wrote prior reviews. So, while my Finepix A200 was average at the time, it is decidedly below average now. For serious photographers and those who want a step up from their cameraphones, my ultimate judgment on the L16 is that it can be avoided. There are vastly better products on the market and the photographer that wants decent digital pictures will likely find better even in the same price range.

For other electronics, please check out my reviews of:
iBud Earphones
Playstation 3
TNT! Kyocera Cell Phone

3/10

For other electronics reviews, please visit my index page!

© 2010 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |

Point, Shoot, Hope (Or Check), The FinePix A200 Digital Camera Is Good For Beginners

The Good: Makes decent videos, Generally good photographs, Light, Convenient screen allows photographer to see pictures instantly
The Bad: Goes through batteries rapidly, Non-flash photos are almost universally blurry, Recharge time, Not professional-quality.
The Basics: The FinePix A200 is an affordable, durable, efficient and easy-to-use digital camera for those who are trying to capture memories, not make expert photographs.


It's always amazing to me when I discover a product I've owned for quite a while that I haven't reviewed. Then again, digital cameras seem to be one of those products that continually change and evolve, so if you don't review it when they first come out, I suppose most people figure that it's not worth reviewing. That may be true for: 1. People living in the past (when things essentially disappeared from the market the moment they left the store - i.e. before the strong secondary market of the Internet), 2. Professionals who are constantly upgrading, and/or 3. those intimidated by initial prices or hope to cash in quick on making reviews that get big fast. I decided it was time to sit down with my FinePix A200 and write a digital camera review for those who are not technically oriented and are looking for a good camera.

There is a man in this life who I envy quite a bit and that takes a lot. I've met virtually everyone I've ever wanted to as far as celebrities go, but there's one obscure writer who impresses me for two reasons. First, Thomas Pynchon is an amazing novelist. His book V remains one of the classics of American literature that is both brilliantly written and difficult to discuss without devolving into "You just have to read it, I can't describe it" type arguments. Second, Thomas Pynchon has not been photographed since he had his military pictures taken back in the 50s. There you go kids, now you get another joke from The Simpsons (Pynchon appeared on The Simpsons animated as a character in a suit with a bag over his head with a big question mark for the face). I loathe having my picture taken and were it not for my recent political outings, I think I might have successfully followed Pynchon's mold (if only my novels sold so well!). So, I understand the desire some people have to not have their pictures taken. In fact, I generally don't like taking pictures either.

At least, I didn't like taking pictures until I was given the FinePix A200 digital camera. Now, I'm about as annoying as anyone with a digital camera. You know, taking pictures all of the time. I have a lot of fun taking pictures with this because it's relatively easy, the controls are intuitive, and the camera has a screen on the back that allows the user to see exactly what they have photographed.

First, the technical garbage for those who need all that hard information. The FinePix A200 is a 4" wide, 1 1/2" thick, 2 1/2" tall silver-gray digital camera that can't weigh more than a pound even with batteries in it (sorry, I don't have a postal scale anymore). The LCD screen on the back is a little over an inch wide by less than an inch tall, but it provides bright, clear images that reflect the exact photographs that will be taken with the camera. The top of the camera has the button that shoots the pictures, simply by depressing it and that is circled by a knob that changes the camera between the three modes: picture, viewing, and movie. The camera turns on and off with a slide power button on the top. It's very difficult to accidentally turn this camera off, which is nice for those taking active photographs.

The back has a button that allows the photographer to engage the digital zoom and the two buttons that come into play when manipulating the menus on the camera screen. The nice thing about this camera is the controls are intuitive. One of my engineer friends often tells me that a device is well-made when the operation of the device is self-evident. For the FinePix A200, that is largely the case.

For example, when in the picture mode, the menu options allow the photographer to easily change the picture quality between 2M, 1M and .3M photographs with a counter of how many pictures the camera has left at each quality level. As a layperson, I've found little functional difference between the 2 and 1M pictures, though the 16 MB card that comes with the camera goes a long way with the .3M photos. The .3M photos are more grainy when developed, so there is a significant quality difference between the .3M photos and the 1M ones. At this point, you might be asking what the "M" stands for. No doubt some technical wizard will come and correct me, but I'm guessing and saying it's the megapixel resolution (this is a layperson's review, intended to educate common people on how this camera functions - not necessarily professionals!) because the front of the camera says 2.0 Megapixel. And because it is the resolution and file size that differs drastically between the different photo types.

The on-screen menu also allows the user to change the flash settings on this camera. Without reading the manual, I was able to deduce what the flash settings were between: automatic, no flash, and red eye flash. The no flash setting has come in handy when I've wanted to discreetly take pictures in natural light when I was not supposed to. As for the red eye reduction, this sends a flash before the flash with the photograph in order to reduce the chance that the picture will have red pupils for the subject. I've found this function works about half the time. The first flash always goes off, but actually reducing red eye happens only about half the time.

