New Kodak Super 8mm camera-Dead?

[Ted Striker]

So with 2018 about wrapped up it has been nearly 2 years since Kodak announced that they were bringing out a new Super 8mm film camera. 2 years with almost no news about a release date.

Can we assume now that this camera is not going to happen?

 

[Dayrell bishop]

I did wonder who would buy it ,the prices I saw mentioned seemed very high and although now old there are still many high quality high spec cameras still on the market .

 

[Ted Striker]

I did wonder who would buy it ,the prices I saw mentioned seemed very high and although now old there are still many high quality high spec cameras still on the market .

Yeah, upping the price from $500 or so up to $2700 didnt do them any favors.

I suspect this camera is now vaporware.

 

[jawarden]

So with 2018 about wrapped up it has been nearly 2 years since Kodak announced that they were bringing out a new Super 8mm film camera. 2 years with almost no news about a release date.

Can we assume now that this camera is not going to happen?

Yes let's come to a consensus that it's now time for the group to start assuming things. 🙂

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

I apologize to the group for becoming the troll.

 

[benmacphoto]

With the amount of quality super 8 cameras on the used market, I'd wonder why they would bother making this camera.
Sure make the film but a new super 8 camera is not needed.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

The problem is that most of the Super 8 cameras out there, even the highest quality, don't have the ability to shoot modern high speed emulsions. I have a like-new Elmo C300 that can even take DS8 but no emulsions are available that allow me to use its TTL meter, so why waste $30 on a S8 cartridge when I could spend the same amount on 16mm?
THAT is why a new Super 8 option would be cool.
Phil Forrest

 

[Ted Striker]

I assume stuff all the time, I think wrongly 50/50, and if it is about my wife, wrong 100%. I assume Ted is just stirring the Kodak pot, right?

Since when is asking a valid question "stirring the pot"? How many years have to pass in order for this question to be valid in your eyes? 5 years? 10 years?



Good god you are a snowflake.


Edit: Apple announced a wireless iPhone charger called AirPower last year. Since then there has been NO update at all on this. I asked the same question as I did hear in an Apple forum, where is the product announced a year ago? Thankfully, the response there were not as childish above.


This is a FORUM. You should understand that people come here to DISCUSS topics. If you dont like the topic, DONT READ IT. There was nothing at all wrong with me asking this question about an interesting camera that was wildly expected years ago. This would not be the first vaporware product (hello Ferannia!).

 

[Ted Striker]

With the amount of quality super 8 cameras on the used market, I'd wonder why they would bother making this camera.
Sure make the film but a new super 8 camera is not needed.

Kodak Marketing must have done research to validate a new product design. Or maybe they didnt and that is why the camera appears to be stillborn.

 

[jawarden]

The problem is that most of the Super 8 cameras out there, even the highest quality, don't have the ability to shoot modern high speed emulsions. I have a like-new Elmo C300 that can even take DS8 but no emulsions are available that allow me to use its TTL meter, so why waste $30 on a S8 cartridge when I could spend the same amount on 16mm?
THAT is why a new Super 8 option would be cool.
Phil Forrest

Exactly. The last I've read about the project was Kodak talking about the complexity of the design and the challenge of working with suppliers to hit tight tolerances. If you've seen the insides of these things they're like tiny friggin' sewing machines, lots of moving parts, etc. Just amazing. A 2+ year development cycle when starting from scratch on a design this complex doesn't surprise me a bit. (You could easily chew up a year on FMEA alone.) I've been involved in product development programs that have taken longer on far simpler products than this mechanical/digital camera. It ain't a Holga they're making.

 

[Ted Striker]

Exactly. The last I've read about the project was Kodak talking about the complexity of the design and the challenge of working with suppliers to hit tight tolerances. If you've seen the insides of these things they're like tiny friggin' sewing machines, lots of moving parts, etc. Just amazing. A 2+ year development cycle when starting from scratch on a design this complex doesn't surprise me a bit. (You could easily chew up a year on FMEA alone.) I've been involved in product development programs that have taken longer on far simpler products than this mechanical/digital camera. It ain't a Holga they're making.

With today's computer controlled manufacturing, hitting tight tolerances is not the challenge it used to be. I routinely visit tiny job shops that can hit sub micro levels of tolerance with very little rejection for failure.

 

[tunalegs]

Good god you are a snowflake.

If you're going to try to insult people, at least use insults properly. 😀

 

[jawarden]

With today's computer controlled manufacturing, hitting tight tolerances is not the challenge it used to be. I routinely visit tiny job shops that can hit sub micro levels of tolerance with very little rejection for failure.

Yes, of course manufacturing has improved over the decades. This is not news, and does not remove the challenges of developing a complex electromechanical product such as this.

If Kodak releases the camera with problems the internet nerds will moan about how they rushed it through, and if they take the time to develop it properly the same people will complain about lack of communication and how awfully long it took when in many cases they had no intention of buying one anyway. Sound familiar?

