Resolving Fine Lines

For our resolution test, we reset the camera to its default settings and then used the highest resolution and quality setting with Tungsten WB. The camera was then set to +0.5 E.V. For more information, refer to our Testing Procedures page. The color space is sRGB. Below are 200% crops of the test. Click on a crop to see the full chart.

Click to enlarge.

Click to enlarge.

In both the horizontal and vertical crops above, the M307 just barely makes it to 1,100 LPH before becoming ridden with artifacts. Although this is a fairly good resolution performance for a 3 megapixel camera, we are disappointed to see moiré just past the resolution limit. We also spotted some hot pixels throughout the chart.

The Timing Tests Color Reproduction


View All Comments

  • MadAd - Monday, November 29, 2004 - link

    320x240 for video? Thats worse than a creative 1mp camera that i picked up over 2 years ago, that did 352x288 back then. Why are the manufacturers not moving on with movie clip mode like they have done with the photo eye?

    If the eye in a similar priced cam is now 4-6 Mp for stills, why is movie mode not at least 640x480? Sure its a chunk more memory, so just buy a bigger card or switch the mode down to what they have now??

    I guess theres something im missing here, I just dont understand it.
  • brian_riendeau - Monday, November 29, 2004 - link

    It is nice to see a review be a little more negative, however this comment near the end really left a bad taste in my mouth:

    "there is a bright side. Firstly, the Photosmart M307 is priced very reasonably at ~$165."

    No its not! For $165 its total junk. It is like right at the end of the article they just had to throw somethign in to make people think that all camera for less than $200 are junk :(
  • DukeN - Sunday, November 28, 2004 - link

    HP = terrible cameras. Avoid like the plague!

    Then again people do buy Fords, and Compaqs so they will buy HPs as well...
  • phaxmohdem - Saturday, November 27, 2004 - link

    I must concur that HP cameras suck in general. Now I have never had the opportunity to play with a "top model" HP digicam. I own three digicams for home use, two for sucky eBay pictures and one for personal nice quality pics. I chose to get two Olympus D-520 Zoom cams for my ebay cams (These are very good for ebay pictures as you can get very close to an object without it loosing focus, though it only shoots upto 2.0 MP's and over-all aquality of the picture is not grainy but still mediocre.) For my persoal cam I when with a Minolta Dimage F100 4.0 MP camera. IT is nice and compact and takes beautiful pictures (though not as close as the olympus cams) My only beef is that it is a tad slow and the flash is positioned so that your finger will always be in front of it and block it if you do not think about it. (The autofocus is a little crazy too with up close objects and its a toss up whether or not it will be in focus at the time the shutter clicks open.) But overall I have never owned a better picture quality cam. I would kill for a digital SLR cam but they are a little outta my price range.

    But yeah, avoid HP! Prices may tempt you but you get what you pay for (and in HPs case you get a little less ussually)
  • stephenbrooks - Saturday, November 27, 2004 - link

    What I dislike most about digital cameras is the laggy shutter delay. Prefocus sometimes doesn't work if you move around a bit or the subject of you picture is. Reply
  • AtaStrumf - Saturday, November 27, 2004 - link

    I had the displeasure of working with a 2 year old HP 2 MP, no zoom 315 model and it's preety horrible even for a 2 year old camera. I had hoped they had changed, but I guess they haven't. Too bad. Reply
  • Bonesdad - Saturday, November 27, 2004 - link

    I have never been impressed with HP digicams. We are forced to use them at work, at least until I made an executive decision and bought a Canon A75 (which the last time I checked was about $199). I hope people do their research when looking for a good camera and avoid HP. Reply
  • Souka - Saturday, November 27, 2004 - link

    Get a Canon SD100 for that money....

    If looking at the 4mp Kodak model, go for the Canon S410 or SD300. (S410 better pic quality, SD300 TOP notch video...60fps capable!)


Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now