Why you can trust TechRadar
We spend hours testing every product or service we review, so you can be sure you’re buying the best. Find out more about how we test.
Kodak PixPro AZ653: two-Minute Review
If you thought bridge cameras (aka superzoom cameras) were a thing of the past, you’re probably not alone. This area of the photography market hasn’t received too much attention over the past few years, especially now that the lower end of the mirrorless camera arena has some solid options, providing decent specs at a reasonable price.
However, the main selling point of bridges camera has always been the expansive zoom range, something the Kodak PixPro AZ653 has in absolute abundance. The 24-1560mm equivalent zoom lens will cover just about every subject you could possibly hope to encounter, from everyday street scenes to distant wildlife. My favorite lens is my 70-200mm f/2.8 ‘trinity’ zoom, but after having such a long zoom range at my fingertips, it has been tough to go back to a mere 2.8x zoom, even if that lens’ wider aperture and quality are streets above for quality.
If you’re after a lightweight camera to take with you on your travels, and you don’t know exactly what photographic opportunities you’re likely to come across, the AZ653 is a petite option that will cover every base.
Autofocus is smooth, if not the fastest you can find on a camera at this price point. It certainly won’t be able to keep up with the fastest animal subjects, so if you’re looking for a wildlife camera, you might be better off with an interchangeable lens model that uses high-end phase detection AF. For slower animals at a distance, however, the massive focal range positions the AZ653 as a good, budget-friendly safari camera.
Image quality, meanwhile, is impressive for a bridge camera, especially one with such a small sensor. The limited area of the chip does place limitations on what the camera can achieve, because of the tiny photo sites, but in good light at least, images are sharp and detailed, even if they do suffer from extreme color noise.
Handling, meanwhile, is decidedly DSLR-like, which is a good thing if you’re used to a larger camera body. It’s comfortable to hold and to operate single-handed, while all of the controls are logically placed. Having a manual control ring on the lens is a huge bonus too, giving the AZ653 a premium edge and a professional look to boot.
It might not be an image quality match for a pro-level mirrorless camera, nor is it going to outgun even the entry-level interchangeable lens offerings from Canon or Nikon, but the Kodak AZ653 is a powerful bridge camera that goes easy on the shoulder and on the bank balance.
Kodak PixPro AZ653: Price and release date
- $449 / £349 / AU$ 750.99
- Available worldwide now
- Limited availability/ backorder lists current in the UK
The AZ653 is designed largely for entry-level users who aren’t ready to invest in an interchangeable lens system, or photographers looking to minimize their kit. The camera is available globally, priced affordably at $449 / £349 / AU$ 750.99.
This makes it significantly cheaper than buying a mirrorless camera with a comparable specification and adding a super telephoto lens. For example, a Canon EOS R100 and RF800mm F11 STM telephoto prime lens would set you back a combined price of approximately $1228 / £1359 / AU$ 2000.
It also costs around 7x less than the Sony RX10 V — a premium bridge camera launched this year, which is superior in most regards except for its lesser zoom range.
Kodak AZ653: Specs
|
Type: |
Bridge camera |
|
Sensor: |
20.68MP 1/2.3-inch BSI CMOS |
|
Lens mount: |
N/A, Integrated 65x (24-1560mm f/2.9-6.7 equiv) power zoom |
|
Displays: |
Main LCD – fixed 3.0-inch LCD (460k dots) |
|
Memory: |
SD, SDHC, and SDXC cards up to 1.5 TB (Class 10 or faster recommended) |
|
Video: |
Full HD 1080p recording at up to 30 fps |
|
ISO range: |
100-3200 |
|
Burst shooting |
5fps |
|
Processor: |
Not specified |
|
Connectivity: |
BlueTooth, USB-C, Wi-Fi |
|
Dimensions: |
126.0 x 89.0 x 111.4 mm |
|
Weight: |
20.7oz/588g |
Kodak PixPro AZ653: design
- Small and lightweight body made possible by the small sensor format
- Reasonable build quality, though mostly plastic
- Fixed 3-inch LCD makes composing shots difficult
Bridge cameras are, by definition, designed to bring together the size and weight benefits of a compact camera with the superior handling characteristics of a DSLR or mirrorless model. By bridging this gap, cameras like the AZ653 are able to offer a generally unrivalled balance of portability and versatility. At least, that’s the objective.
