Fujifilm Z33WP vs Kodak M580

Choosing between two compact cameras released in the same busy summer of 2009 - the waterproof Fujifilm FinePix Z33WP and the Kodak EasyShare M580 - is like picking between two different kinds of adventure companions. Both promise fun, portability, and straightforward shooting, but each caters to subtly different personality types and shooting styles. Having spent countless hours testing compact cameras across various conditions (and accumulated a pretty serious collection of bruised gear), I’ve put these two through the wringer to find out which performs best for everyday photographers and enthusiasts. Spoiler: it’s less about the specs and more about where (and how) you plan to shoot.

Let’s dive deep and dissect these cameras through the lenses of real-world photography disciplines - from portraiture to astrophotography - to help you make an informed choice without getting tangled in marketing fluff.

First Impressions: Size, Handling, and Ergonomics

Before we get to image quality and autofocus wizardry, let’s talk about how these cameras feel in your hands - a crucial factor for any photographer who’ll be shooting on the go.

The Fujifilm Z33WP is a squat and sleek waterproof compact. Weighing in at a mere 110 grams and measuring 92mm wide by 60mm tall and just 21mm thick, it’s delightfully pocketable. Perfect for beach days, hikes, or casual outings where weather might not cooperate (thanks to its waterproof rating). But the slimness comes at a price - grip comfort is somewhat compromised, making it a bit fiddly to hold steady for extended shooting sessions, especially for those with larger hands.

By contrast, the Kodak EasyShare M580 is a bit bulkier and heavier at 150 grams, with a chunkier profile (101x59x56 mm). This added heft and girth actually translate into better ergonomics for users who like solid grip and intuitive handling. Though not waterproof or sealed - so no poolside shots here - the M580’s size offers more substantial buttons and easier control access, which can make a world of difference once you’re in the heat of candid street shooting or family gatherings.

Both cameras sport fixed lenses, but ergonomics matter deeply with compacts since you often rely on quick reflexes and one-handed operation. For travelers and outdoor adventurers after a toss-in-the-bag, weather-ready camera, the Fuji’s form factor will charm you. If you want something more substantial for general shooting comfort, Kodak’s M580 edges ahead.

Control Layout and Interface: Easy to Find, Easy to Use?

Once you’ve gripped the camera, you want dials and buttons where your fingers expect them - not performing a game of digital Twister.

Looking at the top control layouts, both cameras favor simplicity consistent with their compact class. Neither offers manual exposure controls - no aperture priority or shutter priority modes here - so beginners will breeze through their options. The Fuji packs fewer buttons, keeping complexity to a minimum, which is beneficial if you want point-and-shoot straightforwardness.

Kodak’s M580 offers slightly more tactile feedback with bigger, more pronounced buttons, which could help avoid fumbling during low-light or fast-paced shooting. It also has an optical image stabilization feature - a significant plus sleekly integrated on the lens barrel - something the Fuji lacks entirely.

As someone who’s shot with hundreds of compacts, I can definitely say that responsive physical controls outweigh touchscreen technology in this category - both cameras lack touchscreens, so tactile feedback is king here. If your workflow demands simple button clusters that won’t confuse you, both deliver; the M580 just does it with a bit more substance.

Digging into the Sensors: Image Quality Under the Hood

At camera heart beats the sensor, and here’s where things get interesting. Both cameras share a 1/2.3" CCD sensor of 28.07 mm² area, but resolutions differ: the Fuji captures 10 megapixels (3648x2736 max), while the Kodak pushes this up to 14 megapixels (4288x3216).

More megapixels in the Kodak could suggest better detail, but higher resolution on a small sensor often leads to noisier images and diminished low-light performance due to smaller photosites. Even though both cameras share a maximum ISO of 1600, their real-world noise profiles tell a different story.

From extensive testing, I found that the Kodak’s 14MP sensor does produce sharper prints and better cropping flexibility in daylight shots. However, this comes at the expense of increased noise and grain when shooting indoors or at dusk. The Fuji’s 10MP sensor, with slightly larger pixels, manages cleaner images at ISO 400 to 800, yielding more usable shots when light fades.

Neither camera supports RAW shooting, limiting post-processing flexibility, and both apply an anti-aliasing filter, which slightly softens fine detail to avoid moiré but reduces crispness.

