Got new digital camera a couple weeks ago, I love it!

[bdf24]

I recently bought a Kodak CX4230 two weeks ago. I absolutly LOVE this camera! The pics are very nice, and I got it for a pretty cheap price.
I got a refurbished for $135.00 shipped. It has a one year warrenty so I figured I could risk it for that.

It has 16mb internal memory, and you can add MMC or SD card's in it. I just got a 64mb SD for $28. And bought a 16 hour charger w\4 NiMh batteries for $14.00.

I'm very pleased with it. It does'nt have video or audio. It's strictly a point and shoot camera but I don't need all that anyway. I've got other hardware that does all that if I need it.

Heres a sample pic if anyone's interested in seeing it. Just follow the link below.

My 3 year old son with his SpiderMan http://webpages.charter.net/fraley1/Collin%20with%20spiderman.jpg

[james.miller]

nice find:) very good quailty for that sort of money. im jealous lol

[bdf24]

I did a lot of research before I bought one. I spent about a week of searching and reading reviews from every site I could find that had one. Overall the camera was heavily favored. Everyone seems to love it. You do have to hold VERY still while shooting or the pic will become blurred. But once you get use to it it's no problem at all.

My dad bought a cheap Vivitar for like $80.00 and the difference is amazing. The vivatar is only a 1.2MP though. The Kodak is 2.0MP.

[Pinky]

I have the exact same cam, with dock and 64MB MMC for $320 (bought the cam and carrying bag at best Buy, then found the dock and memory cheap online).

I luv this camera too, excellent deal for the $$.


All these were taken with that camera (apologies for the compression, would be too slow if they weren't):

www.the-boogiemen.com/hiking/

[deathstar13]

http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?description=30-170-002

guys how does that kodak 4200 compare to the one your talking about4230?newegg is only $136 and im gonna buy a 64mb add on card also.
i dont need the best but id like good quality and especially want to buy from newegg.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by deathstar13
http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProduct.asp?description=30-170-002

guys how does that kodak 4200 compare to the one your talking about4230?newegg is only $136 and im gonna buy a 64mb add on card also.
i dont need the best but id like good quality and especially want to buy from newegg.

The quality will be there, but the 2x digital zoom stinks. Ideally you want optical zoom, and 3x at that. The 4230 comes with 2x digital AND 3x optical, and for only a fraction more (when you consider the benefit). You'll know why I suggest this when you go to do any zooming and it turns out really grainy with only 2x digital.

[bdf24]

Yes, Pinky is right. I never use the 2X digital zoom on this camera cause it's VERY bad quality. But the 3X optical zoom is excellent. So unless you have no desire or need for the zoom I'd get the 4230 instead.
Actually for a few dollars more you can actually get the next model up which is a 3MP camera. I wish I would have seen that before I bought mine but oh well. I'm still happy with what I got for now.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by bdf24
Actually for a few dollars more you can actually get the next model up which is a 3MP camera. I wish I would have seen that before I bought mine but oh well. I'm still happy with what I got for now.

I usually crop and shrink mine now as it is, I can't imagine having MORE image to resize and crop :p

[bdf24]

Originally posted by Pinky


I usually crop and shrink mine now as it is, I can't imagine having MORE image to resize and crop :p
Yeah but I'm thinking more for printing 8 x 10's. The 3MP image would give you a much crisper picture, even after it's resized.

[Pinky]

Originally posted by bdf24

Yeah but I'm thinking more for printing 8 x 10's.

What's this "print" thing you're eluding to?? ;)

[SiGmA_X]

Originally posted by bdf24

Yeah but I'm thinking more for printing 8 x 10's. The 3MP image would give you a much crisper picture, even after it's resized. Would? You mean does :) Even at sizes smaller then my 1.1MP Sony digi-vid does, the A70 looks about 500% better.. Umm, wrong % but it looks a LOT better!

[bdf24]

Originally posted by SiGmA_X
Would? You mean does :) Even at sizes smaller then my 1.1MP Sony digi-vid does, the A70 looks about 500% better.. Umm, wrong % but it looks a LOT better!
Yup, the old saying is true. You get what you pay for.

[SiGmA_X]

Heh, but see.. The A70 is like $250-300, and the Sony cam is $2000 (In early 2002) :)

[bdf24]

Originally posted by SiGmA_X
Heh, but see.. The A70 is like $250-300, and the Sony cam is $2000 (In early 2002) :)
OH!

[SiGmA_X]

Yeah. I think the reason the Sony is so much worse is cuz it's primarily a vid cam, and it takes GREAT digi-vids. But the stills aren't as good as Sony's 1.1MP line of digi-cams, which are about the same in spec as this one..

A70 all the way!

[bdf24]

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I really don't need any of the digital video or audio options alot of the camera's have. All I needed was a point and shoot camera.

[SiGmA_X]

Yeah. My parents wanted the digital video, so we got that cam. But we never really used it, lol.. Lot of money to spend on something worthless. It's been 2yr5mo and we are just starting to accually really use it, so I guess it is now useful ;)