New Bride Furious Over Blurry Photos From $60 Camera
Jul 22, 2015
Allen Mowery
Allen Mowery is a Nationally-published Commercial & Editorial Photographer with over 20 years of experience. He has shot for major brands as well small clients. When not shooting client work or chasing overgrown wildlife from his yard, he loves to capture the stories of the people and culture around him.
Share:
No matter how cheap I am, I always bear in mind that sometimes you get what you pay for. However, a recent bride doesn’t feel that way about a £40 (~$60 USD) camera she purchased to use on her honeymoon.
Kirsty Fuller, a bride from the UK, wanted to be able to have photos of her honeymoon to cherish for years to come. With this in mind, she purchased an 18 megapixel Polaroid IE826 from Argos to take along with her to Brazil. Upon loading the photos onto a computer at the end of the trip, she was ‘heartbroken’ to find that almost all of them were blurry very low quality. But, it’s when she went to return the allegedly defective camera that the real fun began.
Disappointed that all of their precious memories, encapsulated in roughly 300 images, were reduced to fuzzy blobs, Kirsty took to social media to complain. After posting on Argos’ Facebook page, a company representative replied:
‘As you can appreciate this camera is a very low end camera in terms of its specifications, this is why the camera has a very low price point.
‘Due to both the specifications and the price it’s unreasonable to expect this camera to take high quality images. However, if you feel that this item is faulty you will need to take it and its receipt back to one of our stores to discuss this further.’
According to The Daily Mail, she then attempted to reach the company via other methods and finally just took the camera to a store for a refund. Having attempted to convince a customer service representative to take a look at the images on a larger screen, the store employee looked at the bottom of the camera, saw a scratch, and informed her that the camera was damaged and could not be returned.
“It was the trip of a lifetime, but we don’t have one decent picture to remember it by,” says Kirsty.
A Few Considerations
First off, the bride and groom honeymooned in Brazil. They live in the UK. I can’t for the life of me imagine that a trip like that did not incur some significant expense. So, why would you entrust your memories from an expensive vacation to a camera that cost about the same as two steak dinners?
I’m certain the rest of you are asking the same question, which brings me to my next point. Regardless of whether the bride “should have” assumed that a cheap camera will take cheap pictures, what we have here is a company telling a customer that because an item is cheaply priced that they should not expect it to function as advertised. Slapping an “18MP” label on a camera just to sell it, knowing full well it’s a piece of crap, is not what I consider a responsible or ethical move by either the manufacturer or the retailer.
Even if the camera wasn’t malfunctioning and Kirsty was simply being “one of those customers,” the treatment she allegedly received from the in-store personnel did not help Argos’ argument in the least. There’s no excuse for unprofessionalism. The store’s cost for the camera was minimal; the least they could have done is simply refund her money and moved on.
Argos has since issued a statement, saying:
“We sincerely apologise to Mrs Fuller for the problems she has experienced with her Polaroid IE826 18MP compact digital camera. Argos strives to offer quality products and we are investigating this with the camera manufacturer.
“We are also very sorry for the service Mrs. Fuller has received since making her complaint and we are investigating this with our customer services team.”
Like they say, a happy customer will tell their friends; an angry customer will tell the world. In the end, sometimes we just need to bite the bullet and let the customer be right.
[via The Daily Mail | Images copyright Cavendish Press]
Allen Mowery
Allen Mowery is a Nationally-published Commercial & Editorial Photographer with over 20 years of experience. He has shot for major brands as well small clients. When not shooting client work or chasing overgrown wildlife from his yard, he loves to capture the stories of the people and culture around him.
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
61 responses to “New Bride Furious Over Blurry Photos From $60 Camera”
Uuuhm….?
even if the ultimate image quality is lower, there’s no reason this camera shouldn’t at least focus properly.
Good ending
The image seems crappy even for a 60 dolar cam. But still, it was not very smart to spend so little on something so grand as her honeymoon trip. The fault is on both sides here.
It’s Argos, home of the ‘laminated book of dreams’. I can’t see that damaging their reputation to be honest!
Probably had it accidentally set to macro focus?…
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/reviews/B00MU3A7O4
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/reviews/B00MU3A7O4
Oh wow. It really is an awful awful camera.
Sounds like an article from The Onion.
Its not blurry, thr lens simply has “character”
Richard Prince could probably get $90k for that image.
I’ve owned a couple cameras I’ve gotten for $60 or so and been very pleased with the image quality, of course I did my homework first.
The real issue here is you don’t count on a brand new camera you’ve never tried for “photos of a lifetime”. The camera might be crap, this unit might be faulty, or it might be user error. Regardless, you want to find out BEFORE you’re taking those once in a lifetime shots.
For the love of God take the camera for a spin before you take it on vacation. It’s digital… it doesn’t even cost you anything but a few minutes time.
this.
Yep, like a triathlete, you don’t try new food on the day of a race because it’s cheaper or claims to be better for you. You test it out before you actually need it.
The store employee should have asked her how she was using it. Unless the camera was faulty, it should have taken good pics if used correctly.
Could not tell from the article if it was a defective camera or a defective user. Will the $60 camera, if used properly, take a decent small JPEG in good light? If not, the company should be sued, cheap camera or not. If not, then buyer beware.
Photographers call that Bokeh lol
I think the company should give the lady a trip to Brazil and a Canon EOS-1D X camera
smartphone pictures would have been an entirely valid alternative
This. Yes.
how come all the DIYP articles that hit FB are no more than click fodder…
There is a reason why clickbait sites like Buzzfeed do so well. Still, I think this article was not intentionally clickbait, more of a “beware amateurs”. Hopefully people learn to test gear and bring backups.
who would test a camera before taking it on holiday?
