Previous news story    Next news story

CES 2014: Hands-on with Kodak's M43 Pixpro S-1 and 'Smart Lenses'

By Barney Britton on Jan 9, 2014 at 21:28 GMT
CES 2014: Hands-on with Kodak's M43 Pixpro S-1 and 'Smart Lenses'
1 2 3 4 5 10

CES 2014: Hands-on with Kodak's M43 Pixpro S-1 and 'Smart Lenses'

What's in a name? Among the cameras launched at this year's CES were a handful from Kodak - one of the most recognizable names in the photography industry, albeit one whose name doesn't quite mean what it used to. 

Technically, Kodak doesn't actually make cameras anymore, but JK Imaging, a worldwide licensee for Kodak 'Pixpro' digital cameras and lenses does. JK doesn't have a booth at the show, but we visited them in a hotel suite for a briefing and some hands-on time with the new S-1 Micro Four Thirds camera, and the company's two new 'Smart Lens' camera modules. 

Comments

Total comments: 149
hamada60
By hamada60 (2 months ago)

Yes is already well
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll5kp3yDIw0

0 upvotes
fanedi
By fanedi (3 months ago)

in fact you must read
.... 800mm telescope, which attaches directly to the M43 mount. The lens has an equivalent focal length of 1600mm

0 upvotes
naththo
By naththo (3 months ago)

Looks very Polaroid to me on that camera. Doesn't look like real Kodak.

0 upvotes
jaygeephoto
By jaygeephoto (3 months ago)

Plenty of white space there for that Target or Walmart logo. Pixpro, huh? Does the name Kodak mean anything? JK! (Just Kidding)

0 upvotes
Rocky ID Olympian
By Rocky ID Olympian (3 months ago)

That thing is waay too huge for m43 system! (I mean the 400mm lens)

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (3 months ago)

It has its target market, and with this is mind, providing its pricing is OK, it could do quite well.

What I was not expecting to see was someone copying Sony in the add-on lens for your phone market.

2 upvotes
everiman
By everiman (3 months ago)

"whose name doesn't quite mean what it used to"
It used to mean good film crappy cameras, what does it mean now?

1 upvote
Jerry Ci
By Jerry Ci (4 weeks ago)

Actually, Kodak teamed with Canon and Nikon to make cutting-edge 1990's and early 2000's digital cameras. They were not "crappy", but pricey and among the best available.

0 upvotes
Michael Ma
By Michael Ma (3 months ago)

Anything over wifi and mobile is gonna suck. I feel cellular carriers do strange things with firmware for wifi to throttle it and make it drop packets so that people use more wireless data. Until this practice stops, this setup will always be clunky. They should jack into the usb directly with a builtin USB OTG cable.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
bryanbrun
By bryanbrun (3 months ago)

The Sony Sensor in the latest Olympus models already does produce decent 6400 iso pics.

But I am glad to see Kodak's entry in MFT. The more vendors, the merrier.

4 upvotes
icycool123
By icycool123 (3 months ago)

It'll be amazimg if the bsi sensor is true. The rx10 has quite good 3200 iso pictures. So does the pentax q7. With a micro 4/3s if it can produce decent 6400 iso pics cos of the sensor, this would truly be a game changer. It'll also accelerate development of bsi sensors in larger formats. Really exciting times indeed.

3 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (3 months ago)

olympus made it?

0 upvotes
plasnu
By plasnu (3 months ago)

Who's OEM?

1 upvote
AlpCns2
By AlpCns2 (3 months ago)

Otto E. Maker, Maker of Things.

17 upvotes
rfsIII
By rfsIII (3 months ago)

It means Original Equipment Manufacturer.

1 upvote
AndyGM
By AndyGM (3 months ago)

Hmm... I thought JK Imaging's gameplan was to focus (no pun intended) on the Chinese market, where Kodak is still a well known brand (and an American brand at that), and there is a lot of anti Japanese sentiment? The idea being to hoodwink the Chinese public into believing they are buying an "American" camera and none of that nasty Japanese stuff, when in reality they are selling either a modified Japanese camera made side by side in the same factory that said Japanese company uses, or a Chinese knockoff of something that was a Japanese idea in the first place.

