It looks promising and the first samples are not bad at all. If one can mount an Olympus or a Panasonic lens on this body, it could be a hit. Something has to be clarified though: the sensor is said to be a Cmos BSI... No typo included ?
Besides, we have to get some more samples particulary in reasonably high ISO (800-6400) and to test this camera IBIS to know whether the camera can really compete against japanese products.If it was the case, it would be a little revolution, although I suspect most of the important technologies integrated in this Kodak body are more or less of japanese origin. Am I wrong ?
And you know what ? The user guide is already on line: http://kodakcamera.jkiltd.com/docs/manuals/s-1-manual-en.pdf
Maybe a good business idea: after the trend of making retro-looks for the bodies, why not producing lenses that look like antique cameras ? Hey, Fujifilm, can you hear me ?
Jogger: Ive had a Surface Pro since day 1 and its the best laptop/tablet out there. Those with iPads.. have fun letting Apple/NSA spy on your every move and the walled-off ecosystem... hint, its a millstone, not a feature.
While martindesu's message was for Vladik, may I answer for my part ? I do have a webcam integrated to my computer - like almost everybody nowadays - BUT the lens is always covered.
That being said, I assume Vladik's message was ironic because everybody has something to hide, at least their own body if they are not used to websexcaming like mads (and even websexcamers themselves don't want to be spyed nor discovered without any make up on).
LarryK: As many bags as I bought from Tamrac, I figured they be set for life.
I like their big semi hard storage cases.
At least he did not say "because size matters". How old are you, guys ?!!
To Jogger: Oh, my ! People have such a short memory ! Don't you remember the existence of the so-(in)famous "Magic Lantern" ? If not, here is a little reminder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Lantern_%28software%29
RichRMA: What does the "Pro" stand for?
Or for Peter Richard, Organist (cf: http://tinyurl.com/otlktng )
WilliamJ: Funnily, I've just bought a new laptop today. And guess what ? It's that new machine's diametric opposite. How one can reasonably do serious photo processing on such a little screen (12" !). How about the heat after some hours of work (can one work with it more than 30mn before getting an eye ache anyway) ? Is that computer cooled by super-compact liquid nitrogen cells ? 8GB of RAM at best ? Humm, ok for little files like a bunch of standard jpeg, but I'm not sure it can be enough for a large group of big Tiff to be displayed and worked on. And I even don't speak about the keyboard that seems not so effective for a "super" fast typing. I feel that Microsoft desperately have been trying for some times now to drag us from serious computers to "light and fun" machines. What a weird trend !
To the ones who have answered what I've written: I would not have talked as I did if something didn't led me to, a thing like:
"According to Microsoft, the new model is designed to be a replacement for both your iPad and laptop."
If you had both well read this pretentious and ridiculous ambition, would you have still written what you did or not ?
So who need to learn to read... and to think any further ?
That said, I perfectly know there are different needs, and for some of us, there is a need to have a compact and as-light-as-possible computer to sort out, display, and manipulate a little their photo files on the set. That being said, I still consider a screen that small, a RAM that skimpy and a non-vigorously cooled system as not ideal for post-processing. It's better than nothing but for most of us who are not compelled to rely on such a system to deal with our thousands of photo files, a good old laptop will still be the best tool of the two.
WilliamJ: Pretty decent camera as it seems - thanks for the samples by the way - but 120mm is too short for me. I owned a Canon G10 that I really loved but at 140mm it was too short too (and even not that wide with a 28mm against the Nikon's 24mm). Too bad. At least, camera makers should provide some tele-converter (as Canon did, like the TC-DC58D, but too late for me) to make their gear more versatile. High quality as long as it's possible, but more adaptability when needed.
Red flag for this camera (in my opinion): its grip which is really too thin and unreliable for me. What's wrong with Nikon recently, do they have a grudge against grips ?
Right, but a camera can be pocketable without having to be slippy like a soap. Beside my big DSLR, I use a little camera (Fujifilm F900 EXR) which is both really pocketable, and genuinely capable. As for the newest Canon pocketable camera (Canon PowerShot SX700 HS) it features a little grip that looks like a brother like the Fujifilm's one, proof it's needed and feasible.
Wye Photography: Right Americans, although these pictures are all in fact in England, it is a country which is part of a union and collectively called Britain or the United Kingdom (that may change this September). Most English people (and a good deal of other people from the other nations in the union) prefer to use the term 'British'. I am Welsh but also British and prefer the term British.
