Kodak EasyShare Z981 14MP 26x Optical/5x Digital Zoom HD Camera (Black) - One Touch Sharing!

I bought this camera specifically to take hiking in Utah in areas with ancient Native American (Ancestral Puebloan/Anasazi) cliff dwellings, some of which can only be seen at a distance. Its telephoto lens is what most attracted me to it.One reviewer, an accomplished photographer, determined that it was hard to get quality prints with this camera. Simplifying his recommendations a little, when he used the "P" [Program] setting and "raw" picture quality (resulting in unprocessed image data, which he would process later), and an ISO of 64 (preferably) or 100, he got his best photos. His assessment of the "fine" picture quality setting was that it was not that fine, hence he went for "raw." He also used "exposure compensation" to adjust brightness. Because of his review, when I was in Utah, I often took photos with the "Auto" setting (which defaults to the "standard" picture quality - although apparently I had it set to "fine" most of the time without realizing it) as well as the "P" setting so I could compare them later. Because I don't trust myself with processing image data, when I used "P", I selected "Fine" for the picture quality rather than "raw." At first, I tried to select 64 or 100 ISO, but I did not always have enough light to do that, and/or I needed a tripod (which I didn't have) to allow for a slower shutter speed without blurring, so I ended up letting the camera chose the ISO, which was not as low as the reviewer recommended. I did not fool with the exposure compensation. I used 14 megapixels for the best quality prints (menu button>capture>picture size>14MP).Most of the time (not always), pictures taken in Auto had a little richer (better) color than those taken in "P." Sometimes (infrequently) Auto would distort the color, making tan sandstone more pinkish. When I printed my pictures at home (Canon iP3600 printer, Canon software program - from Amazon), and I made 8" x 10" prints of both Auto and "P" pictures, to the naked eye, both types of prints were comparable and very good quality. Even using a magnifier, I could not notice a difference in them. I could not say one type of prints was better than the other. In the end, I was very pleased with the picture quality of all of my pictures, and I don't think the average person would have any problem with them as 8" x 10"s. Perhaps if larger prints were made, I had used all of the photographer/reviewer's recommendations, or I had a discerning eye of a professional photographer, a difference in quality would be apparent??? (You would want a low ISO, and to uses a tripod, for quality large prints.)When taking distance shots, with trees, etc., in the foreground, the auto focus was a problem. It tended to focus on the closer object(s) rather than the distant subject that I wanted to be in focus. (I did not get into using manual focus, but doing so might have solved this problem.)Because of concerns raised by reviewers about camera movement when the telephoto is extended, I took one reviewer's advice and got a monopod, and a "ball head" for shifting the camera's angle easily. A problem I found was that the ball head was apparently made for tripods with different size threads and would not screw onto the monopod. I tried a second "ball head" as well as a different monopod and had the same result. (On Amazon, for a few dollars you can buy a 1/4" to 3/8" converter which might have solved my problem.) Finally I bought a Canon monopod that came with a ball head attached (Canon Monopod 500 through Amazon), which worked well. In the "field," however, while the monopod kept the camera steadier than were I just standing and holding the camera, with higher magnification, there was still camera movement, especially with a little wind. What I really needed was a tripod (with a ball head). I found that if I was able to sit down, with my feet on the ground and knees up, and my elbows on my knees, I could hold the camera pretty steady - not as steady as would be the case with a tripod, but steadier than with the monopod. Whenever possible, this is what I did for distance shots, and it was sufficient. It was rare that any of my many distance shots were a little blurred (including ones taken with the monopod).I used rechargeable batteries, both the Kodak ones that came with the camera and another brand that also made a 15 min. charger, which I purchased. The 15 min. charger seemed to work better, in terms of how long the battery lasted between charges, than the charger that came with the camera. A set of batteries lasted one day (taking a lot of pictures - 150+) to three days. I like that I can use regular AA batteries (or rechargeable batteries) so I don't have to worry about a not being able to use the camera once a special (non standard) rechargeable battery goes dead.This camera is amazing in low light situations when not using the flash. I like that it is easy to turn the flash on or off. I also like that the camera takes SD or SDHC memory cards and does not just rely on internal memory. (I tend to use a 4GB SDHC card, which works well. I have read that it can take a little longer for the camera to function with cards with a high GB capacity but I do not know how true that is or what GB is ideal for camera functioning. It will take up to a 32 GB card.) I appreciate that one can easily switch from the electronic view finder to LCD screen and that the LCD screen is pretty large (3"). (I usually used the viewfinder when taking pictures.) I was relieved that all or almost all of what I saw in the viewfinder/LCD screen seemed to appear on the printed photo, in other words little or nothing was lost on the edges. It is also easy to review pictures and to delete ones you don't want.Since the camera is a little slower in functioning than some other cameras, it might not be the best for action photos. (One professional review described it as having a 3.6 sec. shot-to-shot time.)For far away and close up shots, the lens is remarkable. Sometimes stopping the telephoto where you want it would be challenging (it moves through its range pretty quickly) but this was not a significant problem.Opening and closing the little door for the batteries can be a little hard, but I don't consider that a big deal. Using the silver button shutter release when taking vertical shots was a little difficult, and its use made it harder to keep the camera steady. When you are about to turn the camera on, remove the lens cover first, otherwise it will have to warn you the lens cover is on and it takes longer to turn the camera on.Overall, this is a very good camera that is lightweight for its size and relatively inexpensive. If you want a camera with an amazing telephoto, and very adequate picture quality for the non-professional, this one is a very good choice.