One of Kodak's struggles appears to be with marketing. They started marketing Ektachrome early and then had delays, and that frustrated those that are easily frustrated and delighted the trolls. (Thankfully the film is great.) With P3200 they got it about right, announcing the product a reasonable time before availability. (And again, the product is great.) This camera though - assuming the project is still active - another example of marketing the product too soon IMO. It gives them a black eye unnecessarily, and makes threads like this appear.

It's an audacious thing they're doing with this product. I wish them the best.

 

[Steve M.]

Nothing wrong with assumptions. They're usually based on experiential knowledge. Besides, no 8mm camera on earth is worth $2700. No matter what you do, it's gonna look like an 8mm film.

I never had an 8mm camera, but can we..... assume..... that the negs would be 1/3 the area of a 35mm neg? Talk about small prints and grainy images. The resolution would be too low and look crappy. It worked for Warhol, but who here is Warhol?

Speaking of Warhol, if you have kiddies you'll want to shoo them out of the room at the 4:20 mark for this montage. No nudity, no profanity, but, well, you know. It's that method acting thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_iJFcSgXss

I like the idea of being a snowflake. I've heard that no two are alike, so one would be totally unique. Good stuff!

This was shot on 16mm. and looks really good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG9pmEAO6q0&t=134s

 

[Ted Striker]

Y This camera though - assuming the project is still active - another example of marketing the product too soon IMO. It gives them a black eye unnecessarily, and makes threads like this appear.

That's just it. Is this camera project still alive? That was the entire point of my OP. I dont follow everything so I was asking if there was news. It is VERY rare that a company announces a big splash product and then two years later, two years, fails to give even the hint of an update.

Kodak may have prematurely announced this camera, but that still does explain why they dont provide updates. Remember, the whole point of bringing back Ektachrome was for Super 8. That was a huge part of the announcement of this film. The volume of Super 8mm Ektachrome was going to help make the still version of this film possible.

Is Kodak even selling a Super 8mm version of the new Ektachrome?

If Kodak wants to prevent speculation, they have to fill the information gap.

 

[Phil_F_NM]

16mm is still an entry level professional quality format. The Hurt Locker and Black Swan are recent movies shot on 16mm.
As for the size of 8mm the image is about 1/5 the size of the 35mm motion image (which is ~half of 35mm still.)
8mm is still a great format for hobbyists but I dont think Super 8 is. Old standard (double run) 8mm can deliver excellent results because there are many extraordinary cameras out there with equally good lenses. That kind of package wasn't really put into Super 8 since it was foolproof home movie making for everyone. The carts don't really have good preasure plates and film steadiness is always an issue. It takes an investment into a working Canon, Nikon, Elmo, Nizo, etc plus a few parts bodies and the $$ and/or skill to repair them in order to sustain that expensive lo-fi hobby and get results which aren't the best in the firat place.
Just my opinion though. Anything that gets people buying Kodak is good in my mind.
EDIT: Yes, Kodak has sold S8 Ektachrome. Juat like the 35mm offering, it was all gone in several days.
Phil Forrest

 

[jawarden]

That's just it. Is this camera project still alive? That was the entire point of my OP. I dont follow everything so I was asking if there was news. It is VERY rare that a company announces a big splash product and then two years later, two years, fails to give even the hint of an update.

Kodak may have prematurely announced this camera, but that still does explain why they dont provide updates. Remember, the whole point of bringing back Ektachrome was for Super 8. That was a huge part of the announcement of this film. The volume of Super 8mm Ektachrome was going to help make the still version of this film possible.

Is Kodak even selling a Super 8mm version of the new Ektachrome?

If Kodak wants to prevent speculation, they have to fill the information gap.

Their last update was Jan '18, so one year rather than two.

Their marketing is strong in some areas and weak in others. That lack of consistency hurts them as people lose interest in projects that feel like vaporware, even though the product may not be vaporware. Time will tell. They have a "contact us" link for super8 camera IIRC, and you can also be put on their email list for the latest news but I'm not on the list as I don't shoot video.

I think the answer to your question about whether the project is still alive is "yes", because I doubt they would keep that section of the web site active otherwise. Just a guess.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

I apologize to the group for becoming the troll.

 

[Ted Striker]

Their last update was Jan '18, so one year rather than two.

Maybe we are due for a Jan '19 update then.

 

[Dralowid]

I wonder where the digital Bolex project went...

Super 8 was always restricted by using the gate in the cartridge which is why Standard or Double 8 still has followers. 8mm film is still around but as said, the new Kodak stuff has all gone. Ferrania is promising some sometime too.

The one format that has I believe finally disappeared is 9.5mm.

None of this can be called cheap and adding the costs of scanning makes for an expensive medium.

I have many, many movie cameras, all still with their lenses, I'm occasionally tempted to use one but instead spend the money on buying another obscure camera...they, at least, are cheap!