As it was 1939 the term "Great Britain in colour" (even spelled that wrong) would have been more appropriate. The English are much more unionised than Welsh and Scottish nationalists.
If it wasn't for Bloody Napoleon you Americans would still be where you belong, and that is under the British crown (NOT an English one)
Rant over, cat among pigeons.
AMAZING PHOTOGRAPHS. I say, just LOVE the jalopy in pictures 1 and 23.
Long live the King!
Bien dit ! (well said)
Funnily, I've just bought a new laptop today. And guess what ? It's that new machine's diametric opposite. How one can reasonably do serious photo processing on such a little screen (12" !). How about the heat after some hours of work (can one work with it more than 30mn before getting an eye ache anyway) ? Is that computer cooled by super-compact liquid nitrogen cells ? 8GB of RAM at best ? Humm, ok for little files like a bunch of standard jpeg, but I'm not sure it can be enough for a large group of big Tiff to be displayed and worked on. And I even don't speak about the keyboard that seems not so effective for a "super" fast typing. I feel that Microsoft desperately have been trying for some times now to drag us from serious computers to "light and fun" machines. What a weird trend !
Marla2008: Are we just condemned to HDR now ? Lord, I hate that stuff....
To TheDman: are you kidding me ? Most pictures here are over-saturated (illustration standard) and about half are a little bit too much HDRed, I just pointed out some photographs that were "really" a little bit too much (and even did not dealt with the dog picture which is a typical HDRed picture and the fully artistic #10). As for the #4... Oh, my ! It's obvious you don't have a clue about the subject, sorry. Have you ever tried to produce such a picture from the inside of a very dark room pointing your lens toward a very bright point ? I would not ask you to give us your opinion for the Guide Michelin if you taste food as you see things.
I don't know if your question is for Maria2008 or for me, but it's ok for me to answer it.
#3 to #5 for instance. Look at the mi-tones and the shadows ! Look at the cowboy riding his horse on the picture #5 which is so clear - while being against the light ! - that the picture looks like a lead pencil drawing. As for the #3 it is over-colored and with the HDR effect diluting the shadows it makes the picture look like a hyperrealist illustration. Don't you feel there is too much HDR in nowadays photography ?
TravelPhotog: Great images! Love #6. The dust spots on the sensor seem particularly appropriate in that one! :)
No offense intended Dallas, I think you have understood everybody here was kidding. Your photograph is outstanding and make me feel younger, when I first watched the movie "Bagdad Café". Anyway, congratulations for your wonderful skill and for the Smithsonian's award.
P.S: too bad your web site is out of order. Is there another one working ?
Scottelly: The only one I like is the kiss.
You mean the french kiss ?
PedroMZ: Sad to say that in France((where it all started) these spontaneous photos are legally no longer possible.I gather the same is now true in Budapest. How long before it applies everywhere? That will just leave us with landscapes that have been copied a million times and macro,oh and of course Selfies! Hence the emphasis on phone cameras which nobody in the street takes any notice of.
PedroMZ is right that streetphotography is more harardous in France these days. There are a lot of laws protecting privacy that have to be taken into account, as well as rights protection even for buildings like the National Library and the Louvre's pyramid at night. Oh, my ! Nothing is as simple as it used to be when Doisneau or Ronis strolled about in the Paris old streets tracking the good image and "l'instant decisif".
Besides, here is a good article about the right to photograph: http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/paris-city-of-rights/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0
N.B: french photographer François-Marie Banier has won two trials some time ago making street photography easier than 15 years ago. Thanks to him, because before his trials, the trend to forbid this and forbid that was utterly dangerous for photographs.
SergeyMS: I never seen photos more impressive!
Maybe because you have never seen that: http://tinyurl.com/mluya3b
AutumnAura: Modern-day western myth.
Japan's photographs during the period 1920-1950's are very interesting too. So not only western myth, but rather picturesque "good old world".
ysengrain: Fantastic photos I know.
Just a little correction to make: it is NOT MENILMONTAUT but MENILMONTANT.
It has already been said at the bottom of this page. So in order to add something "new" to this thread, here is a Charles Trenet's song called... Menilmontant: http://youtu.be/RgtA7FOs90k
Very in the mood of this serie, let it play while looking at the photographs, and let the magic sparks !
tabloid: I stand to be corrected.
Was this picture taken whilst France was under Nazi occupation. (and collaboration).
Why this odd question ?