For landscape shooters who crave resolution and plan to stick mostly to daylight, Kodak could be more appealing, especially if you’re keen on cropping. For portraits and low-light scenarios - think dim indoor events or moody street photography - Fuji offers a more balanced image quality, with smoother tonal gradations and less speckled noise.

Screen and Viewing Experience: Framing Your Shots

How you see your scene greatly affects composition. An LCD screen that’s clear and bright can be your best friend in tricky lighting.

The Kodak M580 sports a larger 3-inch fixed LCD with 230k-dot resolution, while the Fuji’s screen is a touch smaller at 2.7 inches, also with 230k dots.

Although the pixel count is similar, the Kodak’s bigger display offers a nicer preview experience for framing and reviewing images. It’s noticeably more comfortable for quick reference during shooting without needing to zoom in. Due to the Fuji’s waterproof design, its screen does have that slightly plasticky sheen which can reflect in bright sunlight.

Neither camera provides an electronic viewfinder, which is common in this class but unfortunately limits usability in bright conditions when the LCD can wash out.

If you shoot mostly outdoors and want a clear, sizable LCD for checking focus and composition efficiently, the Kodak M580 has an edge.

Autofocus and Focusing Experience: Keeping Things Sharp

Nothing ruins a shot faster than missed focus. Neither camera offers phase-detection AF or advanced tracking features; both rely on contrast-detection autofocus with a single focus mode and no face or eye detection. The Fuji locks focus in a single AF point and does so reasonably quickly, but it can struggle in dimmer environments due to the lack of AF assist lights. The Kodak, while not noticeably faster, benefits from optical image stabilization to compensate for handshake, improving perceived sharpness especially at telephoto settings.

The Fuji’s fixed 35-105mm equivalent lens (3x optical zoom) and Kodak’s wider 28-224mm equivalent (8x optical zoom) play into AF performance too. Longer zoom ranges usually make focusing more challenging and slower, so the Fuji’s shorter, simpler zoom helps maintain accurate focus speed. For wildlife or sports snaps requiring rapid autofocus and tracking, neither camera is a powerhouse - burst shooting is sluggish on the Fuji (1 fps) and isn’t specified for Kodak, further emphasizing their casual photography design.

As someone used to testing fast AF systems on DSLRs, I find these cameras’AF adequate for still subjects and casual use but not for action or wildlife - a limitation worth noting.

Versatility in Photography Genres: How Do They Stack Up?

To truly gauge usefulness, let’s break these cameras down against common photography genres.

Fujifilm Z33WP front Fujifilm Z33WP screen back Kodak M580 screen back

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones and Bokeh

Neither camera has aperture control or interchangeable lenses, so natural bokeh and precise depth of field control are limited. The Fuji’s lens max aperture of f/3.7-4.2 is slightly faster than the Kodak’s unspecified maximum aperture, lending mild advantage to Fuji for portraits. However, weak face detection and absence of eye detection mean relying on manual composition.

Both cameras reproduce skin tones adequately but tend to apply in-camera processing that smooths skin more aggressively on the Fuji, potentially flattering for casual portraits. Kodak’s sharper images can show texture and blemishes more accurately, for better or worse.

Landscape Photography: Resolution and Dynamic Range

Kodak’s 14 MP sensor provides added detail for landscape cropping, but neither camera offers exceptional dynamic range. Fuji’s environmental sealing (waterproof) does give it an edge for shooting in harsh outdoor conditions.

Wildlife & Sports Photography: Speed and Reach

Kodak’s 8x zoom lens (28-224mm) throws a wider telephoto arm, giving more reach for wildlife and sports. Unfortunately, the slow continuous shooting speed of both cameras and lack of AF tracking significantly limit capturing fast motion.

Street and Travel Photography: Discretion and Portability

Fujifilm’s smaller size and waterproof build suit street and travel shooters who want a reliable companion that can survive spills and splashes. Kodak’s bulkier size and longer zoom make it heavier but offer added framing flexibility.

Macro Photography: Focusing Precision and Magnification

Fujifilm claims a macro focus range down to 8cm versus Kodak’s 10cm. Though practically close, the Fuji marginally outperforms for close-ups, delivering sharper results when you get close to subjects like flowers or product shots.

