|
|
Short - viewsLogitech Pocket Digital 130 *and* Radio Shack FlatFotoTHE RADIO SHACK REVIEW IS BELOW, FOLLOWING THE LOGITECH REVIEW FIRST.
FIRST, THE "LOGITECH POCKET DIGITAL 130"
Is Newer Better? Cheaper pocket digicams have been around a while now, and one thing has always been consistent among them - they almost always take crappy photos. If you read my review of the Radio Shack Flat Foto (keep scrolling down as it follows this review) then you'll find I wasn't very impressed with the images it produces. It's certain a small "carry anywhere" camera as you quickly forget it's in your pocket, but, if the image quality is so poor on subjects that are more than a few feet away, what's the point of using it? There were a series of these smaller cams on the market at the same time. Radio Shack and Oregon Scientific produced the nearly identical cams here in the U.S., and it was sold under the Fuji name in Europe. All of them used the same sensor developed by company called (spelled right), "Smal Technologies". The theory was good, but the execution and image quality was not.Enter the next generation of pocket cams. In this case, the Logitech Pocket Digital 130.Features The Logitech Pocket Digital is actually the second camera in this series. The original Pocket Digital looked very similar to the photo above, being small (only about 3 1/2 inches long and just over 2 inches tall), and thereby, "pocketable". You slid it open to reveal the lens, snapped your photo, and there it was. That first model had no flash, and a top actual image size of 640 x 480 pixels, although it could use an internal interpolation method to "fake" a higher 1280 pixel image.The Pocket Digital 130 offers several enhancements over the first model. First, the body is now all metal instead of plastic. This adds to the build quality, but unfortunately also adds some bulk and weight to it as well. The 130 is now at it's thickest point, over 1/2 an inch thick - and with the added weight of the metal body, this version you will definitely know is in your pocket! The resolution has been upped to a "real" 1.3 megapixel image size of 1280 x 1024 pixels, with a 640 x 480 sized choice available. The internal memory can hold around 46 images at top size, before you must connect it to your computer to download them as there is still no memory card slot. There is no movie clip mode on this model.Need light? The 130 does add a flash this time around, albeit a weak one. When the camera is closed, you cannot see it, but when slid open, the flash becomes visible through a slit in the metal housing. You can turn it off, leave it on, or on full auto. The effective range of this flash is no more than about 5 feet, and if you get too close, it will overexpose your subject, so care is needed when using it. The 130's internal lithium-ion battery charges via your USB port as you're downloading, and battery life is very good. I've taken over 200 shots and didn't run out of juice. There is no color LCD on the back (see photo below), but there is a basic LCD that shows battery life, number of photos remaining, and flash settings. For Windows XP and Mac OS X users, the camera supposedly shows up as a drive when you plug it in (no drivers needed). It works as advertised on my XP system, but I do not have access to a Mac to try out the OS X compatibility. There is an included driver disk however, for Win 98 and Mac users, as well as a USB cable for downloading images, and a small instruction book. A basic image editing program is included on the disk as well, but again, if you're using a XP or OS X machine my guess is that you'll just want to use the camera as a drive and load the images onto a better imaging editing program of your choice.
NOTE: THE CAMERA IS NOT TWO-TONED IN COLOR. THE FLASH I USED MAKES IT APPEAR THAT WAY.
Besides the added weight and bulk being a bit of a burden when carrying it in a pocket, the only real complaint I have on this new model is the fact that the designers at Logitech for whatever reason did not put a small slot on the side of the 130 for a wrist strap! There is absolutely no way to secure this camera in your hand (or around your neck as is the trend with some of these gizmos today). Since the body is now a slicker metal body, I would THINK the logical design would include a wrist strap, as it's now easier to slip out of your hands! Someone in the Logitech engineering department fell asleep on this one, and I'm thinking they won't exactly earn a cookie for it.Image Quality Actually, I was a bit surprised by the image quality... it's good. Don't get me wrong - images from the 130 will NOT compete with a "real" digital camera. Even the Sony U20 does a much better job with images than this camera does. However, it's much improved over the last model, and much better than the Radio Shack model below. Colors are a bit muted, and details are decent considering the size of the lens. You will see some "jaggies" on sloped angles, and a few "artifacts" due to some pretty hefty compression, but the images are perfectly usable for web pages, emails, and even some 4 x 6 inch prints I did turned out acceptable for everyday use. Keep in mind what you see through the optical viewfinder isn't what you'll always get - I had to aim a bit left in order to get a centered photo. This is expected and normal however, on a camera at this price level (and it happens on more expensive models too).You can click on the thumbnail below to see a sample image. I have resized and slightly compressed it for space on the site, but it gives a good idea of the overall image quality the 130 produces. Note the detail is decent, colors are halfway ok too, but there are a few jaggies here and there. Not the worst I've seen, and as mentioned above, more than acceptable for web uses.
