bmattock
Veteran
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.u...e_kodak_film_cameras_news_196274.html?aff=rss
When I read this, I thought it was April 1. Seriously.
Now, just FYI, the Vivitar V3000s is made, as are most Vivitar SLRs, by Cosina. So this is the Bessaflex TM in different livery. No idea what the lens mount will be, but I'd be willing to bet it will be a standard Pentax P/KA.
No doubt Kodak continues to make money from the sale of film. Mostly, as has been argued here, from movie film. And the amount of money they make has been dropping like a stone, 30% or more year-on-year. So this statement seems odd to me.
This totally flabbergasts me. China is going digital as fast as their feet can carry them. Workers enter the middle class, get a TV and a cell phone and a digital camera. No film. Lucky Film in China was recently cast loose from Kodak, at a huge loss for Kodak, pennies on the dollar. Their entire China management team were given the sack several years ago for the billions of dollars they poured into film manufacturing in China in a race with Fujifilm, which turned out to be a spectacular boondoggle. And NOW they think, as they did in 2003, that China's market is ripe for photographic film sales? Are they mad?
I am still waiting for someone to report this story a hoax. But here you go. For whatever it may be worth...
When I read this, I thought it was April 1. Seriously.
Now, just FYI, the Vivitar V3000s is made, as are most Vivitar SLRs, by Cosina. So this is the Bessaflex TM in different livery. No idea what the lens mount will be, but I'd be willing to bet it will be a standard Pentax P/KA.
No doubt Kodak continues to make money from the sale of film. Mostly, as has been argued here, from movie film. And the amount of money they make has been dropping like a stone, 30% or more year-on-year. So this statement seems odd to me.
This totally flabbergasts me. China is going digital as fast as their feet can carry them. Workers enter the middle class, get a TV and a cell phone and a digital camera. No film. Lucky Film in China was recently cast loose from Kodak, at a huge loss for Kodak, pennies on the dollar. Their entire China management team were given the sack several years ago for the billions of dollars they poured into film manufacturing in China in a race with Fujifilm, which turned out to be a spectacular boondoggle. And NOW they think, as they did in 2003, that China's market is ripe for photographic film sales? Are they mad?
I am still waiting for someone to report this story a hoax. But here you go. For whatever it may be worth...
tripod
Well-known
Interesting. Thanks Bill.
oftheherd
Veteran
You're right Bill, that is both interesting and strange. Why sign with Vivitar as opposed to Cosina? Do they think they need the Vivitar brand for strength, that Kodak isn't strong enough? Hmmm, maybe they are right. Not everybody knows enough about Vivitar to consider them a compediter, much less Cosina. Will be interesting to watch. I can't believe they haven't already picked a production camera with some cosmetic differences.
Come to think of it, when was the last time Kodak put out anything other than a throw away?
Come to think of it, when was the last time Kodak put out anything other than a throw away?
Toby
On the alert
I suppose it makes sense for film manufacturers to make film cameras if no one else will. But why would you buy this camera new when you could probably buy a far superior second hand canon or nikon Pro SLR for near enough the same price?
BillBingham2
Registered User
Did they not have a big blurb about Leica a few weeks back? I wonder who at Vivitar will be shown the door shortly?
B2 (;->
B2 (;->
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Good question. Maybe they are counting on customers not knowing any better? Marketing people all too often neglect to consider the possibility that their target customers have any brains at all.Toby said:
bmattock
Veteran
oftheherd said:
Well, in the digital realm, they did the very excellent digital SLR cameras based on Nikon and Canon bodies, but in the film world...
I have seen some "Kodak" branded no-name AF zoom lenses, really badly done, plastic everything, even the mounts - for other brands too, such as Pentax and Nikon mount. Why? I have no idea. Some wonk at Kodak hopefully got the sack for that nonsense - they sure dropped that campaign quickly in any case.
I am at a loss as to why they did not go directly to Cosina. They must know that Vivitar doesn't actually manufacture anything - they'll just farm the job out to Cosina.
Part of me wants to believe this - the other part of me is still screaming 'hoax'!
myoptic3
Well-known
I'm all for new film cameras, but why a SLR? Probably because they are cheap to design and manufacture, compared to RF cameras. I see this as just another inept, ill thought out move by what was once a great company but is now totally out of touch w/ the photography enthusiast. Or the consumer market for that matter. I am in no hurry to own a Kodak branded Vivitar camera, and no one else is either. Someone better buy Kodak and save them from totally self destructing in front of our very eyes.
George S.
How many is enough?
Don't you get it? There's no design involved here. No start-up capital needed. They're just going to sell the Vivitar (Cosina) SLRs that have been out for at least 10-15 years under model names like "2000" "3000" and "3300".
bmattock
Veteran
George S. said:
The question is, who is going to buy it? The article says they expect to sell it in India, where film is apparently still a big seller. Could be, I have no idea what the Indian market looks like.
But it seems to me like quite an odd move for Kodak.
