Film Reviews

I've just started scanning film, and after setup, this scanner is very simple to operate. However, if you are either inexperienced with installing hardware and/or software, or are looking to scan slides, I would suggest a different scanner. Personally, I believe a flatbed with a film scanning adapter is comprable in quality.

I do have Windows 2000, and managed to get this scanner working on it, although it claims it doesn't have the components to install the driver on my OS. But that's definitely not something you want to deal with, if you can help it.

You need to have photo editing software to adjust the scans properly. It sometimes has the tendency to turn out a little orange.

Software included: Acquisition program, Adobe Photoshop Limited Edition (an extremely LIMITED edition), Presto! PhotoAlbum, Presto! Mr. Photo (basically, to arrange your personal photos- I did not install them, so cannot recommend).

Good product (3 stars) but no driver available for use with Windows XP. I found this out when I moved from a Windows '98 system to an XP system. Planned obsolescence from our friends at Canon.

I have had this scanner for a year adn a half and have put nearly 5000 slides through it. I am happy with the overall quality of the scans for what I paid for this. I use this as a proofing tool-- I only get my negatives developed (when I shoot prints) and then scan them to proof them. Or if I shoot slides and want to put them on the internet or retouch them. The scanner will make up to an 8x12 at 400dpi. which is okay. Again you must look at what you are paying. The neat scratch removing features that the upper models have would be nice but again repeating for the price this is a great little scanner. I have been happy. I even got it to work in XP but it did take some research. Info for installing in XP or 2000 can be found [online.]

When I was a kid in the 70's I owned a similiar camera (I still have it with the original box at my parents' house). The film format of 110 is too small for any prints larger than 3x5 inches, it is grainy even at that enlargement. Slide film isn't available. The last 110 camera I owned was a give-away from a computer trade show -- it was just a small box with lens and shutter that was rubber-banded to the 110 film cartridge, no exposure control, no view finder. This was 11 years ago. You want good pictures, get something else with a larger film format.

hey, I don't own this model, but I have a little Kodak Winner 110 camrea, and I just recently bought a Bell & Howell 35mm. I finally dug out my 110 and bought the first rolls of film for it in years. even though the film is kinda hard to find sometimes, and the picture quility isn't as good as the 400 speed Kodak film I shoot in my 35mm, it's still alot of fun to play with during good sunny days, mainly cause I'm too cheap to look for flash bars for it.
I'm hoping someday to buy a Nikon but one can only wish at the moment.

This is a great little camera for general use. The film is quite cheap (about $2 a roll, cheaper in a multi-pack) and loads with a simple drop in. Its a lot of fun and easy to use. Although photo experts may scoff at the picture quality,k this camera is great for kids (who don't have lots of money), it's also something so inexpensive that its no biggie of your kid loses it or breaks it. The picture quality isn't bad, but this isn't a camera for really important pictures or high quality.

I bought this scanner and while pleased with the some of the scans, the software always seems to be locking up and is quite a nuisance. It is currently in the shop being repaired. If the Nikon IV wasn't so much money, I would have dumped it and went with it.

I had some difficulty obtaining quality scans with this scanner, and the software wasn't very efficient. Focusing was often inaccurate. However, I tried Viewscan software and the results became very acceptable and fast. 4 slides at 2800 dpi in about 10 minutes. Accurate colors and 8x10 prints are very sharp. I have scanned about 600 slides without a malfunction.

Scanner gives Great Color and Contrast but the setup seems to take forever, under Win2000 scans terminated if IE/NS Browsers are used. ...,

The first Pacific Image Electronics' PrimeFilm PF1800U USB Film Scanner I received was damaged and would not work at all. I returned it and was sent another as a replacement. The scans from this scanner are terrible. This thing is junk. I returned the second PF1800U scanner and purchased a Minolta DiMAGE Scan Dual IV. It cost a little more but was well worth it. The Minolta is wonderful I have scanned close to 9000 slides with it and have had no problems.

I had the same problem with mine...I had Lamp Failure with very few hours on the unit(around 15 hours). I had lost my sales slip so could not get any help. I would have given this unit a 5 star rating because when it was working it was a great tool. Too bad the lamp life wasnt better.

