Kodak DX4530 alarm bells ringing?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by NCK, Apr 10, 2004.

  1. NCK

    NCK Guest

    Hi all,

    Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap and
    not much is said against it.

    However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it saved
    were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?

    Neil
     
    NCK, Apr 10, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. NCK

    Ron Hunter Guest

    NCK wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    > this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    > macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap and
    > not much is said against it.
    >
    > However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it saved
    > were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    > only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    > images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >

    Neil,
    Yes, it only saves .jpg files, but you should check some sample
    photos and make your own decision about quality.

    http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/dx4530_samples.html

    I think you will find these pictures are quite adequate for your
    immediat needs. Remember, this is a $300 camera, so don't expect
    pictures of SLR quality.
     
    Ron Hunter, Apr 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. NCK

    Don Guest

    What you lose with JPEG is not so much quality as some of the ability to
    manipulate the results later. By saving in a format that preserves the full
    color depth, such as RAW or 16-bit TIFF, you can often recover marginal
    shots that you might otherwise throw away. For the vast majority of your
    pictures you probably won't see the difference. I would by no means
    classify the images as "going to be poor."

    BTW, Kodak was one of the early pioneers in production of digital focal
    planes, and of course has some experience in imagery in general :)

    Don



    "NCK" <> wrote in message
    news:e6Tdc.167$...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    > this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    > macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap

    and
    > not much is said against it.
    >
    > However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it

    saved
    > were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    > only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    > images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >
     
    Don, Apr 10, 2004
    #3
  4. The reviewer must not have figured out how to change the JPEG
    compression/quality. A low compression 5 MP JPEG is definite;y somewhere
    betweem 2 amd 3 MB. If it really is 800K I would be very surprised. The
    Kodak web site does give file sizes for some reason.


    Now that I own a 6 MP SLR I can tell you that:-

    1. 5 MP is plenty of resolution. If you print 6x4 or 7x5 3 MP is plenty,
    it's only when you enlarge beyond that, that you need more.
    2. RAW mainly helps if need to correct a bad picture or perhaps you want
    save 16 bit TIFFs. Most of us end up with JPEGs to print out and if the
    picture is OK in the first place RAW doesn't add anything to it.
    3. On big advantage of DLSR is being able to change lenses. For many a 5 or
    6 MP DigiCam with 10 X zoom would be just as good. There are reasons other
    than focal length to change lenses of course.
    4 The generally larger sensor size of DSLRs affects some fundamental optics.
    I am not an expert in this area by my experience tells me is that DSLRs can
    produce pictures with a narrower depth of focus. I also think that barrel
    distortion was more apparent on my earlier DigiCam.

    Dick Campbell



    "NCK" <> wrote in message
    news:e6Tdc.167$...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    > this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    > macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap

    and
    > not much is said against it.
    >
    > However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it

    saved
    > were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    > only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    > images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >
     
    Dick Campbell, Apr 10, 2004
    #4
  5. NCK

    phillean Guest

    On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 20:28:56 GMT, "Dick Campbell" <>
    wrote:

    >The reviewer must not have figured out how to change the JPEG
    >compression/quality. A low compression 5 MP JPEG is definite;y somewhere
    >betweem 2 amd 3 MB. If it really is 800K I would be very surprised. The
    >Kodak web site does give file sizes for some reason.
    >
    >
    >Now that I own a 6 MP SLR I can tell you that:-
    >
    >1. 5 MP is plenty of resolution. If you print 6x4 or 7x5 3 MP is plenty,
    >it's only when you enlarge beyond that, that you need more.
    >2. RAW mainly helps if need to correct a bad picture or perhaps you want
    >save 16 bit TIFFs. Most of us end up with JPEGs to print out and if the
    >picture is OK in the first place RAW doesn't add anything to it.
    >3. On big advantage of DLSR is being able to change lenses. For many a 5 or
    >6 MP DigiCam with 10 X zoom would be just as good. There are reasons other
    >than focal length to change lenses of course.
    >4 The generally larger sensor size of DSLRs affects some fundamental optics.
    >I am not an expert in this area by my experience tells me is that DSLRs can
    >produce pictures with a narrower depth of focus. I also think that barrel
    >distortion was more apparent on my earlier DigiCam.
    >
    >Dick Campbell
    >
    >
    >
    >"NCK" <> wrote in message
    >news:e6Tdc.167$...
    >> Hi all,
    >>
    >> Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    >> this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    >> macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap

    >and
    >> not much is said against it.
    >>
    >> However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it

    >saved
    >> were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    >> only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    >> images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?
    >>
    >> Neil
    >>
    >>

    >



    I own a DX6440 which uses a similar system, there is no option to vary
    the compression, only the image display size.

