Another New/Old Camera

by Posted in Cameras, Kodak P880 Leave a comment
KodakP880-1-of-7

From time to time someone, finding out that I collect cameras, gives me either an old film or digital camera. I’m happy to take whatever they give to me. I like to try them out, see what kind of pictures I can get from them etc.

This happened recently when a friend gave me a bunch of cameras, both film and digital. I’ve mentioned this in an earlier post: See Another newly acquired camera. In that post I described my experience with one of the cameras (A Sony DSC-H50). This post deals with the second digital camera I received.

It’s a Kodak P880. I was particularly pleased with this camera because it has a Kodak CCD sensor. There are essentially two main types of sensors: CMOS and CCD (For an explanation of the differences see here). Newer cameras use CMOS sensors, newer ones CCD. The older CCD sensors are prized for the colors they produce, and the more film like pictures they produce. Among the CCD sensors, those made by Kodak are deemed to be the best of all. So, I was keen to try it to see if this was true.

Here are some features:

  • 8.3-megapixel CCD (8.0 million active pixels) delivering image resolutions as high as 3,264 x 2,448 pixels.
  • Electronic optical viewfinder (EVF).
  • 2.5-inch color hybrid LCD monitor.
  • 5.8x optical zoom lens, equivalent to a 24-140mm lens on a 35mm camera.
  • 1.4x or 2x digital zoom.
  • 25-point autofocus area, with Center-weighted and Multi-pattern modes.
  • Auto, Program AE, Shutter Priority, Aperture Priority, and Manual exposure modes, plus Scene (8 options), Flower, Landscape, and Portrait modes.
  • Shutter speeds from 1/4,000 to 16 seconds. (Limited to 1/2 second max in all but M & S modes.)
  • Sensitivity equivalents from ISO 50 to 1,600.
  • 25-zone Selectable metering system, as well as conventional Center-Weighted, Multi-Pattern, and Center-Spot metering systems.
  • User adjustable White Balance setting with eight modes, including a manual option and three optional presets.
  • Auto Exposure Bracketing.
  • Built-in pop-up flash with five modes and flash compensation adjustment.
  • Hot shoe for connecting external flash unit, as well as a threaded PC sync socket for electronic flash.
  • Burst and Time Lapse shooting modes.
  • Color, sharpness, and contrast adjustments, plus black & white and sepia options.
  • Custom exposure mode for saving user settings.
  • Two Self-timer modes.
  • Movie mode with sound.
  • RAW, TIFF, and JPEG image file formats, with three JPEG compression settings.
  • 32MB internal memory.
  • Images stored on SD/MMC card.
  • USB cable for connecting to printers and computers.
  • Video cable included for connecting to a television set.
  • Power supplied by rechargeable Li-Ion battery pack (charger included) or optional AC adapter.
  • PictBridge compatibility.
  • Compatible with Kodak EasyShare camera and printer docks (dock insert included).
  • Kodak EasyShare interface software included on CD-ROM.

Of course it’s an old (2006 vintage) camera. Here are some of the things I didn’t like

  • Autofocus takes a while to lock on.
  • Flares badly when pointed in the direction of a light source.
  • Takes a long time to save RAW files (the only ones I tried).
  • Burst modes terrible by today’s standards.
  • Low light performance poor.
  • Limited ISO by today’s standards.
  • Found the Macro mode difficult/impossible to understand.
  • Screen was small by today’s standards.
  • Both EVF and screen were difficult/almost impossible to read in bright light.
  • Battery life (at least for my copy) was poor.
  • Whenever I took the battery out, I had to set the date and time. I imagine this because the camera is so old that the internal battery has died.

But despite all of the above I found that I really liked the camera. It’s small, light, maybe plasticky but feels solid, it has a good grip for my sized hands, and I found the 24-140mm equivalent zoom lens to be very useful, the images were very clean, and as mentioned above the colors were bright and quite film like.

For a complete review from when it first came out see here.

Below find some pictures I took using this camera. For more see here.

KodakP880-2-of-7

KodakP880-3-of-7

KodakP880-4-of-7

KodakP880-5-of-7

KodakP880-6-of-7

KodakP880-7-of-7

Getting into Video

by Posted in DJI Osmo Pocket 3 Leave a comment
djiosmopocket3andmics-1-of-1

For some time now I’ve been wanted to learn more about video. When I recently bumped into a YouTube review or this combination still camera/video camera and gimbel I thought it might help me overcome whatever block I have that stops me getting into video. So I got the camera. A few months later I also acquired the DJI Mic 2. That’s what’s in the box to the right of the camera.

A review in Videomaker (See: DJI Osmo Pocket 3 review: A major step forward concludes:

The DJI Osmo Pocket 3 is a significant upgrade from its predecessor, the Pocket 2. This handheld three-axis gimbal camera boasts a one-inch sensor for improved image quality, advanced autofocus for rapid and precise focusing and enhanced low-light performance. It’s tailored for solo filmmakers seeking a portable, all-in-one solution. With a body measuring 5.5 x 1.7 x 1.3 inches and a weight of 6.3 ounces, the camera maintains its compactness while offering a two-inch rotating touchscreen for ease of use in various shooting modes.

Key features include the ability to shoot 4K video up to 120 fps and 1080p at 240 fps for slow-motion effects. The camera offers 10-bit HDR color, useful shooting modes like ActiveTrack 3.0, and panoramic capabilities without the need for a tripod. Its three-mic array captures clear audio, but there’s also support for the DJI Mic 2 for enhanced audio capture. The Osmo Pocket 3 also offers IP streaming with HD livestream capabilities and a timecode function for multi-camera synchronization. While app compatibility enhances the camera’s functionality, activation is required before use.

