Konica Revio KD-400 Review

Click here if this is your business
3.6 / 5
From 8 reviews
75% of users recommend this
Click here if this is your business
  • Image Quality

  • Battery Life

  • Features

  • Ease of Use

  • Value For Money

Japez.'s review of Konica Revio KD-400


Konica Revio KD-400 digital camera: ”

Written on: 24/07/2002 by Japez. (1 review written)

Good Points
High resolution (in practice!), high battery capacity, easily navigated menus, different memory cards can be used at the same time, small size, a lot of useful features, and USB connection to computer.

Bad Points
The metal surface is awfully beatiful until you grab it with your greasy(?) fingers :-).
TIFF should be available instead of only JPEG for the most discerning of us photografers.

General Comments
Konica Revio KD-400 digital camera:

RESOLUTION/IMAGE QUALITY: 4 Mpixels is not bad for the low price when you are rewarded with such a good image standard. I tried the camera in both compression modes (normal and fine), and found that normal is almost as good as fine but give only half the file size, and in 300% size on screen still any difference is almost invisible - impressive!!!


With 2 MB Internal Memory, 16 MB SD Card, and 128 MB Memory Stick I could save 166 photos using 2304x1704 pixels and in normal compression mode.


In one test I shot 398 photos (91 photos in 2304x1704-FINE w/o flash + 166 photos in 2304x1704-NORMAL w/o flash + 141 photos in 2304x1704-NORMAL with flash) all on one battery charge. N.B. the lens was not zoomed more than a few times in this test. The same goes for opening/closing the cover. During the power capacity test, the LCD Display was on.


The tests were done not to brag about the new Konica, but to really try and see the capacity of it. In my judgement, the camera lives up to all my requirements.

  • Features

  • Ease of Use

  • Value For Money

  • Image Quality

If you are commenting on behalf of the company that has been reviewed, please consider upgrading to Official Business Response for higher impact replies.
Report this review
Was this review helpful? 23 0