Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Kodak 6490 vs. Minolta z2 and z3

Reply
Thread Tools

Kodak 6490 vs. Minolta z2 and z3

 
 
Christian Rosenberg Dahm
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
Hello

I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
reviews it gets really bad rating.
Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
and it should help a lot.
The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
overall quality?

What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
other time I zoom....

Kind regards

Christian Dahm
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Larry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
> reviews it gets really bad rating.
> Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
> dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
> focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
> and it should help a lot.
> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
> overall quality?
>
> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
> other time I zoom....
>
> Kind regards
>
> Christian Dahm
>


The Kodak does not have any image stabilization, but its not "Noisy".

The choice should come down to this:

If you can live with the compression level of the jpg files from the 6490,
you will be happy as it does a wonderfull job with color and contrast.

I have found the Kodak easy to hold steady for long periods when using the
full zoom on the lens, but if you are going to do large (bigger than 5x7)
prints, the jpg compression MIGHT show up in the final product if it has
large areas of sky or sea (large ares of solid or similar color) as the jpg
artifacts in those areas can sometimes be troublsome.

Overall, I think the Kodak is a good camera, the only thing keeping it from
being GREAT is the lack of compression options.



--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Robert Barr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004


Christian Rosenberg Dahm wrote:
> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490.


Nose around here for a while:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1011

These aren't formal reviewers; these are just ordinary folks who (for
the most part) are having a gas with their new Kodak cameras. You'll
get a representative opinion from actual users.
 
Reply With Quote
 
ArtKramr
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
>Subject: Re: Kodak 6490 vs. Minolta z2 and z3
>From: Larry (E-Mail Removed)et
>Date: 10/18/2004 9:03 AM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <(E-Mail Removed). com>
>
>In article <(E-Mail Removed)> ,
>(E-Mail Removed) says...
>> Hello
>>
>> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
>> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
>> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
>> reviews it gets really bad rating.
>> Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
>> dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
>> focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
>> and it should help a lot.
>> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
>> overall quality?
>>
>> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
>> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
>> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
>> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
>> other time I zoom....
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Christian Dahm
>>

>
>The Kodak does not have any image stabilization, but its not "Noisy".
>
>The choice should come down to this:
>
>If you can live with the compression level of the jpg files from the 6490,
>you will be happy as it does a wonderfull job with color and contrast.
>
>I have found the Kodak easy to hold steady for long periods when using the
>full zoom on the lens, but if you are going to do large (bigger than 5x7)
>prints, the jpg compression MIGHT show up in the final product if it has
>large areas of sky or sea (large ares of solid or similar color) as the jpg
>artifacts in those areas can sometimes be troublsome.
>
>Overall, I think the Kodak is a good camera, the only thing keeping it from
>being GREAT is the lack of compression options.
>
>
>
>--
>Larry Lynch
>Mystic, Ct.
>


I love my 6490. I get fine 16X20's and the compression ratio is perfect
producing compact files. Image quality is superb. Kodak did everything just
right. Go for it.




Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

 
Reply With Quote
 
Larry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)
says...
> love my 6490. I get fine 16X20's and the compression ratio is perfect
> producing compact files. Image quality is superb. Kodak did everything just
> right. Go for it.
>
>
>
>
> Arthur Kramer
> 344th BG 494th BS
> England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
> Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
> http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer
>
>
>


I must admit, MOST of the pictures I get from mine are superior to some I get
from more expensive gear, but there are the OCCAISIONAL shots that suffer
from compression artifacting. To overlook this fault would be unfair to
someone thinking about buying this camera.


--
Larry Lynch
Mystic, Ct.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan Meyer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
"Christian Rosenberg Dahm" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
> reviews it gets really bad rating.


Have a look at http://www.steves-digicams.com He has reviews of
the cameras and a number of sample photos from each. If you look
at the samples, you'll be able to compare the quality from the different
cameras.

Personally, I think that all of the modern cameras take pretty good
photos. For the most part, the differences between them aren't very
visible to most people.

....
> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
> overall quality?


Kodak and all of the other manufacturers keep developing better
products, partly as a result of feedback from the customers and
partly as a result of new technology. So I think you have to say
that the newer models are better. But a lot of the difference is not
in perceived picture quality. Some of it may be in faster focussing,
better performance in low light, more efficient power management,
faster image processing, etc.

On the other hand, when the new models come out, you can often
get a better price on the old ones. If it meets your needs, the older
one might be just fine.

> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
> other time I zoom....


It's a tough choice. I don't know which one is the best. When I consider
buying a new camera my choices change every day. One has a great
zoom, but another is tiny and fits in a pocket. One has many megapixels
but another has more manual controls. One has a proprietary battery
that might be expensive and hard to replace, but another uses an
expensive memory card technology. And on and on.

