Kodak C360, Canon A300 Review and Photos
The Kodak lens focuses down to 24 inches when in the normal settings. The Canon focuses down to 8 inches. The Kodak is easily set to close-up setting but I found a problem when using flash. The flash would not go off. See the shots for examples. I took many shots with different subjects and ambient lighting but the shots were all failures. I kept the camera's default settings. The A300 had no problem with these shots. I was never able to get a good close-up exposure.
Indoor skin colors appeared dark. The sample photo was taken under a florescent light. The color was similar to one taken under tungsten.
Exterior shots were usually good. however many shots had unrealistic color.
The C360's body is excellently designed. The controls are well placed. The optical viewfinder is big enough to be useful.
The C360 is fast in shot to shot times even with flash.
The camera is not recognized as a mass storage device on my Mac. It was necessary to install the Kodak software that is too limiting for me. It does work but
the camera could not be connected to another computer , like on a trip, without loading the software onto each computer.
The photos in this gallery are straight out of the camera and taken at default settings.
The new Kodak C360 is compared here to a 2 year old Canon A300. The Canon has served me well. It is kind of like a Timex. It just keeps on taking good pictures. It seldom takes a poor shot. It's flash is weak and slow. The movie mode, 640x480 at 15 fps, is still better than most new cameras but I would like more frames. The C360 movie clips do look smoother than the Canons. The microphone position seems to pick up less wind noise. Exposure changes when panning across dark and light areas. The Canon keeps the first exposure setting until the end of the clip. The Canon is limited to 30 seconds while the Kodak can go until the memory card is full. The Kodak uses mpeg-4 so the files are much smaller than the Canon's motion jpeg.
The Kodak's speaker is very weak. I like the audible feedback provided by the A300. The C360 can only be heard when things are very quiet even with the sound level set to high.
Too bad it has serious problems with still shots.
Read MoreIndoor skin colors appeared dark. The sample photo was taken under a florescent light. The color was similar to one taken under tungsten.
Exterior shots were usually good. however many shots had unrealistic color.
The C360's body is excellently designed. The controls are well placed. The optical viewfinder is big enough to be useful.
The C360 is fast in shot to shot times even with flash.
The camera is not recognized as a mass storage device on my Mac. It was necessary to install the Kodak software that is too limiting for me. It does work but
the camera could not be connected to another computer , like on a trip, without loading the software onto each computer.
The photos in this gallery are straight out of the camera and taken at default settings.
The new Kodak C360 is compared here to a 2 year old Canon A300. The Canon has served me well. It is kind of like a Timex. It just keeps on taking good pictures. It seldom takes a poor shot. It's flash is weak and slow. The movie mode, 640x480 at 15 fps, is still better than most new cameras but I would like more frames. The C360 movie clips do look smoother than the Canons. The microphone position seems to pick up less wind noise. Exposure changes when panning across dark and light areas. The Canon keeps the first exposure setting until the end of the clip. The Canon is limited to 30 seconds while the Kodak can go until the memory card is full. The Kodak uses mpeg-4 so the files are much smaller than the Canon's motion jpeg.
The Kodak's speaker is very weak. I like the audible feedback provided by the A300. The C360 can only be heard when things are very quiet even with the sound level set to high.
Too bad it has serious problems with still shots.