ad stars
ad Bestseller
A potelyt.com – Photography & Imaging Resources
PW

Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-620

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus E-620 are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2016 and February 2009. The AZ901 is a fixed lens compact, while the E-620 is a DSLR. The cameras are based on a 1/2.3-inch (AZ901) and a Four Thirds (E-620) sensor. The Kodak has a resolution of 20.2 megapixels, whereas the Olympus provides 12.2 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications
Kodak AZ901
versus
Olympus E-620
Kodak AZ901   Olympus E-620
Fixed lens compact camera Digital single lens reflex
22-1980mm f/3.1-6.8 Four Thirds lenses
20.2 MP, 1/2.3" Sensor 12.2 MP, Four Thirds Sensor
1080/30p Video no Video
ISO 100-3,200 ISO 100-3,200
Electronic viewfinder (202k dots) Optical viewfinder
3.0 LCD, 920k dots 2.7 LCD, 230k dots
Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive) Swivel screen (not touch-sensitive)
5 shutter flaps per second 4 shutter flaps per second
Lens-based stabilizationIn-body stabilization
400 shots per battery charge500 shots per battery charge
139 x 104 x 119 mm, 777 g 130 x 94 x 60 mm, 521 g

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and the Olympus E-620? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

The physical size and weight of the Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-620 are illustrated in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

Size Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-620
Compare AZ901 versus E-620 top
Comparison AZ901 or E-620 rear

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Olympus E-620 is notably smaller (15 percent) than the Kodak AZ901. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the AZ901 nor the E-620 are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the AZ901 has a lens built in, whereas the E-620 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the E-620 and their specifications in the Four Thirds Lens Catalog.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

scroll hint
Body Specifications
    Camera
Model
Camera
Width
Camera
Height
Camera
Depth
Camera
Weight
Battery
Life
Weather
Sealing
Camera
Launch
Launch
Price (USD)
Street
Price
1.
 
Kodak AZ901 139 mm 104 mm 119 mm 777 g 400 n Jan 2016 499 i
2.
 
Olympus E-620 130 mm 94 mm 60 mm 521 g 500 n Feb 2009 699i
3.
 
Canon G9 X Mark II 98 mm 58 mm 31 mm 206 g 235 n Jan 2017 529 i
4.
 
Canon G9 X 98 mm 58 mm 31 mm 209 g 220 n Oct 2015 529i
5.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 130 mm 80 mm 93 mm 640 g 300 n Jun 2015 4,249i
6.
 
Nikon B700 125 mm 85 mm 107 mm 565 g 350 n Feb 2016 499 i
7.
 
Nikon P900 140 mm 103 mm 137 mm 899 g 360 n Mar 2015 599i
8.
 
Olympus E-600 130 mm 94 mm 60 mm 535 g 500 n Aug 2009 449i
9.
 
Olympus E-420 130 mm 91 mm 53 mm 440 g 500 n Mar 2008 599i
10.
 
Olympus E-520 136 mm 92 mm 68 mm 535 g 750 n May 2008 699i
11.
 
Olympus E-410 130 mm 91 mm 53 mm 435 g 500 n Mar 2007 699i
12.
 
Olympus E-510 136 mm 92 mm 68 mm 538 g 750 n Mar 2007 799i
13.
 
Panasonic ZS70 112 mm 67 mm 41 mm 322 g 380 n Apr 2017 449i
14.
 
Panasonic FZ2500 138 mm 102 mm 135 mm 915 g 350 n Sep 2016 1,199 i
15.
 
Sony HX350 130 mm 93 mm 103 mm 652 g 300 n Dec 2016 449 i
16.
 
Sony HX90V 102 mm 58 mm 36 mm 245 g 360 n Apr 2015 429 i
17.
 
Sony HX400V 130 mm 93 mm 103 mm 660 g 300 n Feb 2014 499 i
Notes: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.

Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. The AZ901 was launched at a lower price than the E-620, despite having a lens built in. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.

Of the two cameras under consideration, the Kodak AZ901 features a 1/2.3-inch sensor and the Olympus E-620 a Four Thirds sensor. The sensor area in the E-620 is 704 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 5.6 and 2.0. Both cameras feature a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 4:3.

Kodak AZ901 and Olympus E-620 sensor measures

Despite having a smaller sensor, the Kodak AZ901 offers a higher resolution of 20.2 megapixels, compared with 12.2 MP of the Olympus E-620. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 1.18μm versus 4.29μm for the E-620). However, it should be noted that the AZ901 is much more recent (by 6 years and 10 months) than the E-620, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that make it possible to gather light more efficiently.

