#1 Rhycer

Slick looking camera; less "toy-ish" looking than the product shots of Z980. And since I'm the market for something superzoomer-ish, I was almost interested until i read that again, the Kodak super-zoom camera requires AA batteries. Sorry, interest gone.

Now, if Kodak could make a Z982 with a real battery solution PLUS a sensor bigger than 1/2.33" that plagues these high-zoom cameras. A model like that, from any manufacturer, would be a good complement to the photo bag. Does a model like this exist yet?

10:23 pm - Wednesday, January 6, 2010

#2 Mark C.

Guess what... the Canon PowerShot SX20 and also the Olympus SP-59 super-zoom cameras use AA batteries. If you want a custom battery camera, get a friggin Nikon and watch when you can't find batteries and need to take photos in a bad--bad way...

I was looking to buy the Z980 for the wife for Christmas and couldn't find any in stock. I'm glad I couldn't. This looks to be an improvement (14MP and 2X more zoom for a lower price). Nice!

6:14 am - Wednesday, January 13, 2010

#3 Chuck

Gotta agree with Mark--after burning through all three of my 'proprietary' batteries for my Panasonic/Lumix FZ15 one week into a two-week wilderness canoe trip, I won't look at any camera (or other device) that can't be powered by AAs...

6:34 pm - Sunday, January 17, 2010

#4 Fred M.

I own the Z712is and the Z1015is with the lithium rechargeable batteries. Both of them will take AA battery's BUT with NIMH I get about 30 pixs and there dead! 300 with the klic8000 lithium. Wonder with this one how many pix's with the NIMH?

2:52 am - Tuesday, January 19, 2010

#5 ALEX

100% agree with Mark C. "watch when you can't find batteries and need to take photos in a bad--bad way..." . Thanks to Kodak with AA format.

8:37 pm - Sunday, February 7, 2010

#6 Marlo

I have already pre-ordered mine - I have a Z series Kodak right now and I love it. I also own a professional series Canon Rebel xti that I am selling because my current kodak takes pictures that are just as good. I also purchased a Canon slim camera recently - awful quality, and it was a nuisance to have to charge the battery.

2:02 am - Wednesday, February 10, 2010

#7 panos

I could never understand this "battery" thing.
What serious photographer would want to shoot 300 photos in half-a-day to go back and choose which one is the best????
Sorry, you either know what and how to shoot or else, buy a battery manufacturing company and, keep in mind, ... you are not a photographer. You're just taking a lot of garbage photos only because the camera can do it.
On the other hand, try to think ... "film-wise". Shoot digital as if you are holding a film camera... It will give you both, more skill and, save camera energy, making AAs a great choice.
:-)

3:42 pm - Friday, February 12, 2010

#8 Gene Essman

I pretty much agree with Mark and panos but I'd suggest that bracketing is still a good pursuit is the shot is critical, even with digital. By the way panos, speaking of batteries, your computer clock seems to be about 12 hours off? ;-)

5:06 pm - Friday, February 12, 2010

#9 Gene Essman

...make that "if the shot is critical," Sorry!

5:08 pm - Friday, February 12, 2010

#10 Gene Essman

panos, please let me retract that comment about your computer clock now that I see that my 9:05 am post shows up on here as a 5:06 post. ;-(

5:10 pm - Friday, February 12, 2010

#11 Fred M.

panos you miss the point, when I reach for my camera to take a shot or shots, i want it to Take those shots. A pro would not be buying this camera. We that do buy this are point and shoots and even a pro will tell you take alot of shots because maybe only one will be The shot. Its not like the old days when we were warned about mercury in the film we wasted. Now with rechargable batteries we are totally green! Check my pixs on MyGoodPictures.com all taken with my 712is and 1015is and I DO take 300+ a day on vaca!

9:51 pm - Saturday, February 13, 2010

#12 Michael

What is all the hub-bub about battery life? I too have the Z980 and am using the rechargeable Ni-MH that came with it. Dang, I can run off probably 800 pics between charges. And I am NOT using ANY battery-life-saving features on my camera. I bought spare batts when I got this camera anticipating this problem. Now I'm never without charged batts.

7:44 pm - Wednesday, February 24, 2010

#13 Gene Essman

Michael, you're a cunning guy. Solve the problem before it exists. I'm pretty much on everyone's side here. It is reasonable to "sharp-shoot" your shots if you have a need to and it's also feasible to use the "shotgun" approach when you desire. While the need to be precise and "professional" may be diminished with digital, but not replaced, is true, and yet, it also doesn't hurt to hone one's skills to the finest point possible. I'm not a pro and I do have a Canon EOS 5D MkII with a few "L" lenses, pretty expensive stuff, but I don't like carrying it around with me all the time. I'm old, it's heavy, and it's also expensive. The sensor in my EOS has an expected useful life of around 100k shots and then has to be replaced. I cannot begin to "shotgun" it and hope to replace that sensor for anywhere near the price of a Z980 which does a magnificent job for the price. The Kodak "Z" line serves some real useful purposes for a lot of people and there doesn't seem, in my mind, to be one "better" way to do it. It's all good and makes some real pretty stuff to look at. I looked at Fred M.'s pics and it's obvious that he shoots a lot of pics. I'm happy to see that he has the time and opportunity and don't quarrel with anything he's doing. About the batteries, I've had real good luck with after-market batteries I've gotten from an online merchant in Las Cruces, NM. One Canon battery for my EOS 5D is about $100 but I can get after-market ones online for under $20. I have the backups charged at all times but continue to use the one that came with the camera. I rarely have to stick in one of the backups.

8:45 pm - Wednesday, February 24, 2010

#14 Michael

I was just enjoying some of Mikes pics -- hey does anyone have any high-resolution pics from their Z980 they'd like to share. I'll show you mine if you show me yours!!! Howe 'bout you, Gene -- whataya got??? Try me here or email me at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

2:02 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#15 Fred M.

