Any users of the Kodak P880 out there

[shutter bug]

Hi

 

I'm considering buying a Kodak P880, I have searched the PhotoNet archives and

surprisingly have not found many comments about this camera.

I'm wondering if any users of this camera haunt this forum and could possibly

answer a few real world questions about it.

<br>

One of the reason for my considering this camera, is the size, I actually find

the tiny digi-cams just too small to use easily, and the manual zoom ring is

quite appealing as well.

<br>

<br>

Also, can any users of this camera give some real world answers as to actually

how slow this camera writes to the card when using the RAW Mode.

<br>

<br>

Did the firmware update help

<br>

<br>

Did a faster card help

<br>

<br>

Is the RAW mode essentially useless because of the write times for anything but

static subjects

<br>

<br>

Any other advice and comments will be much appreciated.

[peterblaise]

.

 

Nicely reviewed in f2 magazine out of the UK - see http://www.f2photo.co.uk/ and search for "Kodak 880".

 

EVERYONE shoudl subscribe to f2 magazone - VERY hands-on and written with a level head, no sales/press release poop.

 

David Kilpatrick was shocked (shocked!) to see the RAW iamges nect to the shots from the Nikon D200 and wasn;t sure which were shich - a GOOD thing regarding BOTH cameras.

 

Also, contact Kodak directly and tell us what they say.

 

Click!

 

Love and hugs,

 

Peter Blaise peterblaise@yahoo.com Minolta Photographer http://www.peterblaisephotography.com/

[jcuknz]

Have you also checked www.dpreview.com ?

[shutter bug]

Hi all

 

Ye I did indeed have a look at the various on-line reviews, but I was hoping to get some additional real world, hands-on comments from owners of the camera, especially from those whom have updated the firmware and are using a high speed memory card to alleviate, the slow write times when using the RAW mode, Just looking for some actual comments

[kent_gastreich]

My wife uses the P880 and bought it because of the good feel-size of the camera, the true wide angle lense (24mm equivalent) and large rear display. She does not shoot in RAW but rather fine JPEGs. Write time for the JPEGs is adequate. Picture quality is always excellent both indoors and out. One odd operational aspect of the camera is focusing in low light conditions. If the flash is down the camera really hunts to find focus. If you put the flash up (even though there is no associated focus assist light) the focus is significantly better. Hope this helps, sorry no info on RAW write times.

[lightminer]

I sent a couple of friends in the direction of this camera as at its price point (~400) for a 24mm wide lense it is extremely (impossibly?) hard to beat. 'Borrowing' :) their cameras I've found I can take between 3-6 pictures (shooting RAW) before I get a blue screen that says 'processing' for 10-20 seconds. This is not scientific, sometimes it has happened at fewer shots, and sometimes I can get 6 or so out before it shows up. I didn't use it before the firmware update. Went to buy a faster card with one of my friends and the (fairly trustworthy!) guy at the photo store said we shouldn't spend the money for it as the camera really couldn't take advantage of it so we went with a 'very' fast card, but not top of the line.

 

You ask 'is the RAW mode essentially useless' - well often photography done at 24 mm is not sports, that is more of a telephoto thing (in general) and a person would buy this camera for the 24 - or at least lets say that is one of the more distinctive aspects to it - so not sure what your target is, but for nature photography it is plenty fast. For football players or tigers running away or at you, you might want more than the 6 or so pics I am currently getting.

 

Oh - and compared to film (I still use film myself - Medium Format) there is the 'lag' between when you push the button and when the picture takes which apparently seems to be a normal part of the cheaper side of digital cameras, but which initially surprised me. That effect is definitely in play here, but neither is it much more than 1 or 2 seconds. That kind of info you can probably find from the reviews mentioned above, and they are theoretically testing in a somewhat scientific manner.

 

When these people are using it, I've advised them to shoot RAW all the time for pictures they care about except when indoors with bunches of people (also less chance they will want blowups more than 5X7 or maybe 8X10 if the pictures are just 'social') and they should use 'jpeg fine' for that. So far everyone is happy.

 

For the price and 24 mm lense, this thing is an incredible camera.

 

There seems to be very little talk about it here, but lots of talk on dpreview and some guy named Mike who is from Kodak and he answers peoples' questions - that is a neat thing, comforting to have solid answers to questions from the company on a public forum.

 

If you have access to an SD card from yourself or a friend, you could probably put it in one of these at a store and try yourself and see how long the various functions are, how many pics in a row you can take before 'processing' occupies the camera, and if you are friendly with your local store you could probably try a few different cards there. Of course, if taking up more than 5 min of a local stores time - then I try to buy from them and not turn around and buy through the mail...

[lightminer]

Just realized - if you try my suggestion about trying it at a store it would probably be on a camera that is pre-firmware update, so actually that may give you a much worse impression of the camera than its real capabilities. So, I guess, don't do that!

 

Hey - let me know if you ever get a picture of your namesake!

[lightminer]

This, along with dpreview.com seems to be the most definitive review:

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/P880/P880A.HTM

 

and they have a comparometer thingy where you can compare it to another camera, which is fun. You get the photos from both side by side.

[curt_johnson]

I have one, and I am NOT happy with a few things:

 

1. It is nuts that you can't really control depth of field or ISO in macro mode, and I can't find a way to program a custom macro mode of my own. IF there is one, I'll feel silly, but since I have read reviews making the same sort of complaints...

 

For example, the camera will choose f2.8 and 1/500the sec in SUPER MACRO (focus to two inches), and there is nothing you can do that I know of to get say, 1/200 and f7 or f8, how stupid is that? what were they thinking?

 

2. focusing is still not so great even after a firmare revision that is supposed to correct this problem.