The resolution advantage of the Kodak AZ901 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the AZ901 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 25.9 x 19.4 inches or 65.8 x 49.4 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 20.7 x 15.6 inches or 52.7 x 39.5 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 17.3 x 13 inches or 43.9 x 32.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Olympus E-620 are 20.2 x 15.1 inches or 51.2 x 38.4 cm for good quality, 16.1 x 12.1 inches or 41 x 30.7 cm for very good quality, and 13.4 x 10.1 inches or 34.1 x 25.6 cm for excellent quality prints.

The Kodak PixPro AZ901 has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200. The Olympus E-620 offers exactly the same ISO settings.

AZ901 versus E-620 MP

Since 2007, DXO Mark has published sensor performance measurements that have been derived using a consistent methodology. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.

scroll hint
Sensor Characteristics
    Camera
Model
Sensor
Class
Resolution
(MP)
Horiz.
Pixels
Vert.
Pixels
Video
Format
DXO
Portrait
DXO
Landscape
DXO
Sports
DXO
Overall
1.
 
Kodak AZ901 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38881080/30p20.311.780648
2.
 
Olympus E-620 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 3024none21.310.353655
3.
 
Canon G9 X Mark II 1-inch 20.0 5472 36481080/60p21.912.552265
4.
 
Canon G9 X 1-inch 20.0 5472 36481080/60p21.512.349563
5.
 
Leica Q Typ 116 Full Frame 24.0 6000 40001080/60p24.312.7222185
6.
 
Nikon B700 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38884K/30p20.411.881848
7.
 
Nikon P900 1/2.3 15.9 4608 34561080/60p20.211.672747
8.
 
Olympus E-600 Four Thirds 12.2 4032 3024none21.510.354155
9.
 
Olympus E-420 Four Thirds 10.0 3648 2736none21.510.452756
10.
 
Olympus E-520 Four Thirds 10.0 3648 2736none21.410.454855
11.
 
Olympus E-410 Four Thirds 10.0 3648 2736none21.110.049451
12.
 
Olympus E-510 Four Thirds 10.0 3648 2736none21.210.044252
13.
 
Panasonic ZS70 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38884K/30p19.110.610636
14.
 
Panasonic FZ2500 1-inch 20.0 5472 36484K/30p21.912.031562
15.
 
Sony HX350 1/2.3 19.9 5152 38641080/60p20.511.989649
16.
 
Sony HX90V 1/2.3 18.0 4896 36721080/60p20.211.673847
17.
 
Sony HX400V 1/2.3 20.2 5184 38881080/60p20.111.462945
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The AZ901 indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the E-620 does not. The highest resolution format that the AZ901 can use is 1080/30p.

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the AZ901 has an electronic viewfinder (202k dots), while the E-620 has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Kodak AZ901, the Olympus E-620, and comparable cameras.

scroll hint
Core Features
    Camera
Model
Viewfinder
(Type or
000 dots)
Control
Panel
(yes/no)
LCD
Specifications
(inch/000 dots)
LCD
Attach-
ment
Touch
Screen
(yes/no)
Mech
Shutter
Speed
Shutter
Flaps
(1/sec)
Built-in
Flash
(yes/no)
Built-in
Image
Stab
1.
 
Kodak AZ901202 n3.0 / 920 swivel n 1/2000s 5.0 Y Y
2.
 
Olympus E-620optical n2.7 / 230 swivel n 1/4000s 4.0 Y Y
3.
 
Canon G9 X Mark IInone n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 8.2 Y Y
4.
 
Canon G9 Xnone n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 6.0 Y Y
5.
 
Leica Q Typ 1163680 n3.0 / 1040 fixed Y 1/2000s 10.0 n Y
6.
 
Nikon B700921 n3.0 / 921 swivel n 1/4000s 5.0 Y Y
7.
 
Nikon P900921 n3.0 / 921 swivel n 1/4000s 7.0 Y Y
8.
 
Olympus E-600optical n2.7 / 230 swivel n 1/4000s 4.0 Y Y
9.
 
Olympus E-420optical n2.7 / 215 fixed n 1/4000s 3.5 Y n
10.
 
Olympus E-520optical n2.7 / 215 fixed n 1/4000s 3.5 Y Y
11.
 
Olympus E-410optical n2.5 / 215 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 Y n
12.
 
Olympus E-510optical n2.5 / 215 fixed n 1/4000s 3.0 Y Y
13.
 
Panasonic ZS701166 n3.0 / 1040 tilting Y 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y
14.
 
Panasonic FZ25002360 n3.0 / 1040 swivel Y 1/4000s 12.0 Y Y
15.
 
Sony HX350202 n3.0 / 922 tilting n 1/4000s 10.0 Y Y
16.
 