The original hub-bub was I asked Kodak how many shots could I expect with the z981? They had no clue. First guy told me 300, then retracted it and said if I used the zoom a lot maybe 50. Second guy told me it still in testing and they are not sure.

I love the lithiums in the two Z's i own now. No problems. I tried NIMH in them and they died in less than 30 pix's. Talking to the tech at Precision Camera Repair, he said it since it was made for NIMH it should have good life. Selling my 1015is so I can order the z981. Never sell the 712is!! Think I will ask to be buried with it.

4:07 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#16 Michael

^ Hmm, well I use the zoom an awful lot and I can run off at least 400 pics, possibly more, before having to recharge them. I used the old Z740 for 5 years -- it only used 2 batteries, but the 980 last just as long if not longer, or so it seems. Hey everyone, I joined a Z980 fan forum today. It needs more traffic, so please check out my Z980 pics. They are severely compressed, but you can get the idea and if you like any of them I can email you the large file. They originals will show way better detail.
http://z980forums.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=4602377

6:55 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#17 Michael

^^^ screen name is "winlock"

6:58 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#18 Gene Essman

Michael, I'm waiting on a local store to get some 980s in stock. I'm still using my z712 but I expect a 980 or 981 to arrive about any time. Then, we can do some swapping if you're still in the mood. I'm going to have a look at your shots now.

7:17 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#19 Gene Essman

Michael, I'm waiting on a local store to get some 980s or 81s in stock. I'm still using my z712 but I expect a 980 or 981 to arrive about any time. I like the 81 for the lens but I also like the 80 for the type of IS. I just got back from looking at your shots on the "Fan" page and I'm impressed. Even at low res you've got some great stuff on there. Well worth looking at. You've sure have some subject matter and you obviously have an eye. Is that Mt. St. Helens? It sure looks like something that's blown it's top.

7:35 am - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#20 Michael

^^^ tis Mt St Helens, couple of pics of Rainier in there too. Although both volcanos are about an hour and a half away from where I live, the pics were taken not too far from my house, underscoring the power of the zoom. I have already preordered the Z981. No more hotshoe, just so everyone knows. (that might have already been mentioned)

5:25 pm - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#21 Gene Essman

Great stuff Michael. Enjoyed your pics a lot. Didn't figure there could be too many spots like that around. I'm in Colorado and we don't have those kind of "free-standing" mountains. We get 'em in rows. Hot shoe? Depends. I have friends with lots of red-eye issues with their z's so a hot shoe and/or a cord could eliminate that and the need to edit for it. I don't use flash much so it's not an issue but all things considered, the extra zoom of the 81 would not offset the ability to use an auxiliary flash for me, along with the more reliable IS. The extra lens - if I can't get the shot with 624 I probably can't with 676 or whatever it is. Just a thought. I'm waiting on them to get into the stores then I'll take a SD card and go there and shoot some in the store, taking my time to analysis and make my own comparisons before I make my decision. That's the only way I'll buy a camera. I know I can save a few bucks online, and have, but I like to have someone I can throw it at if I'm unhappy. ;-)

6:53 pm - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#22 Gene Essman

As far as 12 v. 14 mpixel, the printers being used now do not require either of those sizes to get huge printouts. I read somewhere that 3.5 mpixel with get you a 16x20 with no sweat. Have yet to confirm that, but... Plus, I have my 21 mpixel full-frame 35mm sized sensor on my EOS and the ability to go up to 1200mm with good glass if the need arises for more resolution so there are other issues that I have in mind and one of them is to get max flexibility with minimum effort in what I tote around. May not work for everyone but it does for me. Again, not a pro, I'm a hack. If my skills ever reach a level that will challenge the full capability of even my z712, I'll be a happy guy. You're about there. I have some shots on Facebook as Gene Essman, Sr if you're on Facebook and want to have a look. Like yours, my images have been compromised for someone else's benefit but I do have the full res versions, many, many copies.

7:03 pm - Thursday, February 25, 2010

#23 Julie

Michael your photos are pretty amazing, esp if they've been compressed. I am impressed.

I've been thinking of getting a Z981 (or a Nikon P90). I love Kodaks results (Michaels pics back me up). I also have a small Nikon L15 point & shoot and the colour always looks washed out compared to my Kodak does better pictures every time.

I used to have a Z7590 but Kodak seems to have gone backwards since then. The Z7590 I could operate virtually one handed without taking my eye from the viewfinder. Sadly it developed a power problem sucking the batteries flat quickly, then it started making mini explosions which I felt was a bit unsafe so I stopped using it. The lithium ion batteries used to go forever when using the viewfinder, hundreds and hundreds.

I replaced it with the cheapest zoom I could find which was the ZD710. Similar buttons but I have to take it from my eyes and look at the back for settings. It takes two AA batteries, but I can often take 80-100 photos in 30-40minutes and the AA rechargeables are hopeless. The spares I carry with me usually had nothing left on them by the time I needed to use them. I gave up and started using Duracell Powerpix and then Energizer Lithiums, and I reckon I've now thrown away twice what I paid for the camera in the last year. The other very very annoying thing is that I have to reset the date & time every time I change the batteries.

I looked at the Z1015 at one point and was very disappointed, as it was operated in the same backward way as the ZD710, with AA batteries.

Has anyone used the Z7590? It totally spoiled me for anything else, and I keep hoping that the next Kodak will operate similarly.

I've been looking around the reviews, and the comments here have been more helpful than any of them. So thanks all for your comments.

