The Kodak EasyShare C875 is mostly gets compared to super zooms and travel zooms. The Kodak EasyShare C875's top rivals come from Kodak (such as the EasyShare Z8612 IS) and Canon (such as the PowerShot ELPH 150 IS and the PowerShot SX50 HS)

Competitor classes

compared toSuper zoom competitors

Generally, some of the advantages of the Kodak C875 compared to super zoom competitors include: it has a slightly wider aperture (f/2.8 vs f/3.4), is slightly smaller (compact (91×63×37 mm) vs professional size (123×87×106 mm)), is thinner (1.5" vs 4.2") and is slightly lighter (225 g vs 595 g).

However, on average it has a much narrower wide angle lens (37 mm vs 24 mm), has a significantly smaller screen (2.5" vs 2.8"), doesn't have image stabilization (none vs lens), doesn't have a screen which flips out and has a CCD-family sensor (CCD vs CMOS).

Kodak EasyShare Z8612 IS

Kodak EasyShare Z8612 IS
1 year newer
$320

Significant advantages of the Z8612 IS (vs the C875)

  • Much faster max shutter speed: 1/3200 of a second vs 1/1600 of a second

Significant disadvantages of the Z8612 IS (vs the C875)

  • None found

common strengths of the Z8612 IS and C875

  • Very small: Standard size (104×66×71 mm) vs Compact (91×63×37 mm)
  • Very light: 340 g vs 225 g
  • Thin: 2.8" vs 1.5"

Canon PowerShot SX50 HS

Canon PowerShot SX50 HS
6 years newer

Significant advantages of the SX50 HS (vs the C875)

  • Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 37 mm
  • Image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs None
  • Much larger screen: 2.8" vs 2.5"

Significant disadvantages of the SX50 HS (vs the C875)

  • Significantly narrower aperture: f/3.4 vs f/2.8
  • Larger: Professional size (123×87×106 mm) vs Compact (91×63×37 mm)
  • Significantly thicker: 4.2" vs 1.5"

common strengths of the SX50 HS and C875

  • Fairly small: Professional size (123×87×106 mm) vs Compact (91×63×37 mm)
  • Light weight: 595 g vs 225 g
  • Thin: 4.2" vs 1.5"

compared toTravel zoom competitors

Generally, compared to travel zoom competitors the Kodak C875 has a much narrower wide angle lens (37 mm vs 24 mm), has a significantly smaller screen (2.5" vs 2.7"), is much larger (compact (91×63×37 mm) vs compact (95×57×24 mm)), doesn't have image stabilization (none vs lens) and is older (august 2006 vs february 2014).

Canon PowerShot ELPH 150 IS

Canon PowerShot ELPH 150 IS
7 years newer
$278

Significant advantages of the ELPH 150 IS (vs the C875)

  • Much better wide angle: 24 mm vs 37 mm
  • Much smaller: Compact (95×57×24 mm) vs Compact (91×63×37 mm)
  • Image stabilization:
    1. Lens
    vs None

Significant disadvantages of the ELPH 150 IS (vs the C875)

  • None found

common strengths of the ELPH 150 IS and C875

  • Very small: Compact (95×57×24 mm) vs Compact (91×63×37 mm)
  • Very light: 142 g vs 225 g
  • Thin: 0.9" vs 1.5"