Conclusion Many stores are selling the Pocket Digital 130 for around $150.00 (U.S.), and at that price, it is NOT worth it. For the same price or just a few dollars more, you can get a much better camera. For only $169 or so, you can get the above mentioned Sony U20 or U30 models, which while thicker, still easily fits into your pocket, offers small color LCDs, higher resolution, and better quality images. I found the Logitech on a few web sites for under $120.00 and even under $100.00 in some cases, and for that price, it might be a decent little gizmo to play with.I would normally recommend a camera such as this for teens or kids, however, due to the design flaw that left out a wrist strap on this model, I'd have to say that I would definitely NOT buy this for a child. Kids have enough of a hard time not walking into walls or spilling drinks every five minutes - how long do you think it would take them to drop this camera and break it with no wrist strap? Boooooo Logtech... big boo boo.So, a mixed bag. Image quality is better than previous models, and it is small, although bulkier than in the past versions. Price and lack of wrist strap support are the two biggest drawbacks to this camera, so if you can find it on sale, and are not a clumsy person, then it may just be for you. Otherwise, shop around for something a bit better. My grades below are based on comparing this gadget to others in it's class, NOT full featured digital cameras.
My "Grade" for this camera on a scale of 1 - 10?For Design and Concept 6IF IT HAD A WRIST STRAP HOLE, IT WOULD BE A 7
For Image Quality 6-----------------------------------------------------------------------
RADIO SHACK FLATFOTOPhoto Via Radio Shack
Introduction A couple of years ago, a company named Smal Camera Technologies (spelled correctly) came out with a concept camera that really wowed folks at several camera shows. The concept was a credit card sized camera with removable memory, and something called "Autobrite" technology (trademarked), this 1/4" thin camera was supposed to be "the thing" to buy. Well, things stalled out for quite some time, but finally, it's popping up in different markets, and under other brand names (perhaps a deal via Smal to makers due to financial issues? Hmmm).Here in the U.S., Radio Shack seems to be the main carrier, selling the camera under the name "FlatFoto". In this variation, the only difference between it and the original design is that FlatFoto has internal memory instead of a memory card slot, so once full, you will have to connect the camera via the very short USB cable supplied to your computer, to download photos. In Europe, this camera is sold under the Fuji name.
Features The FlatFoto is a CMOS chipped camera, producing a maximum resolution of 640 x 480 pixels. There is no zoom (digital or otherwise), no flash, and no color LCD - though there is a regular LCD readout on the back that gives you the number of photos remaining, resolution setting, etc. The front of the camera has a pop-out section that once the camera is turned on, extends a small amount; this contains the tiny lens, and optical viewfinder. To turn the camera off, you simply press this extended section back into the camera. The back of the camera contains the status LCD, and two buttons for sound on/off, and to delete photos. On top of the very thin device is a small shutter button, and on one side is the "on" switch, and on the other, a strap holder ( for the included neck strap ) and the USB port.FlatFoto comes with it's own proprietary software for downloading it's stored images into your computer... which does work. Once on your hard drive, you can of course tweak them in any image editor, and you WILL need to - more on that later. As mentioned, you get a neck strap ( no wrist strap? ) and a small instruction book, along with a "pouch" to slide the camera into when not in use. Pretty basic stuff.
Thin enough for you?
Image Quality Well, it's small, it's neat, and it's going to turn heads when you use it in public, but what about the image quality? Well, it will turn your head too... down, hanging, as you weep from the horrible image quality. Now really, we do have to keep in mind that this device is well under $100.00. During the holiday season it's being sold with rebates in some areas for as little as $60.00, so we do have to take that in mind before slicing it up to death in the review. Still, in this day and age, even cheap CMOS chips are getting much better in quality, so there's little excuse for the poor quality of images on the FlatFoto... they could be just a little better at least.Colors really flare out with this camera, and bright sunlit areas tend to flare out a great deal, so much so that it appeared on a few images that a nuclear bomb had exploded nearby. Sunlit scenes tend to have a yellowish cast, and objects in shaddow can sometimes produce strong blue casts. There tends to be a noticeable blur around the edges of each photo, due to the tiny size and quality of the lens. Images lack critical sharpness and detail as well. Ever viewed a photo taken with a cheap web cam? You get the idea.
Final Words and Image Samples So, would I suggest that anyone buy the FlatFoto? Well, very few. If you are very proficient using image editors like Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements), then with some major tweaking, you can make some of the images usable for web uses. Resizing them to 320 pixels.. adjusting color, contrast, sharpening, etc. You'll not get prints from it, or quality out-of-camera shots, so as long as you realize the big limitations of a device such as this, you can have some fun with it as a toy. Again, the price won't break the bank, but my fear is always that complete novices to the world of digital photography will pick up something like this and think this is considered the norm for this technology, and it's certainly not.If you want a better "pocketable" digital camera, see my review of the Sony Cybershot U10 camera. The U10 ( and new U20 ) offer much better image quality than devices such as the FlatFoto, so if image quality is a concern to you, but you need something super small, I recommend them over this device. For kids, or gadget freaks, the FlatFoto will provide a nice diversion. Image samples follow - may be cropped for size, but have not been altered, and images are as they appear out-of-camera. |
If
you're a return visitor, make sure and click on your browser's
"Refresh" button on each page to make sure you have the newest version
of this page loaded.