When customers call their support department reporting hardware failure and the unit is within it's one year warranty period the unit may be sent in for repair/replacement under such warranty, I am not sure who some of these customers contacted for assistance but Pacific Image stands behind their products, it is unfortunate that such miss communications cause bad reputations for particular products and companies. I was helped in a timely and professional manner. I would definitely buy their products in the future.

I bought this film because I ran out of Tri-X in the middle of a trip and it was all I could find in B&W. On the plus side, it can be processed by your neighborhood 1-hour shop and it has pretty fine grain for 400 speed film. It also seems fairly forgiving of incorrect exposure. I have two problems with it: -firstly, it's just as expensive as Kodak's T-MAX 400CN film, a higher quality chromogenic (i.e. color-process) B&W film. -secondly, if you do any of your own processing and/or printing, this stuff is just as tricky and temperature-sensitive as color film, and the slightly reddish base color of the film wreaks havoc with contrast, especially if you use multi-contrast paper.

I think the best use of this film is to get aquainted with the wonderful world of black and white. It's biggest feature, from the perspective of an beginner, is that you can drop it off at any old lab and they will do a good job processing it. Very few labs do an acceptable job with traditional (non-C-41 process) black and white film, but they are all set up for C-41.

For the person who does there own processing, this film has a few limitations. Being C-41, it is more difficult to process for the home darkroom, and you don't have the same level of contrast control as you have with "regular" Black and White films. Still, it is really fine grained.

Overall, this film is pretty low contrast, and thus records a good tonal range. It scratches very easily though, so be careful with your negatives.

I use this film often for ease of processing and for convenience when purchasing B/W film. B/W film can be hard to find in a pinch. At least these are the two reasons that led me to try out this film. I love this film! I find it to have great contrast in most lighting situations without burning out the highlights or producing inpenetrable shadows. My photo lab developes the film C41 process (the same as color film), but I ask them to print it on B/W paper. The results are great! Printed on the regular color paper the lab uses does produce a "cast". Greenish, brownish, reddish, seems to depend on the lab (and the day!). You might not mind this. Try a roll and if you can get it printed on B/W paper, I bet you will be very pleased with the results. If your lab can't print on B/W paper, use the 4x6 prints as proofs. If you have a picture you really like, they can probably send it out for you to a lab that can make you a print on B/W paper.

I have been sorely disappointed by this camera. It does not focus well at all and most of the pictures I have taken have come out blurry. In addition the flash lights up the pictures poorly. I figured that based on how nice pictures are that I have seen taken with the EOS rebel this would be a good buy. I was terribly wrong. It was a waste of money and I am going back to the very dependable Olympus stylus model I used to have.

I too was disappointed in the Canon Sure Shot. Mainly, the pictures are not as sharp and crisp as I had hoped; and the indoor pictures have never come out that great. The metal piece on the front that protects the lens FELL off (discovered after the fact, so it was too late to find where it had fallen off), so now I get "light leaks". I will probably not buy a Canon camera again--and will go back to an Olympus.

I bought this camera when i was going to school in Hawaii. The pictures i got from it were clear and crisp I never had any problems with it. I was disappointed when someone stole it from me.

I've ordered not one, not two, but three different cradles from Amazon for my Fuji A210 and I still don't have one that works and includes all the correct parts. The first one didn't work--it charged the batteries for only 15 to 30 minutes which meant that I could only take a few photos before the batteries went dead. I returned it and Amazon sent me a second one but the video cord was missing from the box. Amazon then sent me a third one and it was missing the same cord that was missing from the second box. Since this is the only style cradle I've been able to find that is compatible with this camera, I plan to return the camera, the spare batteries, and the photo card to Amazon for a complete refund and then start all over again with my camera selection. Don't waste your time on Fuji products like I did.