NickTrop
Veteran
The Vivitar 3000S is my SLR since 1990-ish. It's a fine camera, it's held up well, works as new, nice and light and compact, never saw a reason to buy another (though I've been tempted). A K-mart special I bought for $100 -ish with a decent 50 then and I still use it today. Digital cameras are overpriced. Hundreds of dollars, then you need a computer, inks, papers, limited to iso 200 usually... A DSLR kit will still cost you $1000 US on the low end when all is said and done. Then you need the computer, printer, and software... I doubt there are "kiosks" for this sort of thing in the rural areas of China yet.
The "price of entry" for digital is high for an emerging economy. Hell, it's high for me. Also, perhaps those cultures aren't "trained" yet to waste money on items that are billed as "the latest and greatest" but offer no real performance or price gains - just get you to take money out of your wallet and put it into the manufacturers. Maybe China isn't "trained" yet to chase megapixel and don't get "spec drunk" yet. They'll learn (eventually).
Kodak knows what it's doing.
The "price of entry" for digital is high for an emerging economy. Hell, it's high for me. Also, perhaps those cultures aren't "trained" yet to waste money on items that are billed as "the latest and greatest" but offer no real performance or price gains - just get you to take money out of your wallet and put it into the manufacturers. Maybe China isn't "trained" yet to chase megapixel and don't get "spec drunk" yet. They'll learn (eventually).
Kodak knows what it's doing.
bmattock
Veteran
NickTrop said:
The Vivitar series of SLR cameras - made by Cosina - are fine, basic, SLRs. Not made to the same standard as the Nikons, Canons, Minoltas, and Pentaxes of yore, but quite acceptable. I have several myself, from different eras. I have a Vivitar 400/SL - a hulking giant metal M42 monster. A Vivitar v2000, which is so basic I seldom take it out. A Vivitar XV-3, which has AE (aperture priority) which I like, nice compact metal-bodied camera that.
I also have some of the Cosina clones made for other companies. My favorite is the Canon T-60. Mounts all my FD glass, works a treat, AE (stop-down) with my M42 lenses on an M42->FD adapter plate. My only beef with it is that it is so lightweight, the older heavy FD lenses tip it over and make the balance all wonky. With the later black FDn mount lenses, it is fine.
I also have a Bessaflex TM (the silver one). I bought it because I wanted one modern M42 body with metering I could really trust. It's been a great camera so far. One of the few cameras I have spent more than a few dollars on.
Photo Village sells this one:
http://www.photovillage.com/html/vsl43.html
Which amazes me, since you can buy the exact same thing with a Vivitar brand on it - or Quantaray, or Dakota, or etc, etc, for about ten dollars on eBay if you're patient.
As to whether or not Kodak is being smart...I dunno. I guess we'll see if this is a good idea or not. I'm willing to entertain the thought that it might be a clever idea.
Ade-oh
Well-known
It seems a reasonable move. Outside the bigger cities, I'm not sure that India has the infrastructure to support all the things that are required for full-on digital photography, like cable-based broadband internet access and even reliable electricity supply (well it didn't when I visited a few years ago).
So film isn't quite dead after all. Good.
So film isn't quite dead after all. Good.
aparat
Established
There should also be an market for a low-priced SLR among thousads of college students in the US who take intro photography courses. It is virtually impossible these days to walk into a photo store and buy a manual SLR. The used market does not work for everyone. Some people still prefer to buy new and with a warranty.
aparat
aparat
bsdunek
Old Guy with a Corgi
I can agree with this. The price just to keep up is high. A lot of film can be bought for the several thousand dollars it takes to buy a computer, printer, and all the software, and it's out of date when you buy the next camera.NickTrop said:
As for 'lots of used' cameras, we're in a very small market here at RFF. Most people would be afraid of a used camera, want a warranty, where's the instruction book, what about manufacturer support, and hundreds of other reasons the general public won't buy a used camera. Just IMHO.
bmattock
Veteran
bsdunek said:
My most recent PC was $279 from HP at Christmas. Used the same monitor I already had. No printer, because I have no use for one, and my software is all free - I run Linux. Ok, I'm wrong, I bought Vuescan in 2003. Paid $45 for it, as I recall.
I'm not dumping thousands into a PC every couple of years as the film luddites keep insisting happens. The economics strongly favor digital - they just don't want to admit it.
Use film if you prefer it - I love it and use it regularly. But I don't pretend it's cheaper than digital, because it isn't.
bottley1
only to feel
film, wot dat?
Ducky
Well-known
Sitemistic quit to soon, he'd love this thread!
photogdave
Shops local
Sounds like the educational institutes mentioned in the press release may have asked Kodak for this camera. They would already have contacts with Kodak from buying film and chemistry etc. so they probably asked for a new cheap film SLR that could be purchased in quantities.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
To keep film alive we need good scanners at reasonable price and an easy way to get the film processed.
Hopefully Kodak and Fuji after introducing new cameras will cater for all the after-shooting workflow.
I am forced to keep exposed film refrigerated and take it to minilab in batches. I have a scanner by the defunct Minolta.
And I have far too many film cameras. No digital camera yet.
Hopefully Kodak and Fuji after introducing new cameras will cater for all the after-shooting workflow.
I am forced to keep exposed film refrigerated and take it to minilab in batches. I have a scanner by the defunct Minolta.
And I have far too many film cameras. No digital camera yet.