 

3. The camera writes slowly, get the ultra 2 card, I'm going to try one. raw and tiff and even fine jpg are a bit slow.

 

4. The camera always reverts to S jpg mode when you turn it off and back on, even if you have set it to stay in Fine.

 

5. I have not had much luck with the manual focusing, maybe it's just me though.

 

I am going to call Kodak and see if I can convince them to do something about some of this in firmware if that is possible, because the camera really has a lot of nice features otherwise.

 

I wish other users would do the same!

 

GOod things about the p880 are:

 

1. 24-140, gotta love it.

 

2. in custom, (DOH! no custom macro), you control EVERYTHING, and I mean all of it. there are three custom savable settings, wish there were more.

 

3. the flash is pretty darned good at portraits and general, I am impressed.

 

4. If you happen to have almost any printer/charging dock, namely the one that came with the dx7440 or later, $13.50 wil get you the adapter and you can charge your p880 without taking the battery out, and you can do those little dye sub postcard sized prints.

 

5. Small and light, compared to the low end dslrs it actually seems to compete with.

 

I'm posting some P880 pics at http://s32.photobucket.com/albums/d13/Climbingoldguy/p880/

 

IN the main album are some pics with the dx7440.

[shutter bug]

Hi Everyone,

 

Thanks for all the input.. It certainly has helped me evaluate this fine camera. It is close to exactly what I want, yet like so many digital cameras, still so far away. The lens seems great, great image quality and color, but Old Kodak seesm to be aspleep at the wheel, At least for me, the slow write times are the deal breaker. I could live with the other quirks, but not the slow write times. I'm suer it is a fabulous camera though.

[curt_johnson]

BOy do I feel stupid now.

 

About that macro mode, LOL, I found out that you CAN control macro focus in Program, Aperture, Shutter, manual, and custom by pressing the focus button on the left top side of the camera, which gives you a menu choice of several focusing modes.

 

You don't see this choice with the menu button.

 

I am not sure yet if this mode will focus as close as the super macro preset, but a quick check seems to indicate that it will go to life size at least.

[lightminer]

What is your acceptable number of shots/second? For $400 show me an 8 MP camera that is much faster. Maybe there are many, I'm not sure, I'm just saying what would you get instead? Are you definitely going to shoot RAW? In this price range I wouldn't be surprised if the actual performance of the other camera that you would get ends up basically being within 10%. Actual - tested by us, not marketing glop :).

[m_kevin_johnson]

I have one and I am VERY happy with it. There are a few things I would have done a touch differently though. The main thing is when using the AUTO mode to allow it to get set in fine and stay there. The way I work around that is to use the "P" mode (program) all the time.

 

I LOVE the lens on the camera. I often need to get a bit closer then a 140mm (eq) will get so I purchased the telephoto and wide angle as part of a package. I AM NOT HAPPY with the telephoto lens at all! I have YET to try the wide angle one though. I knew I would likely never use that lens but it was part of the set. The telephoto that came with my package was NOT a kodak one which may be part of the issue but the only place that it is sharp is in the extream middle of the lens. It has a HORRIBLE drop off to out of focus extreamly fast. The telephoto I have is a "digital high definition 2X for a P880 (see the image). I do not know about the wide angle but that lens was NOT worth even a penny from what I see on the images. I do wonder about the 1.4X or so. I figure that may be a lot better.

 

In the program mode you can custom set various things and they will stay that way. For example you can adjust both an exposure and flash setting. One thing I wish it could do is be able to utilize an external flash in the "super macro" setting rather then just the flower setting. I have not found a way around that for shooting a 1/4 inch flower in the studio.

 

For print size I always keep the file to be at least 300 dpi at printing. I ran one test to see how the image would look at a 20x24 (from exprint.com) because they said it would take to a 24x36 with no issue but I did not see how that was possible. At 20x24 I would call it acceptable from a few feet away but when I look at it closely I would say it is pixelated mainly seen in face where you have rosey color to regular skin tone. Then again that is why I own and run a film lab I guess. I think overall people have come to accept stuff that they never would have 5 years ago because they are so used to ink jet plots now. If you are 11x14 and smaller it will look REALLY good.

 

Overall I really am glad I bought the camera. BUT I would NOT buy the extra lenses that I got. I would love to know whoat folks think about the regular kodak telephoto made for it though.

 

Kevin<div></div>

[m_kevin_johnson]

I forgot to add, GET THE P20 flash. I wish it held 4 batteries but it REALLY helps with taking images indoors such as at a church or lower light home setting. I carry along an extra charged camera battery and at least an extra 4 AA's for the flash.

 

Kevin

[jason_withers]

I currently own the Kodak P880 camera and found it to be a great high-end consumer camera. After reading the instruction manual, it is pretty easy to use and really delivers excellent pictures. I do not think the lag time to save pictures in long at all; I don't know off hand any digital camera that offers this instantaneously. With a current MSRP of $399.99 from Kodak, it is an excellent buy. I'm also glad that Kodak decided to continue with the Schneider-Kreuznach lenses; they feature great optics in my book.

[jason_withers]

Hey Kevin,

 

I ALWAYS recommend genuine KODAK accessories with their cameras... I have heard that the ones designed by other manufacturers are inferior and do not perform as well. I think you will be happy with the genuine Kodak telephoto lens if you decide to purchase; It's only $149.99 currently from Kodak. :)

 

-Jason

[m_kevin_johnson]

Jasen, yes I may try that in the future. I THOUGHT that is what would be with the set I got but I will not go into that right now. One thing I noticed is that to use the telephoto you need to remove the UV filter, remove the len shade, remove the ring around the lens mount the tube and then mount the lenses. A draw back for sure but when I looked at the results of that lens ..............

 

Kevin