Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
22 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
(...), November 18, 2001
(...) I thought the build quality was rather good; it felt solid; ive dropped it a couple of times and it's been OK. Pick up the Konica email and see how flimsy and plastic THAT is! Also for your shekels you get USB connectivity and a rather neat pouch that has a canny belt loop attached . Spend £400 on Canon IXUS V, as a friend of mine did, and you dont even get a case! How bad is that? Also its childs play to use from the off (unlike the IXUS), although you have to get used to the fact that its so small, learning where you can put your fingers, not covering the lens etc.
OK, its 'only' truly .3 megapixls but i needed it for a web business to take photos of properties and ive found it perfectly adequate.
OK you have to keep your hands still for a while after clicking , BIG DEAL!! (...) I admit it can be frustrating if u want to capture 'the moment' and the moment has passed and uve missed it because the camera 's still making its mind up. (...) OK, so what we're saying is DON't buy this if you've got Parkinsons.
For me the main benefit is its size; you can have it on your belt in any situation and you don't even know its there, no bulky camera round your neck swinging around. No big camera case saying "steal me, steal me" to any opportunist thieves lurking around. Its not mega expensive so you don't worry about damaging/losing it the same way as an IXUS or Nikon coolpixThe software it comes with OK; its easy to correct overexposure/too hot flash etc with software for those complaining about that (bits of scotch tape? what are you on about? Stand further back from the subject and use the zoom function (...) It even tells you that in the instructions. (...)
The battery IS a pain, they're not cheap and they're not rechargeable ( i thought lithium batteries were supposed to last a long time?). What's the point of saving £/$ on film and developing if u have to fork out every week on batteries? I think the optical zoom is greedy with the juice. Incidentally an OPTICAL zoom not digital as you so often get at the cheaper end of the market.
Ive even managed some 'arty' shots with it; its taken shots where 'normal' cameras would have completely failed me [how many times have I picked up my pictures from a developers in the past only to be totally disappointed with the grainy, underexposed results with those 'quality' stickers all over them]
You don't need to ponce about with memory sticks , cards, card readers (all more expense) because there's easily enough 'onboard' memory to last until you can get to a USB point on your laptop or internet cafe etc.
(...) It would be great if they upped the true pixel rating, included a rechargeable battery option and included a lens cover. My only concern is the report (...) that the LCD display cracked when left in the car but I know the inside of cars get pretty hot (Ive melted a couple of floppy disks in mine and thats in England!)It reminds me of something from Q Branch in James Bond and Im well impressed.
|
|
|
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
What a ...?, July 27, 2001
A friend let me borrow this camera to test it. My verdict was "Return this piece of ...". The whole camera stinks of low quality. Zoom, lenses, sensor, casing etc is of inferior quality. Picture taking is slow and cumbersome and the pictures ... This is a JamCam with zoom!! This is really a 0.3 MP camera, 1.0 is by interpolation. Any imaging software can do that. No need for a camera to do that. We compared the pictures with pictures from my Canon A20 using the resolution. There is a huge difference in quality. Do yourself a favour and get a decent camera. Concord EyeQ is small and cheap. It's also ... wasted. If money is the issue look at Kodak DC3200, DC215, Olympus D100 ... There are a number of decent digicams for $200-250. All of them are a better choise.
|
|
|
16 of 17 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
WORTHLESS, June 1, 2001
THE ONLY ADVANTAGE THIS CAMERA HAS TO OFFER IS IT'S SIZE. TOO MANY DISADVANTAGES TO MENTION. HERE ARE JUST A FEW: 1)LCD BUILT INSIDE THE CAMERA INSTEAD OF THE OUTSIDE. 2)TERRIBLE PICTURES WITH RECOMENDED SETTINGS(VERY BLURRY). 3)NIGHT SHOOTINGS ARE TERRIBLE (FLASH IS USELESS). 4)TO SNAP A PICTURE, YOU HAVE TO HOLD THE BUTTON DOWN FOR ABOUT FIVE SECONDS BEFORE IT CAPTURES THE IMAGE YOU ARE SHOOTING. IT IS NOT WORTH THE MONEY! DON'T LET IT'S SMALL SIZE CAPTIVATE YOU .... I PERSONALLY WILL NOT RECOMEND THIS CAMERA TO ANYONE.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