1 upvote
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (3 months ago)

JK imaging is an American company.

0 upvotes
jaygeephoto
By jaygeephoto (3 months ago)

I don't think that the Chinese photo consumer is so unsophisticated as you would imply. Also, the cultural as opposed to marketplace sentiments are for the large part unfounded; the most desirable jeans in Iran are genuine Levis brand. If they are made in the USA (few are actually) they are even more highly prized. Go figure.

1 upvote
Nidal Elwan
By Nidal Elwan (3 months ago)

now we have a new line of m4/3 lenses to choose from .

11 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (3 months ago)

Some people use black tape on Leica to hide the name. You can use white tape here - it will serve the same purpose even if for different reason :)

I would not expect much from it, but the body shape looks actually quite nice.

1 upvote
deep7
By deep7 (3 months ago)

Why would you not expect much from it? It could be just fine.

2 upvotes
Paul Farace
By Paul Farace (3 months ago)

Too bad Kodak can't have a decent funeral with a stately graveside ceremony... it was a great American company that passed into history (it's photographic div. at least). No, instead we have to deal with this zombie "Walking Dead" creature that looks a bit like our dear friend, but isn't. Will someone please put a round through its decaying brain... or maybe a bolt from Darrel's crossbow?

7 upvotes
AndyGM
By AndyGM (3 months ago)

Remove The Head Or Destroy The Brain?

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (3 months ago)

Good photography products Kodak... LOL, hey Samsung needs some competition on the bottom of the totem pole....LOL.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
robmanueb
By robmanueb (3 months ago)

Hell yes. Mass production of high quality camera kit can only be good for the consumer. A lot of comments are quite positive and I know why, price. Who doesn't want to pick up a bargain M4/3 body? The quality will always be in the lenses bodies come and go. M4/3 needs to give away bodies for free or as close to it, that way people will experiment and buy lenses.

3 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (3 months ago)

A strangely out of place dig at Samsung. Clever.

1 upvote
webrunner5
By webrunner5 (3 months ago)

I looked it up. A booth at the CES show is north of $150,000.00. Link http://www.inc.com/ilya-pozin/what-it-costs-to-exhibit-at-ces.html

Interesting read.

2 upvotes
AgatePassPhoto
By AgatePassPhoto (3 months ago)

I really like the film emulation idea too. And would be way cool if final assembly was in the USA. I can see the Chrysler-like ad: "Imported from Rochester". Needs to have Ektar-quality lenses though to really make it work.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

it's really "defect emulation" to repeat the same fault for no reason but the adapted eyes to the fault (like a short time after one takes off sunglasses).

0 upvotes
ironcam
By ironcam (3 months ago)

@yabokkie. Photographs are never 100% realistic and artistically, they don't have to. An extreme case would be B&W photography. Digital images are often heavily pp'ed and thus "defective".

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

it has nothing to do with "100% realistic" or not.
please don't mess up processing and defective.
color film's problem was failure of control
(not the users and not even the film designers)
while post processing is opposite.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
b craw
By b craw (3 months ago)

yabokkie: I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "failure of control"; film via differing film stocks and push/pull processing (film development) lends a good amount of control - greatest latitude being b/w, particularly coupled with enlarger techniques. And I agree that this creative, aesthetic decision making was not related to "defect".

Maybe I am misunderstanding you.

0 upvotes
Ulfric M Douglas
By Ulfric M Douglas (3 months ago)

Show us a view from the front with the lens off,
i.e. show me the sensor.

1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Are you expecting to see something other than a 4/3 sensor?

11 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

+1, not the size but the make of the sensor.
when chipworks doesn't work (doesn't work for free).

Comment edited 37 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (3 months ago)

I actually like the camera body design and nice lens bodies of this camera better than the Nikon 1 J series (I know Nikon 1 is not m43 but it is competing with it to a degree in mirrorless) and also like the tilt screen of this new camera. If the sensor and image quality is good enough, and reasonable price, this could get interesting with JK Imaging /Kodak entering m43 arena of cameras out there or ILC in general.

