Отзывы о Фотоаппарат пленочный Kodak H35N Ektar Half Frame 35mm Camera
1646 отзывов пользователей o Kodak H35N Ektar Half Frame 35mm Camera (H35N)
Пользовались
Kodak H35N Ektar Half Frame 35mm Camera (H35N?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор
First, I should say, the zoom button broke--I was able to fix it with a little gentle fiddling of the lens--and sometimes the pictures don't record, though I think this was my own fault for getting foam (don't ask) and rain on the camera
Pros:
+ value: a great price for what it offers
+ size/style: I'd wanted one of the fancy colors, but even the black looks really nice and sleek and doesn't have the cheap feel that some other cameras have; the size is wonderful too, since it fits nicely even into smaller pockets and hands
+ picture quality: awesome picture quality, with different settings to fiddle around with; my only complaint is that night pictures aren't always the greatest
+ video quality: the videos have great sound and picture quality
+ speed: the picture is taken almost as soon as you press the shutter button. Basically no delay.
+ settings: has quite a few settings for taking pictures in different lighting conditions, etc to try out, without being overwhelming. Try out different settings, even if the setting isn't described as ideal for a certain lighting condition
Cons:
- software: the Kodak software is a mess. If you are able, try to get by without it or use another program.
- video editing: the videos are in .mov files, which is not ideal for me as a PC user; also, the Kodak software is not very good for editing videos and sometimes freezes up with larger files.
- screen: some people like the bigger screen, but it was more of an annoyance to me, since it probably uses a bit more battery power than a smaller screen would and because of its size, it seems more prone to scratches; the pictures look /much/ better on the computer than on the LCD screen.
Overall, in spite of the software flaws (which don't really have to do with the camera itself), I'd highly recommend this camera to anyone looking for a great camera at a great price.


1) this was costing approx $250 with rechargeable battery and charger (NON OEM) as compare to Canon S3 was costing approx $290 with Sony Batteries and charger.
2) It has 7.1 mega-pixels as compare to Canon S3 which has 6.2 mega-pixels.
3) It has 2.5 inch LCD as compare to 2 inch in Canon S3.
So in short I bought the Z812 IS because I wanted advanced features without the technical challenges and cost of a DSLR.
I am very much satisfied with this camera. This is one of the greatest ultra zoom cameras presently available at its price, the best choice if you judge quality to cost ratio. It takes pictures that are very remarkable with great color reproduction and with fine details. Even videos are so great that it can beat some of the low end video cameras except the sound quality. Optical zoom is tremendous. There are around 20 scene modes, selectable with the menu steering buttons. Low light results are also very good. I was able to use "night landscape" mode efficiently to take otherwise difficult night cityscape photos. The camera chose a 10 second (!) exposure time at ISO 64, and the photos came out superbly.
The image quality was very good. The main difference between this and the classier DSLR are the sensor sizes and interchangeable lenses. The Z812 has a 1/2.5" sensor; DSLR's start at about 15 times that area and up. This makes a huge distinction in low-light and vibrant range of the pictures. But of course DSLR's are a lot bulkier and expensive. The Z812 has a lot of sophisticated features especially like the live histogram. Performance was overall quick, except when the buffer filled (about 5 burst pictures), then it takes almost 10 seconds to write it all into the memory card.
The lens is reasonably fast, meaning the aperture doesn't close down too much when fully zoomed (its widest setting is f/2.8 to f/4.8 at 12x zoom), so there's more available light even at highest zoom, so the shutter can be fast enough to freeze sports action, or ISO can remain low for low noise.
During my research I found many misleading reviews on battery issue. This camera works well with Lithium or Lithium-Ion rechargeable batteries. It is good idea to have Li-Ion rechargeable with charger. To buy original or compatible batteries / chargers is up to you. According to me it is not an issue at all. I bought 2 Non OEM batteries and charger from Amazon at 19 $ and they are working great.
Another misleading was about the loose lens cap. If it was not kept loose, it would have easily damage the zoom mechanism if you forget to remove the cap before turning ON the camera.
In a nut shell...
No matter who you are, apart from professional photographer, the camera is apposite for you. You may use it as just point and shoot camera. Or you may play with more technical stuff like f-stop or aperture or shutter speed or exposure compensation or so on. Obviously it is not DSLR and how much you can expect in a $210 deal, but... If you want some thing like DSLR at a price of point n shoot, this is the camera. So overall
A great camera @ great Price

I have 3 kids and another due shortly, so I take tons of indoor snapshots. I was seeking fast speed, short lag, a good zoom, easy to handle and program, excellent photos and good video (exactly the z730 features).
I bought 2 cameras that I felt fit my criteria and budget, the Canon SX100 and the Kodak Z812. Never owned a Canon before, but they seem to get great ratings everywhere I searched. Of course, I also checked out the Nikon D40 (super fast, but no video), the Sony DSC-H10 (over my budget and got so-so reviews on indoor shots, but is fast) and several others. But the first 2 I purchased and tried at home under my conditions. Tried these side by side with my husband and then we swaped cameras and gave our thoughts. We both liked the Kodak better.
The Canon SX100 is a perfect size, comfy to hold, takes various battery options, takes really nice photos, good response time without the flash...however, once the flash is used it takes FOREVER to recycle at about 4-8 secs (with 3 kids that won't work for me), the onboard program is not easy to use (hated it, Kodak is was easier), orientation does not keep pics face up if I snap at side angle (Kodak does), plus if you like a date stamp on the pics like I do, the Canon will only allow it on the "postcard" setting (Kodak has it on all settings). Overall nice megazoon camera, but too slow for indoor shots with flash and not a good menu set-up. I would rate this one about 3 1/2 stars.
The Kodak Z812 is a bit bigger, but only like a 1/2 oz heavier than the Canon. I like the super fast speed of the Kodak Z812 shot to shot time and lag time...even with the flash used I could immediately snap the next shot without a wait. It has a crisp 230k pixel LCD and EVF. The Canon is 172k pixels (still nice) and only has an LCD which makes not much a difference to me b/c I rarely use a VF anyway. Both cameras have a 2.5in LCD. I like to set my camera at auto mode mostly with some tweaking from time to time. This camera happens to capture great videos and the zoom can be used while in use. Takes awesome crisp, clear, true to color pictures even when used in full zoom and macro mode. The program menu is so simple to use and navigate. I like the auto pop-up flash (the Canon has a maual flash) not that this is an important feature for me, but could be for someone else. The downside to the Kodak is the batteries. I do not like that Kodak put a disposable battery instead of a rechargeable one with a charger. It cost about $70 for these 2 added items. Te other thing I don't care for is where the zoom button is located, on the back and I prefer it to be with the snap button. Overall this camera is superb and deserves 5 stars!
The Canon gets returned and the Kodak stays! You will love this camera too, I highly recommend it!