12:57 pm - Friday, February 26, 2010

#24 Michael

Thanks for the nice compliments -- I never used that particular model, the Z7590. I had the Z740 for years and really liked it. I think it was the original z980, who knows. I never had problems with battery life though. One day after a couple of years the battery quit taknng a charge. Thought the battery died and just kept dumping regular non-rechargeable AAs. I went through those pretty fast. When I got my Z980, I gave the Z740 to my brother, just to find out it might not have been a dead battery afterall but we think the charging/printing dock quit working. I hated that printing dock. The paper-feeding system quit working. I just print my pics on my HP all-in-one now.

6:16 pm - Friday, February 26, 2010

#25 Michael

By the way... Easyshare software 8.2 is available for download from kodak.com. I dont see much difference from 8.1 however. Guess I'll keep using Nero Photosnap and Paint for editing.

6:23 pm - Friday, February 26, 2010

#26 Fred M.

Julie, I have the z1015is it will not use AA's. It uses lithium ion klic-8000 batteries. 300+ shots per charge. Maybe they had a early model that used them. Not a bad camera but i am selling it before the warranty expires to order the z981.

3:23 am - Saturday, February 27, 2010

#27 Julie

Hi Fred, you have jogged my memory. I think the reason I dismissed it at the time wasn't the battery but the controls seeming like a backward step to the Z7590. Bit late now though. Ha ha.

10:24 am - Saturday, February 27, 2010

#28 Julie

Another reason I dismissed the Z1015 is that it had the wide angle/telephoto button was on the nearside rather than on the front. I find it annoying on the ZD710 when using the viewfinder as my thumb keeps bumping into my nose. I prefer to use the viewfinder rather than the display.

How do you all cope with that or doesn't it worry you. Or do you all use the display rather than the viewfinder?

Michael those 800 pics between charges – are they using the display or the viewfinder? I’m wondering if I drain my batteries so quickly because I take so many photos in a short amount of time.

With the research I've done so far, the Z981/81 still looks better than anything else I've looked at online. I live in Far North Queensland, and the nearest place where there is an accessible range of cameras to look at is in Brisbane 2000km south. My next camera purchase will have to wait til I do my next big road trip south to visit family.

11:33 am - Sunday, February 28, 2010

#29 julie , seems normal

I use the electronic viewfinder exclusively.
My thumb sit on the zoom and finger on the shutter.
viewfinder is of center to the left so no problems.
The z981 has the same setup as doses my 712is.
Unless you favor your left eye no problems!
HEY! got any good pix's you took of native animals down under? I love shooting wild life! Email me at
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

3:19 pm - Sunday, February 28, 2010

#30 Julie

will have to go looking in the next few days, better at flowers and landscapes

12:28 pm - Tuesday, March 2, 2010

#31 Michael

^^^ the 800 pics -- that number might be a little lofty, but I'm positive I can get at least 500 pics from one charge -- I use he display exclusively. Dont much care for the EVF.

6:28 pm - Tuesday, March 2, 2010

#32 Mary

I have to agree with those, like Fred M., who've had bad, bad luck with the Kodak re-chargeable. I have the Z980 and can't get twenty or so out of the batteries. Seriously. I had been taking pics almost every day when I was using a 10x optical zoom from the old D series. When I received the new Z980, my picture-taking ground to a halt. I even stopped taking family photos and my Mom died recently. Now that I know about the lithiums, I'll try those.

I also HATE the lens cap on the Z980. Will the 981 be an improvement?

8:34 pm - Saturday, March 6, 2010

#33 Mary agreed on lens cap!

my 712is no problems, the 1015is it is barely on and falls off all the time.

8:41 pm - Saturday, March 6, 2010

#34 Mary and the batteries..

I hope that you have a problem with bad batteries, cuz thats been my worst fear that i will be popping new batteries in after selling my 1015is and pre-ordering the z981. Don't think you can use lithium's in the 980 or the 981 , just NIMH.

8:50 pm - Saturday, March 6, 2010

#35 Ryan

First thing, don't waste your money on this camera. Its crap! Just like the Z980 was, Horrible image quality when you zoom in to look at the detail.I have the z980 and now looking to get the Canon t2i or the Nikon D90 , save your money and buy a real camera. And to the guy who bases a camera on a non "AA" batt.. is a lo@%zer. If the z981 had good image quality who cares what powers it.

5:38 am - Tuesday, March 9, 2010

#36 Michael

^^^Ryan, at the risk of sounding like I'm over-protecting the Z981, you are comparing a 329.00 point-and-click camera with a couple of SLRs of upwards of $900. There isn't a person on this blog that wouldn't rather own one of the 2 aforementioned SLRs over this measily little point-and-click. What's more, you act as though you've already used the Z981. Have you??? Because it has not been released to the public yet. I happen to know that in addition to the extended zoom and increase in pixel size (14 mps) that the Z981 is now using a lense-based optical image stabilizer instead of the mechanical-shift CCD stabilizer that the z980 currently has. This COULD make a big difference in the image quality (or lack thereof) that you have pointed out. By the way, what does Canon or Nikon offer in a point-and-click in the 329.00 range? Oh, and dont forget, it's gotta have a 26x zoom, at least 14 mpixels and a lense-based OIS. Lastly, calling the guy who bases thier camera-buying on a AA battery a "loser" is a bit unwarranted. The same could be said about the guy who compares the image quality of a $300 point-and-click to a $900 SLR. There is a possibility that some of us, whom are just as passionate about photography as you are, cannot afford anything better.

7:54 pm - Thursday, March 11, 2010

#37 Nicely put..... Michael

This loser owns two Z-series now so i know what i want in a camera. You left out the thing that got my attention when I saw it @ Kodak, the 26mm WIDE angle lens! The 15x is VERY hard to hold at max zoom so the 26x will definitely need a tripod. I look at the DSLR's too but can't justify the expense with my point and shoot hobby. maybe when I retire I can regress and go back to setting F-stops and holding up a light meter... anyone remember cassete film and flash bulbs? opps! Showing my age...