Of course, this was far more of an obvious benefit before the advent of the mirrorless revolution. The difference in size and weight between a Bridge camera and a DSLR such as the Nikon D850 was far more pronounced than between the AZ653 and an entry-level mirrorless model like the Canon EOS R100 or Nikon Z30. Even higher-end cameras like the Canon EOS R6 Mark III, Nikon Z50 II, Sony a7C II, or Fujifilm X-T5 with a standard zoom lens have a comparable footprint.
That last part is important, though. The lens on the AZ653 is anything but standard. As soon as you take the vast zoom range into account, the projected weight differences diverge dramatically. I say projected since the exact dimensions of a mirrorless equivalent to the 65x zoom can only be estimated – no such lens exists.
The EFL (Effective Focal Length) 24-1560mm F2.9-6.7 optic is only possible because of the smaller 1/2.3in sensor at the heart of the camera, and if you were to try and build a similar lens with an image circle big enough to cover an APS-C or full-frame sensor, it would be more like a telescope than a photography optic.
The Kodak AZ653 is well-proportioned and very comfortable to hold. The deep handgrip is reassuring and allowed a firm grip even with my large-ish hands. Despite the body’s small size, there is ample room for around three fingers on the lower part of the grip at one time, while the forefinger sits precisely over the shutter button.
The zoom control surrounds the shutter release and operates with minimal travel, allowing rapid activation of the power zoom. A nice touch is the ability to zoom using the control ring on the lens instead, which is a far more intuitive action for photographers who have committed two-handed camera work to muscle memory. The downside is an artificially long zoom travel; it takes multiple twists of the ring to zoom from the widest focal length to the longest.
The feel of the zoom indicates it’s an electronic fly-by-wire system, where the ring isn’t physically connected to anything mechanical, but merely acts as a switch that drives a motor to move the lens elements.
With an optical system this long, the operation is slow and at times, a little stuttery – the zoom stops halfway through its journey and there’s an obvious pause while the onboard computer recalculates where it should be placing the elements. This proved frustrating during my testing, and resulted in multiple missed shots.
Manual focus was a little more successful when using the ring, and I could make relatively precise adjustments. You can access this by moving the position of a switch on the lens barrel, which is another nod to the DSLR influence and adds to the professional experience. The magnified preview image is low-resolution, however, and isn’t especially useful.
The camera features a PASM mode (exposure) dial on the top plate, next to the power button. This provides access to the usual array of control modes, including full Manual and Auto, along with several creative shooting positions, including Scene modes, a Wireless mode for remote operation and file sharing, Movie Mode, Face Beautifier mode for in-camera retouching, and a Custom setting position.
The dial itself is too easily moved in my opinion. In several cases, I’d switched mode without realising, either because I’d nudged the dial with my finger or while getting the camera in and out of my bag, which again meant some missed shots.
The build quality is actually quite good. It is largely made from plastic, but this feels reinforced and not significantly inferior to many recent mid-range mirrorless cameras. I wouldn’t necessarily trust its resistance to rain and dust as such, but the outer shell doesn’t give the impression of cheapness, while the rubberised grip and viewfinder surround lend a more premium edge.
Kodak PixPro AZ653: performance
- The power zoom system is slow, especially when using the lens control ring
- The camera is not as quick to boot up and shut down as comparably priced mirrorless models
- Focus speed itself is quite snappy
With such a long zoom range, there’s always a risk of sluggish autofocus performance. This is often purely because of the additional glass elements needed to provide such a great magnification, making it a more demanding task for the autofocus motors. That being said, the actual dimensions of the optical system are much smaller than the effective image results – the lens is a physical 4.3mm to 279.5mm unit.
As such, the elements are quickly moved into position once the camera has found the correct focus distance, with minimal delay. It’s not quite as smooth as the stepper motors or ultrasonic drives found in many top-level mirrorless optics, nor is it as quiet, but it puts in a respectable performance for the price.
The limiting factor is going to be the autofocus system in the camera itself. Unlike the majority of mirrorless cameras, which use phase-detection AF, the AZ653 shares the slower contrast detection system found in many compact cameras, smartphones and older interchangeable lens bodies.
