Kodak M853

Like Casio’s EX-S880, the Kodak has a digital ‘image stabilisation’ system. But it boasts a higher ISO, going up to ISO 1250. In fact, there’s a special setting on the Mode dial for high-ISO, low-light shooting.

The Kodak has another trick – an in-camera panorama-stitching mode. Many cameras have panoramic modes, but rely on software to stitch the images later on the computer. The body isn’t quite as slim, but the price is a whole lot lower.

However, it’s not such a satisfying camera to use. Everything happens just that little bit slower. The startup time is longer and the autofocus is lazy. Plus the Kodak seems to take a long time to write images to the memory card. Though pressing the shutter release will return you to shooting mode even while the lamp’s still on.

No matter what other advances they make in

digital-camera technology, camera manufacturers  don’t seem to get much further with general responsiveness. The Kodak M853’s focus lag is no better than the cameras we were using three or four years ago.

Common adjustments like white balance and ISO are buried in the menus and, if you’re using the scene modes, some options aren’t available. Beginners won’t worry about any of this because much of the time the camera will be left in full Auto mode and these adjustments won’t get used, but those who want to experiment a little could become frustrated at times.

The results we got from the Kodak were good in terms of exposure and colour, but the definition and noise levels were slightly poorer than the rest. Noise was apparent even at the lowest ISOs, and so was the ‘smudging’ characteristic of in-camera noise-reduction. This didn’t get particularly bad until ISO 800 and ISO 1250, and the differences aren’t likely to show up in average-sized prints, but may become apparent in enlargements.

It’s true that the Panasonic and the Casio sell for much more money, and you might expect a slight difference in quality as a result. Unfortunately for the Kodak, the Samsung is cheaper still and produces smoother, sharper pictures. Admittedly, it doesn’t have the high ISOs of the Kodak or the digital image stabilisation, but in everyday conditions the Kodak struggles to match it. The Kodak’s Panoramic mode is mildly disappointing, too. It switches to reduced 3.1-megapixel resolution to shoot the frames for the panorama, and the ‘joins’ can be seen as bands of softened detail. Kodak’s Panoramic mode still lags behind those in HP cameras, but nevertheless, it’s something that none of the other cameras reviewed here can do. It’s averagely-priced and averagely good, and that’s about as much as you can say about it really.