Kodak Easyshare Z1285 vs. Canon Powershot A580?????

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Pathfinder55, Jun 29, 2008.

  1. Pathfinder55 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #1
    I'm thinking about buying a nice new digital camera for a vacation I am taking soon. So I'm looking at two models of camera's that I think look decent, but I'm not a person that knows alot about digital cameras. Here are some facts about the two...

    Kodak Easyshare Z1285 $200
    • 12.1 MP
    • 5X Optical Zoom 5X Digital Zoom
    • Digital Image Stabilization
    • Can take HD movies

    Link

    Canon Powershot A580 $150
    • 8 MP
    • 4X Optical Zoom 4X Digital Zoom
    • No Image Stabilization

    Link

    The prices are from Circuit City... So am I missing anything here? The Kodak looks like a better camera, but can you suggest a camera that might be cheaper but still a good camera? Please give me some advice here.
     
  2. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #2
    I have found the Kodak on Amazon for $177. So thats not to bad.
     
  3. marioman38 macrumors 6502a

    marioman38

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    Elk Grove, CA
    #3
    May I recommend the Canon Powershot A590IS. At only $155, its hard to get much better than this. Image Stabilization, Face Detection, the new Digic III imager, its packs a lot of bang-for-the-buck!

    Info Here

    Purchase Here
     
  4. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #4
    I looks good, I have read a lot of things about that camera. One question though, what is the difference between digital image stabilization and optical? Optical is the better one right? What is the difference between them?
     
  5. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #5
    Also, that camera does look nice but I was really liking the fact that the Kodak will take HD videos. I really like that feature of this camera.
     
  6. idyll macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    #6
    Always preferred the look of images taken with a Canon myself. don't know what it is.. I LOVE my Canon SD1000
     
  7. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #7
    Have you looked at the movies? Is the quality acceptable? Many times something will look good on a spec sheet but not be what you want. The other thing that caught my eye was the 12MP spec. That is way to many pixels for a small P&S camera. You will get more pixels than you need and likly the low light performance will be poor and some digital "noise too"

    What you pick out a camera think about what you will be shooting and the conditions and the light. Then think about what you will do with the image files. Make large prints? Look at them on a screen, like a computer or TV. Put them on the web? Are you a big Photoshop user?

    You will have to tell us a lot more before anyone can give informed advice.
     
  8. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #8
    Thanks for the questions... I wouldn't need a camera that has great low light shooting, because I wouldn't take many photos at night or things like that. About viewing them, I wouldn't need large prints. They would probably be for looking at them on a screen, computers and a tv. And no I do not use photoshop.
     
  9. bamaworks macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
  10. bking1000 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    #10
    My input:

    Kodak photo quality is always in the lower tier, Canon in the upper. I don't think the best Kodak IQ would be better than the worst Canon. Kodak is just that far behind.

    However, Canon's most glaring omission in the point and shoot line is the lack of something better than 640X480 in video mode. Still, as someone pointed out, the video quality on a frame per frame basis will be clearer and better on the Canon, but you won't get the size you want.

    I realize your price target is 150-200, but if you could stretch up to about $280 (Amazon dips down to $280 on this camera from time to time), the TZ5 would be a fantastic choice. Very versatile. Not as good IQ as Canon, but much, much better than Kodak, and a better HD video quality. Also, menus on the TZ5 are much easier to use than Kodak's.

    I also shoot movies, and would still take Canons standard def video over any Kodak camera. I'm sitting on my current cameras, waiting to see if Canon puts out an HD-capable camera in the fall.
     
  11. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #11
    That TZ5 looks like a combination of everything I am looking for... I looks great.
     
  12. Pathfinder55 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    #12
    I've been watching some HD videos from the TZ5, and they look amazing! I would really like to get this camera, it looks like a good one for me.
     
  13. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #13
    When viewing on an electronic screen (TV or computer) you would be down sampling the images so even a 4 megapixel camera has more pixels than you need as there are no 4MP screens. I think you'd do well with a low-end model. No need to stretch the budget.
     

Share This Page