The kit lens of S1 shows Aspheric ED Lens at 12-45mm. After using the collapsible lens of Oly, I stopped using it, and prefer the non-collapsible in other m43 lenses on my EPL. So these lenses I like. I would use primes for short lenses over collapsible ones.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
HelloToe
By HelloToe (3 months ago)

Indeed, I doubt its image quality will be as good as current MFT cameras from Oly & Panny. But if the price is right and it's at least as good as a Nikon 1, there might be a market for it.

2 upvotes
cmorse
By cmorse (3 months ago)

If they are using a sony sensor I doubt the image quality will be any worse , at least in raw. Focus speed, buffer speed, interface, build quality and the like are where it would likely show it's price.

3 upvotes
mrdancer
By mrdancer (3 months ago)

I'm curious about the 800mm telescope lens - might pick one up for birding with my GX7 if it has decent image quality at an attractive price.

Those smart lenses need some kind of easily-removable square framing so you can set them on a table, etc. and take remote pics without having to handhold and try to level them. Even better would be a built-in electronic level that would take a level picture regardless of how the cylindrical lens is tilted (come to think of it, that would be a nice option in many regular cameras!).

1 upvote
harley13
By harley13 (3 months ago)

I have used Kodak camera before they are very good and I agree that a Kodachrome emulsion would be amazing!

2 upvotes
Peter KT Lim
By Peter KT Lim (3 months ago)

Hope Kodak can come back...I am Kodak generation !

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Kodak digital died. It's too late. This is a group of investors using their name in hopes to make money. There should be no emotional attachment to the name Kodak because it's not the Kodak you grew up with.

3 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (3 months ago)

This is not the Kodak company you are thinking of. The original Kodak is now a smaller company focused on commercial and packaging printing.

3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

not even a clone of Hitler.

0 upvotes
ironcam
By ironcam (3 months ago)

If the camera has faithful Portra, Ektar and other Kodak film emulations, than they can sell this, if they market it right.

5 upvotes
Glen Barrington
By Glen Barrington (3 months ago)

While I have my doubts about this particular camera being useful for me, I think JK Imaging has a good direction overall. This will be a nice inexpensive step up camera for people who are ready to transition to more "serious" cameras and who don't have a lot of confidence in their ability to know how to select one. (Lots of people like that). It can only help 4/3s in general.

I might be personally interested in a slightly different configuration though.

5 upvotes
Thoughts
By Thoughts (3 months ago)

Decent looking and some interesting products. Wish them good luck.

11 upvotes
spidermoon
By spidermoon (3 months ago)

The kit zoom doesn't seem very collapsible . The pana 12-64 is really collapsible, this zoom is quite big.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

You mean Pana 12-32.

1 upvote
fakuryu
By fakuryu (3 months ago)

Looks like a Pentax Q (which is a good thing), with a tilting screen (which a lot of people want), m43 sensor (which is another good thing) with a very usable and attractive FL. JK is doing everything right for their first try! Hopefully they would sort out the FW and this could be a good seller, competition is always good for consumers.

4 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (3 months ago)

Pentax Q (the frist one) with a M43-mount - that would be nice!

0 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (3 months ago)

They are working on the right focal length, size and styling. Nice try on putting a 400mm telescope on m4/3 to grab attention (but does it really has to be that long?) Every other things, however, require much testing and verification.

2 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

Making it long is the cheapest option. Then you can have very few lenses.

0 upvotes
AndyGM
By AndyGM (3 months ago)

Well, they do say it's a teleSCOPE lens (as in Refracting Telescope) and not a Telephoto lens. Refracting Telescopes have just 2 glass elements, one at each end, and their 'focal length" is pretty much their physical length.

I would not be surprised if this lens is totally manual focus and maybe even fixed aperture (it is a modified telescope after all). In which case, you're probably better off with that Tokina Catadioptric lens.

0 upvotes
straylightrun
By straylightrun (3 months ago)

Am I the only one genuinely interested in the lenses? The 12-45mm is definitely more interesting than the plethora of 14-42mm lens options on the m43 system. The 42.5-160mm also looks nice and compact.

6 upvotes
Lukino
By Lukino (3 months ago)

I suppose every owner of a m43 body are. If nothing else, some new lenses might help lower the price of existing ones a bit..

