Kodak LS443

4.0 megapixels | 1.8" screen | 35 – 105 mm (3×)

User reviews

Average rating: 4.02
5 stars
(23)
4 stars
(24)
3 stars
(12)
2 stars
(4)
1 stars
(0)
Sort by
1234567
jsundin
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: jsundin posted on Aug 30, 2006 UTC

Opinion: People are knocking this camera (now 4 years after it was introduced.). I have had mine for about 3.5 years now and have taken pictures of scenery, sports events, parties and so on. You have to prefocus on the subjects or the area, but once you do, the pictures turn out pretty good. I know I can get a better camera and will get one soon. But, this camera has served me very well over the years. It is not as horrible as the last several posters have described. It is good, it is simple, it is basic. If you need to shoot indoor pictures in flaky light, such as school gyms, forget it. If you are outdoors, I have been able to capture a play at the plate and have it turn out very nicely.

Problems: 1. After 3+ years, I just noticed a few hot pixels.
2. The camera only charges when sitting in the cradle. (But the battery lasts for over a week of vacation usage)

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
kmatt92701
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: kmatt92701 posted on Mar 27, 2006 UTC

Opinion: This was my 1st digital camera and I was fairly happy with it until now. For a novice it was easy to use and enabled me to send pics to my grandchildren who live out of state.

Problems: I bought this camera 3+ yrs. ago and was happy with it until a couple of weeks ago. Now, I am furious with Kodak. A couple of weeks ago the screen went black. No pictures. I ordered a new battery from Kodak thinking that might be the problem. No such luck. I called Kodak for repairs and they told me I could pay $150.00 plus tax and shipping to have it repaired or they would give me a refurbished V530 Camera for $150.00. (The same camera new is selling at Walmart for 199.00.) I am finished with anything made my Kodak.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Photo_Guy_2005
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Photo_Guy_2005 posted on Apr 10, 2005 UTC

Opinion: DO NOT BUY THIS CAMERA....

This was my first digital camera and I got it as a present a little over a year ago. It does shoot fairly good images on auto ISO mode and a decent battery life.
But this is where I stop being positive...

Problems: CONS:

a. very limited controls!
b. grainy photos when using high ISO settings!
c. movie mode is very bad...flutters between light/dark
d. I've replaced this camera once already after its screen went completely blank and wouldn't boot up... this was weird!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
GrzegorzN
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: GrzegorzN posted on Feb 18, 2005 UTC

Opinion: I used LS443 almost two years, and now I can say something about digital photography and this camera. It is a completely waste of money. I'm very disappointed with Kodak, and I'm not going to buy anything from them again.
When I tried to take a picture yesterday, the LCD was 100% black, all pictures were black and AF didn't work. I've read Kodak fourm at dpreview.com and looks like I'm not the only one with such problem.

Final words: don't buy any of Kodak cameras

Problems: - quality of pictures is very low
- compared to other cameras, it works very loud
- low quality LCD
- flesh performance is way below the average
- almost impossible to get at least average quality indoor picture

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Kiitana
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Kiitana posted on Feb 15, 2005 UTC

Opinion: DON'T BUY THIS CAMERA!! It is a horrible waste of money that will fall apart on you. You will be much better off paying for a Canon Powershot A400 instead. The picture quality is grainy at best and sometimes wouldn't even recognize pictures that it had taken. Please, save your money and do not purchase Kodak cameras.

Problems: memory card door had to be taped shut
didn't even recognize some of the pictures it took (neither
did the computer)
The camera wouldn't hold a charge
Plugged the camera in at night and let it charge, the
camera only then lasted for about an hour with
minimal picture taking.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Ron Harpham
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Ron Harpham posted on Nov 13, 2004 UTC

Opinion: When I first bought the camera I was delighted with the image quality. The colours appear true to life on my PC monitor, I took the camera everywhere.
Now, I've changed my opinion entirely.

Problems: After just 3 months the camera would not focus on distant shots in landscape mode. I returned it for repair and had to wait 2 months to get it back.
A year on and the lens motor has completely packed up. I've now been waiting for over 3 months for it to be repaired. Apparently (I'm told) there is a shortage of parts now that Kodak has discontinued the model. It seems to me that many LS433 cameras have had a similar problem, suggesting a design fault or sub-standard parts. Kodak ought to replace any faulty cameras without question, they can surely afford it.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
spookie
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: spookie posted on Sep 14, 2004 UTC

Opinion: Hi! This was my first ever digital camera. I loved it so much.

Problems: It's 2 yrs old now and sadly, I've suddenly had a problem where all my pictures have a blue tinge. Hence, the pictures don't turn out well anymore. I've sent to the local Kodak for repairs but they said the part I need has been discontinued. Moreover, even if they can source for it, the cost would be almost half of the cost of the camera in the first place....after 2 yrs, parts not available anymore? No more kodak ever for me....now a proud owner of Canon Ixus 500!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
kevincam
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: kevincam posted on Mar 2, 2004 UTC

Opinion: My second camera I owned. It's a great point and shoot camera. It takes great pictures in auto mode, and great macros. It works really well in indoor lighting, but I found colors to be too bright outdoors.

The big draw back is that it lacked real manual settings. Also, the delay between shots is TOO SLOW, as well as power on time.

Problems: Flash stopped working, replaced under warranty.

huge lage between picture

long power on time

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report
Larryl45
0 out of 0 users have found this review helpful
By: Larryl45 posted on Feb 24, 2004 UTC

Opinion: I bought this camera in May of 2003, and took about a thousand pictures until December when the lens wouldn't extend. The pictures were of reasonable quality, and the camera was easy to use. The docking mechanism made it easy to download pictures to my PC running XP. Pictures taken in low-light conditions tended to be blurry more often than not. In addition, someone else's Canon G1 Sureshot, with 3.1 megapixels, seemed to take pictures that were superior. I found that many pictures had to be "corrected" with the Kodak software on my PC.
But since Best Buy and their agent refuse to honor the warranty on this camera, I will be looking for another, and cannot recommend purchasing this - or any other Kodak - canmera.

Problems: The lens extention problem and refusal to honor warranty.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Report