Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kodak Ektra

kodak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 211 posts

Re: Kodak Ektra

#131

Post by Theodores »

jbarham wrote: post #108
noahmbarr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to applaud Kodak for taking a risk. If the camera functionality is that much better, some customer segment might be compelled. It's hard to say until the product is available. Future iPhone customers will benefit from this product release. If it's at all better, you better believe this will only push Apple's camera engineering team harder.

This device is not made by Kodak. It's made by a British company called Bullitt Group that is licensing the Kodak name. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/news/7643905711/kodak-launches-ektr...

That is the key insight here, particularly when you see what other branded gadgets this Bullitt Group have, Kodak have just become a brand name that can be licensed by third parties. There is no connection to the Kodak we know, impetus came from outside.

It seems that Bullitt can innovate, their camera-phone for Caterpillar has some thermal imaging aspect to it. Here I think they have gone for nostalgia with the name and form factor rather than innovation. There certainly is no leveraging of Kodak's patent portfolio going on or anything truly new brought to the product, a decent interface with a few more advanced settings is expected.

I think an opportunity was missed here. Kodak made photography accessible and easy, that could have been the thing here with an auxiliary camera that worked with someone's phone to bring decent zoom and optics to them. They could have also made the camera double up as a recharging brick so there would be reason to always have it with you. If it also had USB-C storage for your device with cloud backup and some VSCO service for the pictures then it could work.

The first Kodak digital cameras for the pro-sumer market had a programming language that you could use to get the camera to do things. You could get it to work out the height of a building by focusing on the top and then the bottom - it would do the trig for you, fantastic. Maybe a Kodak camera could revisit this and make it work for the IoT connected world, so the Kodak camera could be set up to do ad-hoc CCTV, timelapse and other things. Or just a remote camera for taking selfies, a market could be made for that even if the product was sold on doing super clever stuff. Instead there is this nostalgia trip.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#132

Post by pauljaworski »

paulgerhardt wrote: post #89

I absolutely love these platforms for travel. I have a similar model (a Panasonic/Leica Android phone). It has a very large sensor and sim tray. As result I can run a local sim in WiFi hotspot mode for my primary iPhone and still get great photos with a 2-in-1 device. The photo quality is fantastic and it beats having to carry a small mirrorless camera around. Being able to run Photoshop Lightroom right on the device…

I think the majority of the owners of this camera will be popular Instagram photographers who are being paid to use them... and maybe a handful of their diehard, "aspiring photographer" followers.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#133

Post by wtfishackernews »

ramgorur wrote: post #127
soared wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was pretty interested in this, but $550 seems to steep. What is that price point supposed to compete with? To low for iphone/pixel, too high for many other android phones.

I don't think 550$ is too steep, if you compare with phones like samsung s7 (670$), huwaei p9 (500$), 1plus3 (600$).

The oneplus 3 is $400, but I agree.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#134

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

Theodores wrote: post #131
jbarham wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This device is not made by Kodak. It's made by a British company called Bullitt Group that is licensing the Kodak name. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/news/7643905711/kodak-launches-ektr...

That is the key insight here, particularly when you see what other branded gadgets this Bullitt Group have, Kodak have just become a brand name that can be licensed by third parties. There is no connection to the Kodak we know, impetus came from outside. It seems that Bullitt can innovate, their camera-phone for Caterpillar has some thermal imaging aspect to it. Here I think they have gone for nostalgia with the name…

Here's a neat idea: a smartphone, with a great camera, that doubles as a recharging brick. For itself.

So basically a high-end smartphone like we have today that isn't "Half a millimetre thinner TM" but a full centimetre thicker.

Now that would be innovative!

Re: Kodak Ektra

#135

Post by pauljaworski »

exelius wrote: post #10

Didn't Nokia try this already? I'm pretty sure the camera world has settled into two kinds of cameras: cell phones for people who just need to take a few snaps, and DSLRs for people who need more features than can possibly fit in a cameraphone (flash hotshoe, changeable lenses, larger sensor, etc). DSLRs are cheap enough that cost isn't really an issue. I doubt the results here will be any better than Nokia had.