Whatever you wind up with, I hope you enjoy it.

Alan


 
Reply With Quote
 
Alf92
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
Christian Rosenberg Dahm a exposť ceci :

> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
> reviews it gets really bad rating.
> Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
> dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
> focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
> and it should help a lot.
> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
> overall quality?
>
> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
> other time I zoom....
>
> Kind regards
>
> Christian Dahm


Kodak : good construction and pretty good photos.
Minolta Z2 &Z3 : cheap construction but good feature for the price, poor
quality photo.

have you seen the Kyocera Finecam M410R ?
very good in each points.
--
Alf92
think before vote !


 
Reply With Quote
 
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?BenOne=A9?=
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-18-2004
Christian Rosenberg Dahm wrote:

> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
> reviews it gets really bad rating.
> Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
> dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
> focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
> and it should help a lot.
> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
> overall quality?
>
> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
> other time I zoom....
>
> Kind regards
>
> Christian Dahm


I have had a DX6490 for 11 months and I've got some stunning 8x10 prints.
All my smaller prints also look fantastic.

The level of JPEG compression is an issue that people often discuss, but I have
not actually noticed any JPEG artificats in my prints so I guess it's not really
a big deal.I have no way to know if more detail would be visible if the JPEG
compression could be reduced.

One important thing to consider is that noise is visible at ISO 200 and I find
ISO 400 unusable because of excessive noise. I usually shoot at ISO 80, but
there have been a couple of occasions where I've wanted to use ISO 200 or 400.
So it's not a very flexible camera.

I find the built-in flash is quite harsh, so i use an external flash and bounce
off the ceiling - I usually only use flash indoors. The bounce flash photos are
really really good. The lighting is very well balanced and I've got some great
portraits of my baby daughter and wife.

The big zoom is certainly a major plus, meaning the camera is very flexible if
you're taking photos outside. You don't have to crop your photos later, losing
valuable resolution, because you can just zoom in on the subject.


--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ron Baird
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-20-2004
Greetings Christian,

I can certainly understand your dilemma.

Personally, when I make a decision about buying a camera or similar product,
I weigh several things. Does the camera I am interested in do what I want
now and offer technology I can grow into in the future. Will the results be
what I want and meet the need of those I will share with but especially for
me. Do I have the funds to get what I want.

Once I have asked these questions and have sorted out the options, I always
go to the store with media and take some pictures of the same scenes in the
store noting the sequence in which I took them, then I return home to review
the results. This way I get to try the cameras and see if I like the way it
feels and if the controls are how I like them etc.

After a review of the above and the resulting images I make my decision.
Maybe this will help you.

Of course, since I have access to Kodak cameras as I work there, I guess I
have an inside track on what they can do and what kind of quality they have
for my needs. Invariably, and not because of my job, I have always chosen
Kodak. In this case, since it appears you are not too concerned about the
cost, I would seriously consider the DX7590. It is an amazing camera for
the money.

Talk to you soon, Christian,

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company




"Christian Rosenberg Dahm" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) m...
> Hello
>
> I'm bying a new camera, and I am thinking of one of the above models.
> But I have read some very different reviews of the Kodak 6490. Some
> says it takes unsharp pictures, and some say it a great camera. Some
> reviews it gets really bad rating.
> Therefor I consider the Minolta z2, but I have seen its pictures and I
> dont like them... To much noise. Most reviews says it has an auto
> focus problem. But I like the video specs. The Z3 has the stabilizer
> and it should help a lot.
> The 6490 is also an older camera, does that have an effect on the
> overall quality?
>
> What is your oppinion, what is the best camera? I dont plan on taking
> movies that much, it is just "Nice to have" I do want the images to by
> clear and without to much noise, even indoor as I plan to take most of
> my pictures here. I also dont want the pictures to be shaky every
> other time I zoom....
>
> Kind regards
>
> Christian Dahm



 
Reply With Quote
 
howard
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-20-2004
6490 ZOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMM

I have one and the ZOOM is great......

go to photosig and look at photos by camera

H



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak Dx6490 and Vivitar 6490 external flash zxcvar Digital Photography 1 07-26-2004 06:48 PM
Kodak 6490 Compression TEST Jim Spencer Digital Photography 19 12-15-2003 01:37 AM
Help with Kodak DX-6490 Rudy Garcia Digital Photography 2 10-23-2003 02:39 AM
Kodak 6490 Larry Caldwell Digital Photography 12 10-16-2003 05:58 PM
HP 945, KODAK 6490 or OLYMPUS 750? Island Wind Digital Photography 0 09-23-2003 02:01 PM



Advertisments