6 upvotes
Gottschalk
By Gottschalk (3 months ago)

Why not just get the Oly 12-50 then? SOme copies are very good (I have one) and they are cheap as chips on Ebay.Focus is VERY snappy and it's weather sealed to boot...just don't see what the Kodak has over it

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

The Kodak is a little smaller it seems (in collapsed state), and might be cheaper going forward.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

image quality and focusing speed/accuracy we don't know yet.

0 upvotes
gerard boulanger
By gerard boulanger (3 months ago)

To really penetrate the market, a more reasonable zoom (28-60) with good IQ, not too much noise until ISO 1600 and a 1/4000th shutter speed would be needed.
Those extreme zooms will be perceived as gadgets very quickly

Having said that, I like the concept.

Patent infringement from Kodak here? Sony QX...

1 upvote
straylightrun
By straylightrun (3 months ago)

No. There are already 7 kit lens from Panasonic and Olympus that start at 28mm. The wider 24mm starting point is more than welcomed.

9 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (3 months ago)

No, I think this lens is perfect for this camera. It covers the most useful focal lengths without swapping. Starting wider is a very good thing that is starting to become common (probably because of Sony's compact 16-50mm kit lens) The slowness at the long end is a bit of a worry, but I guess I'd rather have the extra length, even if it is slow. The telezoom also looks rather nice. I wonder who is making the lenses for them (unlikely they're doing it themselves) because they don't closely resemble any existing MFT lenses. My guess is Olympus, which would be a good thing for both companies. But it could be almost anyone.

1 upvote
Antzutd
By Antzutd (3 months ago)

looks a bit like a pentax Q

7 upvotes
utomo99
By utomo99 (3 months ago)

JK must solve the lag problems before releasing it.
Maybe adding the memory size, tweaking the firmware and others

If jk did not solve it, they will not sell good enough

1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (3 months ago)

Neat.

1 upvote
RichRMA
By RichRMA (3 months ago)

The most interesting thing by far is the back side illuminated sensor. No one has one this big, they've been confined to tiny sensor P&S.

4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 months ago)

We're still trying to verify that. There are a couple of slightly confusing data-points in the press releases, including a mention of 'optical sensor-shift image stabilization' which don't exactly make sense and make us a little circumspect....

10 upvotes
TheProv
By TheProv (3 months ago)

The biggest BSI CMOS today is the 1" of Sony RX100 II.

2 upvotes
kimchiflower
By kimchiflower (3 months ago)

A more useful range than most kit zooms, starting at an EFL of 24mm.

This looks to be a pretty cheapo made BY china rather than made IN china camera though. $600 for a twin lens kits? Imagine the price 6 months after launch!

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

I sometime buy what you say "made by China" products and find they are of same good quality if not better. actually people from some big brands have hard time to tell difference between genuine and fake products.

it's really case by case just like camera brands which is used to confuse people.

6 upvotes
Lukino
By Lukino (3 months ago)

Don't make too much fun of China, they are slowly surpassing other international markets in many fields. The once had only low price, today there are tons of quality made by china product that surpass much higher priced western options. I suppose many here have sime treasured old soviet glass in the bag... your sons will have china ones, and they will be great!

2 upvotes
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (3 months ago)

Isn't some of the Olympus Pens made in China. China is certainly capable of making good product, as long as quality control is there.
My EPL1 is made in China and works great.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

Chinese are only human but China has a labor market where you can hire from half a billion, though salaries are soaring and many people don't want to work for Japanese companies.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
OliverGlass
By OliverGlass (3 months ago)

I didn't read through the S1 as I'm set on the PanaLympus products.

The smart lenses got my interest. Cheaper than the Sony ones right? I hope it's competent enough :)

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

"JK doesn't have a booth at the show, but we visited them in a hotel suite..."

Pssst. Hey kid, wanna see some top quality camera gear? Meet me in the back alley behind the Rio Hotel. I'll cut you in on a good deal.

21 upvotes
ghohan422
By ghohan422 (3 months ago)

Funny!

But these shows always have companies without booths doing this sort of thing.

8 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

in line with a bankrupted brand.

2 upvotes
Greynerd
By Greynerd (3 months ago)

How does this work? The quality of cameras relates to the money spent on the presentation is that it? So if you cannot afford a fancy booth at CES the product must be rubbish. It does show that throwing money at marketing is effective I suppose if people are so shallow and dismissive of a new market entrant before they have really started.

