Kodak M340 vs Sony TX7: An Expert’s Deep Dive into Two Ultracompact Cameras

In the world of compact cameras, choices abound, but figuring out which model will serve your photography passion best isn’t always straightforward. Today, I’m taking a close, hands-on look at two intriguing ultracompact cameras that, on paper, target similar users but deliver distinct experiences: the Kodak EasyShare M340 and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX7. Both hail from the early 2010s era and box clever in cramming decent specs into pocketable forms. But how exactly do they differ in practice? And which one should you consider (if either) for your photographic adventures today?

Having spent 15+ years testing thousands of cameras - from raw professional gear to these pocket-sized wonders - I’ll break down everything from imaging performance to ergonomics and user experience, sprinkled with insights you won’t find in typical spec sheets or marketing glossies. Let’s get going.

When Pocketability Meets Photography: The Ultracompact Landscape

Ultracompact cameras often straddle a tricky line: delivering decent image quality in diminutive bodies, while keeping controls minimal and user-friendly. Both Kodak’s M340 and Sony’s TX7 are firmly in this category, designed for casual shooters who prize portability but don’t want to sacrifice essential photographic capabilities.

To start, it’s worth comparing their physical sizes and ergonomics - since the feel in your hand or pocket sets the tone for every shoot.

The Kodak M340 is a featherweight 115 grams and measures a tidy 96x59x19 mm. The Sony TX7 is slightly chunkier at 149 grams and 98x60x18 mm, but it’s more about the details: TX7’s wider lens range (25-100 mm) and larger 3.5-inch touchscreen vs. M340’s simpler 2.7-inch fixed screen. It’s a close call ergonomically, but that touchscreen on the TX7 is a game changer for intuitive control - more on that later.

Under the Hood: Sensor, Lens, and Image Quality

Now we get into the heart of image-making - sensor and lens. The Kodak M340 sports a 1/2.3” CCD sensor with 10 megapixels, while Sony’s TX7 boasts a similarly sized and resolved BSI (back-illuminated) CMOS sensor. These sensor sizes (both about 28 mm^2 in area) are typical for cameras of this form factor - too small to compete with APS-C or full-frame beasts, but capable of pleasing casual shooters.

From my experience testing CCD vs BSI-CMOS sensors in this category, the TX7’s BSI-CMOS enables notably better low light performance, thanks to enhanced light gathering and less noise at higher ISOs. Kodak’s CCD sensor is good for well-lit scenes but begins to struggle past ISO 400. Sony doubles the max native ISO to 3200, which gave it an edge in dim indoor or dusk conditions.

Lens-wise, Kodak’s M340 delivers a 35-105 mm equivalent zoom with an aperture range of f/3.1 to f/5.7, while Sony’s TX7 offers a wider 25-100 mm equivalent, f/3.5-4.6 zoom. The wider-angle start on the TX7 lets you capture more sweeping landscapes or group shots without backpedaling - which I definitely appreciated when shooting a road trip album. M340’s tele end is slightly longer, but the difference is marginal in practice.

Overall, image sharpness is surprisingly close, but Sony’s lens delivers slightly crisper results at the shorter focal lengths owing to better optics and its processor.

Handling and User Interface: Button vs Touchscreen

Physical controls vs touchscreen navigation - what’s your preference? I suspect many traditionalists reading this will prefer tactile buttons, while casual users might lean towards touchscreen ease.

Kodak’s M340 keeps things old school: no touch, no manual exposure tweaks, just basic auto with a 5-point contrast-detection AF system. Sony TX7, meanwhile, steps up with a capacitive touchscreen, touch AF, plus a richer autofocus system boasting 9 focus points. The Sony’s Bionz processor also feels snappier when hunting focus and processing images.

In real shooting sessions, the TX7’s touchscreen responsiveness is gratifying - say, selecting a specific area for focus is straightforward without fumbling through buttons. With Kodak, you’re largely at the mercy of where the camera decides to autofocus, which can be frustrating in complex scenes or for portraits.

Shooting Experience: Autofocus, Speed, and Performance

Ultracompact cameras aren’t speedy beasts by any stretch, but I was curious to test burst shooting, focus accuracy, and lag on both cameras.

Kodak’s M340 offers no continuous autofocus or burst mode, limiting it to single-shot AF only. Its shutter speeds range modestly from 1/4 to 1/4000s, but blackout lag between shots interrupts quick sequences. Conversely, the Sony TX7 provides a 10 fps burst mode, albeit at lower resolution, and an autofocus system better suited to catching spontaneous moments.

For sports and wildlife, the Sony’s faster frame rates and snappier autofocus clearly have the advantage. Kodak’s M340 struggles to keep up with moving subjects, making it more suited for still life, portraits, and leisurely shooting.

LCD and Viewfinder: The Window onto Your Image

Neither camera features an electronic viewfinder, which tells you a lot about their intended usage - they’re designed for casual shooting, with composition primarily through LCDs.

The Sony’s 3.5-inch LCD with 921k dots popped with vibrant colors and useful resolution, making it a joy to review shots and navigate menus. Plus, being a touchscreen adds to its user-friendliness.

Kodak’s fixed 2.7-inch screen with 230k dots felt cramped and a little pixelated after a while, especially when scrutinizing focus or exposure in detail.

Real-World Photography Tests: Portraits to Landscapes & Beyond

To truly understand strengths, you’ve got to shoot. I took both cameras outdoors and indoors, through different lighting and subjects, and compiled side-by-side sample images.

