I've always had good experiences with Kodaks, from my very first Kodak 35 to my first point and shoot to my newest digital SLR, for the price range, I'm happy.
I agree, don't put the Kodak disc in your computer, I just pull my SD cards and use external programs, but if you're computer challanged the software is simple.
I need a newer slimmer camera to keep in my pocket that's better then my phone but smaller then my SLR, I'm in for 1.
(as for customer service, I don't know, in 8 or 9 years of digital photography I've never had to call for help, besides typical wear and tear the cameras have lasted through parties and trunk rides and more...)

To head off the inevitable:

Photographers take photos. Not cameras.
I've seen photographs taken with a disposable that outclass thousands that were taken by some schmucks with a 700 dollar+ camera that don't know how to use it. This is true.

If you are starting off in photography and don't have the money to buy something better - go for it. Don't let worries about it not being good enough stop you. Sure I'd recommend something higher end but you can still be creative and take great shots with this camera if you don't have the resources for something else. GO FOR IT.

Some of the best photos I've ever, ever taken were with an EasyShare when I was younger. These are hung on my wall next to the ones taken with a $3,000 setup.

When I'm having a bad week and not taking good shots sometimes I worry I'm the schmuck with a 700+ dollar camera....

Don't be hatin. It's $50, yo.

one other juicy tidbit: this camera doesn't function like a plain-ol' USB drive when plugged into the computer. it calls itself a "camera" (whatever that is) and you pretty much have to use the easyshare software to get your pictures off.

garrettw87 wrote:one other juicy tidbit: this camera doesn't function like a plain-ol' USB drive when plugged into the computer. it calls itself a "camera" (whatever that is) and you pretty much have to use the easyshare software to get your pictures off.

If you right click on the camera you can Explore it and use it as a normal drive. Picasa for example could have opened it.

mboverload wrote:To head off the inevitable:

Photographers take photos. Not cameras.
I've seen photographs taken with a disposable that outclass thousands that were taken by some schmucks with a 700 dollar+ camera that don't know how to use it. This is true.

If you are starting off in photography and don't have the money to buy something better - go for it. Don't let worries about it not being good enough stop you. Sure I'd recommend something higher end but you can still be creative and take great shots with this camera if you don't have the resources for something else. GO FOR IT.

Some of the best photos I've ever, ever taken were with an EasyShare when I was younger. These are hung on my wall next to the ones taken with a $3,000 setup.

I agree with everything MB said - sort of like a duffer playing golf with $5,000 clubs. But I'd add that you might want this even if you do own an expensive digital SLR, simply for the convenience of being able to slip it in a pocket or purse.

KironaoftheSkies wrote:I'm a photographer and I've found Kodak's digital cameras to be vastly sub-par to Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Pentax, and Sony. They tend to process slowly, have limited options in terms of settings and control, and produce lower quality images.

Megapixels do not a good camera make.

This is just a simple point and shoot. It uses many of the same parts (lens and sensor and battery/card assembly) as certain basic models from Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, and Fujifilm. (Probably not Canon.) For example, this camera is as close to the Fujifilm A170 as equivalent Chevy/Pontiacs used to be. Same exact lens, same exact sensor.

And the picture quality is comparable to those brands' VERY BASIC models. Kodak does tune everything (compression and colors) their own way.

Also it's $50 right here right now. Compare other cameras at similar prices, please. For today this is the best $50 value by far.

mboverload wrote:If you right click on the camera you can Explore it and use it as a normal drive. Picasa for example could have opened it.

hm... you sure? i can't remember whether i tried that or not.

davidkaleko wrote:Is the software compatible with MAC OS?

Yes it will work with a Mac. OSX download

However, DONT. iPhoto or other Mac based programs are much better.

davidkaleko wrote:Is the software compatible with MAC OS?

Not likely, but you *can* use a USB cable to copy the pictures off or remove the SD card and use a USB reader.

