Polaroid PDC 2150 review

The price of digital cameras has fallen at an astonishing rate this year - but that doesn't mean you should rush headlong into buying one.

Manufacturers are adept at playing the numbers game, and the number that's particularly notable about Polaroid's PDC 2150 is the magical figure of 2.1 megapixels.

I say 'magical', because 2.1 mega- (or million) pixels is the minimum spec required to capture images that are detailed enough to make 5x7in colour prints. The level of detail is dictated by the resolution of the camera's 'charge-coupled device' or CCD - an array of tiny light sensors. The more sensors there are, the more dots or 'pixels' you get in the image taken.

But image quality doesn't end there. Other factors such as the quality of the optics and accuracy of the focus and exposure controls are just as important. This is where the PDC 2150 falls down. We tend to take it for granted that cameras with high resolutions will use auto-focus. Not so here. The PDC 2150 offers two fixed-focus settings, one designed to cover anything from portraits to landscape scenes; the other a 'macro' setting for close-ups.

For long-distance shots the results were passable, but close-up shots were blurred. The macro mode is only really usable if you're prepared to measure the distance between camera and subject.

On the plus side, all images are vibrant, with strong, saturated colours. What was a bit puzzling, though, was the fact that photos taken using the camera's Fine setting were little different - and in some cases, poorer - than those taken in Normal mode. Small amounts of blockiness could be seen around edges, a result of the JPEG compression used to squeeze image file sizes down.

So why the need to keep file sizes low? Because of the camera's meagre 8MB of built-in memory. The PDC 2150 has a slot for extra memory in the shape of SD cards - but the card is not included.

The PDC 2150 is a decent stab at a quality, budget camera. It's a little plasticky, and I disliked the lack of a lens cover, but picture quality is bordering on acceptable. Trouble is, too many compromises have been made to keep costs down. Wait for our round-up of cheap digital snappers next month for the last word on quality on a budget.

Author: James Nixon