Samsung TL225

4.6x, f/3.5, 27 mm
Retailer
    Style
      Color
        You save

        Summary Samsung TL225

        Prices Price
        Camera only
        Unknown
        Score Snapsort rank
        Among similar cameras
        #n/a of 5
        Specifications Key specs
        Zoom
        Help 4.6x
        Screen size
        Help 3.5"
        Aperture
        Help f/3.5
        Screen resolution
        Help 1,152k dots
        Wide angle
        Help 27 mm
        Movie format
        Help 720p @ 30fps
        see all specifications

        Also known as: Samsung ST550

        Samsung TL225Samsung TL225

        gallery

        Explore our gallery of 2 sample photos taken by the Samsung TL225.

        Pros

        Report a correction

        The Samsung TL225 vs other recent compacts

        Screen resolution High resolution screen Help
        1,152k dots
        Size Quite small Help
        Super compact (100×60×19 mm)
        Thickness Thin Help
        0.7"
        Screen size Huge screen Help
        3.5"
        Touch screen Touch screen Help
        Fewer buttons

        Cons

        Report a correction

        The Samsung TL225 vs other recent compacts

        Aperture Slightly narrow aperture Help
        f/3.5
        Wide angle Poor wide angle lens Help
        27 mm
        True resolution Lower true resolution Help
        9.8 MP
        Sensor type Sensor type Help
        CCD
        Longest exposure Short exposures Help
        8 seconds
        Movie format HD movies Help
        720p @ 30fps
        Light sensitivity Poor maximum light sensitivity Help
        3,200 ISO
        Sensor size Slightly smaller than average sensor Help
        1/2.3" 6.13x4.6mm
        Announced Old Help
        August 2009
        Popularity Not so popular Help
        Among snapsort users

        Appearance

        front photo of the Samsung TL225back photo of the Samsung TL225angle photo of the Samsung TL225

        Discussion

        Samsung TL225
        TL225
        Samsung

        Report a correction

        Showing 0 comments