Good first camera (Kodak Easyshare CX4300)

Member Name: Peakrel Bez

Product:	Kodak Easyshare CX4300
Date:	20/07/03 (1051 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: price, ease of use, fairly long battery life

Disadvantages: slow to store images, shutter delay, plastic body

The Kodak CX4300 is my first ever digital camera. I bought it purely because at £150 it was the only affordable 3+MP camera I'd be able to afford (and it was ex-display so I got a little extra knocked off). It is just a basic machine, but good for a beginner. There was no S/N sticker on mine (which should have been on the base, near the tripod mount), so I had to ring Kodak who supplied me with a pseudo-serial number, and they registered it for me.

The 16Mb internal memory is okay, but to be sure, I bought a memory card at the same time, size 128Mb. This will mean that I'll hardly ever have to worry about 'running out of film' again. This is more than adequate for my normal usage, and only if I was going somewhere for more than a w/e without a PC would I consider buying more memory. One thing I noticed whilst testing the camera, was that with the "Auto" option (whereby the camera will save images to a card, if one is inserted, rather than the internal memory) when I had filled up the card, it did not flip over to saving internally. This, I think, will be more of a positive than a negative, however, as it will mean that should I have been going 'snap happy', when I reach the warning message I won't be up against a brick wall (assuming the internal memory isn't full also). By this I mean that I can swap over to saving internally, and I'll know that I have to be careful about being selective with the photos I'm taking, being aware of the memory getting low. If this didn't happen, one could find that both memories fill up and thus photo opportunities are lost as time is wasted reviewing what's already been taken and unwanted shots are removed - a time-consuming process, and no good if you need to take more shots immediately.

There are three settings for quality of image: Good; Better; Best. The filesizes, respectively, are approx. 1/4Mb, 1/2Mb and 1Mb (give or take 20%). The time it
takes t

o store the images before the next shot can be taken is, again respectively: 15s; 20s; 25s. This is rather slow, and that is one of the main criticisms of the camera. It takes about 7s after switching on before it is ready, and the shutter delay is an annoying 1-2s! This is not good with moving subjects, and I'd have to say that the general lack of speed is my main criticism. The screen on the back of the camera I thought to be very good, although I have no experience of others to guage it against. Images can be viewed at normal size, x2 and x4. There is a slight delay when reviewing images whilst the image is improved, and another delay for processing should the magnified view be required, but this is not too long. If magnified the image can be moved around the screen so all areas can be looked at. There is also a 2x digital zoom for taking the photographs, but as always with digital zooms, they should only be used if necessary. The accessories available include a 2x telephoto lens, as well as: a wide-angle lens; +7 close-up; +10 close-up. I will be purchasing some of these (unless they turn out to be too expensive). >>>> UPDATE: No I shan't, because they are not available for this model, which the accessories booklet does not make clear! The Kodak website, if searched through, will yield this: "The CX4300 does not have additional lenses. For a list of accessories for the CX4300 please go to the following URL: http://www.kodak.com//global/en/digital/accessorie s/CX4300.jhtml;jsessionid=DSQ4XG RCLN4ZBQHIO3JXWIY ". This fact seriously hampers the flexibility of this camera.

My camera has two dodgy pixels, one so-so (which is usually not visible), and one bad (which shows as bright pink, usually). They are near the centre of the image, which is rather ironic, as my laptop has one pixel which doesn't work across all the RGB elements, and that is also near the centre of the screen. TFT screens have a five-pixel tolerance before being re
garded as faulty (unless the manufacturers have change this number), so I assume that camera manufacturers use a similar method of rejection for their camera imaging components. The fault is not a disaster, and is very easy to fix if the photograph is an important one. Other things to be aware of include the build and the power supply. The body is plastic but it's a cheap camera, so what can one expect. Digital cameras should be handled carefully anyway, but worth bearing this in mind if you think you'll require something more rugged. The batteries must not be alkaline, either. These can cause the camera to turn itself off unexpectedly, or vice versa, not switch off at all. I am using Ni-MH batteries to power it now. I've managed to confuse it by turning it on whilst holding down the flash button. I had to briefly remove the batteries to switch it off, but that fixed it straight away. I run the camera with the screen preview option disabled, in order to conserve power. It only takes a button press or two to look at images, though, should the need arise.

