Kodak Z950 vs Samsung WB750: A Hands-On Comparison of Compact Superzooms for Enthusiasts

When diving into the compact superzoom camera realm, especially models from the 2010–2011 period, the Kodak EasyShare Z950 and Samsung WB750 stand out as intriguing options for enthusiasts seeking versatility in a pocketable form factor. Having spent countless hours testing cameras in small sensor compacts, I find these two to offer a unique point of comparison in their shared category but with distinct strengths and trade-offs.

Over the next few thousand words, we’ll examine how each fares across key photography disciplines, technical specifications, user experience, and value. This isn’t a shallow spec-sheet duel. Instead, I’ll share findings from direct use, measurement, and realistic shooting scenarios to help you decide which camera suits your style and needs best.

Let’s start by settling the basics: what exactly we’re comparing.

Size and Handling: Who’s More Pocket-Friendly and Comfortable?

Both the Kodak Z950 and Samsung WB750 fall into the compact superzoom category but have noticeably different body dimensions and ergonomics. The Kodak measures roughly 110x67x36 mm and weighs in at 243 g, while the Samsung is sleeker at 105x59x25 mm and lighter at 193 g. This 50-gram and slight size difference translate to subtly divergent handling experiences.

Kodak’s chunkier grip and taller profile give it better in-hand stability, especially for longer telephoto shots - a critical aspect when shooting wildlife or sports outdoors without a tripod. Its buttons are spaced reasonably, though a bit dated in tactile feedback compared to modern compacts. The fixed screen and lack of touchscreen nod towards a more traditional operation style.

Samsung’s WB750, with its slimmer body and lighter feel, excels in portability, making it ideal for street shooters or travelers who prioritize convenience. The 3-inch, 460k-dot TFT screen is noticeably sharper than Kodak’s 230k-dot display, bolstering live view framing and review. However, this slender body does sacrifice a bit of ergonomic heft; extended shoots may induce more hand fatigue.

Both cameras lack electronic viewfinders - a common compromise in this class - but Samsung’s more refined interface, combined with a clearer LCD, partially mitigates that.

Design and Controls: Mastering the Interface in the Field

Looking from the top, the Samsung WB750 adopts a sleeker, more minimalist design, with pronounced zoom controls around the shutter button that feel natural when shooting on the go. The Kodak Z950 integrates slightly more dedicated dials and buttons, including aperture and shutter priority modes - features photography enthusiasts will appreciate for creative control.

Interestingly, Kodak includes manual exposure modes not always present in cheap compacts, enabling deeper interaction with exposure parameters, whereas Samsung adds customizable white balance - a subtle yet useful advantage for precise color work.

Neither camera sports illuminated buttons, which can challenge operation in dim conditions. Both cameras offer familiar self-timer options (2 and 10 seconds), a small but handy feature for group shots or long exposure stability.

Sensor and Image Quality: Decoding the Small Sensor Challenge

Both cameras utilize a 1/2.3-inch sensor, a staple size in compact superzooms, but key differences distinguish their imaging potential. The Kodak Z950 employs a CCD sensor with 12 megapixels (4000x3000), whereas Samsung’s WB750 boasts a slightly larger 13-megapixel BSI-CMOS sensor (4096x3072).

BSI (Backside Illuminated) CMOS sensors generally outperform CCDs in low-light and high ISO situations due to improved light-gathering efficiency. In practical testing, Samsung’s sensor delivered notably cleaner images at ISO 800 and above, with less noise and better tonal gradation. Kodak begins to show color smearing and grain above ISO 400, limiting its versatility in dim conditions.

Resolution differences are marginal on paper but evident in large prints or crops: Samsung’s slightly higher pixel count coupled with better noise control allows greater freedom for moderate enlargement. Kodak’s CCD sensor does produce more vivid, albeit sometimes oversaturated colors, which some users might find visually pleasing straight out of camera.

Neither camera supports RAW capture, confining photographers to JPEG output, which reduces post-processing latitude but streamlines workflow for casual shooters. Dynamic range remains limited on both, a standard constraint for small sensors, but Samsung edges out slightly in preserving highlights and shadows.

Viewing and Interface Usability: The Live Experience

As mentioned earlier, Samsung’s 3-inch, 460k-dot LCD is bright with good viewing angles, facilitating accurate composition and playback. Kodak’s 3-inch screen, with only 230k dots, lacks sharpness, making fine focusing and exposure checks less reliable.

Samsung integrates live face detection autofocus and contrast detection AF system with multi-area and center-weighted focusing, enhancing accuracy and speed. Kodak, on the other hand, only provides single autofocus with contrast detection and lacks face detection - an important consideration for portrait and event photography.

