Kodak Easyshare C315 digital camera died
OhioGuy
It cost about $100, and was just over a year old. When I turn it on now,
there is a red LED on the front that will blink for a while, then it just
stays on. No signs of life from the color LCD screen. I've removed the SD
card, put in fresh batteries, and even opened up the unit and tried blowing
dust out of the main control on the top. Nothing makes any difference.
My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?
Rick
$100.00 camera and out of warranty? Not worth it. Even if you could get
it repaired for half that cost - highly unlikely - the repair would only
have a 30 to 90 day warranty at best. Especially if your intention is to
replace it with another camera costing only $100.00. The cost for
repair/cost to replace ratio doesn't make ecomonic sense.
Rick
Anthony Matonak
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?
You can buy these (C315 / C530 / CD50) refurbished for around $65.
For instance...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16830170083
Recertified: Kodak EASYSHARE C530 Silver 5.0 MP Digital Camera $65
I can't imagine anyone repairing one of these for less than $65.
You are better off getting another camera.
Anthony
Gary Heston
Depends upon how old it is, mainly. A couple of places turned up in a web
search for "digital camera repair quote Kodak Easyshare C315":
www.digitechcamerarepair.com/ (wants you to fill in a request form)
www.precisioncamera.com/kodak-digital-camera-repair.html (has a link to
a cost estimator, but it doesn't seem to work with FireFox).
You might try taking the batteries out and leaving them out overnight.
Sometimes the control circutry gets confused, and leaving it unpowered
long enough for the residual charges to bleed off will clear up the problem.
Gary
--
Gary Heston ghe...@hiwaay.net http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/
Yoko Onos' former driver tried to extort $2M from her, threating to
"release embarassing recordings...". What, he has a copy of her album?
Anthony Matonak
...
> My big question is this: is it worth taking this sort of thing to a repair
> shop, or would I be better off finding another $100 digital camera?
After a bit of websearching, it looks like the General Electric A730
has the most bang for the buck at less than $100. 7MP, 3X optical zoom,
image stabilization, Mpeg-4 movie recording and ISO 1600.
Anthony
David
"OhioGuy" <no...@none.net> wrote in message news:f9kmuj$8q9$1...@aioe.org...
flat $150. Looks like you'd be better off with a new camera.
Warren Block
GE doesn't even register on dpreview.com, a bad sign. Kodak recently
announced they were phasing out low-end cameras, and their low-end ones
were really, really low-end.
newegg's $75-$100 list for ideas for replacements:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2070070012+4027&name=%2475+-+%24100
--
Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota * USA
Al Bundy
OK, let's parse this thing out.
You took your $100 camera on vacation in your $500 1969 van. You took
family pictures and the camera went blind. Come on folks. How hard is
this to figure out?
Try cooling it down with that refilled fire extinguisher from the
garage sale. This could shock it back to life.
P T
you find that a common complaint about Kodaks is they draw a LOT of
power; you have to be very particular about what kind of batteries you
use. I prefer NiMH, and even with those, sometimes the system will go
dead just sitting for a week, turned off.
You might want to try some different batteries. Alkaline, at a minimum.
Maybe take them out when not in use as well.
Al Bundy
Precisely why I changed from an HP to an "A" series Canon. Now I can
take hundreds of pictures on a set of rechargeable batteries. Even
alkaline batteries work amazingly long. It seems to defy physics the
way Canon powers the flash, the LCD, and the lens movement over such a
long time on standard AA cells.
My Kodak and the HP were about the same, heavy power users. I had
built a separate power pack with cell phone batteries to satisfy their
needs. I could go on vacation with two batteries now (with the Canon)
and still have a charge left when I got home.
throwitout
> I have a less expensive Kodak also. If you read the reviews at Amazon,
> you find that a common complaint about Kodaks is they draw a LOT of
> power; you have to be very particular about what kind of batteries you
> use. I prefer NiMH, and even with those, sometimes the system will go
> dead just sitting for a week, turned off.
Not the fault of the camera. If you look... well anywhere you will
find that NiMH batteries are netorious for having a hih self discharge
rate.
> You might want to try some different batteries. Alkaline, at a minimum.
> Maybe take them out when not in use as well.
If you even looked at the manual once, you'll see where it says about
45000 times "DO NOT USE ALKALINE BATTERIES!!!". Alkaline batteries
perform poorly in high power devices because the high internal
resistance makes the voltage drop anytime a high load is applied.
Ni-MH are a good choice, and for one time use, Lithium are the best.
Personally I have a couple "cheap" Kodak cameras, which have performed
quite well and get 200+ photos on a single charge of Ni-MH batteries.
I also try to minimize using the screen.
YMMV