Looks like Kodak has another loser on their hands

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Tony, May 31, 2005.

  1. Tony

    Tony Guest

    The company that has found so many creative ways to lose money since they
    killed the Instamatic - their cash cow - to prevent it from eating anyone
    else's hay, has now given up on their professional DSLR.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0505/05053104kodakslrdisc.asp

    I don't know if the Nikon mount one sold but all us Canon users looked at
    the one with our mount and laughed.
     
    Tony, May 31, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony

    Hannah Guest

    They should have stuck to making film. They know what they are doing with
    film.
    Hannah.
     
    Hannah, May 31, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Tony

    JohnR66 Guest

    I'd say they were pushed out due to Nikon and Canon now producing and
    selling quality dSLRs of their own. With Minolta, Pentax and Olympus in the
    SLR game, there is little room for another. Apparently Kodak is the leader
    in selling compact digital cameras in the US. They were always good at
    selling lower to mid range compact film cameras, seems the same for digital.
    John
     
    JohnR66, Jun 1, 2005
    #3
  4. That last statement is not entirely correct Tony,
    I had one on apro for a few days. I certainly didn't laugh... More like
    gazed in wonderment at why someone would take the body of a workable
    DSLR (Sigma) and hack it into one that only works in a studio environment.

    The camera is supurb as a Medium format studio replacement. Take it
    outside as many did and it just doesn't cut it. I prefered to Nikon hack
    the started out with. At least at 1 Megapixel there wasn't much to
    compare it with in the early days.
     
    [email protected], Jun 1, 2005
    #4
  5. Tony

    Darrell Guest

    Are you sure, Fuji has outdone Kodak films for years...
     
    Darrell, Jun 1, 2005
    #5
  6. Tony

    Photobossman Guest

    Well who is still manufacturing film in the USA? It sure is not Kodak.

    Who moved their film manufacturing operations to China & Mexico? It sure is
    not Fuji.

    I am sure George would not be happy with how his company was Miss-Managed
    over the last 5-10 years.

    Photobossman
     
    Photobossman, Jun 1, 2005
    #6
  7. Tony

    Tony Guest

    They were about twenty years too early.
    For those who know nothing of Kodak's history, they had pulled the same
    trick several times in the past. Develop a "new" fiilm size that is really
    the same as an old film size but will not fit in older cameras and then give
    away cameras for the new film size and the customers MUST buy Kodak film to
    feed their "free" camera. No one else can manufacture the filmuntil the
    patent expires on some relatively unimportant item -- like the take up
    spool. This is why there were sizes like 620 119 and 126 (Instamatic).
    Kodak killed Instamatic expecting everyone to joyfully migrate to their
    "new" film size - 110 -- which is 16mm with different sprocket holes than
    standard.
    Instead everyone shifted to 35mm point and shoots after discovering that
    110 made lousy pictures - 16mm is simply too small. Since then Kodak has
    continued to make "new" film sizes but they have all failed to ignite the
    market the way Instamatic did - for one thing the company remained firmly
    convinced that the 35mm negative is too big for snaps - Apparently Kodak
    execs don't want to be able to recognize family members in snapshots.
    If Kodak had been willing to "share" the film sales and kept the
    instamatic going, it would have remained a highly successful product right
    up to the day of digital. Instead they have poured millions into trying to
    find a new market beater, and have taken their own (well deserved) beating.



    they killed the Instamatic - their cash >cow - to prevent it from eating
    anyone else's hay, has >now given up on their professional DSLR.
     
    Tony, Jun 1, 2005
    #7
  8. I have never used a Kodak film since they pulled out of ( boycotted )
    South Africa due to political reasons about 30 years ago and left us
    high and dry. The doors were flung open to Fuji, Ilford and Agfa and I
    never looked backed. Kodak tried to come back about 10 years ago but it
    appears the locals are not interested in Kodak at all. Most of the film
    stock I see on shelves today are Fuji. I bought a Kodak DC40 digital
    camera when they first came out ..... without even trying it out !! The
    salesman was fantastic and I was gullible. Colour photos and no more
    film !!! I put down the R6000,00 ( $930,00 ) and took it home. What a
    let down .... a complete waste of time ... I swore I would never buy
    into Kodak again. I know I should have tried it out but for that price
    one should also be able to expect something which also took photographs.
    Photographing a patch of grass just gave you green air brushed graphic,
    absolutely no detail worth talking about.
    I think the writing is on the wall for Kodak. ALL the kiosks around here
    where one can get prints made are Japanese.
     
    Bernard Rother, Jun 1, 2005
    #8
  9. Tony

    george Guest

    Then the photodisc and finally APS!
     
    george, Jun 1, 2005
    #9
  10. Tony

    Hannah Guest

    I totally disagree.

    But whether that may be subjectively true for some, it doesn't alter my
    statement in the least
    H.
     
    Hannah, Jun 1, 2005
    #10
  11. Tony

    Tony Guest

    The fact that Instamatic WAS a huge success when Kodak pulled the plug,
    and that essentially the negative was a good size for the average snap.
    Everyone had an instamatic - it was THE camera. Killing it opened up the
    world for the 35mm P&S. Am I saying this is a good thing or a bad thing -
    No. This is simply what happened. Kodak tried to force their loyal customers
    into using sub-35mm film and ended up losing thier shirts on it.
    Square format was indeed agood one for snaps too as building the
    scrapbook is pretty easy - no need to worry about page placement all the
    pictures fit because they are all exactly the same shape.
    You and I might find that stultifying, but the average family record
    shooter really likes it. Remember, Kodak didn't kill the square format along
    with Instamatic. 110, which they pushed for several years was square too. I
    can't even remember the shape of disk film pictures. I'm beginning to wonder
    if I ever saw one. My brother had gone to 35mm P&S long before the disk came
    out.



     
    Tony, Jun 1, 2005
    #11
  12. Tony

    Tony Guest

    Not for long. The cameras were practically free, and people like my family,
    and the families of my friends used the one or two free rolls of film they
    came with - then bought a 35mm P&S.
     
    Tony, Jun 1, 2005
    #12
  13. Tony

    Darrell Guest

    But look at what a 110 sized CCD can deliver. Now you'll understand why
    digicams are hot sellers. The compact digicams are close to 16mm sized CCDs,
    camera like the G6 are 110 sized sensors (roughly)
     
    Darrell, Jun 2, 2005
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.