Kodak reborn: A look at JK Imaging's 2014 lineup

Kodak is a great (was) company that invented , basically photography. Sony really???A great company to be sure but KODAK commands better than what some folks say. Go Kodak.

"Sony NEX-6 with 16-50mm" is $519 which is not a bad camera vs this $600 Kodak. For $519, you get:

- Larger sensor
- Build in EVF
- Build in flash
- the Name of Sony
- (Wifi)

http://www.amazon.com/Sony-Compact-Interchangeable-Digital-16-50mm/dp/B0096W1OKS/ref=zg_bs_3109924011_1

I am shocked at the lousy response to the Kodak name on here. Kodak invented digital photography, and Kodak, Nikon, and Olympus, all involved in film photography, were the first to tame the excess contrast of the charge coupled device. As a professional photographer, I tried Agfa, Ilford, and even earlier, Ansco products, but I discovered that Nikon cameras and Kodak film, paper, and chemicals made it easier for mecto make top quality photos without problems. I owned, used, and loved Kodak Z510 and Z712 cameras (okay, so my C735 was a p.o.s.) and I thought I would wait and get a Z-Max at a cheap price when they went out of business, but they sold out of that model first, and I lost out. One of my favorite film cameras was the Retina, and I had a iiic stolen out of a Stouffers motel, and haven't bought a Stouffers product since! High-end Kodak products rock, and I hope that the new products treat the brand name as well as, say, the resurrected Triumph motorcycles....

Although I am not for M4/3 cameras at all I really like the idea of Kodak coming back (even in this way - better than nothing), and I wish them all the best.

Yawn!!!!!

Oddly, I see a lot of comments about the quality of this camera and the price point it represents. The lamenting about the the past Kodak products has me somewhat puzzled.
I was once the proud owner of an Instamatic camera with the famous flash cube. I don't remember that camera being compared to the 35mm cameras of the time, yet they were wildly popular with many families and I can't tell you how many high schooler's carried them to school events.
It looks to me like Kodak as usual. I think they can make it work if they keep it simple and inexpensive. Good luck to them, I'm glad to see they're still around and kicking.

The last great product Kodak made was the CCD sensor used in the Leica M9 in 2009. It is sad to see an institution like Kodak, a company that made such high quality film to be reborn as a shadow of it's past. But, let's not dwell in the past, and hope that this time, the Kodak name can live on, so we can continue to describe our favorite pictures as "Kodak Moments".

My folks always purchased Kodak digicams when they converted to digital. I was always impressed with the quality of their P&S models. Let's hope JK Imaging builds on that.

"What brand of camera do you have?"

"Kodak!"

"Really?"

"No, just JK....."

Kodak needs to make good use of it's relationships with the retailers with this new venture. They've always had a good marketing infrastructure for finishing services amongst the retail chains. I've noticed that they are in every CVS pharmacy store with new consumer level photo finishing equipment. If they reinforce the marketing of this camera with strong ads they should fair well.

I am so anxious to try out this camera. I never had a four thirds and I am really looking forward to use a four thirds on a Kodak. What a gorgeous camera.

Hope they succeed.

Its sad to see one of the pioneering brands in photography being "resurrected" to market cheap Asian knockoff MILCs.
George Eastman must really be turning in his grave.

I have nothing against these cameras as such, in fact I'm sure they'll make very good, value for money entry-level cameras.
Its just sad to see a brand like Kodak being reduced to this.

As someone who followed the S-1 from the announcement in January 2013 and then unfollowed it in July 2013, it's overdue and already obsolete. It's supposed to be similar to the E-PL5 in price and features except it has wi-fi. It also was slower (when tested in December.) As much as I am a total Kodak fanboy, the delay gave me a negative opinion and the specs showing nothing new confirmed it. Maybe I'll buy a used one for my collection in the future.

Sorry, but this camera, it's lenses, and the smartphone lenses look uncannily like the ill - fated gear that resurrected Polaroid announced to great yawns a few years ago. The difference, if memory serves, is that the Polaroid's image sensors were in the lenses, and the camera body of bland, rounded plastic was so similar in design to one of Nikon' s offerings that Nikon successfully sued to have the Polaroid camera pulled from the market last year. I suspect that the actual Chinese maker for new Kodak gear might be Sakar, the current owner of the Polaroid brand. Sakar also produces cameras for diminished Vivitar (as well as really trashy kiddie cameras for Disney, Hello Kitty, etc..) GE cameras gracing Walmart and other discounters also look to share DNA with Sakar 's Polaroid digitals, indicating Sakar is the actual maker for GE and the new Kodak. More digging and sifting should bring the truth to light eventually.

where is the nostalgy look, it should look like an Instamatic :-)

The white one looks pleasant, let's wait what the results are first, it could be an interesting allround option with a good pancake attached.

If Kodak were to focus on marketing its camera sensors by comparing them to its pro film products, it will succeed again.

Kodak cameras have always been regarded as amateur products, but their film, paper and chemicals were always regarded as the industry standard of working pros. Kodak should take advantage of this pedigree history.