2:53 am - Friday, March 12, 2010

#38 Michael

I remember those little flash cubes for instamatics. You just spin them around a quarter-turn to get 4 flashes from one cube.

4:05 am - Friday, March 12, 2010

#39 Gregg

I ordered the Z981 2 days ago and can hardly wait for it to ship!I am returning to photography (as a hobby after many years hiatus).I bought a Kodak M381 this past November in anticipation of a visit to London and Paris this fall.it takes some stunning photos so I thought I would stay with the Kodak family and go with the Z981 for more serious stuff.Better than a pocket point and shoot with a fair portion of the sophistication of a (d)slr! I'm sure I won't be disappointed.After all, Kodak has been making cameras and film for 130 years!

2:16 am - Monday, March 15, 2010

#40 Julie

I carry my camera EVERYWHERE in my handbag. I don't particularly want to carry an SLR with extra lens in my handbag - a superzoom is quite big enough.
The Kodak Z980 costs between $435 to $600. The new Nikon P100 is $599 which is somewhat cheaper than the P90 was. It's not the price that's an issue for me, it's the fact that it must fit into my handbag.
I like the superzooms because I can be taking pics of grains of sand, then zoom in to a ship at sea in one quick motion, immediately - how can you do that with an SLR?
I don't ever intend to open a gallery of my pics. However a couple years ago I took some photos with my Z7590 for a friend opening a B&B. I had two friends with me that day who both had Nikon SLRs and they also took photos. All pics were sent to their webmaster and guess who had the most photos used - mine on the Kodak.
Inclined to think people like panos and ryan are just out to get a bite.

6:13 am - Monday, March 15, 2010

#41 Julie

Cant wait til someone gets the new Z981 I'm dying to know what it's like. I haven't got a hope in H-- of seeing one up here in the far north of Australia.

6:16 am - Monday, March 15, 2010

#42 James

I like my Z1015 and little Z650 so much, I pre-ordered a Z981. These cameras take great pics and give me so much rich color. I need a tripod for my 650, but not my 1015, no sir, she takes care of stabilization for me.

12:59 am - Wednesday, March 17, 2010

#43 jfkelley

I agree with Julie about being spoiled by the z7590. I bought mine yrs ago with everything- dock,bag sd card, printer dock, travel charger and all. I love it. The only issue we have is when shooting zoomed indoors. Can't seem to find (or remember) the right combination. Kids recitals or programs seem to be well lit and the shot looks good until you go to print or enlarge. Most alway fuzzy. Outdoor or in with the flash is great!! Also get 100s of shot per charge with the 5001 battery.

6:56 pm - Saturday, March 20, 2010

#44 BASANT RAJAK

hey people, wake-up plz,it's leses are great but ,batteries are outdated,using AA ,why the compnies are providing old model batteries in these modern cameras????
please upgrade it in to lithium ion batteries .why not it's possible?????????

7:07 pm - Saturday, March 20, 2010

#45 James

I can't wait to try the vertical mode with the attaching grip, that is one feature I could really use. Plus I have large hands and like to have a good size camera body to hold on to. I hope they ship em soon, before the flowers and turtles come out. :)

11:30 pm - Saturday, March 20, 2010

#46 BASANT RAJAK

this is horrible to run a camera without lithium ion battery :-(

5:35 am - Sunday, March 21, 2010

#47 Julie

Low light seemed to be an issue with the z7590 but everything else was so great it didn't matter to me, and if I could have been bothered to set it properly it probably would have been fine in low light, just being lazy tho. It's an old model now having come out around 2004 I think, and my newer ZD710 has done much better in low light.

I've been tossing up between the Kodak Z981 and the Nikon P100. Deciding points: RAW, and battery types.

I can see advantages in both AA and lithium ion. If you are out in the wilds of some obscure country (or third world parts of Australia I kid you not) with no electricity, any old AA batteries will get the job done. But realistically I personally am not likely to be anywhere I can't plug into the grid and think I'm better off with lithium ion. With the ZD710 I reckon I've thrown away more batteries (including rechargables) than I paid for the camera.

As for RAW - I'm only just starting to understand this stuff. I'm about to change from PC to a Mac, and the Kodak RAW is not compatible with Macs.

Ultimately I think I will be going with the Nikon. I'd prefer the Kodak as I prefer the end result to the Nikon. But until the controls work the same was as the Z7590 and they start using lithium again, I don't think I'll go down the Kodak path, sadly.

However, I'm still interested in hearing how everybody else goes when they get their Kodaks, so will keep looking in here. My purchase will still be a couple months away, and who knows what may change in the meantime.

8:09 am - Sunday, March 21, 2010

#48 Julie

Having said all of the above, I just noticed that the Nikon P100 had gone from 12mp DOWN to 10mp although they'd upped the zoom to 26x. Think I might be sticking with my old ZD710 a bit longer than I'd planned and see what happens with the Kodak again. Talk about decisive.... not.

How do you manage your rechargable AA batteries? Do you have a system so that you've always got recharged spares when you are out and about. I always found that my spares had almost discharged themselves if I carried them around for a while - which is why I gave up and went to throwaways.

10:53 am - Sunday, March 21, 2010

#49 BASANT RAJAK

im agree with Julie

1:17 pm - Sunday, March 21, 2010

#50 James

The main reason I chose to try the Z981 is prior product satisfaction, but I will be expecting quality pics with this cam. The Kodak store offers a 30 day refund just in case. If I do not like this new Kodak, I am watching the new Olympus sp-800us with 30x zoom, the battery issue does not concern me, but good pics, high power zoom, and zooming in video mode do.

