News at Kodak

I said I would not reply to you ... well I lied!
Where is the modulation of color from horizon to Zenith?, always seen on Kodaks!
Yes I see that the angle is more straight up but it still fails to look real ...

While you were stuck in your camera store selling to idiots who wanted something for nothing I spent many years shooting photography on mountain tops with Medium format cameras so I know what looks real and what doesn't. the example given? ...Fake sky! nice blue color but sky blue?... NO WAY!

Yes I apologize for not giving you credit for your good comments on Kodak and I am sure you tell the truth about defective cameras and I hope Kodak gets off the Hiney.

I have read many good comments from you and learned much as well. I like cameras from all the brands but am just stuck with Kodak for now and hope to go with a Panasonic HD-G1 or equiv. soon. So this is my apology! take it or leave it!

--
Robert

TheGoldenOwl said:

Oh another Ahola that pop up Alova.

Click to expand...

Cute.

TheGoldenOwl said:

And I hope you don't sully Nicklebacks name ...
They are a good band!

Click to expand...

Not at all related. It's just the worst ever misspelling of my quite simple last name. It predates the band by a few years at least, and the spelling is different too.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

Nickleback I see your posts all over as well and you give good advice and i apologize for getting worked up over nothing and about the name mix up: should have known that as well!
--
Robert

TheGoldenOwl said:

Knowledgable & experienced Kodak camera buyers are very happy with
their cameras

Click to expand...

I'm sure.

TheGoldenOwl said:

Don't worry your little selves about Kodak ... they will still be
here when you all are dead & forgotten!

Click to expand...

I hope I've got more than a few years left to live. Kodak's days are numbered. Sad, given what they were.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article5321569.ece

It's been a gloomy decade for Kodak. At present the market values Kodak at approximately 10% of it's peak in the late '90s, not coincidentally just as digital was starting to hit.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

And as an addendum to the fake sky comment I see that the polarizer in use there has improved the picture overall but changed the sky to a little too rich looking blue ... a good result for such a filter application that I used to avoid using when I shot film.
--
Robert

Lets hope that Kodak survives as modern DC's would not exist without the many innovations Kodak has invented ... I hope they sue everyone who has infringed on their patents!.

I hope they then learn from the brilliant ideas like Panasonic has come up with which really is my favorite DC brand all the way back to the FZ4 that I used to lust for with that f2.8 constant aperture lens but I really am more into wide-angle work.
I have worked on the wife alot to get her wanting the G1 and its new concept!
--
Robert the learning Owl

TheGoldenOwl said:

I hope they sue everyone who has infringed on their patents!.

Click to expand...

I hope they'd make excellent products that use their patents! They made some, but overall they aimed low.

TheGoldenOwl said:

I hope they then learn from the brilliant ideas like Panasonic has
come up with which really is my favorite DC brand

Click to expand...

Panasonic has hit the right combination of innovation, quality and price.

TheGoldenOwl said:

I really am more into wide-angle work.

Click to expand...

Try out the LX3. Excellent 24-60mm (equivalent) f/2-2.8 lens, good sensor, hotshoe for dedicated flash, clip on OVF, raw (in case you don't like the jpeg rendering), multiple aspect ratios in-camera (not a crop!), etc.

I don't own it (yet), but I've borrowed one and it's quite good. It's the closest you'll get in a compact camera to a (D)SLR with a 24-70mm zoom.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

Kodak has been in a long, slow slide since the '60s. The transition to digital media has been a more recent trouble spot for them.

Their films were (and are) very good.. but the era of a large film market is over, and shrinking daily.

Kodak never really saw into the digital future - they had some good stuff, but they did not support their own product.. that has been one of their problems for many years. The cameras that kodak put out for the mass market in the 70s and 80s were cheap junk, with poor-quality lenses.. The good stuff was too far and long in between.

Someone earlier in the thread pointed out that Kodak has, with respect to their camera bodies, aimed at the low end of the market. Cheap, cheap, cheap... When was the last time you saw a working professional photographer using cheap gear, except in situations where the equipment needed to be treated as 'disposable'?

Kodak makes sensors, and the bread-and-butter of these are in the scientific imaging sector, not the consumer sector, and the consumer sector is where the profit margins are - this is where one makes one's money.. take that away, and while you may have a great product, you will not be selling it fast enough to pay off the tooling.

Kodak is in the same situation as the North American auto makers for the same reason: No long-term foresight. They stood still while the rest of the world passed them by! They allowed themselves to be deluded into thinking that they were at the top of the heap, even when they were being passed on all sides..

S.
--
5DmkII**

Yes n.b. a splendid camera with good color I might add. Unfortunately the house and all our debts are paid and now I will probably have to use my P880 for years instead of the Pana G1 or its future versions being house poor and all.

Lots of Kodakians seem to be getting excellent results with the new Z and some V cameras I use an old relic that still works, I hope the new ones aren't that bad!
Thanks anyway you are much too kind to this Ahola!
--
Robert

Oh and like Brad Pitt said in 'A river runs through it' "I'll never leave Montana" same goes for the P880 my first DC that I can use intuitively to get great shots.