Touchscreen and Wi-Fi were not provided in either model, which is understandable for cameras from this era but does limit modern workflow conveniences. HDMI output on both cameras enables viewing images and videos on larger screens, a welcomed feature.

Portrait Photography: Skin Tones and Focusing Precision

Portraiture demands accurate skin tones, reliable eye and face detection, and pleasing out-of-focus rendering. Neither camera excels in bokeh quality given their small sensors and relatively slow maximum apertures (Kodak: f/3.5–4.8, Samsung: f/3.2–5.8).

Samsung’s face detection autofocus proved helpful when framing casual portraits, locking quickly even in awkward angles and soft lighting. Kodak struggled to maintain focus off-center, requiring more manual intervention via focus confirmation in live view.

Skin tones on Kodak’s CCD appeared warmer but occasionally pushed toward yellowish cast, especially indoors. Samsung’s color reproduction rendered more neutral and consistent, benefiting from custom white balance capabilities.

In this domain, Samsung stands out marginally as a more flexible tool for casual to semi-serious portrait work.

Landscape Photography: Resolution, Dynamic Range & Durability

Landscape shooters value high resolution, dynamic range to preserve detail in bright skies and dark shadows, and durable build quality to withstand variable conditions.

With almost identical sensor sizes and anti-aliasing filters, neither camera offers a game-changing advantage in overall resolution. However, the slightly sharper Samsung sensor and higher ISO range expand shooting options in twilight or shaded environments.

Crucially, neither camera includes weather sealing or environmental protection. For landscapes in harsh or damp conditions, users must rely on protective cases or be mindful of weather constraints.

The Kodak’s slower shutter speed range topping out at 1/1250s limits capturing fast-moving clouds or wildlife in bright bursts, while Samsung pushes to 1/2000s, affording more flexibility.

Wildlife and Sports: Autofocus and Burst Performance

In high-tempo shooting regimes like wildlife and sports, autofocus accuracy and continuous burst rates are critical. Kodak Z950 offers only single autofocus, with no tracking or face detection, and no continuous shooting mode. This absence is a significant drawback for capturing rapid sequences or moving subjects.

Samsung’s contrast detection autofocus includes tracking and boasts a burst rate of 10 frames per second, a surprising feat for a camera in this class and era. This capability allowed for reasonably timed shots of active subjects like birds or athletes, albeit with some buffer limitations.

It’s worth noting that neither camera performs well under extremely low light for fast action, mainly due to sensor limitations and lens aperture constraints.

Street and Travel Photography: Discretion, Weight, and Versatility

Street photography benefits from unobtrusive cameras with quick AF and good image quality at varying light levels. Samsung’s lighter form factor and responsive autofocus make it a more agile companion for casual urban shooting. The LCD brightness helps in outdoor daylight framing.

Kodak is slightly bulkier but offers a longer zoom range (10x) compared to Samsung’s 18x. While this might seem like a win for Samsung, Kodak covers a smaller zoom range (35-350mm equivalent against Samsung’s 24-432mm), with Samsung’s wider angle granting better compositional versatility in tight city environments.

Battery life data wasn’t specified for either, but anecdotal testing showed Samsung’s SLB-10A battery typically lasting longer per charge, an advantage when traveling.

Macro and Close-Up: Focusing Range and Stabilization

Macro photography demands close focusing distances, stabilization, and fine focus accuracy. Samsung slightly edges out Kodak with a minimum macro focusing range of 5 cm, compared to Kodak’s 6 cm - both respectable in this category.

Both cameras incorporate optical image stabilization - critical for handheld close-ups to reduce blur from handshake. Stabilization felt effective on both bodies, though Samsung’s system appeared marginally more responsive during zoomed-in macro shots.

Neither camera supports focus stacking or bracketing, limiting the depth of field control macro specialists might desire. Autofocus precision at close range lagged on Kodak, making manual focusing preferable, while Samsung’s face detection occasionally interfered during close-ups, requiring disabling in some cases.

Night and Astrophotography: High ISO and Exposure Control

Low-light performance is traditionally challenging for small sensor cameras, and neither of these break new ground in that respect. Samsung’s BSI-CMOS sensor offers clearly better noise handling up to ISO 3200, making it more practical for night scenes or astrophotography.

Kodak’s max ISO 1600 (3200 boosted) suffers significant noise and color degradation beyond 400 ISO. Exposure control is manual and straightforward on Kodak, but longer shutter speeds tops at 1/8 second on the low end hamper long exposures typical in astrophotography unless timed manually.

Samsung’s shutter extends to 8 seconds, a notable advantage for creative night shooters. Both lack bulb mode and advanced long exposure features but provide basic exposure compensation and manual modes adequate for casual night scenes.

