Kodak AWB best in mixed-mode lighting

There I was. At the camera bar of my favorite Wal-Mart...or was it Best Buy? I had a daunting task before me. It was a tough job, but someone had to do it. Yes, campers, I faced one of the more difficult and challenging endeavors of mankind. I had to buy a digital camera for Christmas. Horrors of horrors!

A little over the top? Perhaps, but I don't think so. I bet most non-techies feel this way when they walk up to the bevy of digital offerings at their local chop-shop store. Which one is the best? Which one takes the best pictures for MY needs?

And, as you already know, the wonderfully helpful staff, always eagerly waiting to service your every whim, is there, smiling warmly...or not.

OK...let's cut the crap. I needed a point and shoot. I wanted to take pictures of my 2-year old daughter, so I needed something with the following characteristics [in no particular order]:

- Fast lens [low f-number to techies]
- Good Auto exposure
- Relatively small
- Able to take decent pictures indoors with rapidly moving and uncooperative subjects [like kids]

Doesn't sound too tough, does it? Well if you feel that way you would be...wrong. Drat. I hate it when that happens.

Now, I could write a long, boring tomb [no, not my initials...guess again] regarding the characteristics of digital cameras, technical terms that you don't care about, yada, yada, yada. But this is a blog, not a book [uh...could have fooled me].

So here is the bottom line: Most point and shoot cameras really, really SUCK. They have some shortfall that will raise it's ugly head approximately 2 seconds after the warranty runs out. Just get over it.

Now, having said that, my favorite digital cameras in the point and shoot category for Xmas 2009 are [drum-roll please...]:

1. Canon SD780is - This camera is a joy to behold. Incredibly small, slick and sexy. Fast startup. Great auto-exposure. Lots of options [you'll never need]. OK lens. But note: this camera SUCKS with pictures taken at night in compact-flourescent lighting. That means the Auto-White-Balance [AWB] of the camera cannot understand the color of this particular light, and when mixed with the camera's own flash, the pictures always come out with a strange yellow color which looks horrible. Too bad...otherwise this camera is a keeper.

2. Canon SD1200is - Also a very nice little camera. Cheaper than the SD780, but identical in most every way except:
 1. A larger camera; not as sexy, but still compact.
 2. 10MP instead of 12MP which, in my opinion, is actually desirable [subject of another blog].
 3. Does not have the "evaluative" white balance manual setting. As you'll see below, I think manual settings are useless for most people, so this is a non-issue for most of us.
 4. --> Note that this camera also exhibits the TOTALLY SUCKY AWB performance under CF lighting with flash I talked about above. Too bad...again.

3. Nikon. IMO, all Nikons have really gone down hill. I still have them listed only because of their general build quality and capabilities, but in general they are not nearly as good as they used to be. They are slow to start. Shot-to-shot is horribly slow. Sure they have all the features, but who cares if you can't get the shot off when you need to. Avoid them. Perhaps next year's crop will be better.

4. Kodak. I know it's hard to believe, but Kodak actually has cameras that outshine the competition this year. Especially, with the dreaded AWB problem I talked about above. I suspected the Kodak might do better because I had an old Kodak V603 which did a fine job before I undertook this mission. And sure enough, the first Kodak I tried, the Kodak M381, performed admirably with CF light, effectively getting all the colors correct, rich, and natural-looking. The camera also works well in all other respects you would care about. It's relatively fast. It's compact, but by no means small. Startup and shot-to-shot times are good. Autofocus is acceptable. My only concern with Kodak is build quality. The Best Buy salesperson told me that, of all the cameras they sell, Kodak gets the most returns. The camera does not seem nearly as solid as the Canons or Nikons. I feel that if I look at it the wrong way, it will break. But it works best in mixed-mode light. Ugh.

So, who should care about this mixed-mode light problem? Well you should. As energy costs rise, more and more people are switching the lights in their homes to the CF type, which will save you over 75% of the cost over conventional incandescent lights. Just go to your local Home Depot or Lowes and saunter by the light bulb section [usually placed conspicuously near the entrance] to see exactly how big a deal this is.

So if you are looking for a camera this year, make sure you perform this simple test:
1. Take it home and wait till dark [oooohhh, scary!].
2. Turn on your inside lights.
3. Take pictures. A lot of them. Lots of flash pictures.
4. Check them out. Do the colors look natural? Are they overly yellow? REALLY yellow?  If so, you may have the mixed-mode lighting problem. And you may want to consider invoking your camera store's return policy.

Disclaimer time: OK...for all the geeks out there who will write in and tell me that using manual settings can overcome this problem...so what? Nobody except geeks even knows that manual settings exist, let alone wants to bother switching between them when you are in the middle of a toddler-fest. Do it once, and then forget to switch back the next day causing your outdoor pictures to all look horribly blue. This will cure you of this practice.

Don't be caught by this problem. Don't ignore this issue. Don't practice What Not to Do. Test your new camera thoroughly in your home before you decide to keep it.