5:18 pm - Sunday, March 21, 2010

#51 Julie

Sadly, the Olympus SP800 UZ does not have a viewfinder. It was looking ultra good to me until I realised that. I prefer to use a viewfinder rather than the display, esp in our bright sunlight.

Spoke to Kodak today and was told they weren't thinking of releasing the Z981 in Australia, even tho many places had already sold out of the Z980s.

11:30 am - Monday, March 22, 2010

#52 um?

AA and lithium ion AA is just the kind of fit they take. so it would be AA lithium ion there is nothing that says you cant every camera i have seen gives you the ability to use AA lithium ion (just got to change battery settings)

11:04 pm - Monday, March 22, 2010

#53 :p

seems to me lately only people know about cameras. are people on flickr. no offense to anyone all this cameras call bad i can find a flickr group and find great pics from that camera.

11:13 pm - Monday, March 22, 2010

#54 real price

by the way the real price of the kodak z980 is 399.95 but people are trying to rip people off. so do not go for it.

11:20 pm - Monday, March 22, 2010

#55 James

Thanks for the heads up on the Olympus, I think thats utterly stupid, words fail me,,,, a camera with 30x zoom, and no view finder?????

No thank you olympus, thats why we have Kodak! :)

3:44 am - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#56 Julie

Lot of people trash on Kodak, but really I think they still have the best end result, and that's what counts in the end.

No viewfinder.....
I think they've forgotten who they are catering for with ultra-zooms - we're not the strict point and shooters, neither are we the serious professionals (or would be professionals) who want everything a D/SLR does. Geez, a viewfinder helps to stabilise everything when you're too lazy to use a tripod, like me, or in too much of a hurry, like me.

12:06 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#57 Michael

I never use the view-finder. I always find the image not as clear as the LCD. However, I agree -- for a so-called "bridge-camera", taking away the viewfinder is a huge step-back. To be fair, Kodak taking away the hot-shoe was also a step back, even though, again, I dont really use it.

3:45 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#58 Michael

I must admit -- I became very intrigued with the Olympus SP 800uz with its 30x zoom and "dual-image-stabilizer" BUT, the so-called dual-image-stabilizer is a mechanical CCD-shift AND a digital stabilizer, while the new Z981 will be using an actual lense-based optical stabilizer. I still think the latter is better for shake-reduction and thus, less noise. What's more, some may disagree, but I dont necessarily like 'smaller' -- it looks too toy-ish. If one wishes to graduate to a bridge-camera, why would one want it small enough to stick in your pocket (not that it's possible, but I'm just saying) -- I dont know, maybe its because I have big fat fingers and prefer something bigger and more professional-looking. Ya, that's it, "professional-looking" -- I think a performance-rich bridge-camera should be targeting that audience. Just me.

3:57 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#59 Michael

SHAMELESS ADVERTISEMENT ALERT !!!!
SHAMELESS ADVERTISEMENT ALERT !!!!

I finished my website. All pics were taken with my old Kodak Z740 and my new Z980. Please take a looksie...

http://www.michaelkristiephotography.com

4:00 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#60 Shadow

to me a optical stabilizer makes more scene and from what i have read it should work and look better.


but what do i know i have never owned a camera before. i did pre-order the kodak z981. yeah for a first camera its a alittle crazy lol.

10:28 pm - Tuesday, March 23, 2010

#61 Julie

Shadow it will be a great first camera. I've had 3 Kodaks, and used them all on Auto successfully for ages before I had time to sit and read the manuals.

9:03 am - Wednesday, March 24, 2010

#62 jess

Does anyone know when it is released in the UK?

1:23 pm - Wednesday, March 24, 2010

#63 Albert

This will be released on April 1, 2010 as per Amazon.ca. However, the US Amazon.com still not announce when will release.

According to dpreview.com information, the CCD size of both Z980 & Z981 are the same - 1/2.33 " (6.13 x 4.60 mm, 0.28 cm²), but the pixel density of Z981 is 50MP/cm2 while Z980 is only 43MP/cm2.

What will that means? Is Z981 CCD more advance technology? Which CCD will be better?

Please comments.

7:45 am - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#64 Ken

I own a Z1012 and I love it. The only 2 things I wish Kodak would add are a bulb setting for time exposures and a way to put filters on the lens. BTW. I have never had an issue with the rechargable battery. Just put the camera on the charger every night and you are good to go.

6:00 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#65 Michael

It is my understanding, unfortunately, that the smaller the pixel size, the tougher time it has sensing light -- which translates to more noise. I hope the I'm wrong.

6:00 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#66 Michael

I just went to the Kodak site and found they've already removed the Z980 -- which answers the question for sure, the Z981 definately has replaced the Z980.

6:04 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#67 James

I have never messed around with comparing my pics at different pixel settings, but would lowering the pixel setting on the camera act to reduce noise?

6:07 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#68 KODAK 'CHAT' from just now