This is a pretty wonderful point and shoot digital camera. It takes pictures and when the batteries are brand new, the recharge time is fairly fast (about three seconds). As the batteries get lower, the recharge time drops significantly and I've had to wait more than ten seconds for the camera to allow me to take a second picture before. The nice thing is right above the viewscreen - which shows exactly what will be photographed - there is an LCD that changes from orange to green when the camera is on and ready to photograph.

As well, on the screen, there is a little shaky hand that tells the photographer when the camera is not stable enough to take pictures that will not be anything but blurry. That's convenient. The camera is convenient in that it will allow one to take blurry pictures (if that's what you want), but it lets you know in advance that it will turn out poorly.

Turning the dial around the shoot button allows the camera to switch between photograph and view (what's on the camera) mode and movie mode. In the view mode, photographers may see exactly how their picture turned out and the low-res photo on the viewscreen is convenient for reference purposes and offers a rather true image that allows the photographer to decide whether or not to reshoot their picture. As well, activating the menu here allows the photographer to easily delete individual photographs or the whole chip's worth in order to free up space for more pictures. That's convenient and easy to do; in fact, the on-screen directions walk the user through the process.

The camera must also be in this mode when uploading photographs to a computer. The FinePix A200 comes with a disc with software to make it easy to upload your photos from this camera to your p.c. The software is for the Windows (98 and up) platforms and it also comes with the USB cable to connect the camera to your computer. The directions and software are easy to understand and install. After the first use of the software that comes with the camera, I was able to upload my pictures consistently. As well, in a crunch, there are devices that allow the chip from the camera to be plugged almost directly into the computer and read (not included in this product!).

The pictures upload easily into whatever folder you want them in and from there you may save them on your hard drive or make photographic prints. I've found that the 1M setting yields wonderful 5X7 photographs. Only the 2M setting has yielded truly lifelike 8X10s for me.

This is a very durable little camera. I've had mine for over four years now and taken it (literally) thousands of miles and there is not a scratch on it. It's been dropped, tossed, stuck in bags, etc. and it has held up amazingly well.

The last function is the one I've used least: this camera allows the user to take 30 second movies. When the dial is on the movie move, simply depressing the "shoot" button will start the camera capturing everything that is happening at 10 frames per second. The camera conveniently offers the user a countdown to let them know when the movie has expired. This has been especially convenient for me in some of my endeavors. For example, when I saw James Doohan at one of his last signings, I was able to get a film of him signing a uniquely numbered plate, in essence creating a flawless certificate of authenticity. In that case, the FinePix A200 proved its worth by recharging fast enough from making the first 30 second movie to allow me to shoot a second movie to finish the process (Doohan signed exceptionally slowly before his demise). The camera was discreet enough and functional enough to allow me to do my thing.

In fact, the only function I find truly bothersome on this camera is the digital zoom. When objects are at a distance, the digital zoom does almost nothing to bring them into better view. So, for example, when in Colorado for the first time in 2006, I was thrilled to see prairie dogs (don't laugh, I'm from New York State and prairie dogs are cute!). Trying to use the digital zoom was useless and I could not get close enough to them to get a good picture without scaring them off.

Outside that, the FinePix A200 is a great camera for an amateur. I'm rating this as an "average" camera because I know the difference between this and the big boys. This is not something that allows the user to change lenses, experiment with shutter speeds or be terribly creative. It's a point and shoot camera. I can say it takes pictures that look great whenever I view them on my monitor (click here for that review!) and even when I put them on a video disc and browse through them on my HD-TV.

If only it didn't burn through batteries so quickly . . .

In all seriousness, if you remove the batteries from the camera whenever you are not using the camera, the batteries do not drain very fast at all (I can fill the card about four times at 1M resolution on a pair of batteries if I do this). However, removing the batteries brings up an annoying opening menu that requests the user set the date and time each time the batteries are removed. This menu is easily disregarded by simply hitting one of the buttons on the back of the camera, but it can be a nuisance in situations when speed is important.

Because of the strong aftermarket for products like this, it ought to be fairly easy to find a FinePix A200 easily and relatively inexpensively. If my experience is anything, even used, this camera will provide years of use for amateurs. It's great for getting people into photography and capturing memories.

For other layperson reviews of similar electronic devices, please check out my reviews of:
iPod Touch
Kyocera TNT! cell phone
Acer Aspire 5532 laptop computer

5/10

For other electronics reviews, please visit my index page by clicking here for a concise listing!

© 2010, 2007 W.L. Swarts. May not be reprinted without permission.



| | |