Advice to Kodak; focus on image recording more so than on image capturing devices.

Any new micro four-thirds manufacturer should be welcome.
Today Kodak is just a brand name like Rollei and other companies of the past. Kodak may not have made good film cameras for decades, but was one of the leading developers of picture making for a period of nearly 100 years until bankruptcy a few years ago. Great respect from me!

At least for me, Kodak were crappy cameras that you received the day of your 13th birthday or some other honorific ocasion. Film was another story, but Kodak was not a quality camera name. For that, you had some german and japanese ones. This camera looks bad enough to go on with the tradition.

For me as European Kodak still is a brand name as Coca Cola, almost representing that nation. It might be a matter of lacking self-confidence or short term profit greed to outsource to China and no more believing in their own creativity and strengths.

Kodak did break through innovation in sensor and resolution technology. I find it a pity that someone in Asia/China must revive this. But, at least somebody there does it instead of the matter getting lost. On the other hand we got Tesla cars which is an optimistic outlook. And even better if we could get an American product of ground breaking imaging made there.

Does the "Kodak" brand have much status today?

Perhaps with people over 50, or in some foreign markets, but here in the USA the brand Kodak meant "cheap camera that does OK, for what it cost you."

Those high end Retina Rangefinders and Kodak DC SLRs are the exception, not the rule. And they were never manufactured by Kodak anyway. They were just marketing cameras made by German or Asian companies.

I am 65, and for most of my adult life Kodax was grinding out cheap instamatic cameras that came in kit boxes, and were given as Christmas presents with a tag on them that said "open me first."

I don't see these mass market cameras as being any better or worse than what's already available from other vendors. Kodak is still a very strong brand name that should play well in emerging markets, and that's where I believe these cameras have the best chance for success. Price is what will make or break this venture. Good luck JK Imaging. :)

This is not a dirt cheap and crappy compact camera with below average image quality when compare to smart phone camera.
The Kodak brand deserve a second chance and this is their second chance. BTW. Before Kodak went bankrupt, they also didn't directly manufacture the dirt cheap compact camera. They outsource it to Asia manufacturers and put their brand onto it.

Also, those lenses, (image 3) somehow remind me of Imperial Daleks....

http://www.thedoctorwhosite.co.uk/wp-images/daleks/profiles/15-dalek-full.jpg

Looks like they're planning to compete is several established, currently successful markets like Micro Four Thirds mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras and GoPro competitors. More power to them. I hope these products deliver on their promise and on the name Kodak. Pricing and marketing will largely determine the success of these products. I suspect they won't be bought by people spending a lot of time studying their specs.

I don't understand all the hate for this cam. If it is priced correctly, it will sell well to the target audience, i.e not most of the folk here. Though I think the flash should've been built in to appeal to the masses more.

If it raises awareness of the format, it can only be good for all of us.

We'll see.

[edit] Everything Marty4650 said below, too.

I have to say after purchasing now a second Kodak point and shoot camera I will certainly be looking at this new arrival. I couldn't believe the quality shots my wife got with this cheap little camera..easyshare C143. Just my humble opinion.

I think we should remember that the Kodak "legacy" isn't for making high end cameras.

Their legacy was always "cameras for the masses" like the Brownies, 126 and 110 Instamatics, Disc cameras, etc. While they did occasional produce a high end camera, their main goal was make photography easy and affordable. So these Kodak branded cheapies might fit right in.

These are probably aimed at emerging third world markets.

They will get positive awareness with the Kodak brand. They have experience from Olympus, and seem to make their own glass. They are not linked to huge corporate cultures. This gives them flexibility and speed in our fast paced tech time.

But, how are they mastering the enormous challenge to be better than Olympus and make better glass than say Sigma? Where are the sensors/sw from? This requires big funds and detailed research; perfect processes in manufacturing, excellence in marketing & service.

I was offended by the gold ring imitations on lenses and the strong white. More to shine? Bling, bling with third party common ware behind? We got Leica and Hasselblad already for those niches.

I wish this “New Kodak” well. We need more competition, not less. Any serious participant will be welcome! The Kodak name was a good one and might have the potential to be reborn. Somewhat confusing still remains: Why has no US investor/entrepreneur touched this former industry landmark again?

That 400mm looks very familiar, only mine's f/6.3 and trademarked Danubia.

I like their 360° concept.

More power to them.

What's in a name?

To those in the know, this is a Kodak in name only. But unsuspecting consumers may think "Kodak is back" and associate this product with the Kodak legacy.

That's not to say the camera isn't comparable to a Kodak, it may even be better than what Kodak might be making if it was still manufacturing cameras.'

With the Kodak branding AK Imaging will get marketing attention that it could not garner if were entering the market as an unknown upstart. Who knows what this may lead to. Just think of where Hyundai and Samsung were ten or fifteen years ago.

Let's hope AK Imaging will better represent the Kodak brand than the makers of products that carry the Polaroid label do.

Wish they can be successful! We need more players that can bring down price!