3 upvotes
Jeff Keller
By Jeff Keller (3 months ago)

Actually, their suite was in one of the nicest hotels in town!

15 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (3 months ago)

Generally, not having a booth means it's a very small operation and they don't want to spend the money. It's not some secret handshake kind of thing.

These shows are quite expensive and the big guys have to exhibit even if they don't have anything, to avoid rumors they are going out of business.

5 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (3 months ago)

Elaborate booths can cost in the hundreds of thousands just to build, let alone transport, set up, and store. A great many companies do this, many of them recognized brands.

3 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

My comment was tongue-in-cheek, but let's not fool ourselves here. This isn't "Kodak".

And as far as being "shallow and dismissive of a new market entrant before they have really started". Well, if these people were serious about the business they'd be creating a 'brand', not rehashing an old brand with a generic reverse-engineered product.

3 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (3 months ago)

What makes you think it's reverse-engineered? JK Imaging are members of the MFT consortium, so they have access to the mount specifications, lens protocols etc. It was Olympus, who announced that JK had joined about a year ago.

3 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

You want to tell me that iPhone clip-on monstrosity isn't reverse engineered from the Sony QX?

0 upvotes
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (3 months ago)

If it's reverse engineered, it was done in record time. No, I don't think that happened. What more likely is they heard such a product was being developed and decided to build a competitor. That's a long ways from reverse engineering.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

What's more likely is that it was reverse engineered. Designing a competing product from scratch for a company with obviously limited resources would be nothing short of a miracle in such a small time frame.

0 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff
By completelyrandomstuff (3 months ago)

To Dpreview: How is the build quality of those lenses? Are they made of cheapo plastics or some decent ones?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

both Canon and Nikon are working on plastic lenses.
plastic is the future (if you mean plastic optical elements).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff
By completelyrandomstuff (3 months ago)

I am not asking if it is plastic, I am asking what kind of plastic it is and what is the overall quality - does it feel cheap or not.

2 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

They couldn't afford a booth at CES. What does that tell you?

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

the current uncoated metal barrels mean cheap to me

0 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff
By completelyrandomstuff (3 months ago)

That they are a small company and likely outsource production of their components. The question is to whom.

1 upvote
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

The same nameless crappy Chinese company that makes just about every rebranded piece of junk on the market today. I doubt JKI even had a hand in the design. They probably open a catalog and pick from a number of generic designs. Slap a Kodak brand on it and there you go.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Gesture
By Gesture (3 months ago)

What factories are Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic point and shoots made in?

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

I've seen some Chinese products made in factories with much worse tools but the qualities are not very different.

I think it's at least partly contributed by the fluid labor market that it's easy to hire trained workers and experienced technicians from foreign factories.

0 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (3 months ago)

I think you mean "slave labor market" and "lax environmental protection laws".

2 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff
By completelyrandomstuff (3 months ago)

That 12mm could be interesting.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

The camera (S-1) is basically Oly E-PL6 in different body and with slower processor, right?

But the all-new lenses... 12-45 looks like a very nice kit lens, 12mm certainly more attractive than all those small kit zooms starting from 14mm, while seems a little shorter than Oly 12-50.

2 upvotes
AndyGM
By AndyGM (3 months ago)

Regards the camera, pretty much, yes. No Oly accessory port, and the screen isn't described as a touch screen anywhere (and if it was, you'd think they'd mention it, wouldn't you?)

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (3 months ago)

DPR, at page 6: "single-lens kit with the collapsible 12-40mm"

Shouldn't it be 12-45?

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Petroglyph
By Petroglyph (3 months ago)

Maybe DPR will do a first impressions review when they get a production unit in. Never know what quality will turn out to have. Thanks for the first look. It looks quite a bit larger than a Q, though. Maybe that flash tilts back for bounce?

1 upvote
Hubertus Bigend
By Hubertus Bigend (3 months ago)

Come on, can't anyone report the aperture of the tele zoom? Or didn't they put the figures on the lens at all?

