Kodak DX4530 alarm bells ringing?

Discussion in 'Kodak' 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. Advertisements

  2. 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
     
    Dick Campbell, Apr 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. NCK

    phillean Guest


    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
    #3
  4. 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
     
    Ron Baird, Apr 12, 2004
    #4
  5. 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.
     
    William Jackson, Apr 19, 2004
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.