Kodak

SavannahMan

I don't see alot of Kodak stuff in the popular haunts. Are they pariah¿ If so why.... Just curious because I bought one, a DX6440, and need to know if I'm a diseased leper now..... (I'd rather return it than be stuck with the red-headed step child of the digicam world...)

DoctorIt

SavannahMan wrote:

I don't see alot of Kodak stuff in the popular haunts. Are they pariah¿ If so why.... Just curious because I bought one, a DX6440, and need to know if I'm a diseased leper now..... (I'd rather return it than be stuck with the red-headed step child of the digicam world...)

I wouldn't call Kodak a red-headed stepchild by any means. Kodak always was, and still is on the cutting edge of photography. Any doubts about that, just check this out:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031802kodakslrc.asp

wxwax

dude, I think that's a very good question. Did you know that Kodak sold more digital cameras in the United States in the fourth quarter of last year than any other manufacturer? That it's second only to Sony overall?

But you wouldn't know it from what goes on here, would you? I dunno what the answer is. If I were to take a totally uneducated guess, it's that Kodak mostly sells to beginners, and beginners are less likely to join a message board about photgraphy?

DoctorIt

wxwax wrote:

dude, I think that's a very good question. Did you know that Kodak sold more digital cameras in the United States in the fourth quarter of last year than any other manufacturer? That it's second only to Sony overall?

But you wouldn't know it from what goes on here, would you? I dunno what the answer is. If I were to take a totally uneducated guess, it's that Kodak mostly sells to beginners, and beginners are less likely to join a message board about photgraphy?

I would agree with Waxy. I think my original post was going to say something like that, but I got sidetracked by that pro DSLR. ooooooh!

SavannahMan

Great news then. lol. Appreciate the feedback. How long do ya think before that 14mp comes down to around $400¿

ian408

DoctorIt wrote:

I would agree with Waxy. I think my original post was going to say something like that, but I got sidetracked by that pro DSLR. ooooooh!

Wasn't there something recently about their adopting the Canon mount for the
next dSLR?

jimf

SavannahMan wrote:

Great news then. lol. Appreciate the feedback. How long do ya think before that 14mp comes down to around $400¿

That particular one? Probably never. But we should see $400 14mp sensors in the consumer space in three years.

gus

jimf wrote:

That particular one? Probably never. But we should see $400 14mp sensors in the consumer space in three years.

Come on jim...you seem to know your camera stuff....what the bloody hell do we want a 14 MP for ? I have a 5 & most often use 2 MP. I have a $50 K colour printer avail to me & @ 5 MP A4....its as clear as a bell. It seems to be a marketing thing.

I ment to add here that that a pic off that printer looks the same as a $500 one.

wxwax

For us, at any rate. Dunno about the pros.

jimf

Humungus wrote:

Come on jim...you seem to know your camera stuff....what the bloody hell do we want a 14 MP for ? I have a 5 & most often use 2 MP. I have a $50 K colour printer avail to me & @ 5 MP A4....its as clear as a bell. It seems to be a marketing thing.

Of course it's a marketing thing. In truth, most of the consumer level cameras don't get you any better picture beyond 2 or 3 mpel; the lenses just aren't good enough. And yet they're selling 5 now in those little P&Ss, and you know 8 is only a generation away. Then we'll see 10 or so in another generation, then 14 in another.

It need not actually produce better pictures, it just has to have a bigger number.

jdellis

I'm a red-headed stepchild.

After my 3-week old warranty replacement for my 6 month old Nikon 2100 croaked, I upgraded to a Kodak DX6490.

I like it, but the inclusion of the dock is a waste of money.

I bought my fiance a 3MP Kodak point and shoot for Christmas, and so far so good with it as well.

-jde

cmr164

Kodak has always been the industry leader in imaging technology. It is the press and the public image they can't handle. (Kind of like DEC) I helped design a "camera" (really film plane scanner) for Eikonix (Kodak) in 1986 that had 30M by 48 bit pixels. Boggles the imagination that that was almost 20 years ago.

wxwax

jdellis wrote:

I upgraded to a Kodak DX6490.

I like it, but the inclusion of the dock is a waste of money.
-jde

Funny thing is, I've read that the dock may be one of their strongest selling points with newcomers.

jdellis

wxwax wrote:

Funny thing is, I've read that the dock may be one of their strongest selling points with newcomers.

I totally agree with that, but on a mid-level camera like the DX6490, one could assume the user would be proficient enough to use a card reader.

I should've said that, personally, I'd rather have the option to buy the camera for say $40-$50 less, and manage the files on my own.

-jde

REC

wxwax wrote:

Funny thing is, I've read that the dock may be one of their strongest selling points with newcomers.

I have a Kodak DX3700 and a DX6490, with docks for both. I like the idea of setting them in the docks for charging and just pushing a button to download the pictures. Other wise you need to have USB cable laying a round or wear out the contacts on the memory card switching between a card reader and the camera.
BTW, I use 256K cards for both, with 125K cards for insurance, so I don't usually need to worry about running out of room, even after a full day of picture taking.

wxwax

Hi rec, welcome to the site. And thanks for your insight. It jibes with what I've read: the dual functions of the dock as a recharger and a transfer station make it handy. I dunno if many other manufacturers offer a dock... but I wouldn't be surprised to see more docks in a few months, especially if Kodak keeps selling cameras the way they did in Q4.