HP photosmart 735 digital camera

As everyone has noticed, I have a lot of photos on these pages. What do I take them with?
The first series was taken somewhere by my father with a digital camera. For further photographing I talked one acquaintance into it. The third series of photos I took with a borrowed camera, it was even lent to me for a whole week, so there was peace and plenty of time for everything. And then I bought my own camera, which I use for all photographing and to my satisfaction since 3 March 2004

It is a compact 3-megapixel digital camera from Hewlett Packard. I chose it because: the price was not only not overpriced, but also low (HP is not very well known on the camera market), the basic parameters suited me, it was not stripped of additional functions (some other brands have a time limit on video, etc.), it did not use overpriced XD cards, but SD cards, which seem to me the most suitable. In the end I bought it over the Internet from one person (he had received it, but had a better one at home) and after a few e-mails I took it. It was almost unused. I am still satisfied with it today and until I break it I will not be buying anything new (it has a good relationship with the Earth). A big advantage is also the fast charging of the flash. The speed of taking pictures with or without the flash is the same, you do not even realise that it is charging, which with some cameras takes even 20 seconds. Unfortunately it is no longer sold today, but for the same money you can buy something better.

Parameters and specifications:

CCD sensor:
Image sensor: 1/2.7 CCD with 3.34 megapixels
Effective number of pixels: 3.24 million pixels
Maximum photo resolution: 2088 x 1550 pixels

Lens:
Type: glass with two moulded glass double aspherical elements
Optical zoom: 3x
Focal length: 5.7 – 17.4 mm (equivalent to 38 - 114 mm on a 35 mm camera)
Aperture: f2.6 and f4.9 (wide angle), f5.0 and f9.0 (telephoto)

Storage:
The camera has one slot for standard Secure Digital (SD) or MultiMedia Card (MMC) memory cards
Focusing:
System: automatic through-the-lens (TTL) focusing using a contrast comparison system
Focusing range: standard and macro mode
Exposure:
Modes: AE, EV compensation, exposure mode (auto/default), action, landscape, portrait, aperture priority, white balance, saturation, sharpness, three levels of quality setting, macro mode, night flash, sequential shooting mode
Shutter speed: 15 – 1/2000 s
Exposure compensation: ±2 EV in 1/2 EV steps

Viewfinder:
Type: Optical viewfinder

LCD display:
Size: 3.8 cm

Other parameters:
Digital ZOOM: 5x
Sensitivity: automatic and manual ISO 100, 200, 400
White balance: automatic, manual
Flash: auto, permanently off, auto with red-eye reduction, permanently on, night with red-eye reduction
Storage medium: Secure Digital / MultiMedia Card
Video recording: yes, including sound, limited only by the capacity of the card
Dimensions: 105 x 46 x 71 mm
Weight: 235 grams (without batteries and card)
Power supply: 2x AA batteries (alkaline, lithium, Ni-MH, Ni-Cd)

All the cameras from HP seem very good to me, I have also held the HP 945 and that is really something, but it is already a bigger model and it is really great. Otherwise I also like the HP 707
I also have good experience with Samsung
The Canon PowerShots are average but the price does not correspond to that. From acquaintances I have heard good feedback about the Ixus from Canon, but they are quite pricey.
Olympus cameras are overpriced and bad and those little "mju" ones really cannot do much.
The worst one I have held was a 3-megapixel Nikon, the price was enormously exaggerated. It had terrible photos, features and display. Overall I would compare a camera to a mobile phone.
It is interesting with cameras that have a lot of megapixels, for example 8. At 100% photo size they are not very good (blurry and above all a lot of noise). Only when you reduce the photos do they look good. A cheaper camera and a smaller memory card would also be enough for you and they would take up less space on your PC as well.
I have seen many photographs from all of these cameras, so this does not concern just a few photos.
Maybe it is a bit harsh, but I judge what things can do, not what the manufacturer claims about them, and I do not believe in so-called branded goods
Maybe somebody disagrees with this, but if they tried some other cameras, they might find out that it is more music for less money.