Everyone that is not an idiot.
Or did you mean to say “Who wouldn’t test a camera…”
To get that level of bokeh you would normally fork out big money for a lens.
That’s what happens when you let a singer (lady gaga) be your creative director.
Sounds like she dropped it.
She didn’t ever check the back of the camera to review the photos as they took them?
First world problem!
That is not a camera problem, user error. If you want to buy a new camera to record your precious moments then possibly you should at least try a few to figure out how to work the thing. I can and occasionally do take some really crappy photos with some pretty high end equipment.
Am I the only one tired of the “I/we are better than you” tone in all the post about anything loosely related to a camera or photo? The DIY aspect that originally brought me here has been severely lacking for some time now.
You are not alone. Believe me. Now, I only come here if the feel an urge to be pissed off by by snobs or dilettantes
She needs to be on Facebook and post pictures there. Blurry is revered on Facebook.
Why anyone would not take a little time to research a camera purchase is beyond me. Polaroids are garbage and overpriced. Granted she also likely didn’t take the time to learn how to use a camera but still, it is crap.
Should have used her phone
Should’ve hired a pro. Lol
Oops
$60 doesn’t fix operator error.
Call the NSA…they might have a good set you can have.
It’s sad that she ended up with poor photos but she didn’t research the camera, she didn’t test the camera (how hard is it to take 4-5 digital images of a table lamp, car, fiance, selfie?), and she didn’t review the photos during her honeymoon. It’s common sense but apparently that wasn’t something she received as a wedding gift.
After this read, I bring to question… Did she read the user manual? How do you take a blind picture and not look at it as a whole and not zoom in on placed in the picture to see if it is clear.
Weddings are hard to photograph anyways. There is a lot of movement and action going on.
Of course, the giant smudge of lipstick she smeared on it the day she got it and then hastily wiped off with a Starbucks napkin had NOTHING to do with the low quality…
Sounds more like user error to me…
What has to do those 18 mega with blurry photos?!?! Just she had to read the manual and learn not to hit the button but squeeze it! Or at least to wait for the camera to measure the exposure and focus distance ( usually they make sound) and THEN to squeeze the button!
I wonder if she left a piece of protective plastic over the lens. I certainly question how she didn’t notice when she was talking the photos. Even on a small screen you’d notice photos that bad. How did people manage when they didn’t see the photos until they were developed?
Bride should have booked a professional ;)
And she didn’t think to test the camera before she left?
I have china’s £28 camera and everything looks sharp and in focus.
Saying £40 camera will make blurry photos is just utterly idiot.
Murphy was in the camera Shame shame i feel it in my haerfv
With the loads of blurry photos i get from a 1k$ camera i want a refund too!! :-D
No, seriously, are you sure you don’t risk a sue from the camera company for implying that you can’t take decent photos with it?
Yeah, and I did not read the manual on my new camera and I want a refund as well!! :)
I would have to say that the issue is user error. I looked at the pics in the photo gallery on the Daily Mail website and there is only one clear photo, and guess what? It was the only one not taken by her. Too bad they took it with the light behind them so that you can’t see their faces well though. I agree with everyone else here, she should have practiced with the camera a little more before the trip. I have had cheap Polariods just like this one and they took photos just fine. Still have a cheap 7mp model in my desk somewhere that takes clears photos. I feel bad for her, but this could have been avoided. Also, this camera has a screen on the back, she had to she how terrible the photos were, why did she keep using it? This story is odd.
Always test gear before going on location. Weather it is your new 5DIII or a cheap digicam. If you are doing something important enough, bring backups.
I did a astrophotography trip last weekend, and found that the scope I planned on using had a jammed focuser. Did I throw a fit? Well, briefly, but then I quickly recovered and got out my other scope and got it up and running. Produced a great image. (or it will be great when I am done processing it)
maybe she should have waited long enough for the camera to focus instead of just slamming down the button to take the photo
Sometimes you get what you pay for. As a camera retailer, we never want to see this happen to anybody. While $60 is the low end of the camera price spectrum, quality cameras can be had for near that price. There are too many variables in this case to pinpoint blame. Was the camera initially defective? Did it get damaged somewhere along the line? Was it operator error? Camera shops have value, a camera retailer might have convinced her to spend $10 more for a better camera and made sure she at least knew the basics before she left.
Seems like she just doesn’t know how to use any camera at all. Second photo looks relatively sharp so she must have set focus randomly. Or is it AF that’s the problem?
It sure is easy to blame the user when looking at the images shown here, I know I was leaning that way myself. However if we look at the user-reviews for this (crap) camera we find this poor lady is NOT alone. It sure is curious out of ALL the bad user reviews for this camera the majority of them were complaining of a focusing problem. Coincidentally, one reviewer stated “the camera can take over a second to acquire focus and if you moved during that time you would end up having a blurry image.” Nevertheless, whatever the cause the reoccurring theme in those bad user reviews is the poor focus found in the majority of the images it takes! Also, I find the “blame-the-user-default-in-hopes-they-will-go-away” attitude reprehensible and pretty low-brow from a retailer regardless of how little was spent. With the latter being (in my opinion) a good enough reason or a story worth going viral …
This picture was taken with a 2.5 Mega pixel camera from 1998. The amount of pixelation for the alleged 18 Mega pixel camera is unacceptable, even if it is cheap.
a good photographer can use any camera to get a great photos but in the wrong hands , well you get what you get… learn to use your camera first.. don’t just take it out the box and shoot,,,, if you learn your camera you will some nice photos.
And she is furious at who??? What you pays for is what you get.