HP Photosmart R817 review

The automatic focus, the manual focus and the zoom were also fast and responsive. HP rates the flash coverage at 3.8m for wide-angle and 2.1m for telephoto (ISO unspecified). In our tests, the camera easily exceeded those specifications.

LCD screen accuracy was close to 100 per cent, which is important given the lack of an optical viewfinder. The LCD screen was bright and easy to see except in strong sunlight, when the reflective finish sometimes caused glare. In that situation -- without an optical viewfinder to fall back on -- you'll have to shift your position in relation to the sun.

Image quality
While it would be easy to dismiss the HP Photosmart R817's image-enhancing technologies as gimmicks, on the whole we found they improved our photos. For novices who might otherwise become frustrated, the Adaptive Lighting and the postcapture red-eye removal can make a difference. The downside of using Adaptive Lighting is higher levels of visual noise in some photos. In shots with extreme light and dark areas, the Photosmart R817 produced silky-smooth gradations where similar-priced cameras would have lost the detail. In those same shots, however, even at ISO 50 and ISO 100, we saw a noticeable increase in visual noise. Given the available light, the thin veneer of coloured specks seemed out of place. Was the trade-off worth it? Yes, but it definitely was a trade-off.

Apart from the elevated noise levels, this camera functioned well in low light. The focus-assist lamp and the bright screen made it easy to set up shots, and the results with or without the flash were generally very good. Having three focus-range options (Normal, Macro and Super Macro) might confuse beginners if it weren't for the focus feedback built into the camera. With that feedback and the ability to focus down to 30mm, we were able to capture spectacular close-ups. On the other hand, the exposure accuracy dropped considerably at very close range with the flash on.

The sharpness of the lens held up well and, when combined with the excellent contrast range, provided a rich amount of detail. Colours looked vibrant but not oversaturated. This small camera squeezes just about everything it can from the 5.1-megapixel sensor.

The three video settings did not perform as well. Our videos, recorded at 640x480-pixel resolution and 30fps, exhibited excellent colour and contrast, but displayed significant compression artefacts when the camera or the subject moved. The 640x480, 24fps setting looked relatively flicker-free but greatly increased the visual artefacts. At the space-saving 320x240, 30fps setting, artefacts became so distracting that we had trouble recognising small objects once the camera or the subject began to move.

Edited by Aimee Baldridge
Addional editing by Nick Hide