Got one because of the great price. Too bad it's teal...

Great picture quality, but brand new batteries run out after 30 minutes. 4 out of 5 reviews complained about the batteries and only 1 out of 5 recommended it to a friend.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/Kodak+-+EasyShare+10.2-Megapixel+Digital+Camera+-+Silver/9327089.p?id=1218085598212&skuId=9327089#tabbed-customerreviews

While it's an incredibly cheap price (nice work, woot!) I think this review pretty much sums it up for me.

"It's fairly well made, very easy to use and comfortable to handle [...] However the very poor picture quality and non-existent low light performance are the real deciding factors."

I have owned the Kodak C533 - 5mp for three years and it is a decent camera. Used properly, (hold your breath when you squeeze the shutter) it takes pretty clear pictures. I don't recall mine having any stabilization features, but it looks like the exact same camera. I paid $110.00 for it. This looks like a winner for $50.00. Robear got to have it. In for one.

mymomisaman wrote:the only big complaint i have is the battery life is HORRIBLE! and by horrible, i mean the batteries are toast after using the camera 10 times for a minute or two each time.

also, i know the easyshare is a different model but it only holds 3 pictures without a memory card, but maybe that's common with point-and-shoots, i don't know.

Was that with alkaline batteries? Doesn't matter who the manufacturer is, with a digital camera you'll be lucky to get 40 exposures from alkaline. You may get as many as 200-some with lithiums (flash, LCD brightness, and time spent browsing menus affect the battery life, of course), and slightly fewer with NiMHs.

As for internal memory, you're rarely going to see anything more than maybe 50mb if you're lucky. But seeing as you can get small SD cards for under $10 (and some older ones for under $5), it's not too much of a sacrifice to buy a cheapie and leave it in there all the time.

1110SPRINGER wrote:Note that the batteries are not included

guess you didnt read the very last line on the main page.
AMAZING

mboverload wrote: Software Recommendation
Many cameras come with software but should you use it? NO.* There are much better options out there. You shouldn't even put the Kodak CD in your computer - there's no need to!

Why shouldn't I use the Kodak software?
What makes the other options "better"?

I have had two Kodak digital cameras. I didn't realize until after I purchased the CD14 8.2MP digital camera that it didn't have the manual wheel for choosing what type of photo (or video) to use. Everything on that camera is software based; there is no manual wheel. I have hated that about the camera ever since I bought it.

This woot camera does have the wheel, making it much easier to do change the settings of the camera quickly. I think this is a great buy for anyone wanting a simple and incredibly user friendly camera.

Edurne wrote:Why shouldn't I use the Kodak software?
What makes the other options "better"?

How do you describe how horrible nails on a chalkboard are?
I would suggest you download and suffer the horribleness, but once you install software on a Windows system, especially Kodak software, it's never fully coming off. Unless you're running it in a VM with snapshot capability. Or you have an MSI packager and a bunch of time.

Guess you'll just have to trust me on this one. =D Sorry =P

yudhishkalluri wrote:Hate the cameras with those kind of batteries

I prefer standard batteries. Never have to pay through the nose to replace a special proprietary battery.

Edurne wrote:Why shouldn't I use the Kodak software?
What makes the other options "better"?

I have to agree that there is no need for the software. If you have windows vista or windows 7, once you plug the camera in, you can immediately view your pictures and/or transfer photos to the computer.

If you are looking to edit your photos, you can do it online from any computer on photoshop.com for free.

ueberRegenbogen wrote:I prefer standard batteries. Never have to pay through the nose to replace a special proprietary battery.

Instead of paying through the nose for proprietary you'll pay through the wallet every week for standard ones! =D

mboverload wrote:Instead of paying through the nose for proprietary you'll pay through the wallet every week for standard ones! =D

I didn't say disposables. Only a fool would use disposable batteries as anything but a fallback in a camera.