Night and Astrophotography: High ISO and Exposure Control

Neither camera excels here: limited ISO range (up to 1600), no exposure compensation, or manual modes restrict creative control.

Kodak’s optical image stabilization helps for handheld night shots by reducing blur, but long exposure astrophotography is virtually impossible.

Video Capabilities: What You Get and What You Don’t

Both cameras shoot video in Motion JPEG format - standard for their release time but far from modern codecs.

Fujifilm tops out at VGA 640x480 at 30fps; Kodak offers HD 1280x720 at 30 fps.

Neither camera has microphone or headphone jacks, and neither supports advanced video features, so they’re strictly casual video recorders.

Professional and Workflow Considerations

No RAW support or advanced connectivity means these are strictly casual shooters. No built-in wireless, Bluetooth, or GPS in either camera limits geotagging or instant sharing - an expected limitation for 2009 models.

Build Quality and Weather Resistance: Going Tough or Going Home

One of FujiFilm’s key selling points is environmental sealing and waterproofing.

• The Z33WP is waterproof (claimed rating to around 3m), dustproof but not shockproof.

• Kodak M580 lacks any weather sealing.

For photographers who need a rugged camera that can survive pool parties, beach days, or rain showers, the Fuji is the obvious choice.

Battery Life and Storage: Staying Power Evaluation

Both cameras accept SD/SDHC cards with internal memory options. Battery life figures aren’t officially listed, which isn’t unusual in cameras of their generation.

Fujifilm uses the NP-45 lithium-ion battery; Kodak relies on KLIC-7006.

In real-world use, expect around 200-250 shots per charge on these types of compacts - not stellar but serviceable for daily casual use.

Price-to-Performance: Which Camera Gives You More Bang?

Priced around $197 for the Fujifilm and $169 for the Kodak at launch (adjusting for inflation means slightly more today), both cameras represent budget-friendly options.

Kodak offers more megapixels, longer zoom, optical stabilization, and bigger screen for less money - great value for casual users seeking versatility.

FujiFilm’s waterproof feature and superior build demand a small premium, but for outdoor adventures, it’s justified.

Which Camera Scores Best by Genre?

Let’s wrap it up with a snapshot of how each camera performs across popular photography types:

• Portraits: Fuji edges out thanks to better skin tone rendering.

• Landscape: Kodak’s resolution advantage shines.

• Wildlife/Sports: Neither truly strong; Kodak’s longer zoom gives it a modest lead.

• Street/Travel: Fuji dominates with portability and ruggedness.

• Macro: Slight edge to Fuji’s closer focus.

• Night/Astro: Kodak’s stabilization helps but both limited.

• Video: Kodak superior resolution.

• Professional: Neither fits pro workflows.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

Having put both cameras through their paces, here’s my expert take:

• Choose the Fujifilm FinePix Z33WP if... you want a compact, rugged companion for outdoor and travel shoots where water and weather resistance matter. It’s more portable, better in low light, and easier to carry in active scenarios. Perfect for beach trips, hikes, and casual portraits. There’s charm in its simplicity and durability.

• Pick the Kodak EasyShare M580 if... your main focus is daylight photography and you want more flexibility with zoom and video resolution. Its larger touchscreen, optical image stabilization, and 14MP sensor provide sharper images and better framing range. Ideal for family events, travel where weather is less of a concern, and daylight street photography.

Neither camera is a powerhouse suitable for serious wildlife, sports, or pro-level work, but for fun, affordable compacts circa 2009 era, they still hold water (pun intended) as entry-level options.

Closing Note

In an age where smartphones dominate casual photography, it might seem quaint to revisit these compact cameras from 2009. But for photography enthusiasts who appreciate dedicated optics, physical controls, and rugged designs, the Fujifilm Z33WP and Kodak M580 offer intriguing throwback choices. Their strengths and weaknesses spotlight core trade-offs still relevant today: zoom reach vs. portability, resolution vs. noise, and durability vs. comfort.

So next time you consider a budget-friendly compact, ask yourself: what kind of adventures will you take it on? The answer will guide you to the camera best suited to your photographic journey.

Happy shooting!