Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
75 of 75 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
Inexpensive, but flash and design frustrate overall, October 23, 2001
By A Customer
This camera is relatively inexpensive, but it's not all it's cracked up to be. Battery life, flash charging time, image processing time, and poor design all conspire to make this a frustrating item.Battery Life: The only time this camera works as it should (i.e., flash charges in a reasonable time, LCD can be used, etc.) is when used with superior (read "expensive") batteries. There are no rechargeable power options, and when sending photos to your PC, do not attempt to use any power cord but the one HP sells (for a hefty price) or else you run the very real risk of frying the camera. Design/Ergonomics: The camera's design is very poorly executed. It is difficult to hold the camera steadily without placing your fingers over the lens; consequently one is forced to hold the camera in an awkward way. The viewfinder is not well aligned, and has no depth (i.e., your view out the viewfinder can change a good deal as you slide your eye from one side to the other). Finally, the trigger button has a poor feeling--it's requires that you press down too long. Flash Charging: As noted above, with anything but the best batteries, the flash will take a ridiculous amount of time to charge up: upto 25 or 30 seconds. I've missed many a photographic opportunities waiting for the flash to warm up. Furthermore the camera's default setting upon powering on is with the flash enabled, and changing that setting takes several seconds too. Images: This camera does produce good images in most light (although it tends to overplay reds in low light, and underplay reds outdoors). However the time required to process an image between one snapshot and the next is sometimes somewhat slow. Price: Price is the only real strong point for this unit. In retrospect I would have opted up for something more, especially considering that the price of digital cameras seems to be dropping $50 or so every six months.
|
|
|
46 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
How to Conserve Battery life, January 16, 2001
First off, repeat after me, "I will not use the LCD"Seriously, you can extend battery life very well if you perform the following steps. 1. Buy Good (E2 Energizer or Ultra Batteries) 2. Turn off the LCD, if needed only use the Quick Review feature to review photos just after shooting. 3. Get a Power Cable for when you transfer images to your PC. 4. Turn off when your not taking a picture. 5. Use the Flash only when needed. Enjoy! All in all it's well worth the money, I purchased mine as part of a HP Trio combo, (Printer, Scanner, Camera) Love it!
|
|
|
54 of 56 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A more comprehensive review, September 6, 2001
I have had this camera for a couple of months and Im very satisfied with the camera. I have seen many reviews on this camera, most of which are not too favourable. But then there is always a price-performance curve and this camera, for me, fits right in the sweet spot.Firstly, to dispell some myths
- Battery Life
Yes, this camera eats batteries for lunch. I get only 30 or so photos per set of quality alkalines (with instant preview on and a couple of transfers). Despite what HP says, I use rechargable NiMH batteries (1600mAH) and it works great, I get over 80 photos. My advice, get a rechargable
- Photo quality
The quality of the photos are pretty good to me atleast. Dont bother with the low and medium quality. I would recommend to get more memory (I have 128Mb) and use the high quality. It is not worth it to capture in high compression mode.
Note that this is not some cheap camera (like many others in the market). Comparison to the film camera, I would place it along with the regular autofocus canon/minolta brand. Lower than the SLRs and the high end cameras, but better than the regular $50 cameras
The photos are a bit over/under exposed at times. This is due to the single point metering. I always enhance the photos using PSP or some other tool. Increase contrast, clarify and adjust gamma and you have high quality photos that beat or come close to the pros.
I have taken a lot of photos using my Cannon EOS and scanned them at 600dpi (8MPixels) but the quality of this camera easily beats the scanned images (at much lower resolution too).
- Software
The included software sucks. Just use the included driver. I found it is much easier to use the driver rather than a CF reader. You only lose the EXIF information, but it is not worth missing the thumbnails. Use PSP or any other imaging tool to capture and enhance
- Memory
The included 4MB sucks. Go get 64 or 128MB (it costs only $50 for the 128MB). Although the camera starts with 196 photos in fine quality, it is a guess, I get over 250 photos easily (perhaps my photos are more compressible)
- Flash
Included flash is not too good. I takes long to charge and it is on by default. I would discourage you from taking pictures in the dark. Fill-in flash is not too good either. This is a camera for well lit conditions. As with any CCD, low light results in grainy pictures
- Construction
It is a BIG camera, not for your regular pockets. But for $100 what do you expect. Finally,
I would like to see more features, but for the price, I must say, Im impressed. I have retired my film camera and gone fully digital. Maybe in a couple of years, I might get a 3 or 4MP camera, but for now, this camera is good enough for all my photos
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
Saving...