Without dwelling for too long on the technical specifics, phase-detection autofocus uses specialized sensors to measure the focus position of the lens by looking at how front- or back-focused the light projected through it is. Meanwhile, the AZ653’s contrast-detection AF merely looks for edges of objects in the frame to estimate how far it has to move the lens to get the maximum contrast.
As such, contrast detection has a tendency to hunt, moving the lens elements back and forth to test the correct placement. As expected, this slows down reaction times and isn’t suitable for rapid sports and animal subjects.
The EVF is small but fairly detailed. All of the relevant camera settings are displayed, and it is sharp enough to judge focus with ease. The LCD, on the other hand, is underwhelming. It makes use of only 460K dots, which isn’t enough to accurately assess the quality of captured images.
All files look smudged, not helped by the matte texture of the screen itself. The non-glossy surface makes it easier to preview images in bright light, but critical sharpness is almost impossible to check with any sense of confidence.
Kodak PixPro AZ653: Image quality
- Surprising quality in good lighting
- Mushy JPEGs even at low ISO settings
- Limited to Full HD (1080p) video – no 4K or greater
Image quality is quite surprising. In good light, RAW format files from the AZ653 are rich in detail, and the lens is able to deliver crisp results. Having the RAW capability is a huge bonus and can honestly be considered a staple feature of an enthusiast camera now that many smartphones come equipped with their own RAW mode.
Kodak has been smart not to overstretch the sensor with resolution. The 20 million pixels are more than enough for everyday uses, and by keeping pixel count lower than most APS-C and Micro 4/3 cameras, the AZ653 is able to maintain a workable level of noise control and a reasonable dynamic range.
Sure, highlights clip more easily than when shooting the same scene on both the AZ653 and an APS-C model like the 26MP Fujifilm X100VI, but the performance is better than many larger-sensor cameras of last decade.
In-camera JPEG shooting is a different matter, and the quality is far less impressive. Default noise reduction is too aggressive and fine detail is rapidly obliterated, creating a smudged look common to compact cameras. Color noise reduction itself isn’t especially effective either, leaving behind too many colored blotches.
When shooting RAW, I was able to increase the ISO to about 800 before grain became a major problem which is, once again, impressive. My advice would be to increase the sensitivity of the AZ653 rather than to brighten underexposed RAW files — unlike many of the more ISO-invariant cameras we see today — this should produce a better balance of image texture and noise pattern.
Regarding lens quality, sharpness does drop off towards the long end of the zoom range. The slightly blurred results reminded me of shots taken with a budget Tamron 70-300mm DSLR lens I used to own back in the day – fine detail just isn’t present, almost as if your shots were taken through a greasy window. Files are usable on Instagram, but won’t be suitable for prints.
Testing Scorecard
|
Attribute |
Notes |
Score |
|
Price |
Many smartphones will give you better quality, but not a 1560mm lens for less than $500. |
4/5 |
|
Design |
I love the deep handgrip and tactile control ring – both premium flourishes. The poor LCD is disappointing though. |
3.5/5 |
|
Performance |
The processing power is limited and startup/ shutdown and operation is slow |
3.5/5 |
|
Image quality |
It’s passible in good even light, but the small photosites can’t keep up after dark |
3/5 |
Should I buy the Kodak PixPro AZ653?
Buy it if…
Don’t buy it if…
Also consider
How I tested the Kodak PixPro AZ653
- I spent around two and a half weeks with the AZ653
- Images were taken in both good light and low-light conditions, shooting in JPEG mode and RAW
- Most images were shot handheld to test the usability at longer focal lengths
I spent several weeks shooting with the PixPro AZ653, taking in multiple different lighting conditions. I shot in both JPEG and RAW formats to see how differently the built-in processing algorithms might process the images to my own RAW workflow.
Since one of the reasons to buy a bridge camera is for weight saving, I decided to shoot mainly handheld, as this would be how many users would experience the camera. I wanted to thoroughly check the ease with which someone might capture sharp images at the longer focal lengths.
I mainly used Aperture Priority (A) and Manual (M) modes for both creative freedom and to test the auto exposure systems.
To explore the noise performance, I shot with the camera at each ISO setting, from 100 through to 3200, using a tripod to ensure any drop in sharpness was not due to camera shake at the lower sensitivities. I also worked through the focal range, capturing the same scenes from the widest to the longest zoom settings.
First reviewed: September 2026
Read the full article here
