You are at netAirspace : Forum : Spotting and Photography Forums : General Photography

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/84513994/

Digital dominates. Oddly enough, they created one of the 1st digital cameras back in the 1970s. Talk about a missed opportunity.

Nosedive wrote:Talk about a missed opportunity.

Indeed. For decades, Kodak was almost synonymous for photography.

Shows what happens if you can't adapt to a changing market environment. Even the biggest player cannot survive if their market stops existing.

Leica Camera had similar problems here in Germany. I remember reading an interview with their CEO around 2000-ish. Being asked why Leica doesn't make a stronger effort to penetrate the digital market, he responded along the line of "Digital photography is only a passing fad. Once people will realize that they have to buy a new camera every other year, they will switch back to analogue."

Made me .

That people actually do have to buy a camera almost every other year it seems, and that they are content with the expense, is the bigger IMO. If all else were equal, for the good pics Velvia beats CMOS any day.

Out of ignorance of cameras I ask this:

Wife had a pretty nice Minolta when I met her. She got it five years ago. Digital of course. And she took some great shots with it.

For Christmas this year, I got her a new camera and an extra lens that looks like a hors . . .well, it's BIG.

Firstly, EXPENSIVE - WAY expensive. WTF? Secondly. Why every couple years do you need a new camera?

I have a Soldier/Cop/Chef proof Olympus Stylus 300 that I've had for seven years. It's clean, it takes decent photos, most all of 'em you've seen here and on FB and on my web site were taken with that camera. It works just fine. I don't see a need to replace it. Besides I like simplicity (except when I cook), the less buttons and dials the better.

What's the big deal replacing a camera every couple years?

ANCFlyer wrote:What's the big deal replacing a camera every couple years?

First, you're not spending the $$$ in film and processing.

Second, you get a lot of capacity in a small package. I recall my in-laws coming back from Europe (1999) with 30 rolls of film.

Third, cheap cameras break often, specially when you drop them.

We never replaced a camera just 'cause, only after they stopped working.

But the story just shows what happens when you don't adapt to the changing market. Happened to Polaroid, and now to Kodak. Can't sit back and not change.

ANCFlyer wrote:What's the big deal replacing a camera every couple years?

I agree, the one with which I have been posting pictures on here is about 5-6 years old. With the exception of the fact that I don't use it daily and it runs the batteries down within a few days if I leave them in it, it works perfectly.

Then again, I'm not a camera geek, and I can understand why they might want the shiniest and newest stuff.

ANCFlyer wrote:Out of ignorance of cameras I ask this:

What's the big deal replacing a camera every couple years?

Aside from having to buy a new version of PhotoShop?

AndesSMF wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:What's the big deal replacing a camera every couple years?

First, you're not spending the $$$ in film and processing.

Second, you get a lot of capacity in a small package. I recall my in-laws coming back from Europe (1999) with 30 rolls of film.

Third, cheap cameras break often, specially when you drop them.

We never replaced a camera just 'cause, only after they stopped working.

OK, I'm not talking about cameras that use film. I haven't owned one of those in a decade.

I'm talking about digital. I have mine, wife has hers. WHY should I replace a perfectly good digital camera every couple years or better?

Just so I can have the newest and bestest is not a sufficient answer by the way. I'm not a techno-geek-gotta-have-it type.

I don't do anything to process a photo but put the chip into the printer/or the cable to the computer and hit "go". They download, we print what we want on one of two HP printers we have here at home.

The only cost involved is photo-paper for the printer.

At least for some of us, you get more megapixels, you get better quality. That is nice when you're taking pictures of them there aeroplanes.

miamiair wrote:At least for some of us, you get more megapixels, you get better quality. That is nice when you're taking pictures of them there aeroplanes.

So essentially, like getting a new cell phone every time there's a new app. Ha Ha Ha. My cell phone is a simple flip phone. I can call and I can text. What else do I need?

By the by, all the photos on my web site came from that little instant(?) Olympus camera as does most of the food photos from the Lodge.

I don't see the big deal.

Not trying to be obtuse, just don't see the need to waste the $$$$

I've been using my Canon 20D since I bought it new in March '06, this was right after Canon announced the 30D and the bottom fell out of the prices for new 20D's, as there was about a two month period when Canon was making both. However, the "awesomely new gotta have it" crowd has pretty much started dominating digital photography, or at least it did for about the last 3 or 4 years, and now my 5 year old camera is "obsolete technology."

Though why its obsolete, I have no idea, still shoots like the day I got it except for maybe a little bit more noise I'm starting to notice.

Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

miamiair wrote:Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

If by "buy" you mean "take it off my hands for free" then yes. Somehow I don't think we will be able to come to terms here.

ANCFlyer wrote:WHY should I replace a perfectly good digital camera every couple years or better?

For us, we've only replaced a camera that has broken. If I had spent the $$ in a good camera, we'd still have it.

I wonder how many have been in our same position. Since the cameras are small, they get dropped often. Or that retractable lens gets out of alignment. Since it didn't cost much to begin with, you replace instead of fix.

graphic wrote:However, the "awesomely new gotta have it" crowd has pretty much started dominating digital photography...

The same could pretty much be said about the consumer electronics market in general as well. How many people dumped perfectly good 1stGen iPads when the iPad 2 came out?

ANCFlyer wrote:My cell phone is a simple flip phone. I can call and I can text. What else do I need?

You need apps! Apps I say!! And Data, lots and lots of data. 4G LTE BBQ!



I had hoped that Kodak had learned from Polaroid. Guess not.

graphic wrote:

miamiair wrote:Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

If by "buy" you mean "take it off my hands for free" then yes. Somehow I don't think we will be able to come to terms here.

I can offer $4 more than Graphic.

miamiair wrote:Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

It probably would cost more than a trip to SXM.

Queso wrote:

miamiair wrote:Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

It probably would cost more than a trip to SXM.

Wrong, make an offer.

miamiair wrote:

Queso wrote:

miamiair wrote:Wanna buy a slightly used 50D with a Battery grip?

It probably would cost more than a trip to SXM.

Wrong, make an offer.

Well, , first of all I'd have to do some research to find out what a "50D" is. Then, I'd have to see what the fair-market value is. And cut it in half as a starting point.

Kodak is set to emerge from BK

Kodak doesn't look a whole lot like it did when it filed for bankruptcy protection last year, but its executives and investors are hoping for a picture-perfect future.

Many of its products and services are gone, including the camera-making business that made it famous more than a century ago. Also gone are scores of workers, manufacturing facilities, supply contracts and millions of dollars in investments.

Bummer in a way - no more Kodak cameras. Makes me almost feel like what's the point? Maybe someday they'll start up another line of cameras. *wishful thinking*

I can appreciate the history but I've never had one, I always used good quality 35mm and then dslr neither of which Kodak offered. Growing up I used to shoot on the parents Olympus om1 and om2. Kodak cameras?