Overall, the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 is a worthy camera for creators who need a powerful, versatile camera that offers both high-quality imagery and professional features in a compact form factor. If you currently have the Pocket 2 and wonder if you should upgrade to the DJI Osmo Pocket 3, we’d say go for it.

I haven’t been able to use it much yet, but after a few preliminary attempts I thinks it’s something I could easily get used to. Stay tuned.

Taken with a Fuji X-E3 and Sigma 18-50mm f2.8

Film Camera 2024 -3: Fujifilm Instax Square SQ-6

by Posted in Fujifilm Instax Square SQ6 Leave a comment
fujiinstaxsq6-1-of-2

Following my efforts with a Polaroid SX-70 (See: Film Camera 2024 -1: Polaroid SX-70 and Film Camera 2024 -1: Polaroid SX-70 – Results) and a Polaroid I2 (See: Film Camera 2024 -2: Polaroid I2 and Film Camera 2024 -2: Polaroid I2 – Results) I decided I’d try camera from the only other major instant camera maker: Fujifilm.

It’s a pretty simple camera compared to the two cameras mentioned above. A review in Wired describes it well:

…it’s a straightforward Fujifilm camera. It has a few modes of note: a macro function to let you focus on closer objects, a selfie mode, a double exposure mode, and even a simple exposure compensation feature to let you lighten or darken the image. These are what I expected, although the Lomo’Instant Square also came with a multiple-exposure mode and a bulb setting, both of which can be handy if you plan on getting crazy with your shots.

Another newly acquired camera

by Posted in Cameras, Sony DSC-H50 Leave a comment
sonydsch50-1-of-2

A friend recently gave me some old cameras. There were two film cameras: a Minolta Maxxum 7000 and a Pentax MG. I already have a couple of Maxxum 7000s, and I wasn’t very interested in having another one. I was momentarily interested in the Pentax until I realized that the MG was the lowest in the line that included the much better MX, ME, ME Super, MV etc.. In any case the MG’s mirror was stuck in the up position and the film advance wouldn’t…er…advance. I might keep it as an illustration of a Pentax MG, but I don’t see ever using it.

sonydsch50-2-of-2

That just left the other two cameras: A Kodak P880 and this one: a Sony DSC-H50. This was fine because nowadays I’m mostly interested in trying older digital cameras.

I couldn’t use the P880 immediately because I didn’t have a memory card that was old enough, and low capacity enough to work with the camera: the smallest memory card I had was 4gb and it appears that the camera would support only up to 2gb. So off to see if I could find one.

That just left the Sony DSC-H50 to try, which I did. How did I like it? Well, actually quite a lot. For social media posts and small prints, it’s more than adequate. The things I liked most were:

  • Lots of features
  • Tilting LCD
  • The size (small) and weight (light).
  • Ease of use. I figured out how to use it quickly and with no difficulty.
  • The images are sharp.
  • The colors are pleasing.
  • The zoom lens: very broad range (31–465 mm f/2.7-4.5) for a camera this small.

What I didn’t like:

Of course, you have to bear in mind that this is a sixteen-year-old camera and as such suffers from the technological limitations of the day: low resolution, noise related problems, limited ISO, less than stellar focus etc. But I knew that would be the case.

There were a few disappoints though:

  • No RAW.
  • Terrible chromatic aberration
  • Control pad/scroll wheel combination is fiddly
  • Menu/Home options are confusingly ordered and divided up

There’s are a number of reviews around. After perusing a number of them I think I liked this one most.

For more pictures taken with this camera see here.

Film Camera 2024 -2: Polaroid I2 – Results

by Posted in Polaroid I2 Leave a comment
polaroidi2results-4-of-1

So how did my foray with the Polaroid I2 go.

It went better than my first effort with the SX-70. The camera is clearly working as intended. The picture above, and the three below are pretty much straight out of the camera and onto the scanner.

polaroidi2results-2-of-4

polaroidi2results-3-of-4

polaroidi2results-4-of-4

I was a bit disappointed, but on further consideration I decided that the poor quality of the photographs is most likely the fault of the photographer (i.e. me). One of the main reasons for this is that I’m stubborn. I’d read on a number of websites that the camera didn’t work well in auto mode: i.e. it tended to overexpose and select a slow shutter speed, which introduces blur. I’d been told, but I decided to find out for myself. I can confirm that what the other sites had said was true.

Of course, after I’d scanned them, I had to fiddle around with them in Lightroom. I didn’t want to spend a lot of time on them, so they’re over sharpened in many cases. See the pictures below for how they looked after I’d “processed” them.

polaroidi2results2-9-of-1

polaroidi2results2-2-of-8

polaroidi2results2-3-of-8

polaroidi2results2-4-of-8

polaroidi2results2-5-of-8

polaroidi2results2-6-of-8

polaroidi2results2-7-of-8

polaroidi2results2-8-of-8

There were numerous constraints: Apart from the SX-70 mentioned above I’d only ever used a polaroid camera once, and that was about 50 years ago, and it was one of the “cheap and cheerful” models; This was the very first time that I was using this particular camera; I don’t know much about scanning polaroids and I’m not much good at scanning at the best of times; and I’d chosen to use a mode that everything I had read told me not to use.

So, bearing mind the constraints I was satisfied with the results. I’ll certainly use the camera again (I a paid a lot for it), but next time I won’t use the auto mode. Instead, I’ll probably use either Aperture priority (usually my preferred mode) or maybe even full manual.