‘It Looks Like a Microwave Took These’: Amazon’s Cheapest Camera Is as Bad as Its Price Suggests

I set out with a noble goal for this year's "I tried the cheapest camera on Amazon" article. I purchased a $5.99 camera with the intention of producing wonderfully lit photos and proving that it's not about the gear, it's about the photographer. It turns out, there is indeed a limit.

Let's start with what we're dealing with here. Ostensibly, this camera was called the "Jazeyeah Digital Camera, 1080P HD IPS Screen with Storage for a Versatile Digital Camera,Easy to Setup and Use,Best Gifts for Birthday," but it could also be called the "Desuccus Christmas Birthday Gifts for Girls and Boys Kids Camera Toys for 3-8 Year Old Girls Digital Video Camera for Toddler 32G SD Card" or the "Kids Camera for Boys and Girls, SINEAU Digital Camera for Kids Toy Gift, Toddler Camera Birthday Gift for Age 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 with 32GB SD Card, Video Recorder 1080P IPS 2 Inch." I'm just going to call it PinkieCam for the rest of this review.

Whatever it's called, it's clear that fly-by-night operations in China are making these things and flooding Amazon with what is, to not mince words, cheap crap. It's a shame that the company allows such deception (the first link I bought the camera from has even changed to something else, which calls into question all of the reviews and information on the page). But I digress. That's an article for another day. For posterity, I saved pictures of the listed specs of the camera I actually bought:

So it's listed as having 8 megapixels and 1080p video. It also boldly states in the ad copy "This dual camera will bring you an excellent photographer" while the box it comes in says "Record childhood Keep beautiful." OK.

The included instruction manual says that the camera is capable of "40M" images, which I take it to mean 40 Megapixel images but since it files it under the category of "Photo pixel" I can't be too sure. The menus in the camera list 48 megapixels. Actually, it turned out to be 44 megapixels, which isn't too far off from the menu claims.

Image Quality

How did those 44 megapixels look? Without doing any sort of image quality testing before I started, I decided to really work on the first images I made with this camera. I busted out one of my favorite lighting tools that always makes a reliably well-lit image, the Yongnuo YN360 II LED Light Wand, and went to my known good portrait spots. And here's what came out:

When I sent the photo to the subject of the photograph, her email summed up how I feel about this photo perfectly:

"Omg it looks like a microwave took these."

OK. So maybe I was a bit ambitious. Portraits with lighting are harder photos to take than something outside in natural light. So, how did those look? Well, judge for yourself, compared to a Sony ZV-1 for the same scene:

Like young me trying to play little league baseball, this camera just doesn't have it. A scene like this should have been a layup. I think I may or may not have mixed up my sportsball references there, but the point is, no matter what light this camera is in, it can't seem to make a good image. It looks like someone smeared Vaseline over the lens, which I swear did not happen.

The Sony ZV-1 isn't even a higher-end camera. It's a 1" sensor point-and-shoot camera designed for vlogging and released in 2020. It's not even new or the latest model. Pinkiecam is not that much smaller than the ZV-1, and while it is lighter, I don't mean that in a good way.

When I took the camera apart, it became immediately clear why the camera was so light (and why the images looked so bad):

The internals of this camera are basically two webcams held together by a couple of wires.

Two webcams? Well, that's an interesting design choice. For $6, you get not just one, but two cameras. Behold the second camera:

You could be forgiven if you don't see it. What appears to be a viewfinder is actually a selfie camera. Pushing the right directional arrow key activates the camera up there, and image quality is just as bad as with the front unit, likely because they're probably the same small-sensor junk unit.

The camera, for some reason, also plays games, so if you fancy a game about Snake, well, it's there for you. There's also a built-in MP3 player. I loaded a song onto the memory card and it actually played through the tiny speakers on the camera. I'm not sure why you'd want this, but it exists on this camera.

The video quality isn't much better. It's listed as 1080p, but for some reason, it's 1440x1080. It doesn't really matter, because I can't imagine anyone willingly using this as a video camera:

Conclusion

I thought I'd seen it all when I looked at the cheap camera from last year. On the surface, this looked like something cute to give a little kid. The body is a pleasantly soft texture, and the screen is surprisingly nice, and the buttons are responsive. The zoom, though digital, actually works on this camera. PinkieCam has slightly more going for it than Camera Brand Camera from last year.

But nothing can make up for the guts of this camera, which are just downright terrible. I suppose one can't expect much for $6. Is this a review? I guess so, and with that in mind, here's the list ...

What I Liked

• It plays games.

What I Didn't Like

• Everything else.

Final Thoughts

Truly, don't buy this camera. Not even for a gag. By doing so, you're supporting Amazon in its race to the bottom. Cameras like this one are made by companies trying to scam a quick buck out of unsuspecting consumers. Keeping photos in your mind's eye is better than trying to keep memories this way.

I put all the different purchasing links to the several sellers with this camera up at the top of the article, but you're probably better off setting $6 on fire instead.