Could Kodak go bust because of Digital?

[PHILIE-T]

Im scared. I hope not but how can Kodak compete with the ulimate dominance of Digi?

[Rollef]

no answers in your dream, just plenty of vision 2?

[flatwood]

Im scared. I hope not but how can Kodak compete with the ulimate dominance of Digi?

Kodak is selling a bunch of nice diggy cameras, printer paper and other stuff like this. Whenever one of my friends asks for a suggestion for a digital camera I point them at Kodak. People trust that name. I hope they continue on for a long time.

[John_Pytlak]

In 2005, over HALF of Kodak's revenue came from DIGITAL imaging. Kodak has the BEST of both worlds:

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier. ... cale=en_US

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier. ... cale=en_US

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier. ... cale=en_US

[Mogzy]

Im scared. I hope not but how can Kodak compete with the ulimate dominance of Digi?

I think that was the problem with Agfaphoto- failure to diversify. Kodak fortunately have had the foresight to place an emphasis on digital in the consumer photography business, as this is what consumers want, wheras the professional motion picture industry still overwhelmingly uses film and Kodak is still investing to meet their needs accordingly. Basic economics! Welcome to the West!

[John_Pytlak]

Im scared. I hope not but how can Kodak compete with the ulimate dominance of Digi?

I think that was the problem with Agfaphoto- failure to diversify. Kodak fortunately have had the foresight to place an emphasis on digital in the consumer photography business, as this is what consumers want, wheras the professional motion picture industry still overwhelmingly uses film and Kodak is still investing to meet their needs accordingly. Basic economics! Welcome to the West!

Kodak began investing in digital imaging decades ago. The three color "Bayer Filter" used in most consumer digital cameras is a Kodak invention. The first scanners used by Lucasfilm Industrial Light and Magic were developed by Kodak. Kodak technology (scanner for Thomson Spirit telecine) has been used to create digital masters of many feature films. Over 40 years ago, the lunar orbiter spacecraft that mapped out the moon's surface in preparation for the manned landings used Kodak technology for film and processing, scanning the images, and sending them to earth digitally.

Today, Kodak makes state-of-the-art digital image sensors, including a 39 megapixel CCD sensor:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/digital/ ... bx=imagers

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/digital/ ... 4.17&lc=en

[reflex]

I'm enthusiastic about Kodak's higher end digitals, but my wife had a nasty experience with a low-end Kodak-badged digicam. I'm fairly sure that it was manufactured by a far-east OEM/ODM. Sadly, the end result is that she refused to replace the "piece of junk" with another Kodak and bought Japanese instead.

[BigBeaner]

Kodak isn't going anywhere, I can assure you. Even though I'm scared as the more people I talk to the more they crave the ease and use of video, but so long as there's nuts like me that crave film...

[Mitch Perkins]

I'm enthusiastic about Kodak's higher end digitals, but my wife had a nasty experience with a low-end Kodak-badged digicam. I'm fairly sure that it was manufactured by a far-east OEM/ODM. Sadly, the end result is that she refused to replace the "piece of junk" with another Kodak and bought Japanese instead.

Low-end Japanese?

Mitch

[John_Pytlak]

I'm enthusiastic about Kodak's higher end digitals, but my wife had a nasty experience with a low-end Kodak-badged digicam. I'm fairly sure that it was manufactured by a far-east OEM/ODM. Sadly, the end result is that she refused to replace the "piece of junk" with another Kodak and bought Japanese instead.

Was it a problem with the particular camera (Kodak has a one year warranty, even on the low-end models), or that she was not satisfied with the performance/features of a "low-end" model? Kodak has won high praise for its digital camera products:

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier. ... -path=4643

J.D. Power and Associates 2005 Digital Camera Satisfaction StudySM

J.D. Power and Associates ranked KODAK EASYSHARE Digital Cameras highest in customer satisfaction in the $199 or less and the $200-$399 price ranges. The study was based on 4,256 responses from consumers who purchased a digital camera between November, 2004 and June, 2005.

Since 1968, J.D. Power and Associates has been conducting quality and customer satisfaction research based on survey responses from millions of consumers worldwide. J.D. Power and Associates represents the voice of the customer.

[reflex]

I'm enthusiastic about Kodak's higher end digitals, but my wife had a nasty experience with a low-end Kodak-badged digicam. I'm fairly sure that it was manufactured by a far-east OEM/ODM. Sadly, the end result is that she refused to replace the "piece of junk" with another Kodak and bought Japanese instead.

Was it a problem with the particular camera (Kodak has a one year warranty, even on the low-end models), or that she was not satisfied with the performance/features of a "low-end" model? Kodak has won high praise for its digital camera products

From the JD Powers report, it looks like quality has improved dramatically. My wife's camera was the bottom end of the EasyShare line (bought in late 2001).

Most seriously, the camera dock had a design flaw that caused battery charging difficulties. It would simply stop charging. Kodak eventually issued a technical information bulletin which simply gave instructions for deep-discharging batteries. The consensus on user forums was that this was an attempt to avoid admitting a flaw in the charging circuit, since it didn't resolve the problem. Kodak replaced our equipment, but of course the replacement exhibited the same behaviour and I had to purchase an external charger.

The new cam developed problems zooming shortly after the warranty had expired, and the CCD malfunctioned at about 24 months, rendering all images a beautiful shade of moss green.

This seemed to be the Yugo of the product line, especially since we knew some owners of higher-end DX series cameras who loved them.

[reflex]

I'm enthusiastic about Kodak's higher end digitals, but my wife had a nasty experience with a low-end Kodak-badged digicam. I'm fairly sure that it was manufactured by a far-east OEM/ODM. Sadly, the end result is that she refused to replace the "piece of junk" with another Kodak and bought Japanese instead.

Low-end Japanese?

Nope, mid-range ($500 at the time). It worked perfectly for almost 3 years before developing the "streaky CCD" problem that is common with many cameras that used that vintage of Sony CCD. I took it to Canon's office here in town, and they repaired it for free and couriered it back to me in three days.

I'm sure Sony's footing a huge bill for all the glitched Fuji, Konica/Minoltas, Canons, and Sonys that failed.

[John_Pytlak]

Sorry to hear of your bad experience. I bought a Kodak DX-6490 almost two years ago, and have been very pleased with its performance. Have taken well over 2000 pictures with it, and its been exposed to lots of travel and rough usage (e.g., cold and snowy Berlin weather early last month) with consistently good performance:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/ ... -path=1600

My daughter just bought one of the major Japanese brand cameras in the same price range, and IMHO, my Kodak camera takes much more "film-like" pictures, with fewer digital artifacts.

[reflex]

Sorry to hear of your bad experience. I bought a Kodak DX-6490 almost two years ago, and have been very pleased with its performance. Have taken well over 2000 pictures with it.

Good to hear. I like the P880 myself - it looks like excellent value for its $500 street price.

[Mikael]

the lunar orbiter spacecraft that mapped out the moon's surface in preparation for the manned landings used Kodak technology for film and processing, scanning the images, and sending them to earth

Y not use video ?