Michael (10:08:38 AM): This is a technical question. Regarding the new Z981 -- the Z981 with 14 megapixels has a sensor size the same as its predecessor the Z980, which was only 12 megapixels. Doesnt cramming more pixels into the same size sensor make the individual pixels smaller? And thus giving the sensor a harder time to process light, resulting in more noise?
Jennifer M. (10:12:05 AM): Welcome to Kodak, my name is Jennifer. Please wait while I review your question.
Michael (10:13:13 AM): hello
Jennifer M. (10:14:02 AM): Hi, Michael. I understand that you are planning to purchase the Kodak EasyShare Z981 camera.
Michael (10:14:14 AM): yes i am
Jennifer M. (10:14:23 AM): Okay.
Jennifer M. (10:14:52 AM): The Z981 camera does have 14 MP (4368 × 3256) while the Z980 has 14 MP (4368 × 3256). {<<< incorrect]
Michael (10:14:58 AM): i was excited about the new optical stabilizer as opposed to the mech ccd shift, but i was hoping the sensor would be bigger to accomodate all those pixels
Jennifer M. (10:18:13 AM): Alright.
Jennifer M. (10:18:58 AM): That's actually a good point. Just give me a few minutes to check on my sources regarding your concern.
Michael (10:21:21 AM): right now, with the z980, i can detect digital noise sometimes even at 50%. Especially in the blue sky or in dark areas. I've been told, perhaps I'm wrong, that the smaller the size of the pixel, the harder it is to light-sensitivity -- and that can result in more "noise" in the image. If Kodak is upping the pixel count to 14 million, why not enlarge the sensor as well?
Jennifer M. (10:25:04 AM): Sorry for the delay and thank you for patiently waiting.
Jennifer M. (10:26:36 AM): Actually, the process of the light is still the same however, the difference is just the megapixel size. There is an error with the website regarding the Image Stabilizer both the camera does uses Mechanical CCD shift.
Jennifer M. (10:29:14 AM): The higher the megapixel size the better the image quality.
Michael (10:29:23 AM): I received an email just yesterday from your digital support team saying that the Z981 will indeed come with an OPTICAL stabilizer. So who's right and who's wrong?
Jennifer M. (10:31:16 AM): I have double-checked it with our product specialist and I was told that there was a mistake with the website and it should be Mechanical CCD shift. Good thing you raised this question so that we can correct it.
Jennifer M. (10:31:25 AM): Thank you for that.
Michael (10:32:51 AM): This was in my email; "Greetings Michael, Thank you for contacting Kodak Technical Support. Yes, the Kodak EastShare Z981 digital camera will come with optical image stabilizer feature. However, the image sensor will still be the same as the one on the Kodak EasyShare Z980 digital camera which is 1/2.33 type.
Jennifer M. (10:33:35 AM): Yes, I have double-checked it as well. Thank you for that information.
Jennifer M. (10:35:42 AM): Sorry for the inconvenience. I have double-checked it with our product specialist and the Z981 does have Mechanical CCD shift for the Image Stabilization feature.
Jennifer M. (10:35:58 AM): Any other concern?
Michael (10:36:21 AM): so for clarification, the Kodak website is wrong and it definately DOES NOT come with an optical image stabilizer?
Michael (10:36:39 AM): CCD mechanical shift ONLY???
Jennifer M. (10:37:28 AM): Yes, you are right.
Michael (10:39:42 AM): That's too bad -- Guess what? You've lost a customer. I'm cancelling my pre-rder for the Z981 and selling my Z980 on ebay and I'll pick up the new Olympus sp800uz, with 14 megapixels, 30x zoom and dual image stabilizer for 349.00. That optical image stabilizer was the selling point, even though you got rid of the hotshoe. Oh well!
Jennifer M. (10:41:42 AM): I apologize for the inconvenience however, I have double-checked it and the Image Stabilization of the Z981 is Mechanical CCD shift. We are sorry for the wrong information on the website. We will check on it.
Michael (10:42:10 AM): thank you -- have a good day
Jennifer M. (10:42:21 AM): You're welcome. Would that be all?
Michael (10:42:38 AM): yes that will be all
Jennifer M. (10:42:53 AM): Thank you for contacting Kodak. At the end of this chat session, you will be given an option to fill out the customer satisfaction survey. Please wait a few seconds for the survey to load on your screen. Your comments and suggestions will help us improve our service.
*** Newest Message ***
Jennifer M. (10:43:02 AM): Have a great day, too.

6:51 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#69 James

I found pictures taken with the new Z981 on Flickr,

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kodakpix

7:25 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#70 James

I just noticed on the Kodak site that some of their new cameras are scheduled for March, but are still not available. I sure as heck hope they are not this slow with the 981?

9:17 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#71 Shadow

to me Jennifer m. sounds like a bot. it sounds like Jennifer m. is wrong and Michael is right.


what does Jennifer m. mean when she says (That's actually a good point. Just give me a few minutes to check on my sources regarding your concern.) they have the camera at kodak for testing and so on there should not be a need to check sources they could check the camera it self.

fact of the matter is sources are not always correct sorry to say. all i can say is Jennifer m. does not know what shes talking about. you can tell by looking closely what she says.

9:32 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#72 Shadow

once i get mine ill tell you what it really has. with all this misinformation someone that knows what there talking about needs to clarify.

ill post here again when i get the camera and ill say what it really has and not.
an Michael i think that email is more correct then the talking bot Jennifer m.

9:45 pm - Thursday, March 25, 2010

#73 Michael

^^^ I sure wish I knew. I just purchased the Olympus sp800uz and its being shipped to me. It sounds impressive but it looks funny -- looks toyish. But its the image quality that concerns me most. We'll see how it does. Fujifilm HS10 also has a 30x zoom (24mm - 720mm equ) and has a CMOS sensor. BUT only 10 megapixels and $500+.

4:02 am - Friday, March 26, 2010

#74 Julie

Michael I'm really interested to see how the Olympus goes, so please keep posting here. The big negative for me with that was there was no viewfinder, and I use the viewfinder most of the time.

I was almost heading for the Nikon P100 again, but think I will hold off buying anything at all until I can see a Kodak Z981 in my hot little hand to try out.

And Shadow I'm really looking forward to hearing about your purchase when you get it.

10:37 am - Friday, March 26, 2010

#75 Michael

I will let you know how it does Julie -- If the image quality is as good as "they" say it is, then I can overlook its 'looks'. I never use the EVF, cuz to me, kinda looks like crap. That's just me. All I can say about the Z980 that I currently use is this... It takes great pictures WHEN IT WANTS TO. The Z980 has a little indicator that tells you its in focus and ready to take a shot, but half the time, it seems, they are kinda blurry. I was hoping with the new OIS, those shots would be clearer. But, apparently, it doesn't have one. At least that is what Kodak told me yesterday.

5:27 pm - Friday, March 26, 2010

#76 another "CHAT" with KODAK

Harcy V. (9:44:26 AM): Welcome to Kodak, my name is Harcy. Please wait while I review your question.
Harcy V. (9:44:34 AM): Don't worry Michael, I'll do my best to help you.
Michael (9:44:56 AM): Sure
Harcy V. (9:45:22 AM): Do you have the camera handy?
Michael (9:45:44 AM): No, this is a question about the new Z981 -- it hasnt come out yet
Harcy V. (9:46:32 AM): I see, the camera has an image stabilizer.
Harcy V. (9:48:04 AM): There is a setting on the camera to activa/deactivate the digital image stabilizer.
Michael (9:48:11 AM): oh boy -- is it OPTICAL or CCD mech shift???
Harcy V. (9:48:29 AM): It is optical.
Michael (9:48:41 AM): where are you getting this information
Harcy V. (9:49:14 AM): You can visit the camera information at http://www.kodak.com/go/Z981.
Harcy V. (9:50:25 AM): Is there any other support I may provide you with today?
Harcy V. (9:52:14 AM): Are you still there Michael?
Michael (9:52:27 AM): yes
Michael (9:53:07 AM): i was told yesterday that the website was incvorrect and that it does not have an OIS but is using the CCD mecha shift
Michael (9:53:28 AM): kodak technical assistance (chat) told me this
Michael (9:53:50 AM): back in february, i kodak tech said it was going to be OIS
Michael (9:54:19 AM): an email from kodak technical support 3 days ago said it would be OIS
Michael (9:54:44 AM): bnut the tech yesterday confirmed twice and said the website was wrong and that it would be a CCD shift
Harcy V. (9:55:03 AM): Yss, it is Optical Image Staibilization.
Michael (9:55:09 AM): i cancelled my preorder for that camera yesterday because of this
Michael (9:55:21 AM): WHO IS RIGHT AND WHO IS WRONG????
Michael (9:55:39 AM): WHO DO I BELIEVE -- IM GOING NUTS
Harcy V. (9:56:19 AM): For the Image Stabilization, it is optical. OIS means Optical Image Stabilization.
Harcy V. (9:59:57 AM): Are you still there?
Michael (10:01:14 AM): YES
Michael (10:01:53 AM): im sorry i was talking to kodak tech support by phone as well
Michael (10:02:06 AM): the rep also say the IS is optical
Michael (10:02:37 AM): it is tought o make a decision when kodak is telling 2 different things
Harcy V. (10:03:35 AM): I really feel for you. Don't worry if you have any hesitation or question we are always here for you to support your concerns.
Harcy V. (10:03:39 AM): Is there any other support I may provide you with today?
Michael (10:03:49 AM): no thank you
Harcy V. (10:04:05 AM): Please save this case id number 5668956 for your future reference.
Harcy V. (10:04:12 AM): Thank you for contacting Kodak. At the end of this chat session, you will be given an option to fill out the customer satisfaction survey. Please wait a few seconds for the survey to load on your screen. Your comments and suggestions will help us improve our service.

6:06 pm - Friday, March 26, 2010

#77 Michael

sorry about all the typos in the above 'chat' -- but i was getting extremely frustrated and my fingers couldnt keep up with my head. This is driving me crazy.

6:14 pm - Friday, March 26, 2010

#78 Shadow

what i want to say is that when i put in my experience about my kodak z981 i will have nothing to compare it to. so i will also have nothing that i got use to.

im getting a kodak brand is because i have heard good things about them. an why i picked kodak z981 is because of all that it has it looks good to me for the price.

6:24 pm - Friday, March 26, 2010

#79 Albert

Checked Kodak US site, found the Z981 user manual. compare to Z980 manual:
1) Z980 CCD is 1/2.3-type (4:3 aspect ratio) while Z981 CCD is 1/2.33-type. I was once read some passage that 2.33 one is from Sony. Is that means Kodak changed the manufacturer of CCD? Is it better?

2) In Z980 manual, clearly stated the image stabilizer is CCD-Shift. However, in Z981 manual the spec. of the I.S. is missed. They intended to do so or IT'S A CARELESS MISTAKE????
It is hardly to believe such an important information can be omitted in this important document.
Consider back to Michael case chat with Kodak rep. Jennifer M, now I am no wonder Jennifer keep saying Z981 is CCD-shift. May be their Product Specialist is specialize in manual reading. :-))

Having compared the product features between Z980 and Z981, I believe they are the same design, except the CCD type and unclear of IS type.
In view of i) favor comments from users on Z980, ii) 2.33 type CCD already commonly used in many DC, iii)I.S. system mainly not affected the image quality and iv)faithful in Kodak color management.

I will go for the Z981.

11:30 pm - Saturday, March 27, 2010

#80 Shadow

there is one thing you forgot to say Albert that is different is the size kodak z980 is alittle smaller then the kodak z981.

also the speed from changing shot to shot another from kodak z980 and the kodak z981 is different as well.

this are the different specs kodak z980 Shot to shot < 1.5 sec and the size Dimensions
W × H × D: 3.5 × 4.9 × 4.1 in. (90.5 × 123.7 ×105 mm)

the kodak z981 Shot to shot < 1.6 sec and the size is Dimensions W × H × D: 4.9 × 3.3 × 4.1 in. its what the site says by the way

5:08 pm - Sunday, March 28, 2010

#81 Albert

Dear Shadow
Thanks for your comparison.
0.1sec differ in shutter speed I believe is nothing when use in consumer type. I still believe their mechanism is the same, just a difference when measuring. You know how's the accuracy in Kodak manual? :-)
I also believe the wider width of the camera body is good for my big hand.

Let's share your user experience here after we get the camera.

10:49 pm - Sunday, March 28, 2010

#82 Gregg

I am hoping that Kodak will employ more than one method of image stabilization!Does anyone yet know for sure? The mechanical shift from the 980 will be used but will there be an optical stabilizer as well? I am hoping so because I really would love to have the Kodak but the use of only one stabilizing method could be a deal killer. Maybe I should just trust their 130 years of camera and filmaking experience and chill. LOL. Thanks to all.

2:05 am - Monday, March 29, 2010

#83 Michael

^^ I wished it was dual, but kodak told me (take that for what its worth!) that the OIS is in lieu of the CCD mech shift IS. And I agree, Gregg, the details (or lack thereof) will drive you crazy!

4:55 pm - Monday, March 29, 2010

#84 Shadow

my kodak z981 is coming early yay it was released and sent on 31st of march will get it if all gos well the 2 of april

7:05 pm - Thursday, April 1, 2010

#85 James

They must be busy bees at the Kodak store, my z981 just shipped this morning to arrive on the 5th!!!!

9:39 pm - Thursday, April 1, 2010

#86 Gregg

I am leaving on vacation in the Morning for ten days! I wish my z981 had arrived earlier, for me to take it along,I will be be in Reno on the edge of the Great Basin and near Lake Tahoe!It's not fair I say!!! By the way, may I ask who is being used as the shipper? And how do you know the cameras have been shipped?...an email perhaps? Thanks guys.

3:02 am - Friday, April 2, 2010

#87 James

Hi Gregg

I got notified this morning by email from Kodak, and they linked me to UPS tracking, mine is scheduled for Monday.

Sorry about not having your new cam for the trip, thats a tough hit, but you'll just have to take it on your next one :)

4:02 am - Friday, April 2, 2010

#88 Michael

^^^ speaking of not fair -- anyone that took the time to read the 2 above-posted "chats" with kodak tech support would know by now that I had cancelled my pre-order for the z981, purchased online the olympus sp800uz, then cancelled THAT order and then tried to 're-instate' my original z981 pre-order. Unfortunately, Kodak wouldn't reinstate it. All the pre-orders had been basically used up and I couldn't start from scratch either. Being in limbo, I chose to "pre-order' it from Amazon.com, which, thus far, still haven't recieved THIER hunk yet. In short, I have no idea when I'm getting mine. I am so bummed -- and it was all Kodaks fault. Dang!

4:31 pm - Friday, April 2, 2010

#89 Shadow

by the way for thoughs who have not got the kodak z981 yet or otherwise it has a electric viewfinder by the way.
will use mine tomorrow when weather is better and batterys are fully charged

1:32 am - Saturday, April 3, 2010

#90 Shadow

so far i really like my kodak z981 camera.

but there is a few things that could make it better
like easyer to close the battery compartment because it is hard to close it should get easyer after alot of use. also would like a diff compartment for the memory card. like change the bottom where the batterys go and memory card and cut it so you can put in the batterys but still keep the memory part closed.

but everything about the camera i do like i just would tweek it some to make it more friendly.

6:45 pm - Tuesday, April 6, 2010

#91 James

I was out yesterday playing around with my Z981, the pictures are really nice and clear. The zoom is excellent, the camera feels well made and looks hot as hell, especially when the zoom lens is extended.

I'm lovin this baby!

9:50 pm - Tuesday, April 6, 2010

#92 Jason

Any pictures? Thanks a lot.

10:00 pm - Tuesday, April 6, 2010

#93 Michael

I always have the vertical grip screwed in on mine just for the sole purpose of keeping the batteries in, heh, heh!

1:20 am - Wednesday, April 7, 2010

#94 James

Michael

I always have the vertical grip screwed in on mine just for the sole purpose of keeping the batteries in, heh, heh!


You got a z981???

I love that vertical grip, and the shutter button on the side, fantastic feature, I'll be using that alot.

2:03 am - Wednesday, April 7, 2010

#95 Michael

^^^ No, not yet, ordered mine thru Amazon, but I do have the Z980. I like the vertical grip but I never use the portrait button (or the switch for that matter) -- I just turn the thing sideways and use the same ol' landscape button by force of habit. The portrait button was a nice idea, I guess, but it simply didn't land for me.

3:05 am - Wednesday, April 7, 2010

#96 Jessica

I've just ordered mine off Amazon. Its £100+ cheaper than from the official Kodak site!

3:23 am - Wednesday, April 7, 2010

#97 Julie

Here in Australia there is still no sign of Z981s. The *Australia* Kodak site changes to *Asia Pacific Region* as soon as I click on products which only shows the 981 and not the 980. Doing a search on shopbot brings up nil 981s although 5 camera shops selling Z980s. Tried Amazon but for some reason Aussies are not allowed to buy certain products like cameras & other things that are expensive here.

10:53 am - Wednesday, April 7, 2010

#98 Michael

Kodak called me this morning to let me know it's now in stock on kodak.com again. Cancelled my Amazon order and scooped it up from Kodak this morning. Finaly -- I get mine!

3:55 pm - Friday, April 9, 2010

#99 Michael

By the way -- for those whom have already recieved theirs, can anyone confirm, once and for all, that the Z981 indeed has the OPTICAL image stabilizer and not the CCD shift???

4:00 pm - Friday, April 9, 2010

#100 Joey

Hey michael how can you tell if the z981 has the optical instead of the mech...in the documentation ...i get my on tues from kodak just tracked and its on it way....

3:50 pm - Saturday, April 10, 2010