We've been a Kodak family all our lives, having lived near Rochester NY as a child, and my father working there straight out of college until he retired.As such, I had a clear view of what made Kodak the giant it was in the last century. However, I was an early adopter of digital, and before that, 35mmSLR, both of which Kodak didn't offer at the time(s), being a consumer camera niche supplier in the hardware area. Of course, they continued to be the quality leader in all the film areas, including exotic ones for the pros, and, with family ties, I'd sort of kept an eye on the company's products.Our point-and-shoot (with enhancements mimicking 35MM manual cameras) digital cameras, aside from the very earliest, turned out to be Olympus. The Kodak offerings during those years weren't either sufficiently geeky, or too expensive, or lacking a viewfinder.However, we live full time on a boat in international waters (read: salt), and our most recent Olympus had not only suffered enough salt air to lose its view screen (the one on the back - the finder was fine) during a wave-watching period; it got drenched when a wave slammed ashore, climbed a 50' rock face, and leapt over the 30 feet we were standing back, hitting our companion hard enough to knock him down, and drench us (along with the camera).We eventually sent that camera off to Olympus, where we were informed it was unrepairable; "Would you like to buy a refurb with a full new warranty?" It was more than I'd expected to pay for a new camera, and, by that time, 2-year-old technology, so I demurred.I'd found several potentials in looking around in anticipation of this day, and Kodak had several possibilities. I referred them to my professional photographer brother. He had very nice things to say about this camera, even though it wasn't the current model. That it's not will make finding one, other than on Amazon, challenging, unfortunately, but one of our must-have's being a viewfinder limited our choices, as the industry is moving away from those in all but the very high-end cameras.More research showed that this camera had all the bells and whistles I'd ever need, and, as you can easily find the specs on the internet, I'll not repeat them here.I've had several weeks to play with our new camera, and am very well pleased. The ability to use a common SD chip, rather than the somewhat wonky XD Olympus requires, makes retrieval of the images a snap. We don't shoot in ultra high resolutions, as our usage is to document what we do and experience in our waterborne home, so even a small chip holds more than we'd ever take without unloading it.I find, despite my high speed chip, that images are a bit long to write to file for my preference, but my reading of the specs showed me that a really fast chip wouldn't change that, as the write speeds aren't fast enough to change matters by going to a higher speed chip. For someone who needs to take pictures in other than a burst speed, but very quickly, this may be a knockout for this model.The flash is automatic - it pops up when needed or specified, with no latching button to release, a very nice feature.Many of the reviews I read complained about the battery door. Pish-Tosh! Push down on the outer edge so that the pressure of the battery springs is relieved (hold the camera so that your non-latch-moving hand has the thumb on the top) and the latch moves without effort, whether closing or opening. Helps to be a physics major in my prior life! :)The camera is physically larger than my prior, but nowhere near the size and weight of the DSLR my brother uses, and only marginally heavier than my prior Olympus, so it's an easy user.Two minor complaints as to familiarity vs most other digital cameras: The power switch is right in front of the wheel controlling the setting you want to use; it can get bumped into another place while operating it. The zoom button isn't around the trigger, but on the back of the camera. The zoom is a matter of familiarity, but the power switch has required extra care - I have to look, and activate, carefully, before I turn it on or off.This camera has a vertical (portrait vs landscape) button, but I've never used it, preferring to turn the camera as I always have. I presume the button will transform the viewfinder and image 90° so that you see (a much smaller, which is why I don't use it) the vertical orientation - which would also save an editing step by having the image presented that way on review. Some may prefer this option.So far, we've found the battery life to be satisfactory, but then, we never use the viewpane, so save a lot of milliamps that way. The camera comes with an included charger and 4 Kodak AA NiMH batteries to get you started. I wasn't able to determine whether the charger was "smart" - that is, it cuts off when the batteries are charged, so as to not cook them if left in too long - and the lights don't change character to indicate full charge. So, I assume you have to be careful as to how long you leave the batteries in it. It's also not one of their quick-chargers; the appropriate charge time is many hours.All in, I'm a very happy camper (well, boater, if you can call how we cruise as merely "boating"). I was offered an all-perils extended warranty, administered through Amazon, and given the environment we're in, took it. I got a followup call from the warranty company in a few days wanting to make sure I was happy. That's pretty unusual customer service. The way it's registered is also unique in my experience (maybe living offshore has limited my exposure and it's now the norm?); one merely tied the digital receipt from Amazon to them, and it's done. Pretty simple, I'd say. Dropping, water, and other hazards are covered, so we're very glad of that, given our relatively hazardous marine environment.Thumbs up for me on this camera!