Compact mirrorless cameras are the big third category you're missing, I think. They're the perfect mix of quality, portability, and discreetness, which makes them excellent for travel and street photography. The Fuji X series are great examples. I wouldn't dream of taking my Canon 6D backpacking, but my X100T goes with me everywhere and produces excellent shots. My Instagram handle is @paulwithap if you want to see some examples (I rarely post there anymore, so this is definitely not a shameless plug ;)

Re: Kodak Ektra

#136

Post by astrocat »

imaginenore wrote: post #122
astrocat wrote: post #93

There's a missed opportunity here... this is not a smartphone, because as a phone, it will suck. It's a smartcamera, because as a point-and-shoot running Android with a cellular data connection, it will probably be quite cool. As mentioned already, Nokia tried the "photography first" smartphonecamera - it didn't fly. Because, honestly, iPhones are already top of the line smartphonecameras. The cameras are ridiculousl…

As a photographer, I want to correct you. Camera sensors are good, actually amazing for their sizes. What sucks is the lens + the sensor size combination. On most phones you get a fixed wideangle lens, some phones have two lenses, some have sucky zooms (Galaxy S4 Zoom). None of them come even close to a cheap DSLR/mirrorless with large sensors. All 100% of the phone cameras suck in low light. Yes, even the latest iPh…

Believe me, I know. I carry my D3300 on all my vacations - it's the cheap, entry level DSLR for people like me who want to take better pictures but don't want to invest thousands in high level cameras. Or training ;) But I am like head-over-heels for my 50mm prime.

That aside, that's not really the point at hand. The hypothesis is that there is still a value desert between smartphone cameras and DSLRs that isn't adequately filled by traditional point-and-shoots. And perhaps, Kodak could uncover some by pairing a pocket space computer with a data connection and a better lens (think about what Nokia put on their smartphonecamera) but dropping the phone requirement. This Ektra isn't it, obviously, but it might be a step in that direction.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#137

Post by RUG3Y »

astrocat wrote: post #93

There's a missed opportunity here... this is not a smartphone, because as a phone, it will suck. It's a smartcamera, because as a point-and-shoot running Android with a cellular data connection, it will probably be quite cool. As mentioned already, Nokia tried the "photography first" smartphonecamera - it didn't fly. Because, honestly, iPhones are already top of the line smartphonecameras. The cameras are ridiculousl…

This would be fine for me, because I'm a photographer that uses only a subset of smartphone features. I'd like to have a camera that performs well as a camera and can make calls if I need it to.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#138

Post by nikcub »

jbarham wrote: post #108
noahmbarr wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to applaud Kodak for taking a risk. If the camera functionality is that much better, some customer segment might be compelled. It's hard to say until the product is available. Future iPhone customers will benefit from this product release. If it's at all better, you better believe this will only push Apple's camera engineering team harder.

This device is not made by Kodak. It's made by a British company called Bullitt Group that is licensing the Kodak name. Source: https://www.dpreview.com/news/7643905711/kodak-launches-ektr...

Kodak is an "innovators dilemma" case study, and what they're doing by bringing in an outside group to compete with itself is exactly one of the solutions that is often prescribed.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#139

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

kpil wrote: post #118
st3v3r wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"As mentioned already, Nokia tried the "photography first" smartphonecamera - it didn't fly." It didn't fly largely because it was running a 3rd rate OS that no one really wanted.

Also, "Nokia" is not a camera. But anyway, there is probably a customer segment, but it might not be that large. But the camera design language make sense, i think, especially the leather and larger knobs - even on a phone. Functional-ish instead of apple minimalist - at least I can tell a difference from the rest. But then maybe they should have a real lens and not a faked plastic thing around it to make it look big…

There should be a modular sensor/lens assembly that lets you swap between a standard low profile phone cam and a larger sensor with true optical zoom, shutter, and aperture control. Throw in a simulated focus ring and you'd have a saleable product.

Re: Kodak Ektra

#140

Post by raldi »

simonsarris wrote: post #5
OJFord wrote: post #4

> Edit photos anywhere with Snapseed™ The "before" and "after" images [0] are completely different photographs! [0]: http://www.kodak.com/KodakGCG/uploadedImages/Consumer/Produc...

It's a continuation of scene. I think they were attempting a panorama where half was "before" and half was after, but the subject and feel of each side of the pano is just so different, that it hardly has a comparison effect! For a true before/after, see these images: http://kp.kinsta.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/before.jpg http://kp.kinsta.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/after.jpg

Where did you find those?
Post reply on HN