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Are you expecting f2.8 on a compact zoom?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

f/2.8 is too slow for compact zooms
LX7 got f/1.4-2.3 for example, and is still slow.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (3 months ago)

F3.5-6.3 for the standard zoom, will update tele zoom ASAP

0 upvotes
rpm40
By rpm40 (3 months ago)

yabokkie... are you serious? What do you want, an f0.95-f1.2 zoom? You sound ridiculous.

0 upvotes
PowerG9atBlackForest
By PowerG9atBlackForest (3 months ago)

Focal length = 400 mm and a diameter of diaphragme/smallest lens = 40 or 50 mm maximum will lead us to F8 or F10 at best. What did you expect?

If it was a mere tele lens (it is a zoom, regretably) it could be of a straight forward design, even an apochromatic one. But guess what; it will not.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> What do you want, an f0.95-f1.2 zoom?

for 4/3", f/1.4 zooms and f/0.7 primes should be needed for the same image quality in low light as f/2.8 zooms and f/1.4 primes we have for 35mm format cameras for the last several decades.

0 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Pentax Q with m4/3 mount? :)

1 upvote
mcshan
By mcshan (3 months ago)

I would expect it to be an upgrade over the Q.

3 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

I just meant it looks like the Q. They are borrowing designs all over the place.

2 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

Why not? This has always been the case. Look at cameras (and other stuff) from any era. Look at the film SLRs. Look at the film compact cameras. Look at all the old folding cameras. All are heavily borrowing from each other.

2 upvotes
Retzius
By Retzius (3 months ago)

Is this the same company that got sued for blatantly copying the Nikon 1 series? It seems they have now blatantly copied Sony's QX?

Does JK actually do anything other than copying designs?

4 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (3 months ago)

You’re thinking of Sakar, which was truly shameless.

www.nikon.com/news/2013/1206_01.htm

4 upvotes
Retzius
By Retzius (3 months ago)

Yes Sakar was the company I was thinking of! TBH, this cell phone camera add on does look VERY much like the Sony QX...

Doesn't say much for JK Imaging

0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

Sakar was sued because the used some typical visual design details, i.e. infringing on design patents. Just as if someone puts a bent stripe on their shoes they might be sued by Nike.

Just making a barrel formed camera with a clip to attach to a smart phone is probably not enough.

And - in any case - nothing wrong being a copy cat - that is how the market evolves.

This way of thinking is very common for artists and photographers also. Dont tell me you refuse to get inspired by the work of other photographers.

2 upvotes
Richard Franiec
By Richard Franiec (3 months ago)

@Roland Karlsson
I'm finding your "nothing wrong being copy cat" statement appalling.
It tells me that you've never been a victim to piracy of your intellectual property.
To me, market evolves not by copying each other inventions. It evolves because of new, unique inventions.

3 upvotes
Sonyshine
By Sonyshine (3 months ago)

I wonder how long it will be before Sony sues them!

1 upvote
robmanueb
By robmanueb (3 months ago)

@Richard Franciec.
Have you been a victim of piracy? Your belief that products evolve without evolution and just spring out of thin air is almost as dumb as fundamental religious types spouting off about creationism.

0 upvotes
ybizzle
By ybizzle (3 months ago)

I'm going to assume this will come in around the $499 mark with kit lens. But then the question is, why by this off brand camera vs say a Fuji X-A1 that will most likely yield better IQ and looks better to boot?

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (3 months ago)

Or you can buy last years Panasonic or M4/3 mid-level models for that price.

1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

Yes - the price level is somewhat high for a totally unknown camera maker. On the other hand - they probably have high initial costs and cannot give away their stuff. That is a dilemma when starting a new company.

1 upvote
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (3 months ago)

If you go on the JK Imaging Kodak site (just google it and go to Press Room bottom of page for 2nd top post Jan. 7) the price with kit lens in their press release is $499. and with a 2 lens kit is $599. Not too expensive for m43 if quality is there in lenses and the sensor, and lenses are Aspherical ED which is marked on the kit.