As for the flash, it's rather poor. It doesn't reach into the darkness like the flash on my last 'point and shoot' 35mm camera, and if used as the principal light source the end colours are very poor. As an example, yellow walls looked more like the greyish area of an egg-yolk which has been boiled too long. Post processing might be able to fix any bad pics, but I wouldn't depend on it if I were you. Also, one obviously runs the risk of over-exposing a subject if using flash with the focussing 'close-up' setting, although the exposure setting can be altered to slightly lighten or darken the photographs as they are taken. This is quite a neat little feature to use if the sky is overcast, as it can make the pic seem sunny. Alternately, set to darken the photo can give the effect of dusk, similar to the effect one used to see on television shows when they wanted it to app
ear as though they were shooting at night, when in fact it was in daylight.

Now for an assessment of the quality of the end results. I have been printing my photos using a Canon S520 (an excellent printer - see the reviews elsewhere). If printing an A4 size photo, the Good setting will show the blockiness of edges, although if the picture is viewed from more than two feet away this disappears (depending on the subject matter). There was little difference to be seen between the Better and Best settings, and when one was printing four images per A4 there was sod all difference between any of the settings. One thing which was noticeable was that Good gave 'sharper' edges, in that the edges of objects are easier to see, with objects better separated from those alongside them. Close examination will show that lines and edges are not literally sharper, but the effect overall, when looking at a standard sized photo, made my friend say she preferred the Good shots. I did too, in a lot of cases. However, if you want a shot you can't get because you're too far away, it would be better to use Better or Best, rather than x2, and then crop the image later. The sizes of images, by the way, are 1024x768 for Good (0.8MP, 1/5th JPEG compressed), and 2080x1544 for the others (3.2MP, 1/10th or 1/5th JPEG compressed). When taking portrait shots, the camera can be set to alter the orientation prior to storing the image, to save you having to do it later on your PC. Colour is good, though maybe a little bland at times, but this can change when printed out (blues could sometimes seem too heavy). For some reason, the Good shots seemed to have a slightly richer colour set than the 'B' choices.

My impression of the quality of shots was that they are all right for snapshots, which is what you should really consider this camera as being used for. The Good shots were good enough for desktop wallpaper images, and quite good enough in most cases for the p
rinted paper end result too. The other benefit of using Good will be that more shots can be stored, and it's quicker to take another photo after it.

Other bits and pieces in brief: there is a self-timer option; the flash has four settings (auto, fill, red-eye and off); images can be date-stamped; software comes bundled with the camera; Kodak offer some free photos with the first 'development' purchase; a docking station is available, which will keep a special power pack charged and ready; there is a lens-cap which is attached to the carrying strap by a cord; there is a video out facility. I can't comment on the software (which must be installed prior to connecting camera to PC for the first time) as I have used other software for image manipulation and printing. Such software is ten-a-penny, just look at a few magazines for freebies on their CDs. I also prefer to copy/move/delete the image files as though the camera was a separate drive (which is how the PC recognizes it when it's attached via USB) rather than use the EasyShare software - this is an EasyShare camera by the way. This might come in useful if travelling, as it makes is simpler to e-mail your images to yourself/friends, and then free up your memory again. However, I doubt I'll ever use the EasyShare methods - if you're a technophobe then I guess it'll be useful. You need to check with other users to find out what their opinion of it all is. As for the video out feature, this is really handy should you be taking the camera to someone else's place (and a PC won't be available), e.g. a birthday party. After connecting to a TV or VCR (modern ones have the right sockets) the pictures can be reviewed, in a slide show if wanted. This is great for showing everyone what photos you've taken, and the images can be recorded to video tape at the same time!

All in all, considering what the camera is capable of, and given its price, I'd give it eight ou
t of ten. It has certainly educated me on what to look for when I spend serious money on an upgrade (I'd like a Sony 5+MP CyberShot), which ten minutes fiddling with a camera in a shop cannot do. It's good enough that it won't become useless (it is, after all, just a camera for snapshots), and I don't feel like I've wasted money. It's a pity it doesn't come with a padded case.

Summary: