| Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF | |
|
|
|
Oregon Scientific DS6310-B 3MP ThinCam Digital Camera with Cradle (Blue) |  | Brand: Oregon Scientific
List Price: $119.95 Buy New: $79.95 as of 3/17/2010 17:08 CDT details You Save: $40.00 (33%)
New (4) Used (1) from $49.99
Rating: 17 reviews Sales Rank: 76178
Color: Oregon Scientific DS6310-B 3MP Digital Camera (Blue) Media: Electronics Autographed: No Memorabilia: No Batteries Included: No Floppy Disk Drive: None Optical Zoom: 1 Display Size: 1.5 Minimum Focal Length: 8.2 Shipping Weight (lbs): 1 Dimensions (in): 9 x 8.3 x 2.8
MPN: DS6310-B Model: DS6310-B UPC: 734811316080 EAN: 0734811316080
Release Date: November 15, 2005 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
| |
| Features:
| • | 3.0 megapixel CMOS sensor produces images of up to 2032 x 1524 pixels | | • | Features built-in flash, 4x digital zoom and a 1.5-inch color TFT display | | • | Includes USB transfer cradle, software, USB cable, rechargeable Li-Polymer battery, hand strap and carrying case | | • | Supports SD cards for extra memory | | • | Dimensions: 3.5 x 2.2 x 0.5 inches (WxHxD) |
|
| Accessories:
|
| Similar Items:
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description This micro-size digital camera takes great 3 megapixel pictures anytime, anywhere. It is small enough to carry in your pocket, has a built-in flash, 4x digital zoom and a 1.5" color TFT screen for great quality pictures on-the-go.
|
| Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 1-5 of 17
Worst Camera imaginable. Not worth any of the savings. January 5, 2006 Jack of All Trades (Chicago, IL United States) 16 out of 16 found this review helpful
I bought this camera for my dad who only needed a simple digital camera that was compact, easy to use, and cheap. So I thought a $99 3 MP camera, why not?
From the minute this camera was removed from its packaging, I could tell it was cheap. I at first hoped my dad wouldn't mind. But the menu/zoom functions were almost unusable and it too small of a button really see what to do with it. The screen image was grainy and the quality of picture was not even close to my 3.2 MP from Canon. The pictures remind me of what you get taking a still shot from a digital camcorder. Not good. But that wasn't the big problem. When using the flash, you had to wait about 10 secs for the flash to ready (much like those cheap disposable cameras) and then after you took a picture with the flash, the entire camera went dead. It drained the batteries. We thought bad batteries perhaps, but after two more battery loads and only two more flash pictures taken, we knew this camera was a huge bust.
I took it back and got the $140 4 MP Kodak camera. Yes, it was $40 more, but it is easy, works perfectly, and doesn't have any problem taking high quality pictures AND can handle the use of flash like a today camera on any level should.
Avoid this low cost camera. I wouldn't even use it if it was FREE. It will bring you nothing but trouble and you will have to pay to ship it back anyway.
Ignore the price tag, this is a worthless camera March 26, 2006 A. Ware (Chicago) 9 out of 9 found this review helpful
After the first camera I got didn't work at all, that should have been my first indication. Not to mention all the previous comments that agree that this camera is NOT worth any price.
It's really cute, sure, but the monitor on back is grainy, and my screen had a huge line down the center. The flash is really bright and over exposes the pictures. The pictures I took with flash on look one dimensional and the grainy. The ones without a flash are barely visible (I was in a bright room.)To zoom, you have to go into a menu to select options. The picture is very rocky when you're looking through the view finder.
Great price, but save your money for a better camera. Not good if you care about the quality of your pictures.
Don't fall for the looks, pay attention to the comments and DON'T BUY THIS CAMERA!
Picture quality is awful April 24, 2006 T. B. (Virginia) 8 out of 8 found this review helpful
I received this camera as an anniversary gift from my company.
After taking several pictures at different resolutions and downloading to my laptop, I realized how poor the quality of the pictures were. Very grainy to be 3.0 MP. I have a 1.0 MP Kodak Easyshare camera that could run circles around this camera any day. When I viewed the pictures for this Oregon camera, if I didn't know better I would say they were taken with a camera phone. All I can say is thank god I didn't spend any money on this thing!
Poor Service and worst Camera March 1, 2006 P. G. (Maryland USA) 8 out of 8 found this review helpful
I purchased this Camera as a christmass gift. After 4 pictures the camera ran out of battery. Quality of the picture for a 3 MP camera is very poor. After contacting Oregon Scientific several times since their phone normaly doesn't go through, they accepted to give an RMA to return and promised to send a new one. It has been over 3 weeks and no camera as of now. Poorest customer service I have ever seen. They answer their support e-mail with an standard text message and do not even read your e-mail. Save your money and by something different.
Oregon Scientific Should Be Ashamed May 19, 2006 DT (OC CA) 7 out of 7 found this review helpful
I give it one star for a nice red color.
The other reviews are correct on all points!! Even after being charged all night the battery only lasts five minutes or five pictures.
To Oregon Scientific Co. : If you can't make something right- don't make anything at all.
Sony-here I come!!
Showing reviews 1-5 of 17
|
|
|
CERTAIN CONTENT THAT APPEARS ON THIS SITE COMES FROM AMAZON SERVICES LLC. THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED ‘AS IS’ AND IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE OR REMOVAL AT ANY TIME. - | |