Would like to see later reviews on AF speed and accuracy, and sample images posted. The sensor at 16MP cmos BSI in press release looks very promising. Definitely targeted after a mid range consumer m43 camera like EPL5 or Pan G6 for example (where body is around the same price range). Regardless, to me the camera looks very interesting with its appearance and if the mount is the same will hopefully take other m43 lenses as well, in case some us want to use our existing ones or third party and thinking of this body.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AndyGM
By AndyGM (3 months ago)

I don't agree, $499 is too much for what is essentially a cut down E-PL5 (it may have gained WiFi over E-PL5, but it's supposed to be slow to operate, meaning they've cost cut on the processors driving the UI, and the screen doesn't seem to be the touchscreen you get on the Oly).

1 upvote
Adrian Van
By Adrian Van (3 months ago)

If the processor is slower and the image quality in its jpeg engine not as good as Olympus, I would then go with an EPL5.
Would like to see reviews after some people actually test the camera. Until then, I will keep an open mind. The camera might actually be fine for consumer use. Maybe not for us more advanced enthusiasts. We will see though when it comes out. Maybe it will be good enough.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Steen Bay
By Steen Bay (3 months ago)

@DPR - According to DPR's news story earlier today the S-1 has a 16mp BSI-CMOS sensor. Is that correct? (would be a bit surprising to see the largest BSI sensor yet in a Kodak camera)

1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

It has not been verified. DPR is surprised.

1 upvote
Jogger
By Jogger (3 months ago)

I could see these doing well in Walmart, Target, Staples, or Radioshack. There is a place for cheap off-brand, products like this. And, in many places around the world, American nameplates are still well regarded; e.g. Buick is considered a luxury brand in China.

9 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

isn't m4/3" designed for Walmart if neither Pana or Oly is interested in making high performance lenses? (people express it as "don't compete with full-frame").

Walmart m4/3" are real m4/3".

Chinese are getting it right and Pana and Oly are wrong.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff
By completelyrandomstuff (3 months ago)

Fry's. That's where these are going to be at.

1 upvote
supeyugin1
By supeyugin1 (3 months ago)

Most likely Walgreens and CVS. Fry's is too good for that.

1 upvote
DimLS
By DimLS (3 months ago)

To all negative posters: Just judge the product in accordance to its target market, not if the company's new start isnt luxurious enough. Nikon is 80 yrs in the market, so what, you don t want to support new entries to the market?? Its sick if so. Otherwise pay the "price" of oligopoly or monopoly. I support new efforts and i understand new doesnt have the back up powers of old, so what. Update your level and dont feel secure just supporting an estabished brand, but understanding what a new brand entrie means

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

humans are not very different.

the 4/3" gang rely heavily on f-number cheating in which Nikon is also interested and invented their one-inch system to outgun 4/3" in cheating.

not all cheaters are successful though.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
SirSeth
By SirSeth (3 months ago)

Kodak is hardly a name that will be considered a "cheap off-brand in these store. Most folks won't know about JK Lol Rofl or what ever they call themselves.

1 upvote
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (3 months ago)

There is a place for these level of cameras in these super stores. I bought myself a 'Thomson' tablet from Target at a good price & it works well. When I want something better I will then look at better known brands & this is likely what will happen here by bringing a cheaper introduction of M4/3's to the general public, they will then become aware of Olympus & Panasonic as (or if) they want more & better.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
pdelux
By pdelux (3 months ago)

Yabokkie, no one is cheating anyone. F number is a ratio between FL and Aperture size, its no absolute. Who are they Cheating against...FF?? if by that resoning then FF is cheating against Medium Format, and MF is cheating against Larger Formats...

Your arguments are completely invalid

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

@pdelux,

sincerely, you have to misunderstand f-number to make that comment. people think they know while they don't, which works as a base for cheaters.

0 upvotes
Lukino
By Lukino (3 months ago)

well yabokkie, now spread some light on our underexposed minds about the f-number conspirancy...

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

yabookie has a point. An F8 lens on a large format camera is a quite fast lens as the aperture (in mm) is quite large. The same also works in reverse. A F1.4 lens on a Pentax Q is in practice a very slow lens. as the aperture (in mm) is very small.

In practice this means that a 25 mm F2.0 lens on m43 is equivalent to a 50 mm F4.0 on a 35 mm FF camera, with regard to collected photons and DOF and diffraction.

Personally I would not call it a conspiracy though, but rather a fact of physics. But, I assume marketing is not slow to claim that this new F1.4 is very fast, when it in practice is equivalent to a F2.0 lens for APS-C.

