# Consumer Reports & Kodak EasyShare Z612



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

At 3 am last night I found the latest Consumer Reports that came in my mailbox.

If you like Kodak, it looked like they gave this camera a decent review.

It is the only one in my price range that has a 12X zoom.

The price at Wal*Mart seems to be coming down. 
One staff person at OfficeMax had told me that the new models should be coming out in the next month or two and the prices would then drop some more.

So far Wal*Mart seems to be the only place that has dropped their prices.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5297441

Here is the link.

Let me know what you think of this.

I am waiting for the right time to snap it up (cash flow & vacation soon - you know?).

For the price, let me know what you all think.

Jimbo205


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

I'm not a huge Kodak person, but for the money they aren't a bad review. I did a little looking around on that camera for you. It seemed to get pretty good review for the price. You can read them yourself here.

The macro mode is nothing impressive, and if your looking for good close up fish or flower pictures, you might want to consider spending the extra 150, for a Canon IS S3 or a Panasonic, or looking into their used models for a little cheaper. In this sort of case, ebay and bhphotovideo.com can be your best friend.

With the new Canon IS S5 scheduled to come out soon, the prices on the S3 will be dropping soon. As a secondary, point, the S3 takes AA batteries, where as the Kodak takes specialized ones. While it doesn't seem like much now, come vacation it can be a pain to run out of batteries in the middle of the day and not be able to replace them.

Panasonic's are really underrated for as nice of a camera as they are.

Good luck with your search! I'm not sure if I actually helped you any, or made the decision worse.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Umm... how much are you talking here? 

Or rather, can I borrow an extra 150? (ha, ha)

Oops. I tried that link. I got a blank page. help.


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

I tried the link too and it didn't work. But the address for that camera review is as Pooky125 listed, so who knows.

Jimbo, go to www.dpreview.com , follow the toolbar on the left where it says "Cameras", choose "Kodak". The Z612 is only a few cameras down on the right, or just use the ctrl+F and type Z612.
Camera buying is such a pain!


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

Whoops, sorry about that. Link fixed.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Thank you for the link. 

If I have to make the switch to another brand (I saw the article about Kodak getting out of Low End Digital Cameras. Even the authors of the article was not sure which models or cameras that would mean.) does the brand and camera you mention come within the price range of $219 or lower?

Besides liking what I see so far, and being familiar with how Kodak Digital Cameras work - would this be able to do a good job of taking a picture of Hemianthus Micranthemoides pearling? Or of Malaysian Trumpet Snails in the substrate or of Endler Fry? 

I am looking for a camera that will do what I need and it would be nice to have the support for the first year or two using it.


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

The prices on the Canon's should come down in a few weeks. There expecting a new release of cameras pretty soon.

This isn't one I thought about, but it's in your price range, and has the macro abilities your looking for. The Kodak really doesn't... This is a Fujifilm Finepix S700.

This one is going for 220, but a far nicer camera. It's an Olympus SP-510 Uz Also has a pretty nice macro mode for those close up pictures.

Here's the Panasonic DMC-TZ1. These are really underrated cameras for as nice as they are. Macro is still pretty ok, but not as good as the Olympus or the Fuji, but better then the Kodak. It's cheaper in silver .


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Pooky125, thank you! I will check those out. Are they easy to learn how to use?

I like the first two. Hmmm......


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Optical Zoom is better than Digital Zoom. 

Then there is minimal distance from the lens to the object. 

So, if one camera has a better Optical Zoom but a longer (6 cm vs 1 cm) minimal distance, doesn't that mean that the Optical Zoom can bring this object IN and make up for the difference in (5 cm) how close you can come to the object (plant pearling, snail or fish fry)?


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

The learning curve with any of them is going to be kind of steep. I've personally found Olympus to be idiot proof. As for the other two, I can't say much about them. Never tried. 

Optical zoom makes the object bigger on the sensor, digital zoom makes the pixels bigger. When it doubt, go for more optical zoom. Personally, I never use digital zoom. It often makes your pictures much more grainy.

The optical zoom vs how close you can get don't really play much of a part. On standard point and shoots, theres pretty much a set area of how much you can zoom in on a macro object. Just because you have 12x zoom capabilities, doesn't mean you have them when your taking close up pictures. When in doubt, go with how many centimeters away you can get. That's what really makes the difference.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Pooky, I appreciate the help. 

Here is the deal. It's 2:36 am in the morning and when I talked to the wife about the camera she said, "Great! Just get it before Midnight so it can get delivered here in time for ______ (just fill in the blank with busy family of 4 kids and any number of events we want to photograph). My only deal with her was at least until she gets the OLD digital camera repaired (camera eye won't open anymore) - no kids touching the camera (which sucks because kids can take some really cool shots). 

So, the more I look at the Fuji S700 the more I like it. Until I look at the batteries (alkaline only) , the video and the fact that the Optical Zoom is not as much. THE PLUS is that the minium focus is as small as 1 cm!