Sony HX90V638 n3.0 / 921 tilting n 1/2000s 10.0 Y Y
17.
 
Sony HX400V210 n3.0 / 921 tilting n 1/4000s 10.0 Y Y
Both cameras have an articulated rear screen that can be turned to be front-facing. This feature will be particularly appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in taking selfies.

The AZ901 writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the E-620 uses Compact Flash or xD Picture cards. The E-620 features dual card slots, which can be very useful in case a memory card fails. In contrast, the AZ901 only has one slot.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Kodak PixPro AZ901 and Olympus E-620 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

scroll hint
Input-Output Connections
    Camera
Model
Hotshoe
Port
Internal
Mic / Speaker
Microphone
Port
Headphone
Port
HDMI
Port
USB
Port
WiFi
Support
NFC
Support
Bluetooth
Support
1.
 
Kodak AZ901-stereo / mono--micro2.0Y--
2.
 
Olympus E-620Y- / ----2.0---
3.
 
Canon G9 X Mark II-stereo / mono--micro2.0YYY
4.
 
Canon G9 X-stereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
5.
 
Leica Q Typ 116Ystereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
6.
 
Nikon B700-stereo / mono--micro2.0YYY
7.
 
Nikon P900-stereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
8.
 
Olympus E-600Y- / ----2.0---
9.
 
Olympus E-420Y- / ----2.0---
10.
 
Olympus E-520Y- / ----2.0---
11.
 
Olympus E-410Y- / ----2.0---
12.
 
Olympus E-510Y- / ----2.0---
13.
 
Panasonic ZS70-stereo / mono--micro2.0Y--
14.
 
Panasonic FZ2500Ystereo / monoYYmicro2.0Y--
15.
 
Sony HX350-stereo / mono--micro2.0---
16.
 
Sony HX90V-stereo / mono--micro2.0YY-
17.
 
Sony HX400VYstereo / mono--micro2.0YY-

It is notable that the AZ901 offers wifi support, while the E-620 does not. Wifi can be a very convenient means to transfer image data to an off-camera location.

The AZ901 is a recent model that features in the current product line-up of Kodak. In contrast, the E-620 has been discontinued (but can be found pre-owned on eBay). As a replacement in the same line of cameras, the E-620 was succeeded by the Olympus E-600. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Kodak and Olympus websites.

Review summary

So how do things add up? Is the Kodak AZ901 better than the Olympus E-620 or vice versa? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.

ilogo

Arguments in favor of the Kodak PixPro AZ901:

  • More detail: Offers more megapixels (20.2 vs 12.2MP) with a 29% higher linear resolution.
  • Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/30p movies.
  • More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
  • Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.7") for image review and settings control.
  • More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (920k vs 230k dots).
  • Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
  • Ready to shoot: Comes with a built-in lens, while the E-620 requires a separate lens.
  • Easier file upload: Has wifi built in for automatic backup or image transfer to the web.
  • More affordable: Was introduced at a lower price, despite coming with a built-in lens.
  • More modern: Reflects 6 years and 10 months of technical progress since the E-620 launch.

ilogo

Reasons to prefer the Olympus E-620:

  • Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
  • Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
  • More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
  • Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
  • Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
  • Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (1/4000s vs 1/2000s) to freeze action.
  • More flexible: Makes it possible to change lenses and thus to use specialty optics.
  • More compact: Is smaller (130x94mm vs 139x104mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
  • Longer lasting: Gets more shots (500 versus 400) out of a single battery charge.
  • Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
  • Greater peace of mind: Features a second card slot as a backup in case of memory card failure.
  • More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in February 2009).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the E-620 emerges as the winner of the match-up (12 : 10 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

AZ901 10:12 E-620

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Kodak AZ901 and the Olympus E-620 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Superzoom Camera and Best DSLR Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the AZ901 or the E-620. User reviews, such as those found at amazon, can sometimes inform about these issues, but such feedback is often incomplete, inconsistent, and biased.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

scroll hint
Expert Camera Reviews
     Camera 
 Model 
 AP 
 score 
 CL 
 score 
 DCW 
 score 
 DPR 
 score 
 EPZ 
 score 
 PB 
 score 
Camera
Launch
Launch
Price (USD)
Street
Price
1.
 
Kodak AZ901........3.5/53/5 Jan 2016 499 i
2.
 
Olympus E-6203/588/100..72/1004.5/55/5 Feb 2009 699i
3.
 
Canon G9 X Mark II4/5..4/575/1004.5/54.5/5 Jan 2017 529 i
4.
 
Canon G9 X3.5/5+ +....4.5/54.5/5 Oct 2015 529i
5.
 
Leica Q Typ 1165/5....80/1004.5/54.5/5 Jun 2015 4,249i
6.
 