A Nikon CP8400 user says it gives better results on the wide end than the Kodak but it and the Lx3 are a little limited on the portrait end but both Are smaller than the Kodak.
--
Robert

Scotty, I don't understand how they can be way up there with Units sold but still going under I guess it is the low profit margin. Ow well even Kodak Color Science won't save them. That is all I and many others revere them for!
--
Robert

You know what I find amazing?

That Wall St classifies their problem as one of not selling enough digital cameras, while at the same time they have just come out of a program to get out of film, their traditional market, and go almost all digital.

Talk about no clue, eh?

First: they are "bad" because the bottom has fallen off the digital p&s market?
Hello????????

It's the market that was bad, not Kodak! Same problem for ANY maker of digital p&s. Kodak can't be blamed for this one. Other than for the strategy of being there in the first place. But that is the same for any other maker.

Second: they spent millions restructuring out of film, and into digital, and now that is "bad"?

Can ANYONE make sense out of this? No wonder they have suspended management payouts and bonuses...

--
My gallery: http://wizofoz2k.deviantart.com/gallery/#_browse
Cheers
Nuno Souto

one can go out of business very easily if one is selling for less than the cost of fabrication!

Kodak has the unenviable position of 'low perceived value' with their compact digital cameras - and they have got out of the dSLR game some time ago, which means they have no 'image builder' product - no high end high visibility product to boost their perceived value... for example, Canon has its 1-series dSLR cameras which are aimed at the very high end of the small format (35mm and smaller) market.. they sell very few of these cameras compared to even their bottom line dSLRs and hardly any at all compared to the volume of compacts they sell... but the 1-series builds image with the consumer.

Kodak also has a bad habit of not supporting their products and not fixing known issues.

cheers,
S.
--
5DmkII**

Nuno Souto said:

You know what I find amazing?

That Wall St classifies their problem as one of not selling enough
digital cameras, while at the same time they have just come out of a
program to get out of film, their traditional market, and go almost
all digital.

Talk about no clue, eh?

First: they are "bad" because the bottom has fallen off the digital
p&s market?
Hello????????
It's the market that was bad, not Kodak! Same problem for ANY maker
of digital p&s. Kodak can't be blamed for this one. Other than for
the strategy of being there in the first place. But that is the same
for any other maker.

Second: they spent millions restructuring out of film, and into
digital, and now that is "bad"?
Can ANYONE make sense out of this? No wonder they have suspended
management payouts and bonuses...

Click to expand...

The big test for Kodak management was: Could they use 10-15 years of income from steadily decreasing film sales (and a lot of capital from the past) to identify and grow into substantial, sustainable new business areas?

Did they?

ScottyNV said:

Kodak makes sensors, and the bread-and-butter of these are in the
scientific imaging sector, not the consumer sector, and the consumer
sector is where the profit margins are - this is where one makes
one's money.. take that away, and while you may have a great product,
you will not be selling it fast enough to pay off the tooling.

Click to expand...

That's not really correct. Consumer businesses are notorious short-margin (although very high unit numbers) and B-to-B businesses are normally high-margin (but much smaller units.)

What confuses me is that I thought they had just completed paying off the corporate debt or whatever that restructuring was called and had a clean sheet to return to some kind of eminence with digital; what with all their innovation and experience what could hold them back after 100+ years??

But maybe they will lose footing and be swept away by the same financial tsunami that is engulfing us all and if GM goes ... so goes Kodak too?
--
Robert

TheGoldenOwl said:

what could hold them back after 100+ years??

Click to expand...

Poor handling of the transition from what was essentially a chemical company to digital.

TheGoldenOwl said:

But maybe they will lose footing and be swept away by the same
financial tsunami that is engulfing us all and if GM goes ... so goes
Kodak too?

Click to expand...

If its any consolation, GM is in far worse shape. At least Kodak is making a (slim) profit and has positive equity.

Digital is now 75% of revenue, but it is flat. Film revenue is dropping at 20% per year. So overall revenue is dropping at about 5% per year. Earnings are marginal, but they are up. The main reason for increased earnings is cost cuts, which is exactly what you don't want to see. It's much better if a company makes money from top line (i.e. revenue) growth.

Kodak's cash position is OK only because they sold off their health division. Their cash flow is sharply negative.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

I think that Kodak doesn't advertise their inexpensive printers well.

Laurentiu Todie said:

I think that Kodak doesn't advertise their inexpensive printers well.

Click to expand...

Not a great market to be in in the first place. There are already dominant players, and even for them revenue and earnings are flat because people just don't print as much anymore, especially photos. There's these things call "digital photo frames", and now there are even digital brag books.

--
Seen in a fortune cookie:
Fear is the darkroom where negatives are developed

L.T., I don't know if that is totally true because it seems everytime I look thru the guide on the DISH I see like last night an info commercial on the new ESP printer. They want $200 for it with 'free' stuff thrown in to the deal.

I think I paid about half that price at Wally Mart for my 5100 AIO so I think I can get by with less than the wireless one!
But you said the inexpensive ones so I don't know!
--
Robert the thrifty Owl!