The Kodak Z612 has stereo sound with the video, with Lithion Ion Rechargeable battery, Max Shutter Speed of 1/2000 sec and a 12X Schneider-Kreuznach Variogon optical zoom lens and a 6.1 MP resolution to capture as much detail as you want. The minus - Macro Focus Range: 10-60 cm. 

I was just about to purchase the Fuji S700 until I read B & H's - Guide to Buying a Digital Camera where they said that OPTICAL ZOOM is more important. 

I am so confused I almost want to just call B & H during the daytime and ask them on the phone. But I don't want to wait so I can tell the wife in the morning that it is done. 

This is why she never sweats the details, she knows that I do. Heck, she knows that when I get the darned thing I will probably memorize the instruction booklet (or try like heck to). 

Face it, we nature aquatic people learn more about light and photography than anyone else would ever do.

If I really screw this up and go with the Kodak, I can always purchase a lens adapter that allows me to get within 1 cm, correct? (HELP!)


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

I would go with the Fuji. They make these really neat things called "Rechargeable Batteries"! Which is a big plus over the Kodak. I have a really old crappy Kodak (it's the wifes, I hate it), we have to plan to charge the batteries, can't just grab and go. When you start looking at the price range you'll notice only minute differences between the cameras. Go with your gut*Fuji*, and the main reason you'll be using the camera.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Well, there is #1 MY obsession with aquariums and then #2 the practical use of a family camera. I am familiar with Kodak and grew up with it but I am trying to sort through the information I have come across. B & H made it sound like Optical Zoom is more imporant, yet 1 cm Macro Focus Range is hard to argue with. 

Which one feature is MOST IMPORTANT? 

(I think I know the answer but I after 4-6 hours looking over 'information' online, I need to step back and clarify.) Thanks again for your help with this. The family and I thank you.


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

They're both important. The more optical zoom is just you can be further away, good for example:Taking a picture of the White House door, while your standing at the fence on the lawn.
Or, taking a macro photo from across the living room. You should be fine with a 4x optical zoom for general shooting purposes. The 1cm macro is a big plus! 

Camera research can be very daunting, and get overwhelming. Good Luck!


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Rohape, I love you buddy; but you are killing me here.

Everyone has me 90% of the way to Fuji and dumping the Kodak brand, but the more I look the harder it is to decide.

For taking a photography of a plant pearling, an Endler Fry freshly born or a Malaysian Trumpet Snail; 
which is MORE important? (as in deciding factor)

The 1 cm macro focus range OR the 12X Schneider-Kreuznach Variogon optical zoom lens?


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

The 1cm macro
and geseundheit on that second part of your question.
:mrgreen:


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

If aquatic photography is really your thing, go for the macro. When it comes right down to it, if your going to be shooting your tank the most, that's going to be the most important feature in your books. Probably, somewhere out there even the Fujis have some sort of adapter. The macro lenses work, I have been known to use them occasionally on my DSLR, but when it comes right down to it, I'd much rather have the built in macro. You get much sharper pictures. 
Hope that helps


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Pooky, you are AGREEING with Rohape correct? :frusty:

(I love you guys and gals..thank you.)


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

Hard to believe isn't it?


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

FUJI, FUJI, FUJI, FUJI. Is what you are saying. 

After the hell you all are going with me you know what I will be pitching next in my signature right? (the name of whichever camera I get). :faint:


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

The fun part is coming, learning your camera. 
Glad we could help.


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

I'm saying Fuji. Not necessarily my choice, but I think it's the one for you. Now, quickly, order before your wife figures out you haven't yet.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

:grouphug: 

Thanks. You are all the best!


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

Your very welcome. I hope you enjoy your new camera, and you better share you plenty of pictures!


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Finally got it today.

At first I was so impressed because UPS had gotten it on the truck SO FAST (5:28 am Thursday). 
But because it was not SCHEDULED FOR DELIVERY until TODAY (Friday), the guy drove around the whole Capital District with the darned thing in his truck FOR 2 DAYS! Ugh.

Well, I am going to enjoy this but because it is not a Kodak it is going to take me longer to learn. I know me, I am going to have to read the ENTIRE BOOK before using this. (Maybe not, but that is how it feels right now.)

My hands feel HUGE around this thing. I remember my Dad's 35 mm camera. That had a very nice feel to it. This thing is half the size and for the small size feels boxy.

I am not sure if this thing is ergonomically designed, and if so it was designed for very small hands.

But I am excited about being able to take some nice macros. 
The spider plant that is now outside my office has flowered roughly after I moved into my new office. I have never seen a spider plant flower before (or at least in the 2-3 years that I have worked here and watered the darn plant). 
Anyway, I take that as a good sign and look forward to be able to try taking photos of the tiny flowers.


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

This is the best room to read and learn....:bathbaby: 

Take lots of pictures to see what different things do what. Pretty soon you won't be able or want to use the "Auto" feature. You'll stick to Manual, AV, and TV. 