Nikon B700..+....4/54/5 Feb 2016 499 i
7.
 
Nikon P900......77/1004/54/5 Mar 2015 599i
8.
 
Olympus E-600..........4.5/5 Aug 2009 449i
9.
 
Olympus E-420..85/100..+ +4/54.5/5 Mar 2008 599i
10.
 
Olympus E-520..87/100..+ +4.5/54.5/5 May 2008 699i
11.
 
Olympus E-410..86/100..+ +4/54.5/5 Mar 2007 699i
12.
 
Olympus E-510..89/100..+ +3.5/54.5/5 Mar 2007 799i
13.
 
Panasonic ZS70..+ +....4/54/5 Apr 2017 449i
14.
 
Panasonic FZ2500..+..82/1004.5/55/5 Sep 2016 1,199 i
15.
 
Sony HX350..........4/5 Dec 2016 449 i
16.
 
Sony HX90V4/5+ +....4/54.5/5 Apr 2015 429 i
17.
 
Sony HX400V4/5+ +....4/54/5 Feb 2014 499 i
Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings were established in reference to similarly priced cameras that were available in the market at the time of the review. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Kodak AZ901:
Check Amazon price
Olympus E-620:
Check Ebay offers

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~
    loader

    Specifications: Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-620

    Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.

    Camera Specifications
    Camera Model Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    Camera Type Fixed lens compact camera Digital single lens reflex
    Camera Lens 22-1980mm f/3.1-6.8 Four Thirds lenses
    Launch Date January 2016 February 2009
    Launch Price USD 499 USD 699
    Sensor Specs Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    Sensor Technology BSI-CMOS CMOS
    Sensor Format 1/2.3" Sensor Four Thirds Sensor
    Sensor Size 6.17 x 4.55 mm 17.3 x 13.0 mm
    Sensor Area 28.0735 mm2 224.9 mm2
    Sensor Diagonal 7.7 mm 21.6 mm
    Crop Factor 5.6x 2.0x
    Sensor Resolution 20.2 Megapixels 12.2 Megapixels
    Image Resolution 5184 x 3888 pixels 4032 x 3024 pixels
    Pixel Pitch 1.18 μm 4.29 μm
    Pixel Density 71.80 MP/cm2 5.42 MP/cm2
    Moiré control Anti-Alias filter Anti-Alias filter
    Movie Capability 1080/30p Video no Video
    ISO Setting 100 - 3,200 ISO 100 - 3,200 ISO
    DXO Sensor Quality (score) .. 55
    DXO Color Depth (bits) .. 21.3
    DXO Dynamic Range (EV) .. 10.3
    DXO Low Light (ISO) .. 536
    Screen Specs Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    Viewfinder Type Electronic viewfinder Optical viewfinder
    Viewfinder Field of View 100% 95%
    Viewfinder Magnification 0.48x
    Viewfinder Resolution 202k dots
    LCD Framing Live View Live View
    Rear LCD Size 3.0inch 2.7inch
    LCD Resolution 920k dots 230k dots
    LCD Attachment Swivel screen Swivel screen
    Shooting Specs Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    Focus System Contrast-detect AF Phase-detect AF
    Continuous Shooting 5 shutter flaps/s 4 shutter flaps/s
    Image StabilizationLens-based stabilizationIn-body stabilization
    Fill Flash Built-in Flash Built-in Flash
    Storage Medium SDXC cards CF or XD cards
    Second Storage Option Single card slot Dual card slots
    Connectivity Specs Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    External Flash no Hotshoe Hotshoe
    USB Connector USB 2.0 USB 2.0
    HDMI Port micro HDMI no HDMI
    Wifi Support Wifi built-in no Wifi
    Body Specs Kodak AZ901 Olympus E-620
    Battery Type LB-070 BLS-1
    Battery Life (CIPA)400 shots per charge500 shots per charge
    Body Dimensions 139 x 104 x 119 mm
    (5.5 x 4.1 x 4.7 in)
    130 x 94 x 60 mm
    (5.1 x 3.7 x 2.4 in)
    Camera Weight 777 g (27.4 oz) 521 g (18.4 oz)

    Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.

    You are here Home  »  CAM-parator  »  Kodak AZ901 vs Olympus E-620

    Thanks for your vote!

    You rated this page 4 out of 5.


    Rating

    Any additional comment or suggestion for improvement would be welcome.


    If you like it, make sure you share it:

    • Mention this page to your Facebook friends and Twitter followers.
    • Bookmark it in your browser for future reference.
    • Create a hyperlink by copying the text below into your web-project or discussion forum entry.

    Once again, thanks for taking the time to provide feedback. I appreciate it.