HP PhotoSmart 318 Review

Click here if this is your business
★★★★☆
3.6 / 5
From 5 reviews
60% of users recommend this
Click here if this is your business
  • Image Quality

  • Features

  • Ease of Use

  • Value For Money

Hyge's review of HP PhotoSmart 318

★★★★☆

“Ok i am finnish dude so my english isn't the best, but...”

Written on: 08/10/2003 by Hyge (1 review written)

Good Points
Clear and colourful pictures in good light, cheap, very accurate ccd at the middle (edges may be little fuzzy), uses compact flash cards (they are cheap)

Bad Points
no lens protector, uses a lot batteries, underexposured pictures in some cases, sometimes dim LCD display

General Comments
Ok i am finnish dude so my english isn't the best, but i try to tell as much as i can.



The camera is normal sized digital camera. Package includes 4aa batteries, strap and the camera. Really bad that HP didn't include lens protector to this camera because the lens is only protected by plastic shield which is not replaceable.



I gotta really tell you about the photos. Two and three star photos... well... you cant really say wich one is wich. They look the same but three star photo takes about 800kt per picture. The compression isn't big in two star so i dont really recommend anyone to use the three star photo since i didn't see any difference between them (size not counted ;)



The underexposure is a real bummer in this camera since the finware looks up the brightest bit on the picture. Then it exposures it by the brightest point. Even my lousy webcam has better exposure. There is a way to lock the exposure where you want (I use it everytime). Just place it somewhere dim wich is at same distance as the object or person you want to photograph and press the button halfway down. When the camera is focused and exposured move it to your object and press the button all way and you have nice photos.



CCD is really really good in this cam! I gotta tell you that. Some higher price cameras that i was looking at which had about 3.2MP had very bad image quality. The pictures just wasn't sharp. The bad thing in this CDD (or is it the lens) is that sometimes you can see how fuzzy the edges are.



Conclusion: In good conditions (cloudy but still bright) the camera is at it's best.

  • Value For Money

If you are commenting on behalf of the company that has been reviewed, please consider upgrading to Official Business Response for higher impact replies.

121621_Peter25's Response to Hyge's Review

Written on: 08/10/2003

Thanks for the great review and your english is great-I wouldnt have a cat in hells chance of writing such a good review in finnish! Keep up the good work! hyvästi ystävä!

Reply to this comment
If you are commenting on behalf of the company that has been reviewed, please consider upgrading to Official Business Response for higher impact replies.

Gene Telep's Response to Hyge's Review

Written on: 20/09/2004

Dear Finnish Guy
<br>
<br>Thanks a lot for your suggestion re: HP 318. I have struggled for a year or more with underexposure, and am at the point where I want to throw the camera in the trash and spend money for a better one. I tried your solution, and it works fine!
<br>
<br>Thanks again !
<br>
<br>Gene Telep (Florida guy)
<br>tvcook@thevillages.net

Reply to this comment
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? 2 0