One piece of advice that I have learned for macros, learn to work around an ISO of 50, more or less depending on your camera, but the lowest ISO. This may not be a good or true statement, but it's what works for me. Pictures come out so much more clear and crisp.

Congrats, Good Luck, and happy learning!!


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

Congratulations! Stick it in Auto and have a go with it. The pictures will probably suck, but the more you hold it, the more natural it will feel. It might feel small now, but you'll get used to it. (or it will frustrated you to no end and you'll break down and buy a DSLR in 2 years and never look back...)


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

That's my next camera is DSLR. I feel comfortable enough, and know more about photography than my my mother in law that has a Nikon D80. She just keeps it on Auto....](*,)


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

I learned the trick is to hold it with your right hand. Luckily I am right handed. It seems it is almost designed to be held with one hand only. I believe the best way to stabilize it if you are not resting the camera on a tripod or a surface is to use the eyepiece instead of the LCD and rest it on your face while carefully wrapping your left hand around the edge. 

This camera is amazing. I was able to photograph a bird in a tree so far away, the viewfinder was shaking and when I took the picture it was PERFECT. 

I did learn the short comings of being new with this camera. I took this instead of my analog camcorder to my daughter's dance recital. The auditorium was dark, sometimes the stage was lit okay but when hip hop or ballet dancers are moving it is hard to get a shot. Some of the fluid motion shots were actually pretty cool. As soon as I was able to learn how to change the resolution so I can now take 1,233 photos on one card, I just kept taking shots to learn. I will let my 2nd boy be the delete man. I will let him go through and decide which ones are no good. I like the feature where the camera takes 2 pictures almost at the same time; one with flash and one without. Hard to decide which to delete and which to keep!

If I downloaded to photobucket, could I post some of my photos here and get some coaching? 

Or would that be okay? I am never sure about things like this (none of the photos are of my tanks yet (GASP!)).

Oh, and I just figured out that this is my 40th Birthday present to myself.
And maybe somehow the family and I will get to go strawberry picking tomorrow (or this week) 
to celebrate. 
I have earned my gray hair (crown of glory to those that like to read their bibles).


----------



## Pooky125 (Jul 26, 2005)

I'd happily give you some pointers (though admitantly, I'm not very good at portrait photography.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

I was able to remember to bring my camera in to work and get some good shots. 

I hope to download the photos to my home computer and then put them on photobucket. 

Maybe posting them there and posting a link here would be best. 

Posting ALL the photos I have taken so far may not be such a good idea.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

I have been able to load photos from the Fuji Film S700 to the computer twice. I have loaded a lot onto photobucket tonight. 

I CANNOT figure out how to have the photos wiped off the camera once they have loaded onto the computer. Weird. This was part of the options with the Kodak software. I am tempted to try the Kodak Software with this to see if it works. 

If I remember from last year, you can basically use almost any program to do the same thing with photos, correct? No?


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

Kodak has decent software, and if your used to it, use it. I personally feel that all those photo transfer programs are junk and only conveyors of adware. I use the simple right click, drag and drop, to move photos.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Didn't work. So I used the Fuji Film software. THEN I use the photobucket to upload. They all seem so similar, but I guess it makes sense that the Fuji would not work with the Kodak Software. 

But I downloaded the photos from my camera to my computer before my wife finds my photos of step by step how I hatch Artemia Nauplii. It's going to make a great thread. But definitely deletable if not expected nor appreciated by an Aquarist. :mrgreen:

I REALLY LIKE photobucket software and how easy what little I do works. 

Rohape, I am probably overly cautious when it comes to uploading family photos. Maybe I need to be. Maybe I do not.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

SNAPFISH.COM has the absolute best price on prepaid photo developing for those that do NOT want to keep their photos on their computers, SD Cards or CD-ROMs.

Good deal. I may eventually print out my entire year of photos from 2006. :smile:


----------



## rohape (Feb 7, 2005)

Jimbo205 said:


> Rohape, I am probably overly cautious when it comes to uploading family photos. Maybe I need to be. Maybe I do not.


With the world the way it is these days, there is no such thing as "over cautious". I wouldn't upload pictures of my family to a public photo sharing website either. 
It's different if you made the folder private, or unsearchable, or something along those lines.


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

Thanks. I wasn't sure about that either. You should have seen the expression of my friend who is a federal sheriff when I asked a similar question. Great guy. But he does not know a lot about computers and the internet. And when I asked him a similar question, well the expression on his face was precious. He did not know either. 

It is amazing. As a Dad you want to show off all your photos (kids, garden, wife, family, house) but then you ONLY feel safe showing off your fish tanks. :mrgreen:


----------



## Jimbo205 (Feb 2, 2006)

I am so glad that I asked you guys first before getting my camera. 

I love it. 

It does amazing things. And my wife likes it too (for yearbook club).


----------