    The images are very good for lots of point and shoot and print work.
    Very sharp and saturated and well balanced and the flash is powerful
    and throttles back when needed for close ups.

    BUT, if you want images that you can adjust yourself this camera isn't
    the one, the jpeg compression is just too strong. Kodak has an easy
    system for upgrading firmware and it would be so easy to offer a non
    compression unsharpened jpeg or or tiff save as a firmware upgrade but
    it just isn't there. Also under certain situations the "oil painting
    effect" arises. Do a google search and you will see a few references
    to the "oil painting" effect.

    hope that helps.

    phil
     
    phillean, Apr 11, 2004
    #5
  6. NCK

    Ron Baird Guest

    Hi Neil,

    Saw your post thought I would share on your choice.

    I think it is a good one, of course, and believe the camera will do a
    terrific job. The 5 meg imager is very nice and will give you files that
    you can easily print up to a 20x30. Big image but a big imager. I have
    seen results from some of the shots taken at Kodak and they are incredible.
    Please keep in mind that although it has great features, it will not have
    some of features touted in the newer models.

    It uses a 4000 series docking station, however, so You can get a Printer
    Dock 4000 for it that will let you connect and charge your rechargeable
    batteries and that will bring any images you may have captured directly onto
    your computer. The EasyShare program is great software and the same goesmmm
    for the camera. There are many thousands of happy customers.

    Please visit http://www.kodak.com/go/dx4530

    After a review, and you have additional questions, please post them and I
    will reply as quickly as I can.

    Talk to you soon.

    Ron Baird
    Eastman Kodak Company


    "NCK" <> wrote in message
    news:e6Tdc.167$...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > Right now I need an intermediate digital camera - I want to be able to use
    > this for holidays but also, while I wait to get an SLR..., for a bit of
    > macro photography. I have been considering the Kodak DX4530 - it's cheap

    and
    > not much is said against it.
    >
    > However, I've read a consumer review where someone found the images it

    saved
    > were all JPEG (a lossy compression system) and that the max image size was
    > only 800k vs 2MB for other 5MP cameras. What this says to me is that the
    > images are going to be poor. Should alarm bells be ringing?
    >
    > Neil
    >
    >
     
    Ron Baird, Apr 12, 2004
    #6
  7. NCK

    carl Guest

    "Ron Baird" <> wrote in message
    news:c5emmo$542$...
    > Hi Neil,

    The 5 meg imager is very nice and will give you files that
    > you can easily print up to a 20x30.


    5 megapixels will print 20 x 30 ?
    I don't believe that one ....
     
    carl, Apr 19, 2004
    #7
  8. NCK

    Ron Hunter Guest

    carl wrote:
    > "Ron Baird" <> wrote in message
    > news:c5emmo$542$...
    >
    >>Hi Neil,

    >
    > The 5 meg imager is very nice and will give you files that
    >
    >>you can easily print up to a 20x30.

    >
    >
    > 5 megapixels will print 20 x 30 ?
    > I don't believe that one ....
    >
    >
    >

    No problem. Of course, it might not be as sharp as one would like. Grin.
    Still, if viewed at a normal distance (for 20x30), it will probably look
    pretty good.
     
    Ron Hunter, Apr 19, 2004
    #8
  9. I've seen 20x30 pictures that came from 3Mpixel cameraas that look great.
    Sure if you walk up to them and look at them from 4" you'll see artifacts,
    but when viewed from a couple of feet away they're great.


    "carl" <> wrote in message
    news:ITJgc.11272$...
    >
    > "Ron Baird" <> wrote in message
    > news:c5emmo$542$...
    > > Hi Neil,

    > The 5 meg imager is very nice and will give you files that
    > > you can easily print up to a 20x30.

    >
    > 5 megapixels will print 20 x 30 ?
    > I don't believe that one ....
    >
    >
    >
     
    William Jackson, Apr 19, 2004
    #9
  10. NCK

    Fred Bloggs Guest

    "Dick Campbell" <> wrote in message news:<cOYdc.3480$>...
    > The reviewer must not have figured out how to change the JPEG
    > compression/quality.