I just bought the A210 and am terribly disappointed in the short term life of the batteries Fuji enclosed in the package. I appreicate your comments on the charger, as I just about ready to order that, thinking it would be best and would avoid the costs of the batteries. I am also finding that my picture frames don't follow suit...they skip backwards 2-4 digits when you take a pic, so you don't have a clue as to where you are. I was a firm believer in Fuji and Fuji films...I am saddened to read y our issues, and a few of my own that I have. The camera overall, seems to take great pics, but what do we do about the short life of batteries, and trying to find a decent charger and power supply cord? I guess we need to go to the Fuji site directly.
Some one in Mass.

After just purchasing the FujiFilm Finepix A210 camera, I decided that the cradle would be a great complement to it.

I had researched which batteries were the most dexterous for power-intensive digital devices. After some browsing on the web, I decided that the MAHA Powerex 2300 mAH NiMH's were the best choice.

The cradle arrived from Amazon today and I was shocked, after reading the manual - to find that Fuji says that other consumer-brand NiMH batteries either a) will not work with the cradle, or b) are not recommended to be used with the cradle.

There was no in-depth explanation given, other than that the manual recommended only the Fujifilm NH-10 NiMH's be used with the charger and camera. What gives? Is Fujifilm forcing you to buy only their brand of batteries in order to make use of the cradle, when there are other batteries which have proven to have more longevity?

My second problem is with the cradle's design. The camera itself comes packaged with a cheap, and somewhat flimsy plastic adapter/housing for the camera to sit in. Don't be deceived by the picture above - the holder seen on top of the cradle does not come with the cradle. It is only sold with the a210 camera or other appropriate model.

Rather than just make the adapter/holder a part of the cradle, it's a separate accessory - and makes the unit seem chinsy and not "solid". I would rather slide the camera into something that feels like a glove around the camera while it recharges. You are not afforded this with the cradle, because the plastic holder does not fit around the camera with a snug fit. Instead, when I find myself trying to put the camera into the cradle, I have to wiggle it around a bit in order for the bottom of the camera to mate up properly with the male plug which connects from the adapter to the camera body.

Overall, it's just a very poor implementation in concept and design.

Thirdly, the USB cable which comes with the cradle is only about 2 1/2 to 3 feet long!

Remember - the a210 supposedly features a webcam mode. Unless your computer tower is in the direct vicinity of the cradle, you're probably going to have to move your computer in order to get the camera/webcam where you want it to be. a 3-foot usb cord is simply not long enough for most webcam to pc configurations. 6 feet, even 10 feet would be much more ideal.

I had wanted to put the camera/cradle on the other side of my monitor near the light source on my desk. Unfortunately, I can't do that - the usb cable simply can't reach. 6 feet would have been perfect. Alas, I'm out of luck. Now I have to move my tower just to put the camera and cradle where it should've naturally been able to be placed. You might say - "Sure, well just go buy another USB cable."

It's not that easy. The cradle requires a specialized usb cable, because the connector on one end of this cable is a proprietary design, something I've never seen used with other digital devices.

Those are the three biggest problems I've found with this cradle. I really do hope that it is possible to use other NiMH batteries with the cradle, if not - Fujifilm has just forced you to continue buying only their batteries for your Finepix camera, and their offerings are certainly inferior to the MAHA Powerex's in terms of longevity. Many sites around the internet offer comparison graphs revealing which batteries are the best performers, and the Powerex's are #1.

So I have to say, shame on you Fuji, for misleading your customers. Your cradle's charger should be compatible with any brand of rechargeable NiMH batteries which are ideal for use with the Finepix a210 - not only compatible with your brand of rechargeable batteries.

Proprietary usb cable connector on the short included usb cable, proprietary rechargeable batteries - shame, shame.

Fuji for some reason puts out useless kits to make money and this one's no different. ...

The case is generic and too big for 2650/A203/A303/A205/A210 etc. The tripod is not useable. The batteries don't hold charge for long. A useless kit and total waste of your time and money (even after rebate or any other offers). Avoid any accessory from Digipower and Fuji kits.

Fuji does have a better fitting leather case but its hard to find in stock anywhere. Brand name NiMH batteries are better found at your local store.

This kit is not worth the money unless you're getting a rebate on it. The camera bag is much bigger than necessary for most cameras and has no way to be attached to a belt. The tripod is tiny, but does do the job. It's only about 4 inches high, no kidding! The best surprise was that the rechargeable batteries were better than advertised, mine shipped with batteries rated at 1950 miliamps. That's the highest rating I've seen for AA batteries! I'm still using my first pair after almost a month of use without recharging.

