Kodak DX6490 vs Minolta Z2 ?!?

Which one would YOU think is better and WHY???

In article , wrote

Which one would YOU think is better and WHY???

Why?

I have a DX6490 I would not have considered the Minolta
for the following reasons [JMO] Power is 4 x AA Bty's.
I prefer the 1. Low light performance is not very good
by comparisson. More expensive, ok only a few quid on
Amazon £254 Minolta - DX £229 but every penny counts.

Did you consider that while the Kodak's LCD is bigger, the Z2 has a stronger
flash, hot shoe, manual focus capability, and a spare battery won't cost you
$35-40?

Tom P.

In article m,
wrote

Did you consider that while the Kodak's LCD is bigger,

Well at the time I considered this to be a major plus point
but in retrospect it probably is not since I prefer to use
the viewfinder for shooting and the LCD only for reviewing
or program functions. However, that's just the way I use it
and no doubt there will be sittuations where the LCD becomes
more important.

the Z2 has a strongerflash,

Indeed, but there agin it probably needs it whereas the DX does
not because [probably] it's low light level capability is better.
I think its a case of manufacturers set a spec compatible with
the performance of the item. They do not add increased spec of this
kind simply to cater for the individual preference in operating
style.

hot shoe,

I cannot foresee me ever needing a hot shoe capability. If I did,
then i may not have bought this type of camera in the first place.

manual focus capability,

Well that is of no consequence to me anyway, my eyesight is knackered
enough for me not to rely on my focussing ability [lol past experiences]
so I prefer auto focus. Besides, and again, my need to manual focus is
not sufficient to warrant considering it as a requirement. But I did
consider this point carefully.

and a spare battery won't cost you $35-40?
Tom P.

Well I got one for GBP 10 the other day [+ p&p] which
in your money is probably less than half of what you
pay. So its not an issue. However, I only got it as
an 'extreme' percaution. The bty life and power conservation
features are both excellent. So a spare is IMO and for my
requirements, not really that necessary. But handy to have.

All in all I suppose the differences are not that great and it
really depends on how you envisage using the camera and your
prefered methods of operating. Some features of both may not
necessarily suit you.

So far, I have not been disappointed with my purchase except
for the software provided by Kodak which in my opinion is lousy.
The biggest downfall I have discovered so far is that if you
do not want to use a dock and decide to use USB/Camera connection
only then you run the risk of increased wear and tear on the camera
USB connector. Whilst this is not necessarily a big issue, continued
use in this manner will cause problems later. I frequently need to
take and download small numbers of photo's and the wear and tear
on the USB port on the camera and the protective cover will in time
cause a failure. IMO a card reader is essential and though wera and
tear on the card will increase, that is cheaper to replace than getting
the camera USB replaced etc. [Card £22 for 126mb reader £10] and it
offers far more versatility.