Before Christmas our point and shoot camera bit the dust. This is actually the second p&s we’ve lost in the same way – the lens gets stuck out and won’t retract. What’s that about? It’s not like it was dropped that way – it worked just fine until I tried to turn it off.
Back to topic.
I actually have a Canon XTi, but it’s a larger, bulkier camera that isn’t always the most comfortable thing to carry with you. For Disney vacations, portable is a must, so I bought my husband a new point and shoot camera for Christmas.
I’ll be honest and say that I really didn’t research. On Black Friday I was ordering from Sears online and I saw a good deal and snagged it. What we ended up with is this Kodak CD80.
I’ve been very happy with it. The pictures are generally crisp and clear, and there is very little lag time which is super important when you’re photographing children. And it’s small, lightweight, and easily portable.
When I’m shopping for pretty much anything, I like reviews to help me decide. So in case you are in the market for an inexpensive camera, I thought I’d show you a very unprofessional comparison between the two cameras. Each picture was taken with the same auto settings, from the same position, in the same lighting. In the interest of fairness, I used only the kit lens that came with the Canon, and none of the photos have been retouched.
Granted, this is not exactly a ‘fair’ comparison given the vastly different price points. However, I do think it goes a long way toward illustrating the basic results from each, and what you get for your money.
Kodak CD80 - picture of live tv
Canon XTi - picture of live tv
I was surprised here to see that the color is more vibrant in the Kodak picture. I am guessing that this might be because the Canon’s flash is more powerful?
Kodak CD80 - daylight, mid-zoom of curtain detail
Canon XTi - daylight, mid-zoom of curtain detail
In this picture it is exactly the opposite situation – the Canon colors are more vibrant and true to life, while the Kodak appears a bit washed out. This picture was also taken in daylight in the same room as the TV above, but this is facing toward the window (blinds closed) and the television picture was taken facing away from the window.
Kodak CD80 - dark room, full zoom
Canon XTi - dark room, full zoom
These pictures were taken in a large, dark room. They were shot at a distance of approximately 12 feet, and both pictures were taken at full zoom. As you can see, the Kodak is capable of zooming in much closer than the Canon kit lens does. However, some definition is lost once you switch over to that digital zoom, and as you can see you do sacrifice picture quality. Also, the flash on the Kodak is not powerful enough to have properly illuminated this large room.
Kodak CD80 - outdoor, mid-day, mid-zoom, snow
Canon XTi - outdoor, mid-day, mid-zoom, snow
The Canon picture is more sharp and clear, obviously. I will say, though, that I don’t feel this is an accurate representation of what the Kodak is capable of in this situation. It has a setting especially for bright, snowy scenes and that setting does a fantastic job. However, as stated at the beginning, I used only the most basic settings for this comparison.
Kodak CD80 - outdoor snow scene at a distance
Canon XTi - outdoor snow scene at a distance
Again, there is a difference in the light and the clarity.
And finally, a picture of my daughter. All the comparisons in the world don’t mean a thing if they don’t show you a child, since that is what the vast majority of us will be photographing day in and day out.
Kodak CD80 - indoor, mid-zoom, child close-up
Canon XTi - indoor, mid-zoom, child close-up
And for once Lilly looked at the camera!
As you can see, the Canon certainly takes better pictures. Which is to be expected from a camera that cost $800 more than the Kodak. However, I think this comparison shows that the Kodak does a very respectable job of holding its own against a far more advanced camera. For a $60 point and shoot, I have zero complaints, and in fact am quite impressed.
It’s also worth noting that this comparison doesn’t really matter unless you are trying to decide whether to carry one camera or the other. It’s like choosing paint chips – it makes no sense to compare them to one another, since only one will be on the wall. In the same way, you’ll likely only be using one of these cameras at a time. Ultimately it doesn’t matter how the two stack up, it only matters that you are satisfied with the one that you’ll be using.
My bottom line – if you’re in the market for an inexpensive camera, I’d recommend this Kodak to anyone.
By Becca - Our Crazy Boys, February 24, 2010 @ 5:34 pm
I’m amazed that the pictures look so different… And I think it’s crazy that I have had the same “dead camera” problem… I had a Sony Cybershot that had a ‘lens stuck open’ problem…
[Reply]
By Joe, July 7, 2011 @ 5:47 pm
Thanks for posting. I as well have a Cannon XTI and have in the past owned P&S. As for the first set, the reason why the P&S looks more vibrant has to do with the color satuation settings. P&S typically are set to over saturate and to over expose to make up for lenses that are not so good, it’s basically a gimmic. You can change the satuation on your Canon either on the camera or via post processing and the result will be a picture that is as vibrant and much more clear.
One other point, from the reviews I have read, sadly, despite the name, Kodak has a really bad reputation for cameras. I had a Cannon Powershot years ago and was very happy with it. This was almost 10 years ago, my main complaint was the shutter lag. I do not know if that issue has been resolved, but it was common for all P&S back in the day.
[Reply]