Title: This is a battery eater
Review: Bought the kd-220z at Frys for $120 with a $20 rebate and tried it for about 15 photos until the two new alkaline batteries wentdead. When I opened the package there was an insert from the factory which recommended use of a lithium CRV3 battery which came with the camera, even though the camera is touted as working with 2 alkaline batteries. The camera worked ok and the pictures were of good quality, though it took a second or two or three to actually take a picture after pressing the button. The menues and operation were effective but crude and slow - have to keep turning the display button on and off when switching from display to shoot. I returned it because it took so few photos with the alkaline batteries. I get the feeling the factory knew of this shortcoming and now includes the more expensive (to replace) lithium package. But then the cost is only $100.
Is this product review negative?