The camera itself is very lightweight and small, about the size of a credit card and about the same size as a man's wallet. I'm not a expert photographer, so my main goal for this camera was to get decent pictures and video for a low price.
The camera itself does a decent job of taking pictures with decent amount of sunlight, although it does start to have issues when going into darker areas. The good thing is there are multiple modes to reduce blur and take pictures in different climates (Snow, Beach, etc). The interface is easy to use, and does not require much thought on the user. You can also adjust the picture quality so you can take more pictures, although any mode below 6MP looks pretty bad.
Storage is very limited on the camera, so you can only take a few shots before the internal memory is full (about 10MB, which is barely enough for 10 8MP shots, and 40 1MP shots). SD cards are a must, with the 1GB SD card being able to store about 870 8MP shots.
The video quality is decent for a camera this cheap. You can either do 320 x 240 mode with 30FPS or 640 x 480 with 15FPS. Either way, the video is usually pretty decent and is at least youtube quality. On a 1GB SD card, you can store about 20 minutes in 640 x 480 mode, and 30 minutes in 320 x 240 mode. If you are looking to do a lot of video, a 8GB card might be recommended.
The downside of the camera is the build quality. The mode wheel at the top feels a bit cheap and hard to move, and the SD and battery card cover makes me feel like it will break at any moment. The USB type it uses is exclusive to Kodak cameras, so buying used might be a problem if you do not get the cable. The battery is a rechargable one, but it does not support any other battery types so you cannot just put new ones in on the fly.
Overall, the camera was very decent for the $56 I paid for it used. You can download the PDF and drivers from Kodak's site if you are buying used, but make sure you at least get the USB cable or charger.



So, when I began shopping for a new camera - I was favoring Kodak. My experiance has been that their WasyShare line cameras are generally well-built, reliable camera (if sometimes a bit quirky).
I found the Z812is back in June when my family and I were planning a week-long vacation. The resolution was pretty impressive (at 8.2mp). The 12x Optical Zoom seemed useful, and the price (at that time) was decent.
I did not review this camera immediately, because I wanted to really put this camera through it's paces.
I'm not a professional photographer by any means, though I do take a pretty good family/scenic shot from time to time if I do say so myself. But this is a great camera for still photos. The colors are sharp, the features are useful and plentiful, and the camera is easy to use. Here are some of my findings.
Pros;
1) Good resolution (enlarge to 16 x 22 with no real pixelation).
2) Zoom (gets you right into the shot from a distance).
3) weight (I find that a heavier camera is often easier to hold steady).
4) Manual button controls (I do not like the trend of some toward touch-screen and heavily menu based controls) but this camera has REAL button controls.
Cons;
1) Video feature (Video looks pretty good, but the audio is horrible if you are in a noisy location).
2) You really do need the lithium-ion battery pack (but you can get a generic that is cheaper than the name brand).
3) Start-up time (I find this camera to be a bit slow when first turning it on, so power up in anticipation of that once-in-a-lifetime shot).
In conclusion - If you want a great (CONSUMER-LEVEL) point and shoot camera with a great zoom, this is it.
If you want a camera that does well with video - look into an actual video camera. But for the family photographer - this is a great investment.
By the way - you WILL need to pick up an SD/SDHC card as the file size of one photo tends to be in the 1.3mb plus range. I suggest at least a four gig card because they are so cheap now.



VERY VERY VERY disappointing....I am not sure what it is with society today...we all have these great electronic tecnological tools yet they crap out on us shortly after....why???? SO WE GO BUY SOME MORE.....I tell ya, we bought a $2399 fridge from Sears...and guess what, not even a yr later, the repair man has been out 4 times replacing all kinds of parts.....yet, if you had a fridge in the 50s, the thing prob still works great!
Just venting...but I would stir clear of this camera.....but don't just take my word....or this site...look at other reviews...look at my complaint and see how many others really do have the same issue!!










(Have used Film SLRs previous to that- and owned a few digital cameras since)- just to preface this review with my experience level.
Stay away from this camera. It gives horribly grainy photo results- and generates jpeg file sizes that are half the size of my Canon S550 (which is only 5 megapixels- yes file sizes vary based on subject matter- but not by a factor of HALF the size- when the megapixels are much greater). Went through the manual- online help, and phoned Kodak. Confirmed manual quality settings for sharpness, High color, ISO, 8.1 megapixel, and aspect ratio- and still.. marginal/poor image quality. Confirmed- it is not a lighting issue either.
You'd think an 8.1 megapixel camera from Kodak would yield good photos. Well.. think again. I wish I bought something else and didn't waste precious memories with this crummy camera.