    How do you change the compression on a DX4530?

    > A low compression 5 MP JPEG is definite;y somewhere
    > betweem 2 amd 3 MB. If it really is 800K I would be very surprised.


    Exactly, but all the reviews I've read suggest that this is indeed the
    case.

    >The
    > Kodak web site does give file sizes for some reason.


    I can't see any file sizes. If you'd written `...does NOT give...` I'd
    have laughed cynically and agreed with you!

    > Now that I own a 6 MP SLR I can tell you that:-
    >
    > 1. 5 MP is plenty of resolution. If you print 6x4 or 7x5 3 MP is plenty,
    > it's only when you enlarge beyond that, that you need more.


    The OP is not saying 5MP isn't enough, just that the size of the files
    from this 5MP camera are less than half the size of other 5MP cameras.

    > 2. RAW mainly helps if need to correct a bad picture or perhaps you want
    > save 16 bit TIFFs. Most of us end up with JPEGs to print out and if the
    > picture is OK in the first place RAW doesn't add anything to it.


    I want RAW format so I can take a picture, edit it then save the final
    version in JPEG, and not have to convert it (lossily) twice.

    I still might buy the DX4530, but it's definitely the compression
    that's putting me off. Given that I've seen several reviews pointing
    this out, in addition to loads of consumer reports on the net, I'm
    surprise it's not been fixed. It's only a software issue after all.
     
    Fred Bloggs, Apr 19, 2004
    #10
  11. NCK

    Ron Hunter Guest

    Fred Bloggs wrote:

    > "Dick Campbell" <> wrote in message news:<cOYdc.3480$>...
    >
    >>The reviewer must not have figured out how to change the JPEG
    >>compression/quality.

    >
    >
    > How do you change the compression on a DX4530?
    >
    >
    >>A low compression 5 MP JPEG is definite;y somewhere
    >>betweem 2 amd 3 MB. If it really is 800K I would be very surprised.

    >
    >
    > Exactly, but all the reviews I've read suggest that this is indeed the
    > case.
    >


    Try this one
    http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/dx4530_samples.html
    You will see that all the samples are from 1mb to 1.7mb.

    >
    >>The
    >>Kodak web site does give file sizes for some reason.

    >
    >
    > I can't see any file sizes. If you'd written `...does NOT give...` I'd
    > have laughed cynically and agreed with you!
    >
    >
    >>Now that I own a 6 MP SLR I can tell you that:-
    >>
    >>1. 5 MP is plenty of resolution. If you print 6x4 or 7x5 3 MP is plenty,
    >>it's only when you enlarge beyond that, that you need more.

    >
    >
    > The OP is not saying 5MP isn't enough, just that the size of the files
    > from this 5MP camera are less than half the size of other 5MP cameras.
    >
    >
    >>2. RAW mainly helps if need to correct a bad picture or perhaps you want
    >>save 16 bit TIFFs. Most of us end up with JPEGs to print out and if the
    >>picture is OK in the first place RAW doesn't add anything to it.

    >
    >
    > I want RAW format so I can take a picture, edit it then save the final
    > version in JPEG, and not have to convert it (lossily) twice.
    >
    > I still might buy the DX4530, but it's definitely the compression
    > that's putting me off. Given that I've seen several reviews pointing
    > this out, in addition to loads of consumer reports on the net, I'm
    > surprise it's not been fixed. It's only a software issue after all.


    I would look at the actual pictures, and decide from that, NOT the
    subjective opinion of the reviewer. After all YOU are the one who needs
    to be pleased with the pictures.
     
    Ron Hunter, Apr 19, 2004
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. sam

    Kodak DX4530 vs Canon A70 Walmart/Bestbuy?

    sam, Nov 15, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,138
    Jim Spencer
    Nov 18, 2003
  2. DRB

    Kodak DX6340 vx. DX4530

    DRB, Nov 17, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    376
    Morgan Ohlson
    Nov 18, 2003
  3. eng

    Kodak DX4530 or Kodak DX6340??????

    eng, Feb 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    1,173
  4. ellis_jay

    for whom the bells toll..win98..ME

    ellis_jay, Jun 17, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    29
    Views:
    722
    thanatoid
    Jun 17, 2006
  5. David Taylor

    Maroon Bells nightscape

    David Taylor, Oct 6, 2013, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    132
    David Taylor
    Oct 6, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page