This has been discussed for ages on DPR though. And some will go on claiming that F2.8 is always F2.8 and determines how fast the lens is - even though the fastest lenses we have on this planet (giant telescopes) might be F64.

0 upvotes
chronocommando
By chronocommando (3 months ago)

Let me try to help you.

As we all know is the F number just the ratio betwenn focal length an the diameter of the aperture. If we talk about "fast" it is related to the shutter speed. This works based on F numbers regardless of the real aperture diameter. F x.y results in the same shutter speed independent of the sensor size assuming the same ISO values. There is no cheating in saying it is fast no matter how small the sensor is.

DOF is an other story.

0 upvotes
2manydjs
By 2manydjs (3 months ago)

@roland I do believe lenses with apertures that are relatively large compared to the focal length of the lens are called fast lenses because they allow fast shutter speeds. In that sense a f/64 would not be considered fast.

0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (3 months ago)

Exactly, F2.0 is always F2.0, if we're talking exposure. Total light gathering (and hence, noise), DoF and diffraction are other matters entirely. But nobody is cheating; when stating that a lens has a certain F-stop, you're only making a claim about the FL/aperture ratio. No claims are made regarding image quality or DoF. If you expect an F2.0 lens on m4/3 to give identical results as an F2.0 lens on FF, then it's because you have limited technical knowledge, not because someone cheated you.

1 upvote
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (3 months ago)

Here we go again. You did not read my post. You just answered automatically. Hint - it is the diameter of the aperture (in mm) that lets in photons. So - sure F2.0 is always F2.0, but as the sensor is bigger it is hit by more photons. Therefore you can use a higher ISO and therefore the system is faster.

0 upvotes
Lukino
By Lukino (3 months ago)

Roland, what you say might seem to make sense, but you are just assuming that other people are ignorant. Aperture and diameter are different things, that is why they have different names. Why should you assume that who buy an f1.4 lens for m4/3 expect it to catch as many photons as a f1.4 lens for an Hasselblad? Also is the Hasselblad faster? No, because this is photography and if you use the word "fast" it has a precise meaning.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

f/2 is f/2, that's exactly correct ...
but only out of the context of photography.
(focal length, f-number, ISO, none of them is photographic concept)

about cheating, I'm not saying JK is meant to cheat (they may and they may not). so sorry about that and I may explain it in detail elsewhere related to Oly or Pana products, probably 42.5/1.2.

> it is the diameter of the aperture (in mm) that lets in photons

at a certain (solid) angle of view.

that's why we need larger aperture sizes for tele lenses. half the solid angle will have to be compensated by double the aperture area (which is where f-number comes from, as an approximation using focal length instead of angle of view).

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (3 months ago)

> Also is the Hasselblad faster? No, because this is photography and if you use the word "fast" it has a precise meaning.

at a certain f-number Hasselblad (645 for example) is 10 times faster "at the same image quality" and image quality is what we really want and is the real standard when talking about speed.

someone say "at the same ISO" but same ISO won't give us same quality of photograph so they are really saying "same speed at 10 times different quality of photograph (in terms of exposure photons) ."

10 times different image quality they don't care. but if anyone don't care image quality, then what prevents them from using any fast shutter speed at will?

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
fanedi
By fanedi (3 months ago)

400mm telescope

why is it so big !!!!

0 upvotes
Lukino
By Lukino (3 months ago)

I understand what you mean, but I don't get the point. A 10K$ camera makes better pictures than a 500$ one at the same aperture? Ok, no pulizer material. Pana/Oly is lying when call a 1.4 lens fast? Well I suppose they should write in the PR "this is our new 1.4 lens, good enought to compete with with the best 2.0 lenses for APS cameras"?

0 upvotes
chronocommando
By chronocommando (3 months ago)

The quality of a lense is not determined by what is it compared to another sensor size. There are several characteristics depending on the sensor size. But a F2.0 m4/3 lense is fast as is whatever format F 2.0 lense. No one is lying here.

Whenever you raise the photons keep in mind that you need more photons to illuminate a bigger sensor. There is nothing spectacular about saying you get x-times more photons since you need them.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 149