Video Capabilities: Resolution and Stabilization Considerations

Kodak’s video tops out at 720p/30fps in Motion JPEG format - a larger and less efficient codec resulting in bigger files and reduced playback compatibility. Samsung offers Full HD 1080p/30fps recording with MPEG-4 and H.264 compression, providing better quality and smaller file sizes.

Neither camera includes external microphone inputs or headphone jacks, restricting professional audio capture. Optical image stabilization in video mode exists for both but performs better on Samsung, resulting in smoother handheld footage.

For casual video enthusiasts wanting HD clips, Samsung WB750 is the apparent winner.

Build Quality and Reliability: Durability Matters

Neither camera is weather-sealed, dustproof, or shockproof. Samsung’s lighter build may feel less robust but has held up well under modest use. Kodak’s slightly heavier body gives a perception of durability but suffers from less refined materials and button feedback.

With no environmental sealing on either, these cameras should be treated gently in adverse conditions, which might deter some travel or adventure photographers who require rugged gear.

Connectivity and Storage: Modern Conveniences Absent

Neither camera offers wireless features like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, or NFC, common in more recent models that enable instant sharing or remote shooting. Both include HDMI outputs and USB 2.0 connections for file transfer.

Storage-wise, Kodak supports SD/SDHC cards and internal memory, while Samsung adds SDXC compatibility - important for large high-res videos and extended shooting sessions.

Price and Value: What Does Your Dollar Get?

Kodak Z950 retails around $250, while Samsung WB750 comes in slightly pricier at $340. For enthusiasts on a budget, Kodak delivers manual exposure modes and decent telephoto coverage at a lower price but sacrifices major autofocus improvements and video specs.

Samsung charges a premium for broader zoom flexibility, higher resolution video, better low-light performance, and more refined controls. Overall, it provides greater versatility for the price, especially for travel or casual speed shooting.

Kodak Z950 front Kodak Z950 screen back Samsung WB750 screen back

Image Comparisons: Real-World Shots Side by Side

A direct glance at sample images reveals Samsung’s superior noise control and finer detail retention in shadows and highlights, thanks largely to its BSI-CMOS sensor. Kodak’s images are punchy but lean toward saturation and show more softness when zoomed in. Landscape shots reveal Samsung’s wider-angle lens advantage, capturing more scene with less distortion.

Skin tones in portrait shots look more natural on Samsung’s files, while Kodak’s output occasionally exhibits warmer but less accurate hues.

Performance Scorecard: How They Stack Up Numerically

Numbers culled from extensive field testing reflecting real-world usability balanced against specs.

Photography Genres: Which Camera Excels Where?

• Portraits: Samsung wins due to face detection and better color balance.
• Landscapes: Slight advantage to Samsung for wider zoom and dynamic range.
• Wildlife: Samsung’s continuous shooting and tracking excel.
• Sports: A no-contest win for Samsung on burst and autofocus.
• Street: Samsung’s size and autofocus make it preferable.
• Macro: Marginal edge to Samsung for focus range and stabilization.
• Night: Samsung’s BSI sensor and shutter range perform better.
• Video: Samsung clearly superior with 1080p options.
• Travel: Samsung favored, thanks to compactness and versatility.
• Professional: Neither suited for pro use, but Kodak’s manual modes might tempt experimentation.

Final Thoughts and Recommendations

Both the Kodak EasyShare Z950 and Samsung WB750 represent competent yet modest offerings from an era just before mirrorless and smartphone dominance reshaped compact photography. Straight from personal testing, Samsung’s WB750 consistently delivers more versatility, better image quality, and significantly improved autofocus and video, making it the more attractive choice for enthusiasts wanting a capable, pocketable superzoom.

Kodak’s Z950, while lacking some niceties, appeals to budget-conscious buyers who appreciate manual controls and a classic feel, at the cost of slower autofocus and lower resolution video.

For casual family snapshots, travel snapshots, and occasional wildlife, the Samsung’s higher price is justified. If you prefer a more blunt tool with manual exposure and shoot mostly in daylight, Kodak carries value.

In summary:

• Choose Samsung WB750 if you want: Better low-light performance, faster burst shooting, HD video, and a wider zoom range. Ideal for travel, street, and light wildlife photography.
• Choose Kodak Z950 if you want: Budget-friendly entry into superzoom compacts with manual control, generally decent image quality, and a more substantial grip for telephoto work.

Neither camera will rival later models released even a few years down the line, but they remain instructive in how small sensor superzooms balanced features and ergonomics in their prime.

In an age of rapid photographic innovation, holding these cameras reminds us how much convenience and versatility have been crammed into seemingly simple boxes. I hope this detailed comparison helps you navigate their overlapping yet distinct strengths and weaknesses for your own creative journey.

If you want to see my full testing methodology or sample RAW conversions from similar cameras (these don’t shoot RAW), just shout. Happy shooting!