Kodak M340 front Kodak M340 screen back Sony TX7 screen back

Portraits: Kodak’s more limited AF system (5 points, no face detection) and slower lens gave softer bokeh and struggled to zero in on eyes precisely. Sony’s touch AF enabled quick focus on subjects’ eyes, with smoother background separation thanks to slightly wider apertures at certain focal lengths.

Landscapes: Both cameras delivered respectable wide-angle images, but the Sony’s wider angle and cleaner shadows achieved better dynamic range fidelity - though due to sensor size limitations, neither camera rivals larger sensor compacts.

Macro: Kodak’s minimum focus distance is 7cm, while Sony impressively focuses down to 1cm, which made close-up shots significantly more detailed on the TX7.

Night/Astro: Low light use proved Sony’s BSI-CMOS sensor and ISO 3200 reach were meaningful upgrades. Kodak maxes at ISO 1600 with noticeable noise, so night shots lack clarity. Neither camera excels at astro due to small sensors and limited exposure controls, but Sony’s better high ISO saves the day in dim street scenes.

Video: Kodak records VGA-quality video at 640x480 max, a resolution that feels quite dated now. Sony steps up big: 1080p video at 60fps with AVCHD codec, offering smooth, usable clips. No mic input on either, limiting audio capture options.

Technical Specs and Toughness: Build Quality & Battery Life

Let’s talk durability and endurance: both cameras are plastic-bodied with no weather sealing or ruggedness claims - expected for their price and time.

Sony’s TX7 feels more solid in the hand, thanks in part to its slightly heavier frame and snug controls. Kodak’s M340 feels a tad plasticky, which might concern those prone to knock around their gear.

Battery life specs are unavailable officially, but based on usage patterns, Sony’s battery comfortably supports longer shoots - helped by a lower-power CMOS sensor and efficient processor. Kodak’s KLIC-7001 battery surprised me with decent runtime, but frequent LCD use drains it faster.

Connectivity and Storage: How Do They Keep Your Images?

Neither camera boasts wireless features (no Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC) - common for cameras released around 2009-2010. Both rely on USB 2.0 for transfer, and storage-wise:

• Kodak M340 uses SD/SDHC cards.
• Sony TX7 expands options with Memory Stick Duo/Pro Duo, and optionally SD cards.

Sony’s HDMI output offers a bonus if you want to playback photos or videos on an HDTV, which Kodak lacks.

Price and Value: What Does Your Wallet Think?

At their launch, Kodak’s M340 hovered around $130, whereas Sony’s TX7 came in at about $300 - a significant price gap to justify.

Given the Sony’s obvious advantages - better sensor tech, touchscreen interface, video specs, focus precision - the higher price corresponds to meaningful performance gains. However, the Kodak M340 remains an attractive pick for absolute beginners or ultra-budget-conscious users who mainly want a simple snap-and-go camera without fuss.

Scoring the Cameras: How Do They Rank Overall?

Let’s take a look at a summarized performance rating I compiled from hands-on testing, image quality, and feature assessments.

Sony’s TX7 holds a clear edge, particularly for image quality, autofocus, video, and usability. Kodak’s M340 scores respectably on size and simplicity, but understandably falls short elsewhere.

Specialized Photography: Genre-Specific Strengths and Weaknesses

Breaking down each camera’s suitability for major photography genres gives practical clarity:

• Portraits: Sony TX7 better thanks to touch AF and sharper optics.
• Landscapes: Both okay; Sony’s wider lens is a bonus.
• Wildlife & Sports: Neither ideal, but TX7’s faster burst mode wins.
• Street Photography: TX7 edges ahead due to discreet size and quick AF.
• Macro: Clear winner Sony, with superior close focus.
• Night/Astro: Sony’s BSI sensor and higher ISO performance.
• Video: Sony is vastly superior.
• Travel: Sony offers versatility and better battery; Kodak less weight.
• Professional Work: Neither camera is suited for pro tasks; limited controls and file formats.

Who Should Buy Kodak M340?

• Photography newbies needing an affordable, simple camera for family snaps.
• Users valuing minimal complexity and utter pocketability.
• Those who mostly shoot in good daylight and need no video or manual options.

Who Should Buy Sony TX7?

• Enthusiasts wanting an ultracompact with better image quality and video.
• Travelers and street photographers who want quick, flexible shooting.
• Anyone needing a camera with touchscreen ease, stronger AF, and more zoom versatility.

Final Thoughts: The Verdict from a Seasoned Tester

The Kodak EasyShare M340 and Sony Cyber-shot DSC-TX7 represent compelling snapshots of compact camera tech from a decade ago, but they cater to subtly different photographers.

If you want a straightforward, lightweight camera with zero learning curve for casual capture, Kodak M340 is a fine choice albeit showing its age, with limited low light and video capabilities.

The Sony TX7, on the other hand, is a much more capable, versatile little powerhouse in the ultracompact field, offering superior image quality, especially in less-than-ideal lighting, intuitive touchscreen controls, and full HD video. It’s better suited for photographers who demand a bit more from their pocket camera - without digging into more expensive premium compacts or mirrorless setups.

In the end, picking your next camera is all about matching its strengths to your photographic lifestyle. And hey, with these two in your pocket, you’re hardly stepping wrong - just know the Sony TX7 is the smarter bet if image quality and versatility matter most.

Hope you found this detailed comparison useful! Feel free to drop questions in the comments - I’m here to untangle your camera conundrums with firsthand insights.