Polaroid PDC 320

A good introduction to digital cameras. Poor image quality in low light , but then you get what you pat for . Looks and feels like a toy.

takes pictures.

Picture quality is really quite poor, i cant see the sense in producing low end cameras.

None

Cheap camera, but you get what you pay for. The case is plastic and very light. Feels like a toy, not a camera. Image resolution is 320x200 but it only has 0.5 MB memory. Can store 10-20 pictures but uses a high amount of compression which reduces image quality drastically! Has a lot of trouble with low light situations. No way to use a flash with it. Indoor pics are a non-event, even outdoor shots can be bad in strong shade. Seems very sensitive to changes in light, eg taking a panoramic series gives completely different light levels, even on an overcast day!

Cheap! Best resolution of the cheaper cameras

Flimsy case, Poor performance in low light, No advanced features, eg LCD, Flash, Zoom.

None

N/A

Great Starter camera, this one is cheap, easy to use, cheap as chips with good software, pictures are good enuff to send by email, (320x240) I bought it due to my friends computer not having a USB port, it has served me well compared to some others, lens is a pinhole type which makes it good for a variety of outdoor shots but useless indoors unless there is alot of light. the 9v batterys are avail at every corner store so you wont get caught without a battery unlike some others,, Bottom line is Great toy to give to your children to stop them playing with your Megapixel,(they do not waste film on pictures of their feet or barbie dolls), they can easily use it and it's a much better buy than Nick Click or Barbie (180x160) and Slam Cam.(200x200) It's an ideal starter camera, rather than spending $500 on a megapixel and storing it for 10 years, buy this and try it out, (your kids can always have it afterwards)

CHEAP! $39US with FREE Cosmopolitan Makeover software. okay images good battery life, light, tough, Serial port (works on most computers) with older systems Easy-to-use *Awesome for kids* 9v battery (easy and cheap to buy)

CMOS 256 Colour image sensor, www.vvl.co.uk, gritty images, Unprintable images, needs alot of light, "focus free" pinhole lens, low resolution, small memory (512 KB) Serial speed downloads (slow)

KB Gear JAMCAM 2, Aiptek PENCam, Kodak mc3 some high end ones, (borrowed)

Unsure not used

This is a camera you buy your 8 year old to go out and take pictures of whatever. The light metering system is very quirky indoors - either very underexposed (most of the time) or overexposed. The color rendition is very poor, and it seems that when there is a cluster of coloring (say a cover of a book) it seems to confuse the camera because the quality degrades like you wouldn't believe. Honestly, this camera isn't worth the 50 bucks even as a toy camera.

light, point & shoot, convenience.

Very poor image quality, poor metering and poor color rendition.

canon powershot

These review options didn't allow for a " number of days" answer: I used it only one day and I am returning it tomorrow. I expected more from Poloroid. This is my first experience with a digital camera. The purchase price from Wal-Mart was the very low price (even the Polaroid tech support guy was surprised) $39.43 plus tax ( he stated that the retail price could be as much as $150). I called the tech support 800 number for help after about 4 failed attempts to get the software to install completely. It reached 99% and stopped. I suspected that it was defective. Finally it installed and I downloaded my pictures only to be sorely disappointed to find that the camera performed very poorly. Even in bright light the colors had a washed out apperance. Indoors the picture quality was very dark. I had not expect them to be perfect or sharp but I did expect to be able to have a reasonable amount of distinguishable color. They had the appearance of fuzzy black and whites, but with added lamp light, they became only a little better in quality. I played with that focus limit (3 ft.) and tried shots at about 20 inches. I was not surprised that they were out of focus, but I was surprised that the tops of my subjects were "cut off," even though I could see them entirely within the viewfinder frame. I assumed that the viewfinder and the lens angle should have been aligned to be more "true" than that. Now, I understand why the camera's price is so low.

The very low cost; simple to use if you just want to experiment with the process of taking digital photos and downloading them to your computer. Once installed the "cutesy" software looks like it would be fun to use.

Very poor picture quality. The absence of a flash, The 3 foot focus range is precisely that, and still slightly out of focus.

None