Needed a case for a 3800 I bought for personal use. Priced buying all the included items seperately from a variety of manufacturers and this was competitive before any rebates are applied (none were offered when I bought). Bag is larger than needed for a 3800, but the space comes in handy for storing the camera with the protective lens cone on and any accessories you want with you (wide angle lens, filters, tripod, etc). I feel comfortable with the protection the case gives my equipment. The tripod is kind of goofy, but most that size are. It has come in handy on several unplanned occations for longer exposure night shots or timed portrates.

I need to get another digital camera for work stuff. I am getting another 3800 and this kit.

Camera is easy to load and takes good pictures at first. However the gears that open the lens cover and zoom in and out go bad after after 2 to 5 years and the camera can no longer be used. Each of my daughters had this camera and they both went bad. Fuji will not repair this defect and it costs about $150 to fix. Avoid this camera.

I'm really sorry that the above people had these problems, but these may be just one or two bad apples out of a good crop. And good is certainly a word I'd use to describe the DL290. Straight out of the box you can feel the high quality of the product, unlike some of the cheap and nasty feeling products from other companies. The camera itself is SO easy to use, drop in loading, point and shoot, etc, and has some very advanced features built in too. The picture quality may be sometimes blurred SLIGHTLY, but if you have a steady hand, the outcome is sharp with radiant colours. It has a self timer, and a remote control option for taking pictures too, whilst the range of the Zoom is one of the best for this price catogory. Unfortunatly I lost mine in a party, but Im making my insurance company get me the exact same camera, even though I can get a more expensive camera by another company. My last one served me very well, and its stunning quality mixed with easy of use has convinced me to get another just like it. For the price, you really cannot go wrong.

I have this camera and have been using it for almost a yr. It takes great pictures. I've taken pictures of my kids at the amusement parks going around on a ride and it got a clear picture of a moving subject. It even does pretty good for night pictures too which I was amazed with. Overall it's a great camera. I like the easy loading of this cmaera too.

I found the flash to be too bright, and many photos were out of focus. The camera will be added to the garage sale pile this summer.

Do not get this camera!

I have been a loyal canon fan for a long time. I bought this camera to replace my previous SureShot that had been reliable for ten years. My hopes were high, but I had this camera for only three months before it broke. During the three months it was working, I was disappointed over and over by the SUPER OWL flash which was SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO bright it completely washed out my pictures. The auto focus was unreliable. And now the camera has stopped working altogether: it complains that it needs new battery, but does not respond to replacement batteries.

The quality of this camera fell far below my expectations.
I would warn anyone away from buying it =(

Purchased the camera at Sears on sale for [money]. Having read other people's reviews of this camera and other cameras that I own, I must be lucky or else I know what I'm doing. I've taken close up and landscape shots outdoors and I am very impressed with the sharpness of the 35mm/f3.8 all-glass lens on the OWL PF. I've had other cameras that cost more but the picture was not as sharp. I just do not have a problem with out-of-focus pictures. I think people stand too close to the subject they are photographing, hence a blurred picture and a washout from the flash. I use Fujifilm Superia 400, which I like because it has fine grain for 400 speed film. However, I have used the flash to a certain degree, I took a picture of some objects as well as people indoors at close range, 3-4 feet away and the flash did NOT wash out the picture. It has a simple autofocus system in it and I have found that it works just fine. I don't know how much abuse it would take, but for a "bang around" point and shoot camera I think this is worth the money. I particularly like the large viewfinder. I wear glasses at times and have no trouble taking pictures with this camera. Also, it has midroll rewind which is nice because I'm not one to "finish out a roll."

Strengths:
-- Large viewfinder.
-- Sharp images.
-- ALL GLASS LENS.
-- Flash cancel and fill flash.
-- Seems sturdy. (For plastic.)

Weaknesses:
-- Only accepts ISO 100, 200, 400 film.
-- Manual specifically says you can't use
slide film in it. (We'll see.)