Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 06:13:19 GMT, "Bret Cohen" <bvcohen@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
>Hi all..
>
>I am seeking any info on the Kodak Digital's.
>
>Feedback, durability etc
>
>The prices are so reasonable.
>DX? CX?
G'day I've had a DX 4330 since they came out. Never skipped a beat.
One of my sons has a CX something or other. It's never had a problem
either.
I've specifically wanted it because I wanted a good point'n shoot that
I could hook up to my scope for digital images, and take the odd
snapshot, I've printed out the results on my Lexmark, and had images
printed from the photlabs. Never had an issue.
(and I've won a photography competition with images from it),
Some people will say its the "Macdonalds" of digital cameras, and my
attitude is that you can get equally good shots from a Kodak as you
can most of the other, equivalent cameras.
Some of my shots (specifically for astrophotograpy (mixed in with my
LPI images)
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Bret Cohen wrote:
> Hi all..
>
> I am seeking any info on the Kodak Digital's.
>
> Feedback, durability etc
>
> The prices are so reasonable.
> DX? CX?
>
> Help.
>
> Thanks all
>
> Bret
>
>
I have owned many Kodak cameras over the years. The current line of
Kodak Digital cameras is quite impressive, as long as you understand
that the primary features to consider are lens quality, and sensor size.
Cameras in the DX and LS series are usually equiped with better lens
systems, and more manual settings, while the CX series is lower in
price, and somewhat less sophisticated, and is intended for the
'snapshot' use. It is possible to do some pretty nice photography with
the DX and LS series cameras.
I have been quite happy with the two DX cameras I have owned.
Webshots.com has a few thousand of my pictures taken over the past two
years with Kodak DX cameras. Check out the albums under userid
rphunter42 since 2002. The pictures since Feb. 2004 are taken with the
DX6440, earlier ones are with the DX3600, and those that are scans
earlier than 2003 are done with a Ricoh 35mm, and scanned at 300dpi.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Digital's what?
"Bret Cohen" <bvcohen@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3o5Cd.6762$yV1.6546@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Hi all..
>
> I am seeking any info on the Kodak Digital's.
>
> Feedback, durability etc
>
> The prices are so reasonable.
> DX? CX?
>
> Help.
>
> Thanks all
>
> Bret
>
>
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Hugh Jorgan wrote:
> Digital's what?
>
I gather Mr. Jorgan is saying there should be no apostrophe in
"digitals", which is correct; there shouldn't be. However, by the same
rules, there should be none in "cameras", either.
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
Hi Bret,
I hope I have caught you at the right time, Bret, and am glad to share with
you about Kodak cameras. Good choice as they are really good cameras and
you will enjoy the features. Not sure what you are seeking, but I suggest a
review of the digital cameras page of the Kodak web site. All the cameras
are listed there. Also, if you want to share your interests and desires, I
am glad to review what cameras might work best.
Actually, the best thing you can do is to visit a few retailers to get a
review and feel for the cameras that are out there today. Since you have a
particular interest in Kodak cameras, I would review the Kodak site first so
you can review those in which you have an interest.
Since I work for Kodak I can help you specifically with questions and so on,
but you may want to also review the references on sites like Steves Digicam,
DP Review, and Image Resource. These are great sites with a lot of
information and feedback as well.
Talk to you soon, Bret, Let me know if you have any particular questions.
Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company
"Bret Cohen" <bvcohen@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:3o5Cd.6762$yV1.6546@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> Hi all..
>
> I am seeking any info on the Kodak Digital's.
>
> Feedback, durability etc
>
> The prices are so reasonable.
> DX? CX?
>
> Help.
>
> Thanks all
>
> Bret
>
>
Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)
"Bret Cohen" <bvcohen@sbcglobal.net> wrote in news:3o5Cd.6762$yV1.6546
@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com:
> Hi all..
>
> I am seeking any info on the Kodak Digital's.
>
> Feedback, durability etc
>
> The prices are so reasonable.
> DX? CX?
My first digital camera was a DX6340 purchased almost sixteen months ago.
I spent about $50 more than planned and bought it solely on the salesman's
recommendation about the lens and the ease of use. Its main purpose was to
be for vacation pictures and granddaughter snap shots. After a few days I
started to have a lot of fun (somewhat like I had in the mid sixties when I
bought my first SLR) and this past May I gave it to my daughter and
replaced it with a DX6490.
So far both have proved reliable and the quality of the pictures is
excellent. You can see some of them on www.clubphoto.com (type in beuzet
in the album search box). Very few of them have been touched-up and when
they have the picture number will end with "edited" or something like that.
One thing I like about Kodak is that it has a setting for a 3:2 ratio for
when you know you will want to print 4 x 6's.
I am not a professional and I don't even consider myself an amateur any
more but I have been pleased with the products and the results I have
obtained with them.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.