[Happily using a couple pair of 2500 mAh HiMH AAs in a Canon PowerShot A590 IS (which is surprisingly easy on them).]

shindig966 wrote:This is a great price for a digital camera, but how does Kodak's quality stand up to other brands? I've heard a lot about Nikon and Olympus as far as quality goes, but how about Kodak?

I've got a Leica digital. My wife has a Pentax. My friends have Kodak digitals. They always beat me for qulality of pictures, so I'm thinking of throwing in the towel and going Kodak! Go Rochester!!

i brought the warrenty it will not let me purchase the camera??????

Deleted

killerabbit wrote:Can you use it as a webcam?

This camera cannot be used as a webcam but it will pick up audio for video recording according to everything I found online about this camera.

Deleted post because woot is being stupid. No I don't like an avatar being forced on me, nor do I want to give woot my facebook/myspace/twitter/gmail/etc. account passwords.

Deleted post because woot is being stupid. No I don't like an avatar being forced on me, nor do I want to give woot my facebook/myspace/twitter/gmail/etc. account passwords.

davidkaleko wrote:Is the software compatible with MAC OS?

You don't really need it. Your computer will automatically recognize the device, get the drivers for it, and launch IPhoto. You can do all your browsing and archiving there. If you prefer to use the bundled software, yes, Easyshare works with both Motorola and Intel driven macs.

Wonder if images taken fast are blurry (like me right now)

I would never buy a Kodak digital camera again. They consume batteries at an alarming rate. Kodak does not stand behind this product. Check out Canons, I've saved 49.00 in batteries by switching

Great little camera. I just bought it at Walmart for 80 bucks as a gift for my 9 year old. She loves it and I find myself using it almost as much since my "good" camera is somewhat bulky. EasyShares are nice little cameras. Not a lot of delay on the shutter which is great. Rechargeable AA batteries last a long time. It has a bit of weight to it unlike some other cheaper digital cameras that feel like they are toys. I definitely recommend this camera.

jn082105 wrote:Is the zoom a "smart-zoom"? Meaning, do the images get pixelated when a picture is taken in zoom?

Not sure what you mean by "smart-zoom" but typically you want to stay within the optical zoom range and not use the digital zoom feature. That's when the image quality goes south. I believe that's what you are trying to describe. In this case stay with the 3X Optical Zoom, if you use the 5X feature that will take the image and digitally extrapolate which typically yields poor results.

How is the video capabilities?

I gave my husband this camera for Christmas because of the zoom capabilities. We also recieved a Nikkon CoolPics for Christmas so I figured he would return the Kodak. He likes the Kodak much better than the Nikkon. We've been using the C180 regularly for several months with no complaints.

Edurne wrote:Why shouldn't I use the Kodak software?
What makes the other options "better"?

Kodak software = Malware

shindig966 wrote:This is a great price for a digital camera, but how does Kodak's quality stand up to other brands? I've heard a lot about Nikon and Olympus as far as quality goes, but how about Kodak?

I have had Kodak Dig. for years and they are great I try to get higher than 10 opt.zoom dig. zoom means nothing. Its the opt zoom that matter. They are great beginner cameras

I'd be in for one if there was a color option.

I have a very similar model of this camera, that I got 3 years ago when it was ALOT more money. I got this camera, after having 3 kodak easyshare cameras that lasted, and took great pictures, so when the 10 MP one came out I decided to upgrade.

Pros: great price for a simple digital camera, has great zoom capabilities, light and easy to put in your purse or pocket, can take short videos

cons: lag time between pushing button and taking picture (can be up to 3 sec), not as durable as past cameras ( if dropped it will break and not be worth fixing, i always keep mine in a padded case because I have scratches on it from keeping it in my purse a few times), eats battaries (I highly recommend rechargables and they work well)

If you want a basic camera to take on trips then I recommend it for taking decent pictures, but if